Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Elf

Koldoon's page

1,054 posts (1,090 including aliases). 6 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,054 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Montalve: I'd also be curious to see the judges comments. My story was "The Ujanti Sacrifice"


Steelfiredragon wrote:
I'm still going to lose

You never know. Maybe you wrote about an area or a character that really grabbed one of the judges and they fought for you.

Don't give up. It's not a rejection until the rejection slips come. And then the rejection is as likely to be about what's right or what fits with the piece that wins than a reflection on what's wrong with your own work.


NSpicer wrote:
Koldoon wrote:
You could always just reveal the titles. Sutter will have those already.
Nah. It would be too easy for someone to then say, "Hey! That's mine!" and thereby spoil Sutter's ability to judge without knowing whose submission he's reviewing.

I'm just saying that it'd be a nice gesture to let people know where they stood on the 25th.

Rejection hurts. knowing someone sat on your rejection for a week hurts more, as that wait is bad enough.

Other options:


  • email rejections to those who didn't make it
  • email notices to those who did make it with an admonishment to keep their mouths shut
  • post those moving forward in a spoiler tag and trust your judge not to peek
  • post a list of titles in Alpha order of those stories that DIDN'T make it.

What I don't understand is this idea that it's bad for Sutter to know who made it through to him. I don't see how that's bad, UNLESS he also knows WHICH story the author wrote

Now... I have the benefit of having written for Dungeon during the black hole years, so long waits are nothing new to me. But some of the new folks are probably already past the stage of tearing their hair out.


Montalve wrote:
Andrew Crossett wrote:

So the five finalists will be revealed on Oct. 1, at the same time as the winner?

that is the plan, no other way that they can go blind to Sutter

You could always just reveal the titles. Sutter will have those already.


Navior wrote:

I got mine in with about an hour or so to spare last night. Yay!

I'm kind of surprised there were only 61 submissions. I was expecting more. Still, I won't complain. It improves everyone's odds to win. :)

Likewise, I am not going to complain. 61 submissions means something on the order of a 1 in 12 chance of making the top 5. Though with folks like Todd and Neil in the mix... well, it's a long hard road.

Best of luck to everyone who entered... and of course to the judges, who have many hours of reading ahead of them.

- Ashavan


Montalve wrote:
Urghak wrote:
Will the final 5 be announced here on the 25th?
considering that the entireis would be sent blindly to James Sutter, we will wait till he choses a winner.

Will the finalists get a private email letting them know they've made the cut?

Or could you post just the titles without the authors?


As I've never had any fiction published, I will also be entering. My story is away to the judges, and may they find it pleasing to read.


Guy Humual wrote:

Oh no! The edits.

** spoiler omitted **
Not huge problems, everything else looks very good, but I am curious why those changes were made.

Spoiler:

1 - I assume "the" got nixed in layout for some reason, as it was not pulled out in editing, at least not in my copy.

2 - "20%" got cut as feeling anachronistic and unnecessary. The problem with throwing homages in your work is that you rely on the editor either missing the reference entirely or catching the reference and not caring enough to take it out. I didn't catch the Conan Doyle reference (I'm a Poirot man), and, not seeing it, didn't feel the percentage conveyed enough extra information to be left in. To me, it felt like it compromised the flow and so out it went.

3 - The time frame prevents proper editing. Really you should be reviewing the edits and discussing problems with the editor, but there isn't time for that. Also, you need to be realistic... sometimes issues, like the missing "the" crop up. Sometimes it's the fault of the editor, sometimes it happens in layout... sometimes you accidentally deleted it yourself rewriting a line for the 500th time. But if the worst thing you can say about an edited piece is "I think it's missing a 'the'" then you got very lucky.


Marc Radle 81 wrote:

Koldoon,

It seems pretty clear you have some kind of anti Apple thing going for some reason. The fact is Apple does put out pretty ground breaking stuff. The iPod certainly was, as was the iPhone. The same can be said about iTunes. The iMac revolutionized the way computers are designed. The reality is that, although no can be 100% sure at this point, the odds are that the iPad will be equally groundbreaking.

