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

houstonderek's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 9,306 posts (9,610 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Pathfinder Society character. 9 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 9,306 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hitdice wrote:
houstonderek wrote:
Stuff about an aging customer demographic and realistic expectations.

Do you think WotC is looking ahead to the 50th anniversary at this point? I sort of feel like they must be, and sometimes think that they made such a fuss about the release of 5e in tandem with the fortieth anniversary to set D&D up as the slow and steady, reliable elder statesman of RPGs in 10 years time. Their multi-platform approach certainly seems to be slanted towards growing the brand name recognition rather than total RPG market domination.

Or, what do I know, maybe in 2018 they'll say, "Great news, nerds, we're releasing a new edition every 3 years, so open up those wallets!"

They might be. They can build slowly on the 5e frame for a while to at least keep a game on the shelves and keep the brand relevant enough to try to make a splash on the big Five Oh. A bit longsighted by modern corporate standards, but it's a nice theory to consider.

Liberty's Edge

Hasbro bought WotC for Magic:TG. D&D was a nice side bonus. People forget that. Hasbro doesn't care about the small potatoes TTRPG market, and they don't have to. I am just happy WotC stopped 4e and put out a core I can use with a lot of my old stuff. I don't expect much more than that, frankly.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Adjule wrote:
About my comment concerning published adventures: As was stated, I don't truly believe that anymore, and was not insulting anyone. Right now I am running a 4th edition adventure that I have attempted to convert to 5th edition, and then will be moving over to the Princes of the Apocalypse adventure. So yeah, I don't follow that line of thought any longer. It was a mindset that was born during a time when my only responsibility was school. There are times when I feel dirty running a published adventure instead of something I came up with myself, but that's because it can be tough completely changing one's views about something.

That's the other thing, the hobby is a lot OLDER now. The average age of TTRPG players, I imagine, is much higher than it was in the Eighties. Adults don't have the time to DIY stuff any more, and they also don't have the money to burn like we did when we were kids, so they'll buy one or two well supported systems, instead of getting several systems and making stuff up themselves.

Smaller, aging market with bills, kids, and limited gaming time. Not a great scenario for gaming diversity on a large scale.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I hate to break it to everybody, but the Eighties are over, TTRPG isn't anything close to the market it was when D&D was a huge fad, and console/PC gaming is much more lucrative and enjoys way more adherents. Hasbro isn't going to waste a bunch of time trying to recreate something that was lightning in a bottle and thrived because entertainment wasn't "on demand" and available for a mouse click back then.

I think that one informs the other, though. When D&D was at its peak, it was, even with all of the modules and whatnot, a DIY hobby. Now people expect everything to be available for purchase and download, and, with the tidal wave of instant gratification entertainment available now, the time sink that is creating your own stuff (which was a big part of the appeal back in the day, I think, since we had less distractions) isn't a viable option for a lot of people these days.

Basically, a small number of people want way more content than the hobby can reasonably accommodate, and WotC is going to take a bit of a hit because Hasbro (correctly, from a business point of view) sees more value in the name than the RPG, and is going to concentrate on building the name, not the niche hobby game it came from.

It's sad, but I think gamers live in a little bubble sometimes and don't realize that (because main stream culture is so geeky and SciFi now) the TTRPG hobby that spawned a lot of the meekness is quite small, the market is limited, and, thanks to the mistakes they made during 4e, Paizo (and their supporting 3pp friends) has quite a bit of that market on lockdown. Hasbro isn't going to waste a bunch of money trying to take customers from Paizo. They released a game that feels like a modernized retro-clone and makes some 3x burnouts happy, is a bit easier to get into if you're new, and basically keeps the brand on the shelves. I'm sure they have no real dreams of recreating the 3rd edition (relatively brief) revival of the hobby, and are happy to put out a decent game that people who like to convert forty years of material or like to do their own thing can enjoy, and publish a small amount of supporting material to keep relevant for a while. The brand has some buzz right now, and that will help when they release the video game version of 5E, which is where they really think they'll make their money.

Liberty's Edge

GM Tribute wrote:

I am curious. Will the 5ed conversion have a DC knowledge or skill roll? Or will the player knowledge = character knowledge.

I am recruiting for a grognard friendly giantslayers if anyone is interested. It will require regular weekday posting.

I plan on running it more AD&D style, and downplaying the dice randomly deciding if you can figure stuff out, meta or otherwise. Just makes for a quicker game, and adds the element of letting players get away with being smart and stuff. Plus, I have the advantage of knowing none of the group I'm considering assembling have been through the module, so that'll keep the meta-gaming honest, so to speak.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
houstonderek wrote:
Damn, I guess I have to gain a hundred pounds, grow a beard, and stop bathing now.
I'm never visiting Houston again if you do.

Please. My wife would never visit again if I did. ;-)

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
Arnwyn wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Arnwyn wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
The zhentarim are one of many poorly thought out evil organizations/governments in the forgotten realms campaign setting that for whatever reason was poised to control the world (or their part of the world) before being Scooby-Doo'd by the PC or Elminster. Their level of competence, overall scope of plans, and residence upon the evil/Neutral axis depends on who's writing the story/running the game.

Nope.

(Though I agree that the novels stink.)

can you elucidate?

Sure. Reverse your entire paragraph so it's the opposite of what you wrote.

(Other than novel-related stuff. Then your statement is accurate. But game stuff? Nope.)

then it is indeed the opposite because I liked the novels-or at least Richard Lee byers and Paul s Kemp. I have never encountered the Zhents in anything other than an easily defeated warlord of the week sense in game, although I found their attempts at creating a trade empire to be hilarious. The thayans and did it better. The Zhents are laughable chumps.

Before they started vomiting out FR novels like bulimic frat boy binge drinkers, mostly written by really, REALLY cheesy writers, the Zhents were a pretty scary Fascist group that used targeted assassination, propaganda, and deep moles to effect their insidious plans.

The horrible FR novel writers turned them into a combination of the Germans from Hogan's Heroes and KAOS from "Get Smart".

Liberty's Edge

GM Tribute wrote:

You are in an adventure and given this riddle:

"Round she is, yet flat as a board. Altar of the Lupine Lords. Jewel on black velvet, pearl in the sea. Unchanged but e'erchanging, eternally. What am I?"

You are DEFINITELY NOT A GROGNARD if you roll an intelligence check or any Knowledge check to see if your character knows the answer.

You are POSSIBLY A GROGNARD if you try to figure out the riddle.

you are PROBABLY A GROGNARD if you can answer the riddle.

Your are DEFINITELY A GROGNARD if you can name the module the riddle appears.

I was just converting that to 5e. Damn, I guess I have to gain a hundred pounds, grow a beard, and stop bathing now.

Liberty's Edge

LazarX wrote:
memorax wrote:

Ha I not only get on your lawn. I seed it with pesticide resistant weeds.

LazarX wrote:


Having gamed in those days, I would say that it would be more accurate to say that No one cared. There was not this big set of gaming conventions written in stone (or on the non-existent Internet). It was the NORM that GM's would pretty much do their own thing with different degrees of variance from the ruleset. In all the GMs I played with, not a single one of them held just or used all of the rules in the DMG or Player's Handbook. RAW wasn't even a term in those days.

Seconded

Having gamed with 1E then 2E. RAW was not a term in those days. OR RAI. If it was I never saw it until 3E.

I never saw it myself until people started adopting a herd mentality in online venues such as this one. What I do see is a growing unwillingness to experiment without some mass expression of prior approval. Without a willingness to embrace the prospect of failure, innovation grinds to a halt.

I will say that the seeds for the whole "RAW/RAI" thing were sewn in the pages of Dragon back in the mid-Eighties, when the Forum and Sage Advice sections gained traction. The only difference was the contrarian replies were spaced months apart, and the moderation was brutally strict. ;-)

Liberty's Edge

Oceanshieldwolf wrote:
Arbane the Terrible wrote:
Spook205 wrote:

We really need to come up with a commensurate term for the other end of this particular spectrum.

The anti-grognard, the guy who's on a perpetual quest for novelty and harbors a Hegelian belief that game systems are slowly marching towards a state of undefinable perfection.

RPG Hipsters?

"Oh, you're still playing D&D? That's cute. I do REAL role-playing with an Apocalypse World hack I've added some FATE elements to. Plus my custom rules for shotguns."

Huh. I had no idea hipsters were superior arrogant bigots. Go figure. Must be the bags.

"Superior arrogant bigot with 'retro' glasses and a very unmanly beard" pretty much defines "hipster".

Liberty's Edge

thejeff wrote:
Petty Alchemy wrote:
To clarify, "old-school feel" for me means I don't feel like I need tons of magic items/gold to succeed in 5e. Thanks to the bounded numbers, the big 6 aren't that taxing.
This is why I don't like the term "Old-school feel". It means something different to everyone. I've seen it used for the deadly, "Don't bother naming your character before 3rd level" style, for AD&D's "GM fiat" required style, now your "don't need tons of magic items/gold" thing. Probably others I'm forgetting.

Probably because people are discussing parts of a gaming style, not several different ones. Nothing you list nullifies any of the others.

Liberty's Edge

pH unbalanced wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
houstonderek wrote:
thegreenteagamer wrote:
When it comes to Grognards, my thoughts are usually, "if second edition was so good, why aren't you playing second edition?"
Because grognards are too busy playing OD&D or 1e?

yeah, 2e is kinda the bastard red-headed stepchild of D&D editions.

1e or 0e or B/X or BECMI/RC, that's the good stuff.

Was it even marketed as a new addition at the time? I just remember there being additional splat books, but the original PH and DMG still being valid.

But maybe I missed something -- I was mostly transitioning over to GURPS at the time.

Yeah, the big "SECOND EDITION" on the covers was kind of a give-away that maybe it was a new edition. The sanitation so Christians would stop whining. Yeah, it wasn't just a new edition, it was pretty much a step away from a play style, and a move toward a younger audience (hence the sanitation - no half orcs and their "icky back story", no more calling demons and devils demons and devils, no more assassins). It was AD&D if AD&D were made by Disney.

Liberty's Edge

All of the groundwork laid by Dragonlance coupled with Williams being hired in '84 came to a head, more or less. D&D started to lose the fad shine. It was pretty much the year that started the "modern" gaming style.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I remember "no one ever dies in his games" being as much a red flag back then as "everyone dies in his games", with the latter only being more popular because a gruesome death was more entertaining than the dice meaning nothing at all.

Liberty's Edge

Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:


In essence I kind of suspect that the 'Sandbox Era' if it can be called that would have been somewhere around the point when 1st was switching over to 2nd. Maybe a little before 2nd to some point after 2nd came out.

It pretty much died in '85.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I started playing in '79, both Moldvay basic and AD&D, and the only guys I consider "grognards" are the dudes with the painted minis, tape measures, and a sand box. Seriously, only the old school war gamers that were around before the three brown books probably actually merit the honor. Everyone else is a n00b, frankly. ;-)

Liberty's Edge

wraithstrike wrote:


Dice only exist to make noise, the GM should ignore them.

I see this way more in the "scripted death" games of today than I ever did back in the "let the dice fall where they may" sandbox days.

Liberty's Edge

I doubt he knows. It's pretty obvious to me he doesn't have any idea what "sandbox" means to a bunch of people who grew up in the sandbox era.

Liberty's Edge

thejeff wrote:
houstonderek wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Uchawi wrote:
The key is to mix up encounter challenges so it is hard for the players to predict the story pacing, so in that sense I develop an appropriate level encounter that may encompass multiple rooms, or create the same encounter above the characters levels. The same applies for single rooms, areas, regions, etc. A true sandbox in my mind is a roller coaster ride. You never know what is around the next corner.

How does that work?

My understanding of sandbox is that the GM doesn't restrict things to level appropriate encounters but lets the party figure out what they want to deal with. If they never know what's around the next corner, how can they choose properly?

They used to have things called "sages" and the like in earlier editions. People found out "what was around the next corner" by consulting them. If you go into the mountains and didn't bother to ask what might live in the mountains, and you run into the great wyrm that has lived there for centuries and everyone for hundreds of miles around knows it, it's on you for not asking.

Which, in Uchawi's mind, wouldn't be a true sandbox.

And we care what Uchawi thinks because…?

Seriously, how does the players taking initiative and playing intelligently make something "not a sandbox"?

;-)

Liberty's Edge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
thegreenteagamer wrote:
When it comes to Grognards, my thoughts are usually, "if second edition was so good, why aren't you playing second edition?"

Because grognards are too busy playing OD&D or 1e?

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Vincent Takeda wrote:

22? Man I've got dice twice as old as you. Grumble grumble. Uphill. Both ways... In the snow... Bah... baaaaah! Off with ye then.

Whippersnappers talking about Chuck Norris... Sheesh... The reason I dont shave my grognard beard is because each individual strand of this magnificent beard is alone tougher than Chuck Norris.

Rabble rabble rabble rabble.

Only twice as old? Whippersnapper! ;-)

Liberty's Edge

thejeff wrote:
Uchawi wrote:
The key is to mix up encounter challenges so it is hard for the players to predict the story pacing, so in that sense I develop an appropriate level encounter that may encompass multiple rooms, or create the same encounter above the characters levels. The same applies for single rooms, areas, regions, etc. A true sandbox in my mind is a roller coaster ride. You never know what is around the next corner.

How does that work?

My understanding of sandbox is that the GM doesn't restrict things to level appropriate encounters but lets the party figure out what they want to deal with. If they never know what's around the next corner, how can they choose properly?

They used to have things called "sages" and the like in earlier editions. People found out "what was around the next corner" by consulting them. If you go into the mountains and didn't bother to ask what might live in the mountains, and you run into the great wyrm that has lived there for centuries and everyone for hundreds of miles around knows it, it's on you for not asking.

Liberty's Edge

Hmmm, the commute is a little long. ;-)

Liberty's Edge

thejeff wrote:
Caineach wrote:
meatrace wrote:
houstonderek wrote:


Germany is also very selective about who they admit into a regular university type setting. They don't let just anybody get free college. If you don't have the academic chops you don't get to go. Period. No remedial classes for illiterates in German universities. That seems to be an American thing exclusively.
I've never heard of classes for illiterates at university though, so you'll have to elucidate me.
I've heard of them. Some colleges do remedial HS stuff. They just count towards certificates and not degrees.

Remedial HS classes are common. I'm not sure they go as far as "illiterates" though.

There's a long way between not quite ready for college English classes and "Can't read".

Yeah, it's called "functional illiteracy" and quite a few college grads these days suffer from it. I could link to all of the articles, studies, etc, about the language skills of our current crop of text/Tweet/emojii kids as they come out of college, but I might get carpal tunnel. Sorry.

Damn, remind me to not forget the "functionally" part next time.

Liberty's Edge

Quark Blast wrote:
Scythia wrote:

Perhaps we could set it up so that minors are no longer given a first name, and only those with names are citizen, with human rights. The only way to receive a name is to earn it by demonstrating knowledge, skill, or bravery. High school will go from basic daycare to a testing ground designed to weed out the rest and pass only the best. Fight for your right to exist.

Wait, that's that's not my education idea, it's my idea for the plot of a YA novel series (working title: Nomenclasher).

One of the Grognards here says Heinlein has already done that. He was apparently all about tests for citizenship.

Maybe not YA though… you might have something there.

I love people that completely miss Heinlein's point. ;-)

Liberty's Edge

meatrace wrote:

Or just make college free here to citizens and aliens alike, then you'll massively brain drain the rest of the world as all the smart folks come here.

Germany did something similar recently and I'm sure they're working the same strategy.

Germany is also very selective about who they admit into a regular university type setting. They don't let just anybody get free college. If you don't have the academic chops you don't get to go. Period. No remedial classes for illiterates in German universities. That seems to be an American thing exclusively.

Liberty's Edge

Like I said, I am done with Pathfinder Society. I might pop in and see if there are any 5e games at Comicpalooza, but that's the earliest I see myself looking at a convention. I'm done with PFS completely.

But, on a happier note, Kirth is moving back, so maybe I'll get a regular game going again.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andostre wrote:


I created a feat tree list for an earlier version of Kirthfinder (whatever version it was when I came onboard in 2009), and it was tricky.

I think you were in on the original play test. The idea pretty much started when we realized the Beta test was just for show, and the "we can fix it at the table" camp won.

Liberty's Edge

That was last weekend? Huh. Ever since they hired Frost v.2.0 to run FPS, my convention volunteering desire has dropped to close to zero.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
Quark Blast wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Quark Blast" wrote:
*And don't give me any asinine arguments involving adult consent. Just imagine your own mother/wife/daughter/sister "choosing" that sort of career path. Not a pretty life. Clearly those people are mentally ill and/or drug addicts.
No, but still better by far than being a medieval peasant.
Ha! Watch THIS and get back to me.

Yeah. It's incredibly horrible.

Is it on anything like the same scale, or even the same horror as black slavery in the US? Don't forget, it's not like anything was stopping their owners from sexually abusing them either.

No one's claiming all the problems are gone or even that we're not inventing new ones, but an awful lot really has gotten better. Life expectancy has risen, both at birth and at adulthood. Even with all the conflicts, deaths due to war are dropping.

Naive optimism isn't warranted. There's a lot of work to do. But cynicism isn't the answer either. Giving up doesn't help anyone.

There are truly poor people in America, no doubt, but there are a lot of "poor" people in America as well, with late model cars and Dish Network devices on their roofs.

It's relative. Poor people way back when had just about nothing, and it is still like that in a lot of places in the world, but Western nations, for the most part, have mitigated quite a bit of the worst parts of being poor. Most economically stagnant people in the West at least have some access to medical care, homes, and some form of transportation, and also have access to free education (which helps the people who have the mental toughness to overcome their disadvantage and break out of poverty), and a host of services to make sure they don't die of starvation.

Now, we do need to up our game when it comes to the mentally unfit and disabled (a good portion of the homeless here), as we are dropping that ball regularly, but, for the most part, in the West, the poor are much better off than at any time in history prior.

Liberty's Edge

Krensky wrote:
Kelsey Arwen MacAilbert wrote:
LazarX wrote:
I don't know. they no longer have open fist fights or outright duels in the Halls of Congress.
We haven't had anybody beaten with a cane on the floor of Congress in a woefully long time.
That we know of...

They all learned to be discreet after the Spitzer/call girl thing.

Liberty's Edge

LazarX wrote:
thejeff wrote:
LazarX wrote:
thejeff wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
thejeff wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Quark blast wrote:
Educating kids beyond their INT is like giving me course work on quantum theory - it's a demonstrable waste of time and money. However well intentioned.
Right, but for all but a few people that have severe handicaps there's something thats not beyond their int that will give them a better life than burger flipping. They might not design their Flipsomatic robot replacement but they can learn how to fix it.

Somebody's got to flip the burgers. Or do all the other menial tasks.

We need to make that not a horrible life. I mean, it's a horrible mind-numbing job no matter what. We don't have to compound that by also making people doing it live in poverty.

It shouldn't be a horrible mind numbing life it should be a horrible mind numbing few years you get to complain to your grandkids about.

Unless we bring in a lot more automation, there's an awful lot more menial labor to be done in this country than we have teenagers to do it for a couple of years each.

And even with that automation, there isn't enough high-end mentally stimulating work to keep everyone working.

Education is a good thing, but not everyone can have a job that actually uses four years of college. That's not how the job market is divided. That's why even the lower end jobs have to be enough to live on.

Yes, your Fordship.
Well, other than that Ford was jerk and that I don't think it's necessarily a good idea for an individual business - just one that's necessary for survival of a democracy.
I guess Aldous Huxley is a bit obscure for this venue.

When what you write basically becomes true, everyone is too medicated to care. ;-)

Liberty's Edge

GM Niles wrote:
Although, I still think that we don't have near the problem with crazy fans the way "Football" (Soccer) programs do in Europe.

Ever been to ANY sporting event in Philly? They can make even the most sociopathic soccer hooligan blush.

Liberty's Edge

NobodysHome wrote:

Well, in spite of people railing against things I never said, I still see nothing whatsoever coming out of this aside from a $25,000 fine for Aaron Rogers, since he went ahead and confessed to ball tampering.


  • The balls were reported at 2 psi under, but now that's under question. Considering the temperature change was good for almost a full psi, it's a pretty darned important number.
  • The report that a ball handler took the balls into the bathroom for 90 seconds is just silly. That's just piling on. OK, he *could* have done something. But if you have no evidence, shut up.
  • Again, the Pats have a ridiculously-low fumble rate, and people ask, "How long have they been underinflating the balls?" Well, you're jumping ahead of yourself, mister. We haven't even proved the answer of, "Once" yet. Don't go piling on 'til you've proved Case #1.

My objections are twofold:

#1: As mentioned, I'm "lawful". "Cheating is OK because football is a multi-billion-dollar form of entertainment" holds no weight with me whatsoever. I work for a company worth many times what the NFL is worth (kind of limits who I work for, but...). We compete on a daily basis for sales. Guess what? If we cheat/lie/mislead/bribe our customers, we get sued/fined/penalized. It's the nature of working in a multi-billion-dollar industry. The notion that we should "cut the Patriots some slack because football is ultra-competitive" offends me to the core. If you don't like a rule, lobby for it to be changed. Don't break it and hope you don't get caught.

#2: I'm an old-school Niners fan. I accept that all of their records will some day be broken. But watching them be broken by a team with a stream of asterisks after their wins (tuck rule, Spygate, InflateGate) is hurtful. Can't someone win honestly? Or at least cheat cleanly enough that no one notices?

Again the Patriots have already been tried, convicted, and penalized for cheating (Spygate). If they are caught cheating again (intentionally deflating balls to improve...

Do not forget that Tyson just admitted he got the math wrong and it was 90 degrees that the balls had to be inflated in for that to happen. Couple that with the revelation that it was probably less than 2psi, and, well…

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

That's the thing. I like to play games where the dice mean something. And, sometimes, they mean a "crappy" death.

If I wanted to script a death, I'd write a screenplay.

Liberty's Edge

Orfamay Quest wrote:
Caineach wrote:

Someone did a response of why my previous post used bad statistics

The response itself is pretty terrible.

* If you do the math using fumbles per play instead of plays per fumble, you get a different number, yes. You find out that the odds are "only" one in 300 instead of one in 16,000 that the Patriots simply have been having good luck with fumbles.

* By-position analysis shows that the Patriots quarterbacks don't fumble very much, that the Patriots running backs don't fumble very much, and that the Patriots receivers don't fumble very much. All of which are independent (compare the NYG, who had the worst running backs, but the second-best receivers).

So even the reanalysis actually shows that, yes, there's definitely something there. The Patriots are systematically better at not-fumbling across the board in a way that transcends any one player or position and that is probably not due to chance.

This could be due to all sorts of things. The Pats could be systematically calling plays that are less likely to result in fumbles. The Pats could be systematically training their players better in ball-handling skills. The Pats could be paying more attention to ball-handling in their recruitment process. Or they could be doing something outside of the rules. The data don't tell us what they're doing. But I'm convinced they're doing something, when even the reanalysis shows that they're doing something....

Or, if you actually watch Pats games, if you fumble they pull you out of the game and might not start you the next week. They also have one of the best scouting departments in football, and rarely make draft mistakes.

I can't stand the Pats (grew up a Jets fan), but they do a lot of things right that have nothing to do with ball PSI.

Liberty's Edge

Joana wrote:

All the anecdotal evidence I've heard has indicated that the 5e launch was considered very successful, even that the development team was pleasantly surprised that it did even better than they were hoping.

It's always possible, of course, that a success for Wizards of the Coast is not a big enough success for Hasbro. :\

Pretty much. If it doesn't move millions of units, it's not worth Hasbro's attention.

Liberty's Edge

Don't read too much into the layoffs. It seems to be an annual tradition over there.

Liberty's Edge

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Caineach wrote:
Name a specific divination spell that would identify a threat years in advance.
Levels don't take years in most published material.

Yep, the way any 3.5 game levels, you go from 19 year old "wet behind the ears" pogue to 19 year old "Master of the Universe" in about six months.

Liberty's Edge

Quark Blast wrote:

My 2 cp here:

Jester David wrote:

Kickstarter and side RPGs are likely claiming some of the audience.

But that side competition that might erode away at D&D (the Strange/Numenera, 13th Age, FATE, and Star Wars) also chip away at Pathfinder's sales.

Looking at 4Q sales figures (which is the holidays remember?! biggest sales of the year and all) and they show that PF sales dropped significantly with the release of 5E. How significantly? Hard to say because profitability matters more than absolute sales. But the PF Core Rule Book may have had its worst holiday period since its first year.

However that's not my main point, which is that, IMO, fragmenting the market cannot be good for anyone in the industry.

I've tried to get answers from others deep in the industry <cough>Sean Reynolds...Keith Baker...</cough> that are always going on about this RPG Kickstarter or that RPG Kickstarter. And I get ignored - I am after all really no one to them so this is not unexpected, but I think guys like these are making a buck at the expense of the TTRPG industry as a whole.

For individual authors, and serious hobby-gamers who produce products for sale, Kickstarter can be a good thing. However, if the TTRPG "pie" isn't growing, then Kickstarter and the like are simply slicing thinner and thinner portions for everyone else as each new product enters the market.

In short, no one has been able to show me how that (more TTRPG choices) can possibly be good for the [larger]industry as a whole[/larger] and the big players in particular. No one has offered any evidence that Kickstarter and its clones are growing the TTRPG market.

So, everyone should just give up. We have enough, too few people and too little money for anyone else to jump in.

Whatever. If TTRPG wants to survive, they need to make product that appeals to the short attention span generation. So far they haven't. Enjoy the fact that people are willing to continue to write stuff for a fading hobby. It's had a good run, but, like many things, its time of glory is in the past.

The industry can be best described as "cottage". It will eventually all be kickstarter type stuff for a dedicated core of people holding on to their favorite hobby. It is never going to be as big as it was in the Eighties, sorry.

Liberty's Edge

"Seems to find"? When you generate it yourself, it didn't "find" you.

Let the battle of the cheaters commence!

Liberty's Edge

Muad'Dib wrote:

Having gone to Sonics game with more people in the audience wearing Lakers or Bulls jerseys than Sonics I can understand the frustration. (funny how you never see Bulls jerseys anymore).

What can I say, the Hawks have a lot of players with Attention Deficit Disorder...

Carroll must have a pharmacy that travels with him from team to team.

-MD

Carroll was a cheater in college, and Seattle leads the league in PED suspensions since he's been there. We might as well call this year's edition the Cheater Bowl.

Liberty's Edge

If it were contained to the Pac NW, it wouldn't be an issue. It's when a few thousand people who could't find Seattle on a map, have never left Texas, and claim "life long" fandom when they were wearing a Brees jersey three years ago that the "haters" go buck wild. I guess never having been "good" before that has insulated y'all from the bandwagon "fans" people who live in other places are laughing at right now.

We are actually happy that life long fans finally have something to cheer for, believe it or not.

Also, considering how many Seahawk players have been caught sharing the same Adderal scrip, I'd hold of on the "cheating" talk. Seattle leads the league in PED/substance suspensions since Carroll took over. And Sherman was only able to win his appeal because of a leaky sample cup. ;-)

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Aberzombie wrote:

I tried to watch the Pro-bowl last night, but found it...boring.

What's wrong with me?

** spoiler omitted **

The only thing wrong with you is you tuned in to the Pro Bowl and expected it to be anything but boring. ;-)

Liberty's Edge

My wife is an Aggie, she concurs.

The Texans are fine. We're a QB, DB (Joseph isn't worth the high salary he's up for with his time in), and a run stopping MLB (Cush, I'm afraid, after two surgeries and a PED suspension - no more juicing - isn't the answer any more). We have a patient owner, Crennell where he's proven he belongs and thrives, A HC that did well using four different QBs in situations that mattered (and not just garbage time) because of injuries, and went 9-7 after a ridiculous 2-14 with a journeyman hipster with a noodle arm and too much brain, not enough instinct, much of the season. We were a play or two from the playoffs, to be frank, as well. A dropped pass here and a spectacular play by the other guy there go the other way, we had 11-5 in reach.

But, we're Houston. We'll get optimistic, get our heart's broken, then move on to the Rockets for more abuse. We're used to it.

Also, you can always at least keep it Gulf Coast and jump over to 'Nawlins. Ok, they suck too, but team shopping isn't where it's at. ;-)

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
houstonderek wrote:
Been watching sports since the Seventies, and I've never seen a bandwagon fill so quickly in my life.

yeah Jason has you here,

I myself have always been a fan of the Seahawks and the Sonics (R.I.P.) i worked at Seahawks stadium when it first opened (as a security guard, and when it was actually called Seahawks Stadium) my daughter was born in Seattle.
I've seen some pretty s@*@ty weather as a Seahawks fan, its nice to finally see some sun, so i'm going to soak it up:-D

You guys do realize I said "outside of Washington State and northern Oregon" (i.e., the place Seattle fans should come from). Locals following a team when they get good isn't really bandwagoning, it's a team finally putting a product on the field worth watching.

It's the "Seattle" fans born and raised in Texas, and still live in Texas, and have never left Texas, for instance, that my disdain is directed toward.

Y'all are supposed to support your team! ;-)

Liberty's Edge

Jason Nelson wrote:
houstonderek wrote:
Been watching sports since the Seventies, and I've never seen a bandwagon fill so quickly in my life.
No bandwagon will EVER fill up as quickly as the Chicago Bulls bandwagon in the early 90s.

I was talking football, but I agree. But they did have something Seattle doesn't: arguably the best player to ever play the game, so it was a little less annoying.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:
houstonderek wrote:

Don't worry, we Texas and East Coast fans are just as tired of all of the Seattle fans that didn't exist until a couple of years ago. The ones that couldn't pick David Krieg, Curt Warner, or Steve Largent out of a line-up, claim to be "life long" fans, and are old enough to know them. And probably have never been to Seattle in their life.

Been watching sports since the Seventies, and I've never seen a bandwagon fill so quickly in my life.

OK. You get a gold star just for Steve Largent.

Now there lives one of the "most underappreciated Seattle players EVER!"

My wife and I also hand-contructed a fabulous "clipboard Jesus" for my brother, just before they traded poor Charlie away.

And I have to love my POOR brother! He used to love going to an empty stadium for an enjoyable afternoon of hilariously-atrocious hijinks. Now he actually has to deal with football. He's not sure whether to be delighted or disgusted...

EDIT: And just for "full disclosure", I was a die-hard 49er fan through the 70's and 80's 'til they forced out DeBartolo, browbeat Montana into leaving, and generally destroyed the organization from the top down.
I still hate Steve Young for taking advantage of it all. Feh on his HoF career, I say. Feh! Now, where did I put my onions...?

EDIT2: So really, all I root for these days is for the Raiders to finally finish a perfect 0-16, and for Dallas to get humiliated one more time. Old rivalries die hard...

The funniest thing is, DeBartolo wasn't nearly as criminal as the Owner of Pilot and the Browns, Haslem, yet Haslem still gets to keep his team.

I was always kind of a Knox fan, thought he was a classy coach, so I followed the Seahawks a little in the '80s. My traditional team growing up was the Jets (and I'll go back if Johnson ever sells the team), but now it's pretty much just the Texans. Astros and Rockets in their sports, U of Texas for college (didn't graduate, but went there for a couple of years), and the Penguins, as I loved, loved, LOVED watching Mario Lemieux back in the day. If it weren't for his illness, he'd go down as the GOAT, I'm sure.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Don't worry, we Texas and East Coast fans are just as tired of all of the Seattle fans that didn't exist until a couple of years ago. The ones that couldn't pick David Krieg, Curt Warner, or Steve Largent out of a line-up, claim to be "life long" fans, and are old enough to know them. And probably have never been to Seattle in their life.

Been watching sports since the Seventies, and I've never seen a bandwagon fill so quickly in my life.

Liberty's Edge

Aberzombie wrote:
houstonderek wrote:
Aberzombie wrote:


I haven't much paid attention to football this year

Funny how that happens when your team sucks. ;-)

*ducks*

Houston (since I live here now)? Yep, the blew other goats.

Hey, we were Cleveland playing eight more minutes of football away from the playoffs after going through all three roster QBs and a reject from last year. After a 2-14 season, we'll take that all day long!

One thing you'll learn about living in Houston is that we have low expectations for our teams and just enjoy that they're here. ;-)

1 to 50 of 9,306 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.