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

memorax's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 1,929 posts. No reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,929 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I can see players using a faux accent when playing Dwarves. In the first Baldurs Gate you get a quest from a Dwarven npc with such a accent. Not sure if the the later games did the same thing.

Another thing players who don't like guns, ninjas or anything not your vanilla fantasy. I get that some like fantasy to just the usual mix of stuff. Yet if I tell you upfront it's going to be a non-standard fantasy game. I don't want to hear "Guns! They don't belong in fantasy" or something similar.

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Artemis Moonstar wrote:
When you state your campaign takes place a few hundred years after the Numerian crashed ship triggered a remote detonation of over half the reactors scattered around Golarion (home-brewed to be placed there), and it's a "Guns-Everywhere, High-Tech uncommon" setting... Shows up with an elven archer and complains about the mass proliferation of tech items, roving robots, and large swaths of land blighted by radiation... Oh, and the mutated ogres (Super Mutants).

I always find these gamers both funny and strange. It's as if they either ignore you when tell them the background. Or don;t read the notes sent by email about the campaign world. If you hate aspects of a certain campaign world why even join the game or make a character.

Andoran

Hama wrote:


He freaking goes around the city with a katana strapped to his back. Made of steel and sharp enough to easily maim a person. He's been arrested twice because of it but he doesn't relent.

He is out of control I agree. If the police arrest you twice for carrying a weapon and the excuse to keep carrying its "but I like manga". Then IMO he is a little too obsessed by his hobby. Especially if other of the same hobby consider him too extreme.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

For me it's the I'm a super strong and tough character cursed with a low intelligence and charisma. But really I have a high intelligence and charisma despite my looks. While refusing to roleplay low attributes. Or simply getting by through adding skill points into Diplomacy. Or not be penalized by them. Once or twice I'm fine with that concept after awhile it just feels like taking low attributes and not expecting to be penalized by havvng them. I implemented a house rule where if the person wants to bypass the negatives of a low cha or int they can. At the cost of a lower st and con. So no 20 str and/or con at my table. At most 16 in each. The time spent learning to be more socialble and learning to talk to people better comes at a cost of being stronger and tougher.

The gamer who swears he knows the system from front to back end of the core and knows almost nothing about the game.

The gamer who refuses to put in a few dollars for snacks yet takes the most at the table. Granted every game has one I'm not impressed by them.

Andoran

Any idea when we can get this in stores? Or is it too early to to ask.

Andoran

Adjule wrote:
I have seen a lot of vitriol towards 5th edition on these boards, mainly because it was made by WotC, and even more because they don't have pdfs or any form of digital "printing" (yet).

Even if they had PDFs or digital printing their would still be vitriol thrown there way. Gamers use any and every excuse to edition wars

Andoran

thejeff wrote:


"Bitter" is probably farther than I'd go.
I'd say I saw far more 3.5 fans who were unhappy with the change and didn't want to move to 4E than with any other change, including this one.

The irony here is that the same stuff 3.5 and Pathfinder fans complain about with the rules is that for the most part 4E fixed. Maybe not in the way they wanted but it did. Now we still see the same people argue about the same flaws real or not with the rules over and over again.

Andoran

In my neck of the woods their still is a decent amount of fans that play 3.5 and will not switch to any other edition. To the point where thw owner of the LGS that I buy books from just does not want to deal with them anymore. After a point inly so many times one can tell a person that 3.5. no matter how one wants it to be will not be supported. They refuse to buy the PF core. Or use the online SRD or even a app.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
DaveMage wrote:


Really? As I said, I haven't seen it. I take it you *have* seen a large number of bitter 4E fans? (Honestly asking - I have not seen it.)

I have seen a few unhappy fans about 4E. None very bitter. I guess I must hang out with more socially well adjusted mature fans of the hobby. The same way where I meet a handful of fans who were unhappy about 3.5 being cancelled. It has nothing do with Wotc 4E advertising campaign. Or what they did to FR. Or for having to pay for new material. Again maybe because the gamers I hang out are again well adjusted social individuals who have better things to do then be bitter about rpgs or the companies that make them.