I can say that Kindle has NO interest at all for me but I WILL be buying an uPas because it looks like a great product. The fact that one thing it will do, and do as well as a Kindle in all likelihood, is really just icing on the cake.

I guess I just don't see what you are so upset about, beyond an apparent dislike of Apple

You would be wrong that I have something against Apple products. Apple is nothing if not innovative, even if I don't believe the iPad to be the best example of their innovation.

As for the iPad... I don't believe it will be equally groundbreaking, though there is no way to be sure until it comes out. For me a backlit screen on an ereader is a deal breaker, and I'm far from alone in that feeling.

I don't feel a need for a multifunction ereader... when I sit down to read, I don't want the distractions a multifunction device provides... when I sit down to read, I want to read... I want a device that effectively disappears in the background. The kindle gained its market share on its ability to do just that.

What I worry about is that the Apple iBookstore will start another trend of higher prices for books and ebooks. If the authors were getting a bigger piece instead of a (now smaller) percentage of a smaller piece, I might not dislike the deal so much. Many, if not most, writers cannot live on their writing income alone... they have Evil Day Jobs to pay the bills and provide necessary health benefits and do their best to write as best they can fit it in.

Paizo is right that the Amazon deal is not great... they demand a huge chunk of the pie to sell an ebook on their store. Of course, Paizo could sell a non-DRM mobi format copy which would work on a Kindle just fine.

They won't. But they could.


James Sutter wrote:
Koldoon wrote:
Vic Wertz wrote:
I think publishers *should* be able to set the price for electronic versions of their books.
And I frankly think you're wrong. Manufacturer's SUGGESTED retail prices exist for a reason.
But wouldn't you be pissed if you went into a conventional bookstore and found that they'd put a sticker over that $9.99 MSRP saying "Actually, $12.99"? Publisher control works both ways.

If a store has a bad deal, I can go to another one that has a better deal. Except that the deal with publishers setting the price absolutely denies me that ability.


Vic Wertz wrote:
Koldoon wrote:
Sorry Erik... Vic is receiving the brunt of a month's worth of arguments... and I'm grumpy 'cause I've been having the argument for a month. iPad will be better than kindle and a game changer, I'm told, simply because it's being put out by Apple. That it's also more expensive, with less battery life, and backlit (not to mention that the wireless carries a monthly fee) doesn't seem to sway anyone. It's Apple, so it will trump everything else.
The world isn't saying "It's a Kindle, but from Apple, so it's better." The iPad does a million-and-one things, of which reading eBooks is just one, and I'm pretty confident that a *lot* of people are going to feel that's it's a worthwhile purchase—not because it's from Apple, but because it's a VERY USEFUL DEVICE. And a significant chunk of that audience will be folks who would never, ever even have *considered* buying a Kindle, but who will now consider buying books from the iBookstore. And *that's* why the iPad and the iBookstore will change the eBook landscape—it has the potential to open the world of eBooks to a larger audience in the same way that the iPod and the iTunes store opened the world of electronic music downloads to a larger audience.

Sometimes it's better to do one thing well.


Vic Wertz wrote:
I think publishers *should* be able to set the price for electronic versions of their books.

And I frankly think you're wrong. Manufacturer's SUGGESTED retail prices exist for a reason.


Links to most of the useful information on the topic at one time or another appeared in this thread:

http://www.amazon.com/tag/kindle/forum/ref=cm_cd_tfp_ef_tft_tp?_encoding=UT F8&cdForum=Fx1D7SY3BVSESG&cdThread=Tx2MEGQWTNGIMHV&displayType= tagsDetail

But it's well over 2000 posts long and I really am not in any mood to find them again. The thread focuses on the pulling of titles from MacMillan, but again, this pull occurred in response to MacMillan's demands, which were themselves based, at least in part, on the deal they made with Apple. Other articles in the prior few days had covered that five of the big six publishers (of which MacMillan is one) had reached the same deal:

an agency model where the publishers would set the actual retail price of the ebooks with a starting range for new releases and best sellers between $12.99 and $14.99

Given that Kindle users had responded well to the advertising that most bestsellers would be priced at $9.99 there is a LOT of not particularly interesting cursing out of both publishers and Amazon... but there are some real gems in the links throughout the thread.


