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

Steve Geddes's page

Goblin Squad Member. Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber. 6,964 posts (7,932 including aliases). 13 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 7 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 6,964 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

I just got Pyramid of the Sky Pharaoh (or however you editors spell it*) and read the article on the river of souls. I don't have a question, but wanted to tell you that it has immediately become one of my favourite AP back matter articles ever. You should do less editor-in-chiefing and more writing, I say. (Or maybe more of both - I have it on good authority that you're the best editor-in-chief going around).

Really, thoroughly, totally awesome work. <- (doesn't have an editor)

*:
Is that funny yet?


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

I doubt it's a common position, but for me it's because I'm hoping to see a rules-light system with a lot of support.

I've never got excited about a system because of the system - it's always about the supplements/adventures/accessories. One of the problems with rules-light systems is that it's hard to get lots of supplements for them (at least where I live). The various gaming shops generally carry everything for D&D and Pathfinder, then bits and pieces of other systems - they dont usually carry everything for those others though.

For the last several years, that's meant that most of my supplemental material (which is my favorite) has been skewed towards rules-heavy systems. I still enjoy them, but I have more work to actually use them.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
gbonehead wrote:
Sara Marie wrote:
gbonehead wrote:

And now for a totally unscientific, baseless observation: about a year later, of the 16 identifiable Charter Subscribers in this thread, one is no longer.

So, based on Gorbacz's comment and using Fermi estimation (yeah, I'm an XKCD fan :), one could guess there's now roughly 15/16*1000 = 938 Charter Subscribers.

I'm always curious about such things :)

Interesting.

Heheh

Well, certainly interesting for me. I'm sure you can just do a query and get the actual number, so it might be less interesting for you :)

Me too. Poor souls at Paizo having to live without the mystery.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

I've never got very far reading jade regent. I always dismissed it on the grounds that we don't like "eastern stuff". Based on some of these comments, ill have to give it a proper look.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Scott Betts wrote:
I will note that the single day's notice thing was shady...

In my view, this was the only part that makes me level the accusation against WotC. If they'd given "fair" notice (whatever that is) I would be agreeing with you completely.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

Sure they did - they allowed third parties to offer multiple downloads over an extended period. The fact that they were acting in a certain way and then stopped means that they violated (some people's) trust.

It doesnt matter that other sites offered something they werent allowed to. WotC still took an unexpected action suddenly - that's where some people lost trust.

It's not a question of liability or legality, it's a question of actions. Even people who understood they didnt have rights in perpetuity didnt think WotC would tell the other sites to pull the PDFs - that just wasnt the done thing. WotC were allowed to change their minds, but without warning everyone they were about to, they were breaking that trust.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Buri wrote:
thejeff wrote:

We're not talking about keeping things for decades. We're talking about something you could have bought yesterday not being in the companies download library tomorrow.

Hope you got the warning email.
So, I bought the product and had a chance to download it. How was I wronged? Just because it wasn't up the next day? That's immaterial. Unless there was a binding agreement (read: in a legal agreement and not some marketing slogan on the site) that you had with DTRPG then there's zero guarantee. That's a universal truth in business. If there were a binding agreement, then you'd have grounds to sue.

It's really not about the legality.

When I buy a Paizo AP instalment, I trust that I'll get full color pictures. To the point that I dont check each time, just in case. If they suddenly release a product in black and white, it would be a violation of trust because they've set it up as a reasonable expectation.

They're not legally bound to continue as they have in the past, of course. Nonetheless, if they're going to make a change which I regard as significant, I'm going to feel let down unless it's telegraphed well in advance. Whether it's legal, justified, a good idea or anything else doesnt really enter into it. Trust is an emotive thing, based on previous dealings.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Scoundrel the Tiefling wrote:
I'm not talking about mechanics. I'm talking about how often they have put out a new edition. 3.5, 4th and now 5th ed so soon? I think that's Hasbro's doing.

