I´m just wondering. Recently, several threads seem to have turned into flame wars, so much so that posters feel compelled to inform Gary of this, or Gary posting himself and warning posters of imminent time-outs. This seems to happen in the playtest feedback area mainly. Until now, I was quite happy that this place was more or less flame-free (not counting the 4e area, which I haven´t looked at for about half a year or so). I hope that this does not change. I already noticed that I look less at these boards, partly due to the flames and partly due to less free time on my hands.
(FWIW, IMO someone who cannot behave himself properly after warning and timeout should be banned permanently, even if their contributions were meaningful - I would rather live without this persons insights than bear their obnoxious behaviour, if it comes to these extreme measures. I have my share of annoying people I have to cope with in real life that I don´t need more of the same online. Just IMO, of course.)
Stefan
|
Both the playtest forums and the design forums have been genuinely interesting of late. But, anyhow, I hope that whatever's done on the moderation front doesn't lessen that (because as I said in the recently-locked 'flame war imminent' thread, I want this game to be great (for me, it's the last chance saloon for 3.x as a genuinely supported game going forward, and I know I don't want to play 4e...)
|
FYI: Sometimes when Gary comes into a thread, it is because a poster has informed him of the goings-on within.
EDIT: I also agree with Heathy (see below).
I edited, to agree with Stebehil. Unlike Bagpuss, I'm not entertained or informed by any of it. Forgive me, Bagpuss, if I've taken your position out of context in any way.
I agree. Both with the increase in flaming and with the desire to avoid contributing as a result.
It's too bad some people feel that they have to be overly aggressive to get their points across. Kinda like desperation in getting their ideas in the open while the open playtest window is open, or a rabid attempt to contribute to 'the perfect' game system.
Kinda flies in the face of a game that's premised on social interaction. As the messageboards are also meant to be.
|
|
I edited, to agree with Stebehil. Unlike Bagpuss, I'm not entertained or informed by any of it. Forgive me, Bagpuss, if I've taken your position out of context in any way.
I'm entertained by some of it, but mostly I am informed by the stuff that's posted about the game (those are mostly disjoint sets). If someone says "This is crap and here's why" or "you're an idiot and here's why" I am finding that the 'why', in most of these cases, is sufficiently interesting that I enjoy reading it and in any case I have never really had any problems ignoring the precursor/accompanying insults.
I agree that sometimes this stuff occludes discussion -- as I said in the now-locked thread, political discussion is a good example of that (I moderate a political forum on an otherwise unmoderated board and the reason for that moderation was that the political discussions otherwise went nowhere) -- but I, personally, haven't felt that to be the case here. In large part, I imagine, it's because the people in question are mainly here to post thoughts about the game (and, as in P_R's construct-a-companion case, make concrete suggestions); they do it in a way that I personally don't choose to, and it clearly does offend and irritate some people, but I think that their heart's in the same place as mine, which is to say, improving the game. The other stuff then, to me (and possibly only to me) is incidental.
But, of course, we've been through all this before. I would add now, in case there is any misunderstanding, that I'm not attempting to tell anyone else what to do (particularly the Paizo admins, who can moderate however they see fit regardless of my preferences, obviously). Just saying that I, personally, think.
Perhaps consider taking The Troll Test. The Test appears at minute 46:43. Just hit the play button, then let the podcast play thirty seconds in in order to build up buffer time so that you can then roll forward to the later parts of the show. The test tells you how to defeat the trolls. I think I offer a sound strategy.
|
Even though we have an international group here on the boards, I have to wonder if all the vitrol just might die down after the US elections are done and the market smooths itself out for a while.
It just seems that emotions are really high in so many ways that I think that many people are not willing to backdown from any sort of debate and anything that is the littlest bit snarky is taken to be a grave insult. (and if the comment is actually snarky, forget it, it's on.)
Sometime you just need to take a break if it's getting ugly.
I miss the good old days, when the only board flames were over scantily-clad women on the covers of Dragon and Dungeon... :-(
Yes!
Even though we have an international group here on the boards, I have to wonder if all the vitrol just might die down after the US elections are done and the market smooths itself out for a while.