Dragnmoon wrote:
Koldoon wrote:
As for the iBookstore... well, the agreement they made with the publishers has already pretty much guaranteed that they will never see a dime from me. You're a publisher, I sorta expect you to like the agreement. But what's good for publishers rarely is good for readers, who just get squeezed more by prices going up.
You have a link about this? I have not been able to find any news about Apple making deals with Publishers for the iBookstore

Not off the top of my head, as I mentioned, the argument has been going on for over a month and searching for the necessary posts is DEFINITELY not my idea of fun or relaxation.

Most of the interesting information though can be found in news stories covering Amazon pulling all MacMillan titles from their store at the end of January in response to MacMillan demanding they switch to the agency model or lose access to the ebooks for the first 6-9 months after release... the same deal that they had made with Apple for the iBookstore. The agreement, as described, changes ebook stores into an agent of the publisher, who will set the actual retail price in exchange for providing a cut to the seller.


Sorry Erik... Vic is receiving the brunt of a month's worth of arguments... and I'm grumpy 'cause I've been having the argument for a month. iPad will be better than kindle and a game changer, I'm told, simply because it's being put out by Apple. That it's also more expensive, with less battery life, and backlit (not to mention that the wireless carries a monthly fee) doesn't seem to sway anyone. It's Apple, so it will trump everything else. And just to top it off, the deal made for the iBookstore between Apple and five of the big six functionally increases ebook prices everywhere.

I just have tons of love for Apple right now. Really.

As for the iBookstore... well, the agreement they made with the publishers has already pretty much guaranteed that they will never see a dime from me. You're a publisher, I sorta expect you to like the agreement. But what's good for publishers rarely is good for readers, who just get squeezed more by prices going up.

I hate to think that books are becoming a luxury item, but they are quickly headed that way, and it won't be good for publishers when they reach that point.

Anyway, I come to forums to relax, and this has had the opposite effect, so I guess I'll go now.


Vic Wertz wrote:
Koldoon wrote:
Really... a backlit answer to ebook reading gamechanging? For books? I'm not sure I see that Vic... not for fiction. I can see rule books... they'd look pretty. But a book?

First, I refuse to accept the argument that reading a book on an iPad will be unpleasant—at least, until somebody outside of Apple actually has a chance to *do* that and provide an actual firsthand account. Until somebody knows, nobody knows.

That aside, note that I said I expect the *iBookstore*, not the iPad itself, to change the eBook landscape—I believe that the iPad will indeed make a mark, but it's really Apple's publisher sales agreements that I hope will have the greatest impact on the publishing industry.

To be frank, I find Amazon's current Kindle agreement offensive to publishers, and I hope that the iBookstore will succeed to a degree that forces Amazon to reexamine their position.

Refuse all you want... it doesn't make it less so. Nor does the fact that your eyes may not be bothered mean that mine won't. I didn't say it would unpleasant, Vic. I said it would hurt your eyes... whether you actively notice the strain or not, if it is backlit, and there is every indication that it is, then it will strain your eyes to read it.

I'm very protective of my eyes. I injured them, you see, by trying to use a television as a computer screen when that was the vogue thing to do in the 80s.

And Apple's agreement with publishers is frankly more offensive to me than Amazon trying to set competitive prices. If the publishers hadn't cried so much for years about the costs of printing (and paper) being what was driving up book prices all those years I would have more sympathy. But it was the publishers that convinced America, falsely, that printing and paper costs were what drove prices upward, so they should hardly be surprised that consumers took that to heart and expect lower ebook prices as a result.