I could see Hasbro taking an interest in movie rights or computer game rights (since those might have earning potential to actually matter and would presumably require resources not available to a mere subsidiary). Possibly even book sales, although my understanding is that even those arent particularly valuable.

I'd be astonished if they take more than a passing interest in details around the RPG.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Jeraa wrote:

Hasbro does own WotC, but that doesn't mean they are the ones calling the shots about when/if a new edition is released. Hasbro probably just wants WotC to make them X-amount of money with their RPG line, and Y-amount of money with their collectible card game lines, and its up to WotC to do what they need to to meet that requirement.

I suspect they want WotC to earn a certain amount from Magic and then not lose anything on....whatever else it is those guys do.

Hasbro could hardly spend much ongoing energy on properties as insignificant as D&D.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:

an AP that has more roleplaying elements in it is something I've always wanted, and I always punch up the roleplay elements in APs I develop. I'm certainly intrigued in pushing it further... but as someone upthread mentioned... the game's core design is a combat simulator, and the further we drift from that, the further we drift into new areas that, like Mythic, will change the game and how it's played. Perhaps in ways you or I can't predict.

So... it's a tricky thing to do.

Fwiw, i thought the first instalment of Serpent's Skull was brilliantly pitched in terms of the role playing/combat mix. There was enough there with the NPCs for the group to interact with those that caught their eye and ignore those who didn't.

One of the risks with "role playing encounters", in my experience, is when they're a mandatory part of the plot, they can feel quite stilted when the PCs just don't care for the people/scene involved. A detailed set of backgrounds and relationships means that, whoever the PCs decide to latch onto, I will be well placed to flesh out the interaction and progress the plot. That becomes more difficult (or feels more contrived) when the module has a key NPC the players "should" talk to but my group just don't care about them, or miss the cues.

Thanks!

The first Serpent's Skull adventure is something I'm really quite proud of. It's got about the right mix of roleplay and combat and sandbox and dungeon, for my tastes. I could see it (or something like it) having a bit more roleplay and a bit less sandbox, I suspect.

It was awesome - doubly so because I had literally zero interest in a "deepest africa/indiana jones" adventure, so went into it quite skeptically. Soul's for Smuggler's Shiv totally turned that around - it remains one of my players' favorite adventures I've eve run.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

Personally, I think sites which were distributing others' PDFs should have made it clear that they werent guaranteeing the downloads would be available in perpetuity.

That doesnt really relate to the trust issue though - people trusted WotC not to pull the rights of distribution and WotC betrayed that trust. They had the right to do what they did, but given other RPG companies allow sites to offer perpetual downloads, wasnt it reasonable to assume WotC would also?

Trust isnt about doing what's legal it's about doing what's expected.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:

an AP that has more roleplaying elements in it is something I've always wanted, and I always punch up the roleplay elements in APs I develop. I'm certainly intrigued in pushing it further... but as someone upthread mentioned... the game's core design is a combat simulator, and the further we drift from that, the further we drift into new areas that, like Mythic, will change the game and how it's played. Perhaps in ways you or I can't predict.

So... it's a tricky thing to do.

Fwiw, i thought the first instalment of Serpent's Skull was brilliantly pitched in terms of the role playing/combat mix. There was enough there with the NPCs for the group to interact with those that caught their eye and ignore those who didn't.

One of the risks with "role playing encounters", in my experience, is when they're a mandatory part of the plot, they can feel quite stilted when the PCs just don't care for the people/scene involved. A detailed set of backgrounds and relationships means that, whoever the PCs decide to latch onto, I will be well placed to flesh out the interaction and progress the plot. That becomes more difficult (or feels more contrived) when the module has a key NPC the players "should" talk to but my group just don't care about them, or miss the cues.

Of course, the same happens if there's a key NPC the players "should" fight but the group just don't care about them, or miss the cues.

If the role playing encounters are a mandatory part of the plot, then they should be tied into the plot enough that the party will care about them. If the party doesn't care about the plot, then you have larger problems.

I'm only speaking from my experience.

