It's standard industry practice to not try to send a large number of emails all at once. That's the sort of thing spammers do, and it's one of the quickest ways to get one's email servers blacklisted. Given that, it's not surprising that there's been a delay in people receiving the message. All this means is that Paizo's sysadmins know what they're doing (I can't say I'm surprised).
Now, what I'm curious about is if everyone received the same message.
I mentioned this in another thread, but it appears as though this one would be more proper: all but the GMG and IWSG download and open fine on my iPad. The other two are over 100 MB and will not open/download.
Now that I've had time to play with these a little, I'd like to offer some stats for debugging / further optimizing purposes.
I have an iPad 3 64GB CDMA (Verizon) and it renders the ISWG without issue, along with the others. The non-lite PDFs were usable, but a little slow. These PDFs are zoom zoom fast. So now I have another reasonably zippy choice for reference on my tablet while playing.
Just for giggles, I put the lite PDFs on my iPhone 4 16GB CDMA (Verizon). They're just as zippy there, though I do need to zoom in to actually read things. :)
Both devices are running iOS 5.1.1.
I am having timeout issues reaching paizo.com from several points on the Internet. Here's the list of network points whence I cannot connect:
* Philadelphia, PA: Comcast
Networks from which I or a friend can reach paizo.com:
I can provide traceroute / mtr for all points of presence. My friend should be able to do that if I annoy him enough.
Their forums are arguably more amenable to collecting this sort of data due to the restriction on post editing here. Most of what I've seen here is covered in those two threads—except for some of the Paizo-specific stuff, of course.
Everything that follows is, of course, my personal opinion. You don't have to read it, you don't have to agree with it.
Before I start, a bit of advice: yes, you're oldschool. Are your players? That's the important thing. You're running the game for them to have fun. If they don't want to roll abilities, it won't be fun for them. I'm not saying that you should let them have 35 or more pointbuy, but don't stifle their freedom just because of a personal opinion of yours. If their using point buy really ruins your fun, I would reconsider why you're running a game.
That said... I go with 20 point buy. I don't like the statistical irregularities of dice for character creation. PFS uses 20 point buy. It's a nice middle of the road. I don't play with people who want to start with especially powerful or weak characters. No one has complained about the 20 point buy yet. So I keep things simple in terms of stats and take the middle-of-the-road approach. My games are focused on roleplaying more than combat, so those high stats won't help you much anyway. For some, that makes me a boring GM. That's fine. There's plenty of other games out there.
I have created a character using traditional (2nd ed, even) 3d6 rolling. It created a character dramatically different from what I envisioned. I feel that having players roll stats is sort of like telling them to eat their vegetables: yes, it can be good for them in terms of character development (unless what you rolled doesn't let you select the class you want... too bad, maybe next game*). But they don't want to do it. Why not? Most folks who come to the table have a preconceived notion of the kind of character they want to play, either in terms of mechanics or backstory/personality. And why shouldn't they? This is a roleplaying game. It's all about pretending to be someone else. Having a preconceived notion of who you want to be is entirely the point. Random die rolls interfere with that. I wanted to be a charismatic silver-tongued rake. But the dice didn't let me. As has been said above, the game is supposed to be fun. To continue the vegetables analogy, it's supposed to be like the sweets at the top of the food pyramid: it's supposed to be fun. I see fun as the system not interfering with how I want to express the person I am pretending to be.
I am decidedly oldschool in my gaming. I let my players use any skill they can think of in a situation. Want to use Perception to have the guard not arrest you for murdering his buddy? Sure. Roleplay it. Battlemaps? Fooey (until my players asked for them, anyway). But I will not force rolled stats on my players. Forgive the heresy, but this is something I really think Dave and Gary got wrong.
* So glad 3E got rid of stat-based class restrictions.
Merisiel Sillvari wrote:
I was originally thinking along the lines of "in a reality where magic is real, surely contraceptive magic would be one of the first things devised", but that works, too.
... now I'm curious what the other 25% is.
This is my favorite book Paizo will publish in 2012 and I haven't even received it yet. I am a serious fan of gaming world history and so far this seems to be the best book for the subject.
Oh, and if it's not too late, I want NPCs! As I said elsewhere, history is the context for the present that guides us to shape the future. As a corollary, it is the hands of the people of ancient societies which shape that context. So, more NPCs please!
About bringing characters together and starting the story: taverns are boring and overdone. And what if one of your characters is a teetotaler? The Paizo modules and adventure paths I've looked through / played through have character traits that link the players into the story somehow. They're varied and specific to each story, but provide a lot more flavor (and storytelling hooks for you as a DM) than "so you're in a tavern one night and ...". Avoiding the tavern cliché is probably one of my favorite things about Paizo's adventures. It's a tough thing to do, and they do it well.
Chris, I hope you've perused the kotaku-male-entitlement thread!
I have, yes. I'm a software developer by trade, and the same sort of thing is extremely prevalent in the tech industry as well. It's something I'm familiar with from several aspects of my life.
If we are to use Star, Cosmo, or Women's Health as models for what women want to look at, it is pictures of attractive women. Who could blame them.
I just... wow. Seriously? There are so. many. things wrong with the media regarding how women should see themselves / behave that are utterly in contrast to reality. One Google search for something like 'magazines women photoshop' will show you just how insane it is to use the media as a guide here. Please talk to any female you know about how utterly and totally f@#$ed the media is in its depiction of women.