That publishers paired their agreement with Apple with a cut in contract rates for ebook royalties (I think this was specifically MacMillan, but I don't doubt the remaining five will follow suit) argues to me that they are not on the author's side either.

I'm not doubting that Amazon unfairly used its effective monopoly on ebook sales to strong arm publishers into unfair agreements. But one only has to look at what Apple itself did to music prices to see that the publishers are simply trading one predator for another.

The screen is a larger iphone screen... there's no reason to believe that it will be any easier to read on than the iphone is... especially given that Jobs has publically stated that he doesn't believe we read anymore, and so has little motivation to see that we can read comfortably.


Vic Wertz wrote:
Koldoon wrote:
Any word on whether the pathfinder fiction books will be available in ebook formats?
To be determined. I'm expecting Apple's iBookstore to change the eBook landscape to at least some degree, and since we're still several months out from having products available, we have time to see how that shakes out before we commit to anything.

Really... a backlit answer to ebook reading gamechanging? For books? I'm not sure I see that Vic... not for fiction. I can see rule books... they'd look pretty. But a book?

I don't think a backlit answer will trump the eye friendly eink tech of the kindle/sony/nook e-readers. I know everyone seems to love their iphones and apple can do no wrong for some reason... but I just can't see the iPad as a game changer with a backlit screen. If it had a color eink screen maybe. And I'm sure modules and other rulebook pdfs will look dandy on it.

*sighs*

Oh well.


Vic -

Any word on whether the pathfinder fiction books will be available in ebook formats?

pdf is only going to actually look good on an ipad, and as a backlit screen, that's no good for reading anything lengthy.

I'd love to see them in kindle and ePub formats.

- Ashavan


For roleplaying, I actually like the Storyteller system quite a lot.

But then, I'm also a 4e fan.


what Daigle said +1

When I first started writing I would despair waiting for responses from the Black Hole that was the Dungeon and Dragon magazine slushpile.

Don't just wait... there's reasons for this... if you get rejected, then what? If you don't have anything else in progress or out waiting for a response then you can become frozen. But if there is something else out there the rejection doesn't feel so much like the end of the world... you still are waiting for another response, or you have another project in progress to mitigate the loss of the rejection.


I knew a Wendy Darling in college.

I've also known several people who went by their middle name because they hated their first name so much.

I also have people doubt me when I tell them my name, but at least it's unique.

- Ashavan


Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Seriously, Write or Die helps. I've been using it since you posted it up here, and I got my word count from 18,000 to 22,000, making up for the day before (in which I did hardly anything).

As of yesterday, I'm at 29,000 words and very excited!

Glad it's helping!

- Ashavan


Hope those of you still working on novels are still getting the words out. Today should mark 30,000 words for those still trying to get to 50k by the end of the month.


Hey, keep it up guys.

I do this every year (this is year 5 for me) and for those wondering at the size of the project and how feasible it is, it's day 14 and I closed the day with over 45,000 words. It's possible and even likely I will finish the word count tomorrow... though the story is likely to continue for a while yet.

For those needing help to keep writing, I strongly recommend write-or-die or a communal write-in where someone is giving you leverage to help you get your word count in.

Write or die:

http://writeordie.drwicked.com/

The idea is that you set a preset goal (in number of words or time) and until you meet that goal, nasty things happen if you stop typing for more than a few seconds at a time.

- Ashavan


Opportunity Lost

by Ashavan Doyon

Pain exploded through me at the thought. It started in the temples, beating like drumbeats hard upon my flesh. Then it jolted inwards, inflaming the inner layers of my brain like that stupid egg they used to tell you would be your brain if you did drugs. Funny, didn't need drugs to make that happen.


I confess, edition wars have largely been the culprit keeping me away, though I try to still hang out in the chat room fairly regularly.

When the play tests first started on Pathfinder I thought, great. But the play test forums and indeed almost all the forums became toxic for anyone who played (or even liked) both systems.

I love paizo, they're great people and I enjoy the opportunities I've had to write for them. I like their world and can only say I wish they'd slow down the pace a bit, cause it is hard for me to keep up! I have no trouble saying that paizo produces the best interwoven adventures in the business and does so consistently. That's not to say other companies don't manage a gem now and then, but I know I can buy almost any paizo adventure and trust the quality will be outstanding.

I have mostly switched to 4e for my games. That doesn't mean that I'm not reading pathfinder and hoping to (eventually) run some online 4e conversions of the adventures. It doesn't mean that I won't play or run a pathfinder game in a pinch. But it does mean that I do, for the most part, avoid posting on boards where the mere mention of liking 4e gets me branded as some sort of traitor (or worse).

Not posting doesn't mean I'm not reading, however, though I readily admit I don't do so every day as I used to.

- Ashavan


Malachi Tarchannen wrote:
I wish to remain clear that I was making a purposed (and dictionary allowable) distinction between the two terms, precisely so that I could illustrate that it is also possible for a man to be prejudiced against a certain race without being racist.

This is exactly the problem. When you label it prejudice against a race, there is a level of prejudice you seem prepared to accept. If it was labeled racism, which it is, by definition (webster accepts that definition whether you do or not), then it would be more forbidden. You are softening the man's racism by using another term to describe it.


Malachi Tarchannen wrote:


Words have meanings, and we must use them correctly. We cannot Clintonize our language to make a term mean whatever we want, as it suits our purposes. Tarren, I am NOT attributing this to you. Many people butcher the language, however, and so I make sincere attempts to find and use the right words.

To this, I still contend that the terms are distinct. As was pointed out, racism is a subset of prejudice, but the two are not equivalent terms. If it helps any at all, I am simply using them distinctively.

Using a word to mean something that it means is not incorrect use of a word. Just because you may disagree with which definition of the word someone uses doesn't make you right.

Words have multiple definitions because people use the words differently at different times and in different places to mean different things. That may be inconvenient, but it doesn't make those usages wrong.


Champions Online never pulled at me. Something about the graphics bothered me and still does.

I still like City of Heroes/Villains, though I confess still being miffed that the power gamers completely destroyed the architect system within weeks of release.


I wouldn't usually name the game unless among gamers. I'd just say I was meeting some friends for the evening and not say more unless asked.


That's a healthy attitude. Gaming books, for all that we love them, are still things, most of which can be replaced.

I'm happy to hear you're alright, and I'm sorry about your books. It's easy to say they're only things, but I know how frustrated and hurt I'd be if my own collection were lost.


Louis Agresta wrote:
Welcome, Brandon!

Oooh, another leafy fella! Welcome to the patch.


Mothman wrote:

Ha!

Well, there are worse nicknames to have

Yeah, I try to forget most of my nicknames.

-Ashavan


alleynbard wrote:
Sharoth wrote:


Yep! Besides, you can always pick up the other books later when things get better.

Edit - Plus you get two of the Darkmoon modules for free. Sort of. If you hit the gamestore for the free RPG day or if you downloaded the free PDFs.

I think I will use Darkmoon Vale. I just picked up the .pdf and I was happy with what I saw. It is a good, traditional setting with some nice twists. The area will appeal to my group and, if I decide to, I can find a place for Monte's Dungeon a Day.

If you already have the gazeteer, then you really don't need the hardcover campaign setting. Much of the material is similar to the point of being repetitive.

I also like darkmoon vale as a setting and am preparing a 4e conversion to run as an online game... there are enough twists to make the area fun, Falcon's Hollow in particular provides some great opportunities for role playing, and the lumber consortium provides an interesting "law vs good" type conflict for players who like that sort of thing.

If you are thinking adventures though, don't forget to check out the pathfinder society adventures... they have the advantage of being very inexpensive and are quite good - and short, which makes plugging them in places as a break a little easier.


F. Wesley Schneider wrote:
Dark_Mistress wrote:
I'm still waiting on the Boys of Paizo speedo calendar. :D

That shrill ringing you hear way off in the distance. That's me screaming.

That sound will continue forever.

Thanks.

This from the one of the guys at paizo who probably looks pretty decent in a speedo.


Joshua J. Frost wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
My experience working on Dungeon (with its side treks) and Pathfinder (with its set pieces) is that writers hate hate HATE writing short adventures, and that they invariably take more work than it's almost worth to trim back down to "short" status. I'm pretty fed up with the idea of short adventures as a result—anything shorter than a 32 page module at this point is probably not something Paizo's going to be tackling anytime soon as a result.

*cough*

Pathfinder Society Scenarios
*cough*

In addition to being short, they have the added bonus of being relatively inexpensive. Now if only I could not have to print them out.

Of course, they'd be even better if I could write them. (well, not really, the writers are very good already, I'd just like to see my name up there one day too!)

I've been thinking of doing some conversions for these to 4e, since that's what I'm playing lately.

EDIT -> PS - this is not a dig against Pathfinder RPG, I haven't seen it yet to judge it. For me, Paizo's greatest strength is the stories the adventures tell, and they do it better than anyone, that's why I use their material for my 4e game.


Celestial Healer wrote:
That this thread is still open is indicative to me of how awesome Paizo is.

They could just not have seen it yet.

Or they could be taking the approach of being flattered.

- Ashavan


Kirth Gersen wrote:

Scott, I can sympathize with you through most of this, but one thing to remember is that Paizo has set themselves up, more or less, as a "haven for the disaffected." In a sense, Pathfinder is a blantant anti-4e. Unfortunately, that means that almost any mention of 4e is met here with cries of "blasphemy!" -- and why wouldn't it be? -- that's the target audience of the company, people who don't like 4th edition. It's kind of unreasonable to expect, well, reasoned argument about it.

The logic seems to be that if someone equates computer games with "no roleplaying" and says that's bad, well, then 4e must be based on computer games, because 4e is bad: QED. (Personally, it reminds me more of Magic: The Gathering for some reason, with the monster card layouts, but I don't personally have enough experience with either game to really support that statement.)

One could suggest that Paizo's audience is those who like well written adventures, since the quality of their adventures is what they're known for.


Fuchs wrote:
Scott, you are the best argument for an ignore function on those boards. Your hypocritical and arrogant crusading for 4E and your inability to accept any critic of it - no matter how true - should be labelled as the trolling it is.

It seems to me that he has been exceedingly polite given the tone of your posts. If I needed an ignore button, frankly it would be for you.

Check what bridge you're hiding under.

- Ashavan


Oh, and I expect Lilith should be along with cookies for you shortly... I'd offer some, but I don't bake.

- Ashavan


Thiago Cardozo wrote:


I am sorry again for causing you distress. I do know people are pretty inflamed when it comes to criticism to an edition or the other. However, I would like to point out I did not say any of those things you mention, though I guess from your response that you have had plenty of those coming from others. I was just mentioning a difficulty I think newer players might have with the recent iteration of the game, since some of those elements that were instrumental to me seem to be missing.

You have plenty of experience with RP as it seems and playing 4e is as good as playing any other system if you and your players are experienced.

I'm sorry if that post felt directed solely at you. As you might imagine, I see these sorts of posts often. You ended up at the receiving end of several months of pent up frustration. For that I apologize.

As for needing to be an experienced group to roleplay, again, I have to say, we must have read two very different versions of the DMG... the 4e guide went into far more depth on how to run a game, especially from the perspective of a new DM, than I recall any previous edition doing.


Fuchs wrote:
Scott, get a clue, and do the math before you post next time. SC are broken, math says so. Arguing with math makes it really hard to take any of your opinions seriously.

---> Points to prime example of what he was just posting about


Thiago Cardozo wrote:

My main problem with 4e comes from the way it teaches a new generation of RPgamers our loved hobby. It is true that experienced players can grab mostly any set of rules (3.5, 4e, or even Chess) and construct a role-playing experience.

I started playing RPGs with AD&D some 16 years ago. The amount of fluff, tips on roleplaying, and literary references that came with the core books really aided me and everyone playing at the time to understand what RPGs were all about.

I keep hearing these sorts of comments from people who don't like 4e. I have to think that I read a very different set of books than they did, because I see plenty of roleplaying possibilities in 4e.

I hear things like "well powers are all the same - only the damage die and type changes" and I think what were the differences between ray of frost and burning hands or flame strike vs fireball vs lightning bolt vs cone of cold. combat spells do damage of a type in a shape - they did in 1st edition and 2nd edition and in both 3.0 and 3.5 - so why is this bad in 4e?

Flavor and role-playing depend on the players and the DM - anybody who started playing very young knows that, because when we were young, very young, we probably didn't understand the rules well enough to play correctly. But we still had fun, because when you're a kid roleplaying comes naturally. And you know what was exciting? The bits where you got to fireball the troll. And it's still exciting in 4e.

Only in 4e, I don't have to prepare for six hours if I want the game to go well, or even longer at high levels. I can just spend a reasonable amount of time preparing and enjoy.

4e gives tremendously good DMing advice in the DMG - Easily better than ANY PREVIOUS EDITION of the Dungeons & Dragons game.

I don't have anything against people who enjoy 3rd edition, nor anything against Paizo. Heck, I think they put out great products, and I'm thrilled to be able to port some of that content for my 4e games. I will still pick up the Pathfinder RPG when it comes out. But I am really sick of hearing "but there are no rules for roleplaying in 4e" because there are, and frankly, the barebones rules light approach for roleplaying appeals to me a heck of a lot more than the 'must be a rule for everything in case someone tries to break the game' approach taken by 3.5 ... I'm so relieved to not have to spend hours stating up a monster with class levels... I can do it in a few minutes, and not have to feel like crap if my two hours of prep work dies in the first round of combat.

I'm also really sick of the edition wars. I've tried to be neutral - because I do enjoy both... I like playing in 3.5, and even DMing at lower levels... but I also enjoy 4e and I see a LOT of unjustified attacks.

It's a boardgame that requires minis - I hear this a lot too. So did 3e, it just didn't outright say so. Was it possible to play without? Yes. Did certain classes lose out if you did so? Yes. I wonder where the excitement of playing with the table, with a board went to. My brother and I used to use legos, and we thought it was so cool to be able to put the monster mini down, especially if we had the right one. Now it's bad????

I'm sorry, I'm just fed up. I'm really sick of being told that if I enjoy 4e I don't know what role playing is. I'm really sick of being told that if I was a good DM, I wouldn't have to prep so long for my 3.5 games. That clearly 3.5 is better and that I owe it to Paizo to support their game of WotC.

This edition war is destroying both games. And it shouldn't. I like both games. I hope, I really do, that somehow Paizo manages to fix 3.5 for DMs, because I like the game - I just hate that DMing for it became work rather than fun, especially at high levels. I hope that WotC manages to figure out that failing to actually let new blood into their adventure writing pool is causing most of their adventures for 4e to stink. Because I want to be able to play and DM in 3.P and I want to be able to play good prepublished adventures in 4e.

And mostly, I want not to feel every time I go to one discussion board or the other that I am the enemy. Even when I don't post, when I read the boards... these wonderful boards that were once the best gaming community out there... I cringe. I'm always the enemy now, no matter where I go, just because I like to enjoy my game. Gamers shouldn't do that to other people. We should know better.

- Ashavan


1, 4, and 7 for me.

I like this game. Not all of it, but then what DM doesn't have to houserule SOMETHING they don't like about a system.

What I like:

DMing is fun again. I don't think I realized how much I missed that. Whether it will hold as true for high levels, I'm not sure, but it certainly does for low level play.

All characters get to have something fun to fall back on. The new bard rocks. Sorcerers and Warlocks are just cool. Divine characters get a really cool control type character too in the Invoker.