In my experience, mandatory combat encounters the players fail to see the importance of are not as stilted as mandatory roleplaying encounters the players dont care about.

In depth background material and NPC write-ups helps me avoid that problem.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:

an AP that has more roleplaying elements in it is something I've always wanted, and I always punch up the roleplay elements in APs I develop. I'm certainly intrigued in pushing it further... but as someone upthread mentioned... the game's core design is a combat simulator, and the further we drift from that, the further we drift into new areas that, like Mythic, will change the game and how it's played. Perhaps in ways you or I can't predict.

So... it's a tricky thing to do.

Fwiw, i thought the first instalment of Serpent's Skull was brilliantly pitched in terms of the role playing/combat mix. There was enough there with the NPCs for the group to interact with those that caught their eye and ignore those who didn't.

One of the risks with "role playing encounters", in my experience, is when they're a mandatory part of the plot, they can feel quite stilted when the PCs just don't care for the people/scene involved. A detailed set of backgrounds and relationships means that, whoever the PCs decide to latch onto, I will be well placed to flesh out the interaction and progress the plot. That becomes more difficult (or feels more contrived) when the module has a key NPC the players "should" talk to but my group just don't care about them, or miss the cues.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

Yeah, the city book was really limited by page count too, IMO. When I read it, it just felt like they didn't have enough room to do the place justice. One of the reasons I'd like an Absalom AP is in the hope they'd also release an Absalom hardcover.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

Fair enough. I never read it in a book, it was just how it was explained to me. I like it better that way anyway - even if it is a new thing, rather than a return to how it was intended.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

Wasnt the point of prestige classes initially supposed to be that they were setting related - taking one was tying your character to the campaign world in addition to making a mechanical decision?

I thought Paizo's shift back to tying them tightly to Golarion was an acknowledgement (or a return, perhaps) of that philosophical approach.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

I could definitely use more Varisia. The more fleshed out it gets the better, in my view.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

Ahh, cheers. I did wonder if there was already the facility for that. Terms like "RSS feeds" are beyond my understanding (and tend to induce cold sweats) but I'll look into it.

Thanks, vic.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

I can understand that. If I could sort of create a "watch list" of publishers, that collected items as they were added to your store, until I removed them or ordered them, that would be a decent substitute.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

You're very welcome. I'm glad some have started arriving.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
organized wrote:
I don't want to know about total amount spent. Ignorance is bliss there.

Yeah, maybe not automatically displayed, but every now and again I review my expenditure and it's currently a pain to work out what I spent at Paizo last year (or whatever). I'm also vaguely curious as to average order value and proportion of that spent on shipping and so forth - the more automatic counting I can get from the site, the better in my view.

Fair enough it shouldnt be hitting you in the face every time you check your account though. Only if you ask it to. :)


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Joshua Goudreau wrote:
Vic Wertz wrote:

We're going to do a very special foldout cover.

Unlike other foldouts, it won't give you two extra full pages—it'll just extend the width of the spine by an eighth of an inch so that we can fit "100" on it.

I suspect sarcasm...

Now I feel foolish. :(


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

Yeah, I understand that argument and I'm not really saying it "should" be different, so much as it's annoying. Especially in my case, where cost isnt the issue but speed is. (I wouldnt mind paying more for DHL's superior service, for example).


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

Yeah, that's what I meant really. (I don't have high hopes for many of them actually getting implemented).

I wouldn't feel any pressure - when I've requested them previously the posts have generally sunk pretty swiftly - hardly a clamouring of support from other paizonians. :)

Cheers


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:

To a certain extent, the point of Mythic was to "break" the system and to allow mythic characters to do things that non-mythic characters cannot do. It does certainly change the game and how it's played... certainly more so than I'd anticipated with Wrath of the Righteous. But it sounds like there's plenty of folks who are enjoying how those changes work... so it's not a bad thing for everyone.

THAT SAID... an AP that has more roleplaying elements in it is something I've always wanted, and I always punch up the roleplay elements in APs I develop. I'm certainly intrigued in pushing it further... but as someone upthread mentioned... the game's core design is a combat simulator, and the further we drift from that, the further we drift into new areas that, like Mythic, will change the game and how it's played. Perhaps in ways you or I can't predict.