It just seems that emotions are really high in so many ways that I think that many people are not willing to backdown from any sort of debate and anything that is the littlest bit snarky is taken to be a grave insult. (and if the comment is actually snarky, forget it, it's on.)
Sometime you just need to take a break if it's getting ugly.
Election season certainly explains why so many have rushed off to the left and right to play rhetorical red rover and side-specific mutual agreement society in political 'discussions' which just as often as not seem to be shows designed to convince undecideds to swing their way. When election season ends, a certain measure of peace will be restored, to be sure.
However, the rules discussions bring out the crazy every time. Rules Nazis must make for great kindling.
Over-react, much?
As a recent recipient of Resurrection, I've been playing a lot of board catch-up. To quote Conan's faux- Schwarzenegger, "It's human garbage!" around here. I hope that it'll clear up post election, but yeesh, stop trampling all over Paizo's soul.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
To make the best of a bad situation everyone should sit around the flames and roast marshmallows and sing camp fire songs.
Don't forget singing Kumbaya! ;)
|
I can't really say much about the politics of the situation, since I'm not in the US. And most of those discussions, as much as I have paid attention, seem sort-of OK. There is doubtless a lot of stress out there with the financial meltdown too and ongoing economic problems.
But most of the flaming has nothing to do with that, and is about 4e and the PF playtest. On a D&D website it is hardly surprising that passions run high on this. However, 4e seems to be calming down as far as I can tell, and when the PF playtest ends I suspect most of the more aggressive posters will depart, since they show no interest in the rest of the board. So, on the plus-side, I think it is a waiting game before things get back more-or-less to normal. On the negative side, it might be a few more months before that happens.
I think that the playtest has drawn in a fairly good number of people that aren't Paizo regulars, but are sure that they know what 3.5 "needs," and as such they flocked to Paizo when the open playtest started up. I'm almost certain once the final rules are out, if not before, a lot of those types of posters will be long gone.
While I think it is great that Paizo did this playtest to get the input of the people that buy their products, its going to, by its nature, be open to people that are just sure that 3.5 has to be modified to address each and every thing that they personally perceive as a problem. I also think a lot of them want to see something in the rules that they can point to and say "I did that." And finally you have the people that just want to win a argument, even it if completely draws a thread off topic and doesn't help anyone.
I've been a little less likely to chime in depending on the current "wave" of posts and if I think it will even do any good. I'm torn, often, in wondering if I should post, so that there actually is an opposing view in the thread and Paizo doesn't get a skewed idea of what its base wants, or if I'm just going to get drawn into an discussion about something that I don't care about or that seems obviously to be something that shouldn't be added to the game.
There are a lot of times I really just want to be neutral and say "this is how it worked when we were playtesting," but there is a drive to look at each instance that a rule is used, invest some emotion in it, and try to extrapolate what it means for the game in a vacuum.
Every so often I start to worry, because if feels like there is a vocal group on the boards that wants to throw a ton of extra abilities into every class, and from time to time it looks like they get listened too. I want to see some fairly minor tweaks to the game, but I keep hearing about huge revamps thrown onto the 3.5 frame, which honestly, is making start to just hope I can use Pathfinder stats well enough with 3.5 and I'll keep using that.
But I know we are a long way from the final product, and I need to be patient. I knew, more or less, what I was in for when I wanted to get involved in this whole playtest situation.
As for the fourth edition boards, and continuing edition wars fallout, all I can say is that people are still touchy all over the place, and lots of people don't want you to be able to do anything less than declare absolute fealty to one system or another. In one day, in the space of one hour, on my FLGS's message boards, I was more or less called a 3.5 and a 4th edition hater because of comments in two separate threads.
I will say I really miss seeing a lot of the regulars from the Dungeon/Dragon/Pre-Playtest days posting a lot and having nice, general discussions about running games and Paizo's specific adventures and not rules and the like. I hope that the core group that I used to love seeing around here doesn't end up drifting away before things start to stabilize.
Chief Technical Officer
|
There are a lot of times I really just want to be neutral and say "this is how it worked when we were playtesting..."
Please do—that's the kind of feedback we *really* want.
Also, keep in mind that we aren't automatically listening to the folks who shout the loudest, or who think they're "winning" some argument, or that we're *not* listening to people who don't do these things. Our designers are capable of drawing their own conclusions after considering multiple points of view.
Aw, I'm touched (and not in the way my wife usually says I am). Just to clarify, not only has Vic addressed this here, but I've also talked to Lisa via e-mail. These guys are really great, and its what I love about Paizo, that they care enough to specifically address their customer's concerns. I hope that I've remained respectful and even handed in my concerns thus far.
Jal, as far as posting, I'll be throwing in some more comments once we get to see the paladin in my campaign taking some of the new rules for a test drive in my Rise of the Runelords campaign this Thursday.
|
|
I think the short tempers in some posts are an element of desperation; this 12-month period would appear to be the last opportunity to get this game right. It's not just a question of 'ban all books except the core 3'; there are serious balance issues, that have been in the core game for over 30 years, through several edition changes, and have slipped through the net every time.
|
|
I think the short tempers in some posts are an element of desperation; this 12-month period would appear to be the last opportunity to get this game right. It's not just a question of 'ban all books except the core 3'; there are serious balance issues, that have been in the core game for over 30 years, through several edition changes, and have slipped through the net every time.
And some of them got worse in 3.x (fighters getting the shaft, for example).
As I say, I think that this is the last-chance saloon for 3.5
|
|
I agree with what has been said.
I finally got my group to abandon our 3.5 campaign, because i was desperate to start from scratch playing Pathfinder while there was still a chance to have a meaningful influence on the rules set. I love the fact that Paizo is handling it this way, but the 1 year window (shortened by printing lead time) does lend an air of desperation to the trial and error process.
We all have an axe to grind with one thing or another, but when we start hitting each other with the axes, we are no longer honing the edge. I find when the flames start, i end up reading the thread taking sides and keeping score, rather than evaluating the ideas in the midst of it all.
The nature of this is we have all been making house rules to fix our perception of what is wrong, likely as not that won't change. Hopefully Pathfinder can minimize some of the neccesity to do that. Paizo is in the wonderful (and thankless) position of listening to all of our ideas and trying to incorporate the simplest, most effective among them. That doesn't mean other ideas are bad, wrong or inferior.
I too would support banning repeat offenders. It lessens my enjoyment of the site and the game, when people lose perspective. We are supposed to be having fun after all. Thank you Paizo for making this cooperative environment possible. It is up to all of us to maintain the cooperation.
Arnold
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
I've pretty much given up on the playtest, truth be told. Too much vitriol, too little constructive discussion. Sadly, the attitude seems to be spreading beyond that ghetto.
Just what i feared, actually.
No reason to give up.
Play the game with your group.
Give Paizo feedback about the game.
If anyone gives you any flack about the 'brokenness' of your feedback, ignore them. They're dumbasses.
|
|
I think people have maybe misunderstood my gnomic utterance. Bagpuss made the point that we can thank Paizo for putting up with the more eccentric posters by buying their products (which we do anyway). My point was that we aren't being paid to put up with them, and we are nevertheless expected to debate rules with them in a (sometimes) hostile atmosphere. Maybe the payoff of a good game at the end of the process is enough for some, but it isn't for a lot of us, since our interest extends beyond the immediate products to the broader community here. I simply take comfort from the fact that they won't be around for ever.
|
|
Maybe the payoff of a good game at the end of the process is enough for some, but it isn't for a lot of us, since our interest extends beyond the immediate products to the broader community here. I simply take comfort from the fact that they won't be around for ever.
I'm just glad that threads are no longer being disrupted, but I do see your point. These guys have as much as said they'll never try to be neighborly.
Sam
|
|
I'll be more than happy enough to get a great game out of it.
I'm not sure that I'll be happy with what you want though.
For instance, I'd be happy if fighters had more skill points and greater movement abilities. I'd be ok with fighters having access to feats that helped them block or hinder enemy movement. I'd be outright upset if fighters were to get some kind of gamist spoiler ability or outright mystical tripe. I'm onboard with an upgrade, but not at the expense of theme.
Sam
I've pretty much given up on the playtest, truth be told. Too much vitriol, too little constructive discussion. Sadly, the attitude seems to be spreading beyond that ghetto.
Just what i feared, actually.
No reason to give up.
Play the game with your group.
Give Paizo feedback about the game.
If anyone gives you any flack about the 'brokenness' of your feedback, ignore them. They're dumbasses.
Graaaaah shine on you crazy diamond!
That's freehold-speak for "I agree." I think this attitude should be applied to any inflammatory post.
I've pretty much given up on the playtest, truth be told. Too much vitriol, too little constructive discussion. Sadly, the attitude seems to be spreading beyond that ghetto.
Just what i feared, actually.
No reason to give up.
Play the game with your group.
Give Paizo feedback about the game.
If anyone gives you any flack about the 'brokenness' of your feedback, ignore them. They're dumbasses.
True, true.
Would this be the time when I should pull rank and mention that I have been doing mathematical modeling as work? And the most important thing to learn and know is that you always have to look at what evidence you can get from real world.
Even if your model says that thing A should be the preferential event to take place with your input, but actual empirical evidence show no sign of that event taking place, there is something wrong with the model.
The modeller might have for example forgotten to include parameters "chance of the player getting thrown out of the gaming group for being a cheese weasel" or "appeal of sub-optimal builds for thematic or roleplaying purposes".
If models and real-world evidence disagree, it is always the model that is wrong. This is why real-world evidence is needed.
If models and real-world evidence disagree, it is always the model that is wrong. This is why real-world evidence is needed.
"Ground truth" absolutely must trump hypothesis, that's for sure -- otherwise there's no way to calibrate your models.
I've been sticking with the playtest boards despite the bile-spewing, lobbying for the fighter, exactly because we've been lamenting his comparative "lackluster-ness" in play since we switched to 3.X and got above 6th level or so. The difference in how 1e played vs. 3e was rather striking in that regard -- 3.0 introduced a number of concrete tactical combat rules that, while looking good on paper, left little room for the fighter to interrupt spellcasters, guard his friends, etc. -- all the stuff he used to do in 1e.
There are one or two actual playtest feedback threads here about the Beta fighter as well that are worth looking at, if you can find them.
That said, I strongly feel that there's absolutely no reason in the world for anyone on the boards to act like an obnoxious jerk. Ever.
|
|
I think people have maybe misunderstood my gnomic utterance. Bagpuss made the point that we can thank Paizo for putting up with the more eccentric posters by buying their products (which we do anyway).
Actually, I was just referring to the use of the word 'thankless' for the playtest in general (which is what was referred to in the post to which I was replying), not any sort of poster in particular, and saying that if the playtest improves the game, we'll provide thanks in the form of cash for PFRPG products.
This entire thread causes me serious consternation.
On the one hand, we've always tried to let this be a self-moderating community of adults who can take it upon themselves to curtail rude, immature, and brazen behavior. On a few rare occasions we've had to step in and kill a thread, or ban a poster, or put a few people in timeout. Compared to the tens of thousands of people in this community, those instances are few and far between.
Lately they're not so few and not so far between.
As someone who's a huge proponent of messageboard communities and their advantages from a marketing perspective, from a PR perspective, and simply from a "getting to know the people who keep me employed" perspective, I'm always disappointed when a community grows large enough that we can no longer ignore the bad seeds.
We have bad seeds on these boards and we're at a crossroads.
I consider quite a large number of people on these boards my friends-in-absentia. And when my friends are constantly saying, "I'm leaving because the tenor of the boards has grown too negative" or "I can't even go into the Beta threads because I feel my voice isn't heard" or even "I won't post in the 4e forums because of the vitriol" I'm saddened by that and then I get a little angry about that.
We're talking a lot around the office about what steps to take next to bring the boards under control again. I'm not ready to reveal a plan (as we are not yet ready to reveal one) but rest-assured we're talking about this and there are many folks in this office who are dissatisfied with the direction our community has taken.
Be warned: this is our sandbox. If we don't like you playing here, we don't have to let you play here. Be nice or leave.
*Sits Happily Supportive*
Is it just me or does anyone else think its time for a group hug?....
With cookies! :D