Andoran

thejeff wrote:


The same thing could be said about 3.5 fans about Wotc dropping that edition as well.
Other than that they weren't a very, very small minority.

I don't think either side is a small minority as much as some want to present it on these boards.

Andoran

DaveMage wrote:


I *have* seen a few 4E fans that are bitter with the fact that WotC dropped 4E, but those are a very, very small minority.

The same thing could be said about 3.5 fans about Wotc dropping that edition as well.

Andoran

I despise edition warring. To the OP give it time. As can be seen in this thread some posters jut can't seem to let it go. Edition warring for the sake of it. It also helps that Paizo cracks down on it as well.

Andoran

darkwarriorkarg wrote:
Because the dude in robes is invisible, displaced and mirror imaged?

Pretty much this. Unless the wizard is braindead or comatose. He is either buffed up, hidden or flying with spells. Or unless it;s a ambush well postioned in the middle of a group.

Andoran

Shakes Hands with Tels

I feel your pain yet don't let it get to you. Every rpg company has it's fans who defend the company. The best thing to do is respectfully disagree and move on. That being said don't let anyone here stop you from posting anything negative towards Paizo. It's a forum to discuss both positive and negative stuff about Paizo. It's also not a echo chamber either. I was unhappy with the editing mistakes in the ACG. Continue to remain unhappy with the devs making the same mistakes over and over. Made worse by the fact that even after all this time they can't design new material properly sometimes. Either it's really good like Sacred Geometry. Or not do good like Slashing Grace. Or the fluff description if say a feat is amazing yet the crunch the opposite. I'm looking at you Craft Ooze.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Buri wrote:
Pricing and value economics don't care about your subjective view of the item in question. There's actually quantifiable work and research put into coming up with a price point. Paizo's own CRB costs $50 and don't mince page numbers. You get either game in print for the same price. That's not to say Wizards modeled there price after Paizo at all. $50 to buy *a* game is pretty standard. It is competitively priced on Amazon perhaps more influenced my Pathfinder which goes for the same price. Your arguments, sunshadow, is entirely trying to tear into Wizards while conveniently ignoring both a) gaming industry (not even print/publishing) standards and b) the practices of the company whose forum on which you're posting. If Wizards is doing it wrong, then so is Paizo and so is most of the games industry.

Agreed and seconded.

I know of two people who don't buy on the internet. Both self professed luddites. Otherwise about I would say 90% of the gamers I know would buy online. Some don't to support the lgs. I know next year looking for a new job I may go online myself. Reserving the lgs for used or books I can't wait to be mailed.

As well if a gamer is not sure about wanting to buy the 5E PHB their is a starter set and a free PDF they can download. No way no how is any rpg company going to price a PHB at the 10-15$ range. The only one I know is Palladium books at 20$ or so. Even then at the cost of the book looking and reading like it was a product made in the 1980s. I think Your right Buri it just any excuse for Sun to tear into Wizards.

As for 5E not being in pdf yes it's a little annoying but you know what the rpg industry and gamers like msyelf did just fine without pdfs before they became the industry standard. It's not a deal breaker to some of us.

Andoran

As to the OP. I'm not sure yet if I will be switching over or not. I want to get all of the 5E core first. If PF keeps releasing badly edited stuff like ACG though it may make my decision a hell of lot easier.

Andoran

I don't think it's expensive at all. It's rare do I say say impossible to find a rpg harcover that cost less than 40$ nowadays. Were not even talking full color glossy pages high production either. I don't like it yet were no longer going to get tommorow rpgs now at yesterdays prices. Amazon pricing is as near as were going to get. Remember the Battletech Readouts that used to be between 15-20$ now sell for 30$ before tax. Everything is more expensive.

Print a book. Having it bound. Then moving it from the where it was printed to the store. It cost money to do so. Unlike the rpg books don't magically appeaer out of thin year. If I could I would force every gamer to take a class on basic economics as they are not really educated in that subject. Everything is more expensive.

I do have to say that if anyone in this thread thinks that Amazon is not a big factor in people buying habits guess again. I work in a bookstore where we don't match the online price. Our traffic in the stores fell by at least half in the last then years or so. As people switched to amazon or our own site. So I have very little sympathy for anyone who says the core is expensive when Amazon has it for cheaper. The PF core before discount is 50$ on Amazon so its pretty pricey too. http://www.amazon.com/Pathfinder-Roleplaying-Game-Core-Rulebook/dp/16012515 05/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1409928713&sr=8-1&keywords=pathfinder +core

The 5E core before discount is 50$ as well http://www.amazon.com/Players-Handbook-Dungeons-Dragons-Wizards/dp/07869656 06/ref=cm_cr_pr_pb_t

Rocket Age with decent production values and black and white art is 40$ http://www.amazon.com/Rocket-Age-Ken-Spencer/dp/0857441582/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UT F8&qid=1409928882&sr=8-1&keywords=cubicle+7+rocket

Your not going to get high production values at 40$ . Not anymore. Maybe 10-15 years ago. That ship has sailed. No company run by anyone with a ounce of business sense is going to sell something at a lesser price because some fans can't afford it.

Andoran

Rushley son of Halum wrote:

Gencon has been over for a while now, so that's not really an excuse.

But we desperately need an FAQ to clarify a lot of issues in the ACG. How long does the first round of FAQ's for a book normally take?

Agreed and seconded. Not to say that they don't do some extra work at Gencon. Neither were they building a school from scratch for orphans in Africa. I hope that this time around it's in PDF format for easy download. I really don't want to work my way through all the errata needed for the ACG section by section.

Andoran

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Any estimate as to when we can get a errata PDF for the ACG?

Andoran

When it's all said and done I can respect fans for defending the favored rpg company. Even if some don't want to hear negative things about it. I'm not so sure it's truly a bad thing. Nor a good thing either.

Andoran

Odraude wrote:

That's a lot more involved than saying it's an unwillingness. Those are genuinely good reasons to meet GenCon releases. Still, that doesn't bode well for Occult Adventures. I have a feeling history will repeat itself and Occult Adventures will be another editing mess due to rushing to meet the new GenCon date. It's a heartbreaking shame to me, because I genuinely like the people that work at Paizo and I really love Pathfinder. But if nothing can or will be done about the editing issues, and if GenCon is going to continue to be the focus of Paizo at the expense of quality control, then maybe it is time to move on.

That really sucks. But I don't want to spend money on a poor quality project. I guess thems the breaks.

I will concede it may not be unwillingness. Yet while I will still buy product I expect the poor editing and mistakes to continue.

Andoran

Hopefully the posts I was referencing came out properly as my work computer is giving me issues. So I'm not holding my breath on better editing and quality control when the reasoning seems to be Gencon or Christmas whatever the quality and editing of the book it has to be released.

Andoran

Odraude wrote:


Well actually they did use a lot of the feedback in the ACG. They just didn't use all of it. Sometimes for good reason. Other times, like in the case of Dex to damage, it was for a bad reason.

Also, a link to where they said more QA is impossible? I want to read the actual quote before I decide on spending money on Paizo products again.

While I will still buy more Paizo books I'm not expecting the editing to get better. Here's why.

Insain Dragoon wrote:

A lot a cool stuff, but some major weirdness. It feels like the people who wrote the classes, the people who wrote feats, and the people who wrote archetypes had minimal communications. Also feels like the people who wrote feats and archetypes weren't around in the respective feedback threads for the playtest. Too many oddities and unwritten things in this book makes me feel a little disappointed as I read. I'm used to missing and the occasional oddity within Paizo books, but this book has too many.

Maybe SKR was right about the production schedule being too crunched and how trying to get this out by Gen-con constrained them a lot. I would have preferred this stayed another month in development and editing.

Ross Byers wrote:


You have no idea how many moving parts there are to a book like this. With so many new classes and things that rely on them, simple changes to a class feature can ripple throughout the book. I'm not saying its perfect (it isn't), but I don't think it is in any way more or less flawed than previous years' Gen Con releases, including the Core Rulebook. I dare you to do better.

I also doubt that another month would have brought it to your level of satisfaction. Please, do not misconstrue that as saying you're impossible to please. What I mean is that everyone has a pet issue with a book like this where they disagree with decisions that were made. Something left out they wanted, something included they didn't, or just something they wanted not done to their own personal taste. It's easy to say that if the book had more time, or more developers, or a different developer, that it would match the mental ideal the person built during the run up to release. It's sort of a way of saying "I'm right, and if Paizo had just tried harder, they would have realized that." Even though that if the book was different it would be some other person making a slightly different complaint about the thing that was different.

Ross Byers wrote:


Okay. Which classes get an extra page, out of the 10 new and 18 old in the book? Or are you going to give them a paragraph each, letting that information dangle off to the next page and making header placement awkward? The publishing industry calls those things 'orphans' and they are considered to be bad.
And which feats and spells are there 'just to take up page count'? There are way easier and less error-prone ways to fill space than developing rules text. Perhaps you meant spells that are developed to fill a specific space on a page (i.e. "We need a spell of about 250 words, and the title has to be alphabetized between 'Pe' and 'Pr'")? I have no idea how many of those are actually created, but I'd like to give the developers enough credits that they try to create a spell that is interesting and useful within those constrainsts, because if they just want something no one would read twice they could just use Lorem Ipsum. Or perhaps you just like to assume any option that you don't personally think is worthwhile must have been created for bad reasons?
Also, you'll note that if something is created to fill a space, it is because that space needed to be filled. The feats chapter can't just end halfway down a page, for instance. Well, it could, if you filled that space with a half-page art, but that still doesn't let you start the next chapter a half-page earlier.
Ross Byers wrote:


Do you know how important Christmas (and the associated season) is to the American retail economy? 'Black Friday' is called such because for many retailers it is the day of the year where they become profitable (i.e. out of the red and into the black.) Video game studios can live or die based on if their product reaches stores in time for Christmas.

Gen Con is a big deal for tabletop RPGs. And Paizo, among may other things, is a business. You might prefer that they ship mid-september or something, but showing up to Gen Con with that year's release is a big deal.
They can't finish later - the only alternative is to start earlier. But I think you can agree that running another year in advance of the release schedule is unfeasible. Perhaps they should havecut one of the rounds of playtesting to get more development time. Would that have been better?

Andoran

For the most part I like Pathfinder. To the point where I can no longer play in a game of 3.5. AS I lkike what they did with some of the classes. I don't have any anger towards the devs. Just a lot of frustration as to me at least in some cases they just don't listen. What I mean by that is that they can't seem to find the right middle ground when designing something new. At this point with all their knowledge and experience they should be doing it in their sleep. Either a feat is too good like Sacred Geometry. Or not that good like Slashing Grace. It's one thing if they did their own thing without feedback. Instead they do get feedback and it gets ignored. Usually for the worse instead of better. Which leads to them making the same mistakes in designing new material.

I'm sure someone will point out that they don't have to listen to feedback. Which is true they don't. Then again why bother with feedback at all if they are going to do their own thing anyway. The D&D community for better or worse is a very vocal community. Paizo was imo opening a can of worms when they started asking for player feedback. When gamers give feedback they eventually wan the developers to use it. Ignoring it as I said above gives way to frustration and a lack of faith in the developers. For me what impressed me the least with the ACG was when a poster asked for better quality control and were told "well it's simply not possible". At this point its a unwilligness to do do better. When your release for Gencon is poorly edited with mistakes ad a wrong cover uyou strive to do better. Not say that your unable to imo.

I still enjoy the game and will run and keep playing it. I don't think the rpg or the devs are perfect. If I see something I don't like I will comment on it. Whether I like the rpg or not.

As Paizo can't be given a free pass for criticism because people have a lot of emotion invested in it.

Andoran

First gamers complained they were too liberal in the changes and what they did with 4E. I really don't blame Wotc for being conservative. Given how rpgs are not as popular as before and comptetion from other forms of entertainment. Better to be safe imo. As for releasing stuff and hope it sells Paizo is doing the same thing imo. When PF was first released they did not release as many books. Once it took off we have a bunch of stuff that comes out every month.

Diffan wrote:


But for some, the mechanical choices were paralyzing or otherwise unwanted. They didn't want to wade through lots of options and stuff and they just wanted to sit down and play. Can't really blame them other than their desire to NOT want a robust option system yet desire the "best" options that were there.

Seconded. Players want to make characters asap. If it means less choices than so be it. I don't agree with that type of philosophy yet understand it.

Andoran

I'm curious Sunshadow do you have anything good to say about 5E or Wotc? It's like listening to a broken record. We get it you don't like 5E or Wotc. I can respect that even is I don't agree with it. Could not keep repeating yourself by downplaying everything Wotc has achieved. Or the merits of 5E. It's not even a month since the 5E release and your nothing but doom and gloom.

Andoran

Buri wrote:


That's certainly some conjecture. You're using rose colored glasses to demean a years long process of democratic selection and refinement. That puts it up toward hyperbole. It's also entirely counter to my experience. So, to paint everyone who likes 5e as 'they' with your attributions is simply wrong.

Agreed and seconded. So far I'm liking what I see. Not sure if I will ever run let alone play it. For the first time in a long time I want to play a Paladin. I do think that 5E may give PF a run for it's money.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jeven wrote:


It would be good for new players. It won't decrease sales of the CRB, as people who already own it won't be buying another copy of the existing book anyway. A new CRB - just like the existing CRB - would mostly be sold to new players.

What stopping them from buying cheaper older copies of the current edition then using the SRD or the free PDF as you mention to take what they need of the new rules. Were talking about a 50-60$ purchase. Not many gamers want to spend that money again just for a few new houserules tossed into the core. Gamers are also cheap as well. You want to bet the first thing that will be said as a complaint that it's more of the same.

Jeven wrote:


Any rule revisions could just be included in a small free pdf for download.

They should and knowing Paizo they will. Were not guaranteed that they will.

Jeven wrote:


A new CRB makes sense if for no other reason than to improve the quality, layout, readability and various fixes.
The CRB is the gateway to the whole game, so Paizo should be putting their best foot forward quality-wise to help sell the game to new players.

It still has to be worth the 5o-60$ of purchasing the same material again. I like organized well written core books. I'm not going to buy the same book again because of it. Not unless 30%+ of the material is new. With the free SRD and Apps the core is not the only geteway to the game. I have a APP that for five or is it six dollars I have the entire catalog of hardcovers. With the exception of the ACG. Let's not forget 5E as well. Unlike 4E it seems to have been better received by the fans at least so far.

@ Devils Advocate. You used WW to point out that how edtions are not needed. They are doing a new one. So using them as a comparison is not a good one. Call what you want it is a new edition. With Exalted, Scion and Trinity Contimuum all being rereleased. With a new core and the core WW lines all getting new core books imo it is a new edition. Why rerelease all the core books if it was not at least different enough to do so. Not that it's a bad thing I enjoy WOD. I call it what it is.

Andoran

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:


I'm not sure we have an example of a selling an RPG twice with no changes. We do have plenty of examples of reselling an RPG with moderate to heavy changes, and from the looks, they tend to do very well. 3.0 -> 3.5, nWoD -> The God Machine, oWoD (which was out of print and no longer supported) -> the 20th Anniversary editions, WotC rereleasing the 1st-3rd Edition core books, which as I understand all sold pretty well. Even Paizo and Pathfinder have rereleased their Core book in what 5 different "printings" editions, and by all accounts their fanbase and sells keep growing exponentially.

Too bad White Wolf is still going ahead with a new edition and rereleasing the core with the GMC stuff inside and a whole new set of core books. http://theonyxpath.com/the-world-of-darkness-second-edition/ Notice that nowhere do they mention that the new edition is backwards compitble.

I get your point. Except their is a difference between a reprint of the core and working on another edition. With a new edition some in the hobby expect something new. If it's a rehash people will not buy imo. Not everyone has 100$ to invest in a core and a Besitiary with no changes. Who unless they are truly a huge fan of the system and company. Half my gaming table has yet to buy the core. Why bother when the free SRD is up. The Apps are cheaper.

Andoran

If the design goal is to please everyone in the design process it's doomed to failure. The devs will never get 100% approval on anything. All that matters is if a majority are happy with it. If that means no changes to the exisiting rpg. Than so be it. I will be dissappointed yet still keep playing and buying product. If the no change side wins then my advice to the devs is not even waste time on the next edition. Gamers don't like buying the same rpg twice with no changes. With apps and the SRD it's going to probably be the first time imo that 0the PFcore is not going to sell as well imo

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Scavion wrote:


So basically if they release a new edition and change nothing?

That seems to defeat the purpose of making a new edition.

It's interesting how those who do not want any change or little expect Paizo to work on then sell such a edition. Why would I or anyone else buy it. If there is nothing new. Why even waste time or effort on playtesting what is essentially a rehash. Good luck trying to sell the same game twice by the way. I don't see it as being as successful as this one. First gamers are cheap. Second the community in general is in no mood for another 3.5 rehahsh. How do you plan to generate interest in a product with no changes. I'm sure to be ignored yet I'm curious.

While I would not mind to see Vancain caasting go away it should still remain while offering a new system for casting spells side by side. No new magic system means zero interest for me and others. I have the current edition if I want to play with just vancian casting.

Martials should get nice things. Both Wizards and Martails should be able to do amazing things in game. If the new edition or rehashed editions keeps martials from getting nice things good luck trying to sell it is all I'm going to say. As again I can stick to this edition.

Backwards compitabiliy would be nice yet not a must. Again no reason to buy a rehashed edition if that is a design goal because the current allows me to do the same already.

Andoran

Pan wrote:


I just dont believe you. I do think some people probably got pushed away and that is a shame. Though I think these forums are pretty well moderated and have fair discussions. The forums are welcoming to anyone who likes PF and even those who dont. There are trolls but what site doesnt have them? I also dont think you have a basis for a biased playtest. The goal was to make a backwards compatibale system so having a lot of changes was never in cards.

I saw what I saw and all we can do is disagree. As I don't want to thread jack any further.

While it would be good for a new edition to be backwards computable it does not have to be IMO. As the current one is already.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pan wrote:


I think its a bad thing because I dont agree with you. I think things turned out a way you dont like and you feel that forum posters somehow got to make that choice by being vocal. If posters are driving people off I trust the moderators here to do something about that. Though permabanning people just because they dont agree with you is thankfully not going to happen. Folks enjoy the 3E/PF system and like a more conservative approach to evolving the system and they are going to voice that.

There fans who refuse to come to the forums because of the core playtest. Some in the hobby consider the core playtest a sham because a very vocal subset of fans chased them away. I'm not one of them because I own a lot of material.

Why is my asking for a fair and unbiased playtest bother you so much. Is it because of a fear that they might change something. That's the risk of a playtest.

Andoran

MMCJawa wrote:


this comment...is all over the map.

It sounds like what you are really saying is "Take feedback seriously, but not only ignore playtest comments that disagree with me, but ban those people entirely from the process".

And here we go with people misunderstundaing what I said.

I want a playtest where everyone is heard. Not just myself. Where no set of vocal posters drown out everyone else. I came late to the core playtest and stayed away because a very vocal group kept chasing away anyone who wanted significant changes. I don't want to see the same thing happen again. If it's a serious playtest then everyone pro change and not should be given a fair chance to be heard. Hopefully this clears up everything.

Andoran

Pan wrote:


So those who diasgree with you are "sabotaging" the playtests and should be permabanned?

There politely disagreeing and then there shouting people down so they don't get heard while telling them to go elsewhere. Which happened during the playtest of the core. Which I don't want to see happen again. In a playtest everyone should be heard. Not a very select few very vocal posters. I'm surprised that you would think it was a bad thing.

Pan wrote:


Exposure to what?

Letting other people on other forums besides this one know about the poll.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Posted a thread on rpg.net with link to get more exposure.

Andoran

I'm glad we will have access to both the Dreamscarred Press version and the Paizo one. I wonder how long it will be before the cries of blot begin yet again.

Andoran

Absolutely Hell Yes.

I have no interest in spending 100$+ on a rehashed edition with new art and little or no significant changes. Why buy the same thing a second time. Those who don't want any change forgot well how will Paizo market a product with little changes. Even Chaosium Call of Cthulhu 7E is different enough this time around from what I hear. That being said I'm in the minority so realize it will not happen.

If they do a playtest

If your going to ask for feedsback use some of it. Don't ask for any if in the end your not going to use it.

Your not going to please everyone so don't approach a new playtest with that in mind as imo Paizo is dooming itself to failure.

Keep a very tight rein on those who are very vocal who attempt to sabotage the playtest. Permabanning them if need. We don't need another core playtest debacle imo.

Andoran

I can see a special race once or twice in a world where you have the core races. To be treated the same by the locals it depends on the race. I can see a furry while raising a eyebrow not get asked too many questions. After all people in town own cats or live in a area with wild cats. A nagaji or Kobold would raise a few eyebrows and would have to prove themselves to the locals. People in my worlds act like real people not locals from a fantasy novel.

Andoran

Odraude wrote:


That's also not true. Feedback was taken into account and applied during the playtest and after. For example, the action for studied target on the Slayer was changed in regards to the feedback given.

The thing with any beta is that the feedback isn't always right or matches with the design vision of the company. For better or worse, a company sifts through the feedback and sees what aligns with it. Of course I don't agree with their decisions all the time (like Dex to damage). But from the previous books we've read they do listen and apply what feedback fits in the game.

I guess we will have to disagree then. They do listen yet imo they do when it suits them to do so. And that's okay because in the end they spent the money on making the rpg from the ground up.

It's hard to feel like they listen when Sacred Geomtery is given the green light. Yet slashing Grace is really not worth it imo. Same thing with Craft Ooze. I wanted a feat that allowed me to create and use oozes in combat. Instead it's a very situational trap feat. I guess the frustration from myself is that their seems to be no proper middle ground on the design process. Either something is very good or very bad. Never a mix of the two imo. At this point with the experience in designing new material they should be finding the proper middle ground in their sleep.

Andoran

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pan wrote:


I am noticing a patern with your posting Mem. Just becuase the DEVs dont run with your ideas doesnt mean they are not listening to feedback. Also, when they do listen to folks, whom you happen to disagree with, that doesnt automatically make them a "vocal minority". Who cares about the rogue if you now have "rogue" viable classes? I get that folks are upset because the rogue sucks. Paizo decided to leave the rogue as is for people who play CRB or 3.5 comp only but add optional new classes for the rogues sucks crowd. sounds like win/win to me. Especially, since unchained is going to offer a new rogue. Patience is a virtue. I am pleased that Paizo takes a conservative approach to changing the game. Something folks on the internet rarely want to wait for. /shrug.

I guess you were not here for when they playtested the core. Anyone who tied to post any major changes were chased away by a very vocal minority who wanted no changes. It happened.

Here the thing about feedback if the fans ask and ask for a proper dex to damage feat and they don't deliver why would it look like they listen to feedback. They were told over and over again by some fans not to allow Gunslingers to target touch AC yet in the end they still did. I'm not saying they have to listen to me or others feedback. Just don't ask for feedback if in the end the devs are going to do their own thing.

Then again to me anyway it's just a good PR exercise. Make the fans think their feedback means something then do the opposite. It makes the fans feel good yet the devs do what they want. To be honest they don't have to listen to feedback. They can take it into account when developing new material. Yet at the end of the day they can and will do their own thing. I may not like it. I can respect it.

At this point we are seeing much more levels of frustration from the fanbase. When they still can't find a proper middle ground on developing new things well it can be frustrating. I have never seen the boards being so very vocal imo. Asking for patience when the end result is the same is also frustrating. It's been how many years they just keep repeating the same mistakes imo.

As for the Rogue the Investigator is so much better in all ways. Except for their version of Sneak attack which still requires a melee weapon. I get your point about the Rogue yet im owe will see a lot more Investigator builds than Rogues in the future.

Andoran

Odraude wrote:


On the other hand, we got the Slayer and Investigator as actual good skill classes that can contribute more than most martials can.

All any of this proves is that there are examples of good mechanics and bad mechanics that are in Paizo books. Though it's my opinion that editing aside, ACG has a great deal of good options, with a few that admittedly boggle the mind.

Don't get me wrong there are good things. Though with the Investigator we might as well just have a tombstone with the heading Rogue RIP 2014 IMO. No reason to take a Rogue anymore. Slayer is good as well. I just think that in the end feedback is useless IMO. As for better or worse the devs will do their own thing.

Andoran

I don't mind anthrorphic characters as pcs. Nor should DMs be forced to allow them at the table. It's a matter of preference. I have both a Gunslinger and Alchemist in my latest game. I'm not going to allow them in my next game. Nor is it a bad thing.

Andoran

I'm with Kthulhu. After seeing what we got with Sacred Geometry and Slashing Geace I'm not holding my breath on the revised Stealth rules. Feedback was given yet chances are good The devs will ignore it and do their own thing.

Andoran

Hama wrote:


Anyway, a guy who after I show enthusiasm for my game in which I am introducing him to tells me to lay off the caffeine and curb my enthusiasm because I'm not 10
.

You think it would be a bonus to some that the person running the game is enthusiastic about it. If happened to a friend of mine as well. He took booted the player out of the game.

Annoying thing by players I have come across.

One who play casters yet by level 5 still don't know any spells by heart. Or uses a cheat sheet. I can understand not memorizing certain spells . How hard is it to remember what Bless dies.

The restrictive DM turned player who wants access to anything and everything in the books. Then when one refuses something complains about it.

Players who channel their inner male chauvinist mysognustic self through their characters at the table. Nothing runic a fans more than seeing a player make lewd, rude comments towards female npcs or players. Had two in my games over theocrats booted them out as soon as that BS began.

Players who ignore any advice at the table. Then when bad things happen get angry and lash out at players. Had his happen in a game two weeks ago. A player lost 11 hp to a trap. Instead of saying " I need to he healed" went on and his character died. Began to pull a fit at the table. Which the DM stopped finally and very grudgingly admitted he screwed up.

Players who make characters unsuitable to the campaign at hand then get mad at both the players and DM when he or she can't do anything. If it's a hack and slash style of game told upfront about it why make a character built only for social encounters who can't hit broadside of barn.

Is told writing game notes is a must to join g the group. Then complains, whines, moans and tries to weasel his way out if doing them.

Andoran

In the end if the majority if fans want a new edition. With the current version becoming unprofitable they should do a new edition. They are not going to please everyone. Not should they lies money just because some want to stick with a older edition , I only ask that this time around they have a proper play test. The last one was hijacked by a very very vocal minority that wanted no change. Who did they damn best to chase away anyone who disagreed with them.

If not and the majority want more if the same than they stick with the current rules. In the end in not licked into any one rpg.

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Editing and mistakes aside as some have said the book is not a total loss. He'll it even close to one. It does bother me that whenever we ask for better quality control the response seems to be " well that simply not possible. ". Which us even more frustrating. It just seems they are unwilling to improve on quality control IMO. I could be wrong yet when we mentioned the same issues with quality control with UMD we were given the same response. It could have been rushed for a Gencon release with the release if 5E. If that is the case it shows.

I will say this with the Investigator Paizo really IMO does not like Rogues IMO. Or very much.

Andoran

I may not be as excited with a unchanged core book. If it was better organized and written I might purchase it. Heaven knows the first few pages of the magic section put me to sleep. Even better if they split the book into a phb and dmg. I still think it won't be a guaranteed sale IMO.

Andoran

The same thing happened to Pathfinder once they started releasing new material. So it's not just a problem that will happen to 5E.

So I ask the question again if the next edition will not change anything or very little how does one go about selling it. I mean why would myself or others buy the same thing twice. Which keeps getting ignored by the don't change anything group.

Andoran

I dont mind more rules. Nor more sourcebooks. Its how most if not all rpg companies make their money. I does bother me that because its new people comne across as forcing to use it. No one is bein forced to use anything. My main complaint of the new stuff is lots of interesting fluff but the crunch is severy lacking imo. Or they release badly designed feats or worse classes that are better than what is in th core.

Odraude wrote:
In the product description it mentions a simplified action econom, monster creation, and crafting.

I read that as well. While my interest is high Im nto holding my breath either.

1 to 50 of 1,929 << 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.