So... it's a tricky thing to do.

Would it be possible (and less risky) to push the boundaries in this direction in the module line, perhaps? Hangman's noose was one of my favourite early pathfinder modules and that seems perhaps similar to what's being asked for.

Maybe one of the new larger modules would be a good "testing ground" to see how it was received.

Edit: like the other two just suggested too. Serves me right for replying without reading the thread.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

I'll make a note thanking you. :)


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Tangent101 wrote:
Also, this assertion basically says "if you want to roleplay, Pathfinder isn't for you so go find a different gaming system." In short you're telling Paizo customers that they are choosing the wrong product and they should leave and go to their competitors. In the long run this will drive Paizo out of business.

Is this to me? Which "assertion"?


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

It's irrational, but I always find a page of repeated art (even if expanded in some way) as a page of lost opportunity.

...although:
That impression might change if it's shamelessly stolen from another publisher...


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Justin Franklin wrote:
For some reason I am guessing Nidal.

Ooo I hope so. That'd be fantastic. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

I've made a number of requests at variable levels of reasonableness over the years and since you're now the go-to person for that kind of thing, I thought I might list the things I wish your website did for me. :)

I'd love to have the following features:

  • Ability to preorder PDFs
  • A total of amount spent on order history ("You have 515 orders in your order history worth a total of $x.xx" - even better if I could designate a period of time)
  • A place to hide (if not permanently remove) aliases
  • Probably dreaming here, but I'd love to be able to buy a PFS season as one big PDF.
  • Pathfinder legends subscription
  • Syrinscape subscription (though I've bitten the bullet now, so perhaps that doesnt matter)
  • A more transparent sidecart/preorder/backorder setup. Sometimes it seems like your system spawns an order knowing that one or two items arent going to be available for a while. Admittedly CS can always sort it out for me, but they'd probably prefer that I could do it myself. Personally, I'd like to be able to open up an order and see a list of estimated dates of arrival for each item so I could zip down it manually shifting things back to my sidecart if I dont want to wait (or possibly even cancelling them if they were non-subscription items?).
  • Related to the last, but I'd really like it if the system didnt label things backorders/out of stock/unavailable when I order the last one. In fact, it would be great if it told me precisely that I did have the last copy reserved - so I at least knew not to cancel it!
  • An ability to subscribe to third party products (ie everything from Legendary Games, Wizards of the Coast or whatever). If I had the ability to move things around and cancel stuff as referenced above, this would be awesome.
  • As a slightly less awesome option to the last (and perhaps I can already do this) I'd love a feature where I could mark a list of publishers and go somewhere to see any new products, preorders or otherwise, which have been added to the store since last time I checked (so I could then mark them as "viewed"). I hate learning that something cool has come out and then gone out of stock before I even knew about it. :(
  • I'd like to be able to use DHL or other freight companies (though I understand that doesnt really belong here, I'll include it for completeness).

Hmm...I think there's more, but I can't remember them all at the moment. Nonetheless, if you can make any of those happen, I'd appreciate it. :)

I figure it's possible I can do some of that stuff with wishlists and/or RSS Feeds (or something?) so if anyone dropping by has any idiot-proof instructions on how to fulfill any of those requests already I'd appreciate any suggestions.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

I enjoy lower magic campaigns, by and large. I think Odraude's list is really useful to keep in mind. I'd also make sure your players want to play a low-magic game (and understand it to mean the same thing you do). That seems to me to be the heart of the problem in most of these genre-challenging situations - if the DM isnt running the game the players want to play, someone isnt going to enjoy themselves.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

I think the new look is better, however it would (will?) probably irritate me in my grumpier moments to have a clearly delineated "set" of books with half one look and half the other.

Personally, I'd suggest making the switch but, from time to time, I will be irritated. :p


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Odraude wrote:
I'd be surprised if it wasn't Absalom honestly. It always felt weird, that it's been played up as like the analogue of the Free City of Greyhawk, but there haven't been large adventures that take place in there. I think there's really only been some PFS modules.

I dont have a link, but I'm sure I remember that being semi-officially stated, in fact. That Absalom was kind of PFS's playground, rather than being particularly well suited to being fleshed out in an AP (Hangman's noose was a pretty cool Absalom module, but it could have been set anywhere, to be frank).

It was a long time ago and wasnt anything strict along the lines of "we'll never..." but I'm 99% sure it was a staff member in the know, rather than just random speculation by a paizonian.

It would be great if the next AP was Absalom related though. The Absalom sourcebook was always in need of expansion, in my opinion.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

Shipping is one of my only grumbles in buying stuff here. I'm used to paying international charges, so the cost doesnt bug me (and I pretty regularly receive subsidised shipments as well) but the lack of choice is something that irritates me from time to time.

I dont mind the time taken packing the order (and it's always very well done), however the fastest USPS service to Australia is pretty terrible compared to DHL (like nearly a week difference if I get it from Noble Knight Games plus DHL is usually cheaper and comes with tracking in that specific instance too).

I'm hoping some of the other freight companies can eventually get their toe in the door here.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

I'm not responding to that specific conversation. Maybe I misunderstood this bit (which was what I quoted and did find peculiar):

Quote:
I've seen this bandied about a few times now, and I'm having a lot of trouble accepting that it's anything more than, "In my day Wizards couldn't cast cantrips at-will, so that's how it should be!" I'm not a fan of tradition for tradition's sake, especially when it comes shackled to a host of headaches and awkward asymmetries.

That seemed broader to me than some specific poster, but maybe I just read too much into it.

I'm certainly idiosyncratic in what I like and dont make any claim that game designers "should" cater to my tastes. Nonetheless, I'm regularly expressing views in favor of vancian magic, caster-martial disparity, imbalance as a virtue, etcetera. If your characterisation/parody above wasnt intended to encompass my views, then I just misunderstood. It sounded like you meant people like me.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Scott Betts wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:
I've seen this bandied about a few times now, and I'm having a lot of trouble accepting that it's anything more than, "In my day Wizards couldn't cast cantrips at-will, so that's how it should be!"

In my case it's: "In my day Wizards couldn't cast cantrips at-will, and that's how I like it!"

Does it have to be anything more? Stating one's preference doesnt have to be convincing to anyone else.

It doesn't have to be convincing to anyone, but I don't see any reason that people can't comment on how they don't believe it to be convincing. This is a discussion board.

Sure, but who are you discussing with? It seems like an odd conversation - kind of like hearing someone say "I like heavy metal music" and replying "But it's nowhere near as influential as classical!"

I like wizards with very limited magical resources. Replying that an opinion is not convincing just seems like a non sequitur to me. I never intended it to be convincing, it was just a point of view.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

I guess I see all RPGs as on something of a spectrum from rule heavy to rules light. Pathfinder is at the rules heavy end and I dont see the point in writing adventures which dont cater to that approach (and it's inevitable strengths and weaknesses). I may be misunderstanding, but this sounds like you're speaking more of shifting the approach to how Pathfinder is generally played. Whilst that would suit me down to the ground as I much prefer games with minimal mechanics and more narrative/descriptive/roleplayed resolutions, I dont see the dice-rolling/statistic based resolution approach as a flaw - just the way Pathfinder does it.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Scott Betts wrote:
I've seen this bandied about a few times now, and I'm having a lot of trouble accepting that it's anything more than, "In my day Wizards couldn't cast cantrips at-will, so that's how it should be!"

In my case it's: "In my day Wizards couldn't cast cantrips at-will, and that's how I like it!"

Does it have to be anything more? Stating one's preference doesnt have to be convincing to anyone else.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

Thanks, Sharaya. I'm happy to be retrospectively charged for the surplus 4 decks, by the way - I'm going to be getting another bunch when the next base set comes out anyhow.

Cheers
Steve


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Tangent101 wrote:
Okay. Here's one problem I have with the d20 system - it de-emphasizes roleplay and increases the importance of die-rolling.

...

Quote:

I want roleplaying. Roleplaying! I want my players to go through an encounter and have that plaintive little voice ask "can he do that?" I want my players to prevail without ever having drawn a sword. I want them to pull an Asimov in "Foundation and Empire" and defeat the Mule in a verbal argument within the first page of 11 pages of debate and dialogue.

And I want Paizo to take that chance and create that product. I think they would be better for it. And I think we as GMs and players would be better for this.

I dont quite understand why you want them to do that within the system you think isnt really designed for it. Given you think the system de-emphasizes roleplay and you want roleplay - why not just play another system?

Pathfinder seems to me to involve lots of numbers and other objective elements and is well suited to combats or other events resolved with dicerolls. I dont see much value in trying to write APs to suit an approach which isnt so heavily aligned with the system's strengths.

For my part, I dont get a lot of use out of all the statblocks since I generally run Paizo APs in other systems (so I'm ultimately going to do well out of the change you're advocating for). It's just that when I buy an adventure written for a combat heavy, statistic laden game like pathfinder, I expect lots of combats and dicerolling.

Changing the APs without changing the system seems like putting the cart before the horse to me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

Well, yes. I want a good AP, of course.

The storyline is the important thing for me though, I'd hate to miss out on a whiz bang story just because the mythic rules weren't perfectly understood (or because they try it once and then move on when it didn't work out the way they intended).

Almost every AP has problems. I'd rather paizo learn from them than try everything once and then give up. I think occassional misfires is the price of innovation. Mythic is a whole new thing - I really enjoyed the difference in scope that they were able to play with.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

I'd be up for something like that. Although I'd vote for the great beyond over distant worlds.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

I'd like to see another mythic storyline too.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

Hi paizo

I just received order 3133136 (4 ultrapro PACG deck protector packs) and discovered that I already seemed to have received them. Order 3132951 (for 20 packs) had arrived a week or so previously and included two boxes of the packs. I had assumed each box contained ten packs, however it turns out that each box contains twelve packs.

Long story short - I now have 28 packs (and think I've only paid for 24). I'm happy for you to charge me the difference, but figured I'd draw it to your attention, in case you're inadvertently shipping out packs of twelve and only counting them as ten.

Of course, there's always the chance I've actually ordered twenty eight packs (I probably will eventually). In which case, just disregard this post. :)

Cheers
Steve


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Exo wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
I would say that I think you're putting too much emphasis in your own experience. I suspect that there arent many in your situation - who received decks from different printings and for whom it is a big issue. From what I see they have no problem with repeat business
I think there are more people than you suspect who are getting sets with different printings. For example, and the only example I can speak to from experience: Amazon.com is selling the base set, the addon, and all adventure decks as if they were the same printing. You cannot order a certain printing, they are just selling all the products of this line willy-nilly. So if you hear by word of mouth that this game is great, and you go to amazon and buy yourself a set, you will more than likely end up with different card sizes within that set.

Yeah, I meant that I dont think it's having a significant impact on sales (In response to: "What I am saying is that when you are making a CARD game, Quality Assurance has to be paramount, even, dare I say it, between printings, or you aren't going to get much repeat business."). The problem of mismatched sizes is clearly a thing - a lot of people seem to be dealing with it (via hunting down the correct versions or sleeving). Or they're accepting it as 'one of those things'. For my part, it would bug me, but it wouldnt make the game unplayable. I appreciate we each have different standards though - I didnt mean to suggest you were alone in your view, it was a comment on the commercial effect.

Quote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
I suspect that Paizo are more disappointed than you are in how this turned out. Nonetheless, things like this happen. What they have consistently demonstrated is an ability to learn from their mis-steps and put things in place to ensure they arent repeated. They got the first batch printed in China and the quality was unacceptable so they switched to a superior printer for the second printing and future sets - there is a problem between different printings, but if they'd stuck with the Chinese printer for reprints of the RotRL expansions there'd still have been an issue, given the color matching problems.