What I dislike:

I'm not sure I like how they've done druids. I'd like a typed damage that couldn't be instantly healed overnight. Strict reliance on a battlemap grates on me (but I note that 3.5 had this too, at least if you wanted to get the most out of rogues and fighters). Monsters don't have enough ecology/fluff and have become simplistic descriptions with stats.

Can I play this and feel I'm playing D&D -- yes.


Pax Veritas wrote:

Let's hope a month passes, or a year if that's what the contract reads, and the entire IP for the realms returns lock-stock-and-barrel, from what I've heard, back to Ed Greenwood.

Perhaps it was even this thread, where I heard 'ol Ed wrote that into his contract to ensure FR was a continuously supported system ad infinitum....

How's that for Deus Ex Machina?

I wouldn't count on that. I'm pretty sure the Realms were bought outright.


Knightsfyre wrote:
The other "participating" store (which I only visited because I wanted some new dice and my FLGS had none that appealed to me) had just tossed the FreeRPG product in a casual and teetering pile on the corner of the sales counter, in amongst any number of other random bits like invoices and an empty pop can. I had no idea they were even participating until one of the only other two patrons in the store (which was deathly quiet) asked about it. The owner just said, "Yeah, just grab something from there" and waved in the...

Yeah, one of my area stores is like that too. Last year they declined to offer any of the Free RPG stuff on Free RPG day, keeping it instead to give as promotional giveaways later in the year (thus completely screwing people who went there ON freeRPG day for stuff.

I haven't shopped there since, though strangely they are one of the stores around me that has managed to stay open.


SkyGuard wrote:

I am amazed at some of the stories people have posted no wonder the FLGS are having such a hard time competing now. The whole point of this is to get people into the stores and to get people to try new products so they will come back and buy them if they like it.

I guess I should be thankful that my FLGS gets it (Myriad Games in Salem, NH) was only asked to please limit myself to up to 5 items with no duplicates. And for the record the idea that Free RPG day is a promotion work as it got me in the store today and I ended up buying a new board game to go with my shiny new pathfinder bestiary.

I was a little disappointed in the overall selection this year there wasn't a ton to pick as compared with past years. The bonus bestiary and the q-dice I thought were the best things I saw, and yet again as in 2007 the paizo product wins free RPG day in my opinion. I'm guess the economy play a big part in it this year,

My husband actually seems quite pleased with the Eberron adventure so far, and I didn't notice a significant decline in the quality of the offerings this year. I did note, however, what seemed to be a significant decrease in participation this year. Last year I could have chosen between six different participating stores. Three of those stores were not only not participating, but have closed in the last six months.

This economy is hurting stores badly... kudos to those that actually used the freeRPG stuff as a way to get people to the store. Whenever I get stuff for FreeRPG stuff, I always buy something at the store too... usually something I've been looking at and on the fence about but haven't managed to pick up yet.

- Ashavan


Fantasy Grounds II is very nice and has a 4e ruleset available, created by fans. The program itself costs money though, for both the DM and players (though it's a one time expense).

In free options you've got:

TTop is supposed to be very good also, is free, and the developer hangs out on the Paizo chat -- he's usually willing to run demos for folks.

The developer for Glittercom also hangs out on occasion at the Paizo chat, so you might consider that also.

Maptool, part of the RPTools.net suite of tools, is also pretty good and free. It has a great community who are helpful if you have problems and need help.

- Ashavan


I feel lucky then... Our FLGS allowed two items for regular customers, and let you pick out another one if you stayed for the games. Which is what they did last year.

No problem getting the pathfinder bonus bestiary, since I was the first person to get anything. My husband picked up the Eberron adventure, and I picked up the quickstart guide for the new Whitewolf WoD game.

I wish I could have gotten a complete set of the Q workshop dice... purple with yellow numbers, they looked sharp.


skinnyfat wrote:
Does anyone know of a virtual tabletop that can be run on a Mac?

Maptool is Java based and so will run on a mac that can run the appropriate java version. Fantasy Grounds II is prettier, but it only runs on windows... oh and it costs money.

- Ashavan

1 to 50 of 1,054 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.