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

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Let's Dish Gish


Pathfinder RPG General Discussion

751 to 800 of 846 << first < prev | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | next > last >>
Taldor

Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Cards, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
With the magus, our base class count will be up to 18. I'm not sure we'll be going up to 19 base classes without also introducing an entirely new subset of rules.

Ninja what?

(I love the name of the book and the class - for the record)

Grand Lodge

Erik Mona wrote:
Well, gee, Chuck, maybe you should read more than the first two words on the cover of the book before you make that decision, eh?

Why, I don't.

Well, I look at the pictures, too.

Shadow Lodge

Zombieneighbours wrote:
I am sure that the book is going to be awesome, and can't wait for it. But, I really dislike the name. :(

+1

Cheliax Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

I must admit, I'm not a huge fan of the title Ultimate Magic either. It sounds like a product from a small third party publisher - a little bit bland and leaning a little too heavily on a superlative. The other element is that it suggests further books in a series (much like Complete Mage). If that's the plan, calling it Ultimate probably makes sense to help establish the line.

A similar type of book that comes to mind is the 2e Tome of Magic. I don't have the inside scoop, but that seemed like the unofficial fourth core book for 2e and it's title is more like Grimoire than Ultimate Magic. Granted, it was more of a spell compendium type book (and dear god, if that 3.5 product wasn't a good place to use the title Grimoire, I don't know what was), so it's not an apples to apples comparison.

In any event, you guys are in a better place to consider the data on the best title name, and I imagine the content will be great no matter what. To me, the Paizo brand is the important factor, and the title is secondary. I don't think this title captures the strong flavor of your work, but maybe that's appropriate on a product that is not Golarion specific.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber

Advanced Magic ? Magic Revisited ? Spellmastery Guide ? Guide to Stabracadabring People in the Face ? (OK, maybe not the last one)

Shadow Lodge

I suggest the title of the book be "Magic Reborn".

Grand Lodge

Official Guide of Stabracadabraing People in the Face

.
.
Sorry, I just had to say it outloud once to get it out of my system.

Paizo Employee Publisher, Chief Creative Officer

Guys, the title for this book is not really up to a public vote. I appreciate that there might be a better title out there, or that some of you would rather it be called something else, but it is not changing at this point.

Feel free to post alternative suggestions and what have you, but please understand that they will not be used. You might as well suggest alternative names for the sorcerer class or the Council of Thieves Adventure Path.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber

Sniff... evil man, that Eric Mona.

BTW - am I the only person who gets a brothel in Melbourne as the second Google result for "Ultimate Magic" ? :)

Cheliax Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

Now that you mention it, it's always bugged me that it's not Council of Rogues. The thief class isn't even in 3e! ;-)

In any event, I'm not asking for the title to be put up to public vote - I'm not a fan of consensus-based creativity. I'm just not in love with the title you're using, whether it's changing or not. I'm not going to not buy it, or ban it, or tell others to not buy it based on the title.

I just don't like it much, and hope titles of future core books will be a little less pedestrian. The quality of your work deserves a less generic sounding title.

And, if Council of Thieves had been called Adventure Path 4: Thieves Guild, I would've complained about that as well.


Erik Mona wrote:

You might as well suggest alternative names for the sorcerer class or the Council of Thieves Adventure Path.

oh good, you guys are finally reading my letters


Gorbacz wrote:
Advanced Magic ? Magic Revisited ? Spellmastery Guide ? Guide to Stabracadabring People in the Face ? (OK, maybe not the last one)

I approve of that last one. My daddy wrote the book on it!


Sebastian wrote:

...I'm just not in love with the title you're using, whether it's changing or not. I'm not going to not buy it, or ban it, or tell others to not buy it based on the title.

I just don't like it much, and hope titles of future core books will be a little less pedestrian. The quality of your work deserves a less generic sounding title...

You put that so much better than I did Sebastian.

Erik Mona wrote:
...Well, gee, Chuck, maybe you should read more than the first two words on the cover of the book before you make that decision, eh?...

I didn't have a problem with the words 'Book of', Erik. It's those third and fourth words which conjure shades of the 3.5 Archmage, Abjurant Champion, Incantatrix, Ultimate Magus and their ilk. Apologies for not phrasing it more diplomatically, in my previous posts, but it reads to me like I imagine 'Tome of Gish' might read to you... ;)

(Further) Edit
Okay, at this point since Paizo have said that they won't be changing the title I shall bow out of this debate.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16, 2012 Top 32

Sebastian wrote:
The other element is that it suggests further books in a series (much like Complete Mage). If that's the plan, calling it Ultimate probably makes sense to help establish the line.

I was thinking the same thing. "Ultimate Magic" is a perfect title for a book that's intended to spawn related products if it sells sufficiently well.

Also, in a post that seems to have been eaten earlier, I wanted to point out that "Ultimate Magic" seems like a good title if the intention is to intrigue younger gamers. I suspect that "Ultimate Magic" would be more likely to capture the attention of a young gamer than something accurate but bland like "Grimoire" (or "Player's Handbook X," for that matter).

Edit: Although, if I were naming the book, I'd be tempted to change the title from "Ultimate Magic" to "Ultimate Magic!" (with exclamation point). :P


Yup.

Opinion follows information. :)

Andoran

Evil Lincoln wrote:

Yup.

Opinion follows information. :)

That's not cool. :P


Studpuffin wrote:
Evil Lincoln wrote:

Yup.

Opinion follows information. :)

That's not cool. :P

I feel that it was.

Andoran

Evil Lincoln wrote:
Studpuffin wrote:
Evil Lincoln wrote:

Yup.

Opinion follows information. :)

That's not cool. :P
I feel that it was.

Well, you are incorrect sir. I feel that it's not.


Recursive humor limit reached.


Nothing? Really? Damn... :(

Andoran

Evil Lincoln wrote:
Recursive humor limit reached.

Apology accepted.


James Jacobs wrote:
Evil Lincoln wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
And "Ultimate Magic" is much more than just new spells for black magic, so it's not really an accurate name.
Apple Dictionary Application wrote:

grimoire |grim'wär|

noun
a book of magic spells and invocations.
ORIGIN mid 19th cent.: French, alteration of grammaire ‘grammar.’
As a recall, a number of historical grimoires enumerate the names of Angels and such, who featured prominently in alchemical practice. I think it is a great word for "the book of all magic", but I suppose not everyone shares that opinion. I also happen to think it would "look right" on the shelf next to Bestiary.

I agree that the word "grimoire" looks good next to "bestiary." But again, the title has to look right for more than just you and me. If the title doesn't look right to buyers and distributors and the book trade, they won't know what the book is and that can easily translate into low orders and that can easily translate into a book failing at market because no one placed orders.

And again... "Bestiary" = book of monsters, and that's accurate. "Grimoire" = book of spells and invocations (using your definition)" and that's NOT entirely accurate. This book will have a new base class, new magical options for many core classes, new feats, and some other non-spell stuff, in ADDITION to spells, of course.

I'll run the idea by Erik and the rest, but names of books aren't as much up for vote. It's actually pretty unusual for someone outside of Paizo to name a book—and that includes the book authors. We name most every one of the books we publish.

Well, could you please re-consider grimoire? Bring it up with marketing or who ever else you need to. Grimoire sounds much better, and more mature.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

Uncle Erik's Awesome Guide to Magic and Stabbing?

Just make the stuff between the covