Steve Geddes's page

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

Everyone should have received a pm spelling out what requests I was able to meet. As I said in those, I'll be shipping everything out over the coming week.

If you thought you were going to get a pm from me and didnt, let me know in case something slipped through the cracks.

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

Maybe it would get tired, but I like gold digger.

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

Send me a pm if there's something you like even if you haven't been around here much - there's a lot of "popular" requests and some less so. If you want something nobody else asks for I'm happy to send it your way.

I just wanted to be clear that, in the case of competing demand, I'd be favouring those who I recognise from their posts here, that's all. :)

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

You could just ignore DR couldn't you? The PCs will presumably be doing less than "expected" damage anyhow without magical boosts (to both hit rolls and damage), so they've kind of got a hit point boost anyhow.

One thing I've done is to allow people to ignore some of their opponent's DR equal to the PCs level. That way heroes are still heroes but its more intrinsic to them, rather than their gear. (Note that when it comes to rules I favour "quick and easy" over "balanced and realistic" so this might be a very poor low magic rule. It worked okay for us though).

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

Steve Geddes wrote:

But I mean how do you practically distinguish between them - what would suggest to you that this was a random selection from a list or the scene the DM had decided was going to happen?

What does that have to do with my preferences about random encounters?

Err...Maybe I misunderstood. I thought you meant that you liked playing in a game where the encounters were randomly selected from a list of preprepared scenes rather than where the scenes were just determined by the DM. I wondered how you would tell (since having a preference between two things which you cant distinguish between seems a little odd to me).

I'm not challenging you, I just dont get what you mean.

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

Ah. I dont read PDFs very well, sadly. I thought you could just keep retraining it until you reached your maximum.

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

Sure (that's true of just about anything really). But I mean how do you practically distinguish between them - what would suggest to you that this was a random selection from a list or the scene the DM had decided was going to happen?

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

Does the cost of retraining hit points seem cheap to anyone else?

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

As a player, how can you distinguish between a randomly selected encounter from a list of preprepared scenes from just a preprepared scene?

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

I like encounters randomly picked from a list of preprepared scenes.

You mean as a DM?

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

We like the tension argument so when we play PF, the spell casting player rolls their targets saving throw. When the monsters cast spells, the player rolls their own.

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

Steve Geddes wrote:

I have a feeling I didn't explain myself well. I didn't mean that professional rpg designers just sit around playing all day, nor that its easy to get a Playtest session happening. What I meant is that they know what kinds of feedback to give. They know the rules well enough to anticipate where problems are going to arise.

Only to a point. They can anticipate where problems they've previously encountered before will arise. They can spot the obvious "problem" feats that are too good. They can miss ones that render other feats obsolete.

Compare Penetrating Strike to Clustered Shots.

There is never a situation where Penetrating Strike is better than Clustered Shots, yet it has a much steeper curve to get to (12th level is the earliest access point)

Both of these feats are good, but Clustered Shots is something that everyone just takes.

What Ashiel understands better than most is that Pathfinder is an overlay of multiple effectiveness curves: Hit points accumulated versus damage, healing versus damage, To-Hit numbers versus AC. Ash understands the numbers behind the system as a systematic whole.

Of the game devs I've interacted with at Paizo? Few do, because to them, the overlapping curves aren't The Game, they're just how things are, and they can't actually change them without doing a massive new edition...which the company is going to put off for as long as possible, and forever is something they're hoping for.

Dev teams who work with this stuff on a day to day basis really don't like dealing with either of the key ingredients of a playtest group: The annoying prick breaking the rules, and the village idiot.

What happens when they playtest is that they playtest with people they know and play styles they know, and if their friends don't experience problems, well, the problems don't exist.

Except that they do. It's a blind spot and an acknowledgement that Phases 2-3-4 are necessary...and often skipped when doing this under deadline pressure.

Well, I've never spoken to them about it, but I have read posts by Sean where he's basically nailed my view/experience far more succinctly and eloquently than I could have. I also think the Beginner Box is a sign they really get "people like me" (a view reinforced when I read the transitions document).

I'm impressed that Pathfinder has done such a spectacular job of capturing the 3.5 fans (who I consider to be non derogatory "system nuts" by default) whilst simultaneously keeping people like me interested, even if not totally sold. It seems to me they must have a pretty broad view of the market to be capturing both extremes.

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

Fair enough - sorry for hassling so soon (I didnt remember it being that recently). I guess I've only just started to notice the recent price increases, plus have made a few more nobleknight purchases.

I'm glad to hear there's a kind of 'annual review'. Hopefully it will make sense for you to broaden the options eventually. Cheers.

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

Who says they have to be combats?

Most of them arent combats (in our experience, anyhow) but some of them are.

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

Hi vic.

I know you've looked into it before and there were a variety of issues not immediately obvious to us, however I wondered if you've recently looked into the viability of providing a DHL option for us overseas customers?

Since the recent hike in USPS pricing, I've noticed a substantial difference when I order from Nobleknightgames who offer both options. Ordering from them, the various USPS shipping options to Australia are typically around the same as yours. What they call "DHL express" is substantially cheaper (my most recent shipping charge being around $50 compared with around $100 from the USPS option). It also provides tracking for international customers and is noticeably quicker.

I appreciate there's a bigger picture re volume pricing and so forth - presumably you get a cheaper USPS domestic rate given the amount of international shipping you do, but given the disparity has grown so much, I wonder if it's worth looking into again?

It's not a dealbreaker for me, obviously but there have been one or two times when I've bought from Nobleknightgames rather than paizo. If I'm looking at one book as fast as possible, I can usually get it cheaper and quicker from them, which is a shame.

Cheers
Steve

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

Thanks, Sara. I figured it'd be ok, but technophobia being technophobia...

Cheers
Steve

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Steve Geddes wrote:

It was a one off celebration of paizo's anniversary, the launch of pathfinder, etcetera.

Here is the post from vic on the topic, in which he asks us to squash the idea. He has lots of other really thorough posts if you search his history for compilations or reprints.

Vic:

"Seriously, guys, please stop asking for other compilations. It's not going to happen, and I don't want people who don't read carefully thinking it's likely to happen.

One of the main reasons for not doing this one is that just having the notion out there that we *might* do this for other APs is harmful. I'd really appreciate it if everybody would help squash that idea whenever and wherever it is raised.

This is a unique circumstance."

Lol - in other words:

"Seriously guys, as paying customers and the very lifeblood of everything we do here at Paizo, stop asking for things you'd like to buy. "

Wow.

Not really. If you read all his posts on this topic, rather than just that snippet i quoted, it's more "Please keep giving us feedback. Please keep telling us what you want. But in this one, specific, very unique circumstance - please understand that we can't do it and that the mere presence of requests for it is a risk. Now that you know the answer and the reasons for it, we'd really like you to keep your enthusiasm in check. Otherwise people skimming the boards will think that we sometimes do these compilations as a matter of course, or that its likely to happen again eventually."

That comment was addressed to a bunch of us who'd been batting that specific idea around over a bunch of threads, it's not a statement of general policy regarding customer feedback pertaining to all their products.

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

One of the few things I actually dislike about Golarion is the presence of world spanning organisations (pathfinders, red mantis, apsis consortium, etcetera). In my mind that does run counter to the "PCs are the heroes" schtick paizo generally try to convey. However, it's easy enough to deemphasise those organisations, to downplay their reach and effectiveness, or to assume that they are all engaged in perpetual, finely balanced struggles with rivals.

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

Now, I also don't run Pathfinder. I go with more old-school games (Castles & Crusades is my current game). Combats go a lot faster when players don't have to look over a list of feats or a tactical battle grip trying to decide what trick to pull out next and where to maneuver to maximise AOOs, reach weapons, and flanking bonuses.

Yeah, I forgot to mention that. The slower nature of most modern RPG combats is another reason I don't really favour them in pathfinder. With the older games its easier to chew through a round in a few minutes, even with lots of combatants. That makes random encounters less of a drag/distraction from the story.

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

Hi paizo people

I'm presumably worrying needlessly, but I have both a deluxe and a regular comics sub. Am I right in thinking that I'll get one copy of all the regular covers with two copies if the paizo.com exclusives for both the regular series and the more limited story arcs?

I figured that's likely to happen, but recall some oddities when the double sub was set up, so thought I'd raise it ahead of time.

Cheers
Another difficult customer

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

Steve Geddes wrote:

I suspect their Playtest sessions are both more effective and efficient, as well.

In my experience, generally not.

One of the things that happens in small game companies is that the days are long, and you're *staring* at this stuff for hours every day. By the time your "recreational" time comes around, all of your co-workers are also a little crispy around the edges.

What usually happens is someone says "I've got a mod for rule X."

And everyone else is too busy doing the thirteen other jobs they have to do around the office to really give a good sounding board. There will be company-mandated playtest times, often unpaid save for company provided pizza. You get more sounding board time when you're the amateur.

Playtesting isn't as fun as just playing. Playtesting with the guys at the office is a great way to get a serious case of "everyone I know plays it this way" blinders, too. Because everyone "knows" the rules and how they're supposed to work, and the guy who goes "Look! I can kill a Balor in the surprise round!" generally isn't hired by the game company at all, so isn't present in the game company playtest sessions.

Every playtest group needs a small salting of annoying pricks. Not just "power gamers" but actual annoying pricks who get their ego boo out of proving they're "smarter" than the asshat dev who wrote the rule.

Every playtest group also needs a handful of village idiots, the guys who'll read rules and go "OK, what does that mean?" You know, the player in your group who you swear never reads the rules based on what they do.

I have a feeling I didn't explain myself well. I didn't mean that professional rpg designers just sit around playing all day, nor that its easy to get a Playtest session happening. What I meant is that they know what kinds of feedback to give. They know the rules well enough to anticipate where problems are going to arise.

If you want someone to look over your product, Sean Reynolds is going to give you better feedback than me. Hands down. Admittedly this bit of your post:

"Every playtest group also needs a handful of village idiots, the guys who'll read rules and go "OK, what does that mean?" You know, the player in your group who you swear never reads the rules based on what they do."

Is a pretty good description of our group. Nonetheless, although its no doubt useful to know, the way the rules read to the clueless isn't that important, surely. One of the joys of playing the way we do is that obscure or contradictory rules make very little difference to us. We won't get it right anyway, so we just skim read them and do something roughly in line with the book.

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

5 people marked this as a favorite.

A gift card sub where the user set the amount to be bought and converted to credit each month would be great. (Even better if they could also select the day the transaction happened).

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

I'm glad this line is doing well. Extra glad I get something written by Erik Mona.

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

Okay, I had no idea about that - that's just silly! I'm sure someone, somewhere can save money by fixing that..

And with the goblins 5-issue series it's no doubt going to get even worse for you guys. Good luck! :p

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I suspect their Playtest sessions are both more effective and efficient, as well.

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think the issue in that case, is that for me it doesn't make sense for anyone to argue anything if they are assuming that they are in the wrong.

Basically, people argue because they think they're right.

One of my degrees included a large chunk of philosophy. It was essentially nothing but argument (and the non philosophy stuff was maths). My later academic study (accounting) included a bunch of law. Both of those involve the ability to argue positions you disagree with, so perhaps my perspective is unusual.

Nonetheless, one often sees people overly confident in their own position. A little self doubt is a good thing, in my view. It helps avoid the situation you often see where people continue to pursue an obviously lost argument.

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

That's like saying chess is simpler than PF. It's not, it just has simpler rules. Generally, the simpler the rules, the greater the complexity of play in a game.

Weiqi has extremely simple rules, but is one of the deepest and most sophisticated games humanity ever devised.

It's not saying that, at all. It's pointing out that one can become an expert even in a field where the basics are easy to pick up. Like rpg design.

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

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Gorbacz wrote:

Assuming_Control wrote:

Yeah, I was wrong on that, Turns out my GM has been using that spell wrong since 3.5 and I didn't look into until you pointed it out.

But hey, I didn't publish Prone Shooter, either.

Sure, no probs. But, that means designers are perfectly qualified to make the same mistakes that you do, eg. writing the original Prone Shooter. And those mistakes shouldn't really surprise or rile you, because you're making them yourself.

I can be rather acrimonious on forums, but I promise I'm not as riled up as I come across.

My issue is that Steve Geddes is saying that we should defer to the devs and basically assume we're wrong until proven right.

To be perfectly honest, I don't give half a d*nm about sheltering peoples egos from my opinons, and I resent essentially being told not to rock the boat.

Im not telling you not to rock the boat and it has nothing to do with egos. In fact, I specifically said that people who disagree with the developers should argue their case and challenge them. The admonition to assume you're most likely the one in the wrong is simple statistics - if the person you're arguing your hobby with does it for a living you're probably the one who has missed something.

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

Steve Geddes wrote:

Assuming_Control wrote:

Steve Geddes wrote:

sunbeam wrote:

Oh for god's sake. You guys act like it takes some kind of talent for rpg design.

It doesn't. It's probably for the best that they understand the rudiments of probabilityand statistics, but I believe there have been successful game designers that haven't.

MOST of the people who post on this site, or any gaming site have the chops to be successful game designers. It just takes getting the gig and getting to to it every day. Being around others doing the same thing will improve your expertise at it. Having somewhere where it is no problem to find people to be in your game, and being able to try out what you have just created with other people helps too.

Tell me something. Do you think being a game designer takes more "talent" than being an insurance adjuster? Do you think game designers have shown more command of statistics than actuaries?

RPG designers are better at designing RPGs than insurance adjusters. They are worse statisticians than actuaries are.

And who's to say the insurance adjuster isn't also a RPG designer? I'm sorry but the reality is that RPG design doesn't require significant investment of time or effort (compared to say, engineering or medicine). The Bar isn't set very high. That isn't a knock on RPGs or their designers, it is simply a reflection of the fact that games designers are not experts (because the field rarely displays the depth necessary for there to be "experts" in the sense you are using the term in), or at least very few of them are.

I wouldn't presume to tell an astrophysicist his business, He's an expert after all, and I'm not qualified in that field. However, I and many others on this forum are perfectly qualified to discuss pen & paper RPGs on equal footing with Paizo (and WotC for that matter) staff.

You can get better and become an expert in just about anything. The fact it's easy to learn the basics doesn't imply it's

...

I was responding to this:

"(because the field rarely displays the depth necessary for there to be "experts" in the sense you are using the term in),"

It doesn't need "depth". Bridge is a far simpler game than any RPG, yet the professionals are almost archetypal experts.

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

Steve Geddes wrote:

sunbeam wrote:

Oh for god's sake. You guys act like it takes some kind of talent for rpg design.

It doesn't. It's probably for the best that they understand the rudiments of probabilityand statistics, but I believe there have been successful game designers that haven't.

MOST of the people who post on this site, or any gaming site have the chops to be successful game designers. It just takes getting the gig and getting to to it every day. Being around others doing the same thing will improve your expertise at it. Having somewhere where it is no problem to find people to be in your game, and being able to try out what you have just created with other people helps too.

Tell me something. Do you think being a game designer takes more "talent" than being an insurance adjuster? Do you think game designers have shown more command of statistics than actuaries?

RPG designers are better at designing RPGs than insurance adjusters. They are worse statisticians than actuaries are.

And who's to say the insurance adjuster isn't also a RPG designer? I'm sorry but the reality is that RPG design doesn't require significant investment of time or effort (compared to say, engineering or medicine). The Bar isn't set very high. That isn't a knock on RPGs or their designers, it is simply a reflection of the fact that games designers are not experts (because the field rarely displays the depth necessary for there to be "experts" in the sense you are using the term in), or at least very few of them are.

I wouldn't presume to tell an astrophysicist his business, He's an expert after all, and I'm not qualified in that field. However, I and many others on this forum are perfectly qualified to discuss pen & paper RPGs on equal footing with Paizo (and WotC for that matter) staff.

You can get better and become an expert in just about anything. The fact it's easy to learn the basics doesn't imply it's impossible to be an expert.

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

I don't think it works very well in pathfinder, although I like them in AD&D/etcetera. In games where gold is worth experience, wandering monsters are to be avoided as an unprofitable resource drain. It basically stops you from walking around the dungeon checking for traps every ten feet and requires a little more judicious thought in that regard.

In games (like PF) where defeating monsters has more (relative) reward, there's less reason to avoid them, meaning they lose their motivational value.

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

Oh for god's sake. You guys act like it takes some kind of talent for rpg design.

It doesn't. It's probably for the best that they understand the rudiments of probabilityand statistics, but I believe there have been successful game designers that haven't.

MOST of the people who post on this site, or any gaming site have the chops to be successful game designers. It just takes getting the gig and getting to to it every day. Being around others doing the same thing will improve your expertise at it. Having somewhere where it is no problem to find people to be in your game, and being able to try out what you have just created with other people helps too.

Tell me something. Do you think being a game designer takes more "talent" than being an insurance adjuster? Do you think game designers have shown more command of statistics than actuaries?

RPG designers are better at designing RPGs than insurance adjusters. They are worse statisticians than actuaries are.

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

You cannot compare sports (which are based off physical performance) to writing up a set of rules (which is based off mental factors), Ciretose. That's not even comparing apples to oranges. It's more like comparing apples to freaking grenades. Also, name some examples of those incompetent people shouting about their poorly planned out ideas instead of just stating something with nothing to back it up. Because really, I have seen people who do a better job than Paizo ever has and who never got paid for it (or have their works ignored because it's 3PP), Kirth being one of them, while you are here claiming these people are a myth.

I think it's about percentages. I mentioned Einstein doing great physics as a patent clerk and I think that's a relevant analogy. The amateurs might come up with a new theory of gravity, but mostly they're trying to build perpetual motion machines. Mostly - the output of the professional is going to be better than the output of an amateur, even though there are some hobby geniuses and some lousy professionals.

I think the lesson there is that, if you're an amateur in a debate with a professional, you should give them a serious listening to. Don't stop arguing your case, but operate from the position that you're probably wrong rather than the expert.

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ashiel wrote:

I said don't be foolish, which you kind of were acting foolish...

Ashiel wrote:

I said don't be foolish, which you kind of were acting foolish As for the nine year old thing, I never suggested that you lacked the comprehension of a nine year old. I said any nine year old could see the logical conclusion to a situation where one product isn't available versus another.

So basically what you are saying is that you did actually say he was foolish and had the comprehension of a 9 year old, you just don't think you should have to apologize for it, and he should stop being mad at you.

FWIW, Ashiel and I have pretty much worked out our misunderstanding via pm. I think it's fair to say we were having two different conversations.

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

Steve, I get what you mean with that, though there IS at least one AP* where the status quo shifts.

Yeah, they all have an impact but its not that huge (not at the death of a god level, anyhow). Jade regent is a pretty significant political event too.

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

** spoiler omitted **

What distinguishes golarion (IMO) is that in general, if the players win there's no dramatic change to the status quo. I don't really mind having huge negative consequences for failure but i dont want it to happen if its imposed by fiat (in a "...uh oh the god of magic is dead!.....again!" Kind of way).

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

1. Human-centric setting, but the god of humans is dead.

2. Kitchen sink where everyone will find a place for himself/herself.

3. Cosmology that takes a deep bow to Planescape.

4. Solar system that's full of life and wonder, drawing upon best science-fantasy traditions.

5. Best reinvention of gnomes, ever.

6. Gods are fascinating and colorful but distant and don't meddle in the world.

7. No realm-shattering events.

8. Global organizations such as Pathfinder Society or Hellknights.

9. Low intensity of high magic.

10. Kaer Maga, the city done right.

I like this list except for number 9 (Golarion always seems like it has high magic everywhere to me).

I'd replace that with:

9*. There arent many heroes beyond the PCs (and no widely operating 'good guys'). If you uncover a world threatening problem, you'd better do something about it - running to get help isnt going to work.

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

Fair enough. We're definitely going to approach these kinds of discussions from a different perspective (I think balance, consistency and completeness are not terribly important traits in a ruleset, for example - I'm willing to bet that view wouldnt sit well with you).

I would suggest we hold off on applying labels of foolish or 'understood by a nine year old' as it's hard not to take those things personally. If we engage again, I'll try and make wordier posts - I hardly went to much effort to be complete with rather a lot of 'reading between the lines' being implied. Sorry about that.

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If there was something other than just being contrary and trying to muddy any sort honest conversation that you were getting at then I'm all ears. Otherwise I'm just going to leave this conversation alone. Getting hammered by other posters for nothing leaves a bad taste in the mouth - especially when you're just trying to converse about not only your hobby but your community.

Gee how would you have responded if I'd called you foolish or suggested you lacked the comprehension of a nine year old?

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

At least, that's basically what I took from your posts. Unless there was some sort of point you were driving at. It's very possible I missed it through the many posts grossly misrepresenting my commentary, or acting like I shot the Paizo golem or something.

Misrepresenting? I thought this was your position:

.
You think that Paizo do a fine job, but that they occasionally drop the ball. They're only human after all and everyone makes the odd error from time to time. There are various desirable features a ruleset (or subsystem) should have and there are many examples where the amateur fans of the game have produced something which is superior (by that measure) than the 'officially sanctioned' product of the comparable time.

Is that wrong?

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

Yet apparently it was such a big problem for you that I could suggest that someone else could have made something of a higher quality than the endless pages of garbage that haunts 3.5's reputation to this day, unless it had lots of dollar signs attached to it.

Oh - you were talking to me about that "Paizo fanboi" stuff? Pathfinder isnt even my preferred roleplaying game so no, I wasnt objecting to any post you made suggesting that someone else might have done something better. I was objecting to any suggestion that quality was objective - I thought you subsequently agreed with that?

.
My point has always been that, if you're an amateur, you should approach disagreements with the professionals from the point of view that you're probably missing something rather than from the perspective that they are.

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

Steve Geddes wrote:

Mileage potentially varying is precisley what I mean by there being no objective measure of quality.

I'll be sure to remember that quality doesn't exist then. If "being functional" vs "being nonfunctional" is not a near universal measure of quality then we can deduce that quality is a myth.

I think it would be silly to say quality doesnt exit.

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

Steve Geddes wrote:

Ashiel wrote:

Your measure of quality or not quality seems to only extend so far as dollar signs are concerned, which means that we disagree on fundamental levels and there's not much point in discussing it further.

That's not my measure of quality. My claim is that there is no objective measure of quality.

I guess quality as I see it is whatever is more useful as a product. When I see things like prone shooter, elephant stomp, antagonize, and similar things in the books I buy from professionals, I am forced to look at things that actually work from other writers - many of which are fanmade products with no price tag - and accept that they are at least of equal or greater quality.

YMMV.

Mileage potentially varying is precisley what I mean by there being no objective measure of quality.

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

Steve Geddes wrote:

Creating a rule book is much more than creating rules. As an amateur you don't have to make the hard choices around space constraints, broad appeal and (crucially) deadlines.

This is precisely why amateurs often write better rules.

Publishing is not game design and the needs of publication, deadlines in particular, are contrary to the needs of good game design. Amateurs don't have deadlines. They can release when they're done. They can revise when they or their audience find problems. They can fix problems without worrying about word count preventing serious errors from getting locked in. Amateurs can iterate freely. Professionals have to get it right the first time, or at least get it wrong in a fashion that happens to use as much page space as getting it right would. Professional game designers aren't enough better than amateurs to overcome that limitation.

I think there's no doubt that amateurs can write better rules than professionals. My only dispute with what you've written here is the word "often". Einstein did a lot of great physics work as a patent clerk - yet there's a reason that physicists and mathematicians discard (without reading) all the unsolicited submissions from amateurs claiming to have unified the forces, proved that all perfect numbers are even or similar.

.
In general (I claim without argument) amateurs are usually worse than those who do it for a living. The stakes are so high for those whose livelihood depends on it whereas there's nothing but internet-pride on the line for the amateur. Potential homelessness is a decent motivator.

What that means is that, if you find yourself as an amateur consistently disagreeing with the professionals, you should factor in a serious dose of self-doubt. You might be Einstein, but you could be the nutter with the perpetual motion machine.

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

Your measure of quality or not quality seems to only extend so far as dollar signs are concerned, which means that we disagree on fundamental levels and there's not much point in discussing it further.

That's not my measure of quality. My claim is that there is no objective measure of quality.

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

The idea that sales records are an indication of the quality of a product is an extremely faulty premise and is often more reliant on marketing and financial backing than the actual quality of the product.

Because those of us who buy books are too "foolish" to purchase what we want and instead just purchase what we're told to?

.
What you value in a ruleset (consistency, balance, clarity, etcetera) is not what I value. You say "actual quality" as if that's some kind of objective measure, but there's no such thing.

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

I thought I'd post here rather than sending lots of individual messages - I am receiving people's pms. I'm just not going to respond to each individually until the end of the week. Then I'll close the offer and distribute books appropriately. Cheers.

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

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Steve Geddes wrote:

Ashiel wrote:

Steve Geddes wrote:

Ashiel wrote:

Steve Geddes wrote:

He's better than he used to be now that he's doing it for money.

Practice makes perfect.

He's better than he would have been if he'd not gone into business.

That seems like a pretty unsubstantiated claim. How can you prove this? And is there a reason you're ignoring the part where I pointed out how they produced a book - as amateurs - that was at the time much better than the professional alternative?

It is an unsubstantiated claim. It's my opinion. (I was rewording it, since it seemed like you'd misunderstood my point).

I didn't address the follow up point because I have no idea if it was better. How did you determine that? The only objective measure seems to be sales.

Well let's see...

If you went to the WotC boards and asked about expansion material or Complete Psionics. 9/10 people on those boards would tell you to ignore it and get Hyperconscious and Untapped Potentil instead, citing it as better balanced, better written, and more useful, leading me to the conclusion that it was in fact better received by its audience.

The audience for RPG rules are people who play RPGs, not the hardcore ones who post on a forum. (Presuming your 9/10 statistic was accurate).

.
"Lots of people on the internet agree with me" is not actually substantiation or we'd be outlawing vaccinations.

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

Steve Geddes wrote:

Ashiel wrote:

Steve Geddes wrote:

He's better than he used to be now that he's doing it for money.

Practice makes perfect.

He's better than he would have been if he'd not gone into business.

That seems like a pretty unsubstantiated claim. How can you prove this? And is there a reason you're ignoring the part where I pointed out how they produced a book - as amateurs - that was at the time much better than the professional alternative?

It is an unsubstantiated claim. It's my opinion. (I was rewording it, since it seemed like you'd misunderstood my point).

I didn't address the follow up point because I have no idea if it was better. How did you determine that? The only objective measure seems to be sales.

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

You've actually done the thing being compared. That was the point. Coming up with a few house rules is the equivalent of assembling a kit computer - not being a computer technician.