My gut agrees with you here. From the random posts I've seen from the folks at Paizo, they seem very genuine, very grounded, and very much for the gamer. A company I would want to support and keep track of, to see what else they might have up their sleeves.

Except that I just spent a ton of money on one of their products that is simply unplayable in the state that I got it in. I did see the color variances in my Chinese printed base set, which was a turn off, certainly. I was a bit disappointed in that, but it was forgivable because: things happen, and the game was still playable. I was still having a lot of fun with the game until I got to the US printed Adventure Deck 3. Suddenly the game became unplayable, and here we are. I didn't get on these boards and cry about the color issues of the Chinese printing, because it wasn't a deal breaker for me. What IS a deal breaker is when you spend X amount of money on something (a game, a car, anything) and it is unusable.

Steve Geddes wrote:
I'd encourage you to bear that approach to errors/troubleshooting in mind in deciding whether to continue picking up PACG sets. The first one may have had unacceptable Quality Control issues, in your mind, but it seems to me that issue has been addressed for future sets. Not buying those on the grounds that you were unhappy with the lack of redress with RotRL might be a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

True enough. Yet it feels like, for now at least, that I will be doing just that. I have no inclination to go searching out for another Paizo product after this fiasco. Guess I'm gun shy, and maybe I will miss out on some of the good fun that these folks can pump out, but at least I will *certainly* miss out on any other nightmare scenarios that might be in store for me instead (ala buying a card game that comes with different sized cards which are supposed to be shuffled into eachother in order to play the game).

Fair enough. There’s certainly plenty of games out there. For my part (as a long term Paizo fan) I wont pretend there’s never any issues, but they’re very committed to learning from their mistakes and making the next games better.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Exo wrote:
What I am saying is that when you are making a CARD game, Quality Assurance has to be paramount, even, dare I say it, between printings, or you aren't going to get much repeat business.

I would say that I think you're putting too much emphasis in your own experience. I suspect that there arent many in your situation - who received decks from different printings and for whom it is a big issue. From what I see they have no problem with repeat business (maybe there's about to be a massive drop off in subscriptions with Skulls and Shackles, but that isnt my impression).

I suspect that Paizo are more disappointed than you are in how this turned out. Nonetheless, things like this happen. What they have consistently demonstrated is an ability to learn from their mis-steps and put things in place to ensure they arent repeated. They got the first batch printed in China and the quality was unacceptable so they switched to a superior printer for the second printing and future sets - there is a problem between different printings, but if they'd stuck with the Chinese printer for reprints of the RotRL expansions there'd still have been an issue, given the color matching problems.

Without denying how annoying it obviously is for you, I'd encourage you to bear that approach to errors/troubleshooting in mind in deciding whether to continue picking up PACG sets. The first one may have had unacceptable Quality Control issues, in your mind, but it seems to me that issue has been addressed for future sets. Not buying those on the grounds that you were unhappy with the lack of redress with RotRL might be a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

I also hope they embrace the OGL (I dont really understand the terminology "release 5E under the OGL" since the core 3.5 books werent OGL were they? It'd be good if they updated the SRD though to include mechanics like advantage/disadvantage).

I'm hoping the Necromancer games kickstarter demonstrates to them that it's going to happen anyway and they may as well garner the goodwill and 3PP support, rather than try and fight it.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

Hi CS people

Would someone mind glancing in the direction of my July sub just to ensure everything is looking okay?

Im not really in a rush, but I've got a bunch of merged orders, sidecart orders and things now listed as back orders, etcetera and I've seen that mess things around sometimes.

Of particular interest (read: source of paranoia) are the three limited edition comics. I really don't want to miss out on them.

Cheers
Steve


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

And now this thread appears to have three invisible posts...you guys and your mystic, mod powers.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

Me too. I'd love to see a mythic module or two, personally.

1 to 50 of 6,964 << 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.