Stepping off the soapbox now...
I am not the target audience of this thread, but I love what you're doing here and wish you the best.
... and just to be clear, some of us straight guys are bothered by scantily-clad women, too. I specifically don't want sexualized (and sexist) art in my RPG materials. I could rant for hours and hours about this, but I'll just say that I am happy to put money behind material that isn't sexist and womanizing as a means of supporting it and saying I want to see more. I am reminded of a certain webcomic.
But what if Hemingway bores your players to death? Some people want detail and verbal beauty. Going the Hemingway route is an extreme which will make them very, very unhappy.
I suppose what I'm saying here is to have balance. It sounds like John hates Tolkien's vivid, sweeping (and engrossing, in my so-not humble opinion) descriptions. I personally cannot stand Hemingway and wish he never took pen to paper. You're probably going to have both sorts of players at your table, as well as people in between (unless your group is comprised of people who affect a sampling bias, like English majors or MMO players). Going to any extreme, like Hemingway's sparseness or Tolkien's lushness, will disappoint someone. Seek the path of balance, and it will be the most enjoyable for most of your group. Unless you see reason to do otherwise, of course.
Enevhar Aldarion wrote:
Making a +2 enhancement "Always Available" for any character that has reached an appropriate level, somewhere between 5 and 7, would be a good way to fix this.
Sounds like that requirement could be expressed with Fame. Unless there are scenarios in the 1-5 tier that grant disproportionate fame, I don't think that'd be a problem. And even if there were, if your character survived an especially tough scenario, maybe they've earned the right to carry around a +2 item. :)
Evidently you haven't actually looked at Mac app pricing. :) I don't mean the big names like Photoshop or Logic; I mean the everyday apps for non-professionals like iWork ($20/each app) or GarageBand ($15). Then, updates are always free. And App Store apps can be installed on as many Macs as you have; you just need to associate an Apple ID. In-app purchases tend to be much smaller than what's being asked here for what will be the equivalent, too.
I have three Macs and would like to run this on all of them. But there's no way I'm giving you $60 to run one app on three computers. That's not the way the Mac ecosystem works. Ditch that silly "one computer == one license" clause and I'll consider thinking about it. Put it on the App Store and I will think about it—provided a full-featured demo, of course.
Mark Moreland wrote:
What specific clarifications would people like on online games? For the most part we've left it open so people can do it however works best for them, using the programs and forums they're already using. I fear that too much clarification will result in people who feel their method of online play isn't covered simply not playing.
Okay, right. Fair point. But my questions are even simpler than that and are of a logistics nature. I want to run a PFS game as a PbP. How do I handle the chronicle sheets? Do I need to send them to my players, have them fill them out, return them, and then I sign and send them back? Is there an honor system? Basically, I'd appreciate some structure, or at least guidance, for making the record tracking work. Conversely, what should I expect as a player in a PbP game in terms of chronicle sheets?
Mark Moreland wrote:
Yes, please, considering I just searched for a thread for it :). They're $4/each; I'm okay with not getting my subscriber discount. Doing the math, they add up to, what, the price of a 320 page hardcover per year? Yeah, I'm fine with that. I'm thinking about running scenarios online, and just having them in my downloads as they're available makes it much easier. Further, if I want to submit a scenario concept, I have a good pool of prior art to look over to be sure I'm not duplicating anything.
I too would like clarification about running play-by-post games, as I am interested in doing so myself. I see a lot of APs being run PbP, but not as much PFS as I would like. Some clarifications in the guide could make this more popular, which could mean more money for Paizo (more people running scenarios could mean more people buying scenarios).
We are indeed lazy. And Paizo does awesome work. So, why not?
Except you could, you can replace Golarion with Faerun with out to much trouble. Just ignore a few pages and use the planets and what not in Faerun's setting fairly easily.
I already had that idea two hours ago. ;)
You know, there are games exactly like that...
There's no pirate class; however, there are archetypes for bard, fighter, ranger, and (shock!) rogue. Sort of what one would expect, as they all fit well with the pirate lifestyle—except the Ranger. What's that doing there? Basically, the archetype for the Ranger puts her in the position of a crew leader, trading a few land-oriented class features for things that help her allies win fights.The Ranger approach is interesting, something I may just have to play through for Skull and Shackles.
Yes, Dark Sun is post-apocalyptic, an apocalypse (IIRC) caused by an abuse of arcane magic.
Megacorporations? In a non-Shadowrun setting? Fascinating. I will be interested to see how you manage that with what seems to be a pre-Internet level of technology without (much) magic.
So far things seem cohesive and interesting. Are you going to run this as a PbP? Can I join? :)
Eep. I think you misread my post, specifically what 'that' was referencing. I was referencing that what is commonly referred to as 'wicca' was invented by Mr. Gardner--not what we think of as 'witch'. Yes, you are right with the common meaning of the word 'witch', and I am reminded of Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Also, I only mentioned 'wicca' for the etymology (which was quoted back in the old thread), nothing to do with the faith itself. Sorry for the confusion, Geraint.
It has had that meaning for that time, yes. But that's not the only meaning it has had over that period of time. I don't think we're disagreeing, just that I am trying to espouse a modern descriptivist point of view to balance your traditional prescriptivist.
... how ironic, considering I was firmly in the traditional prescriptivist camp not even two years ago. But I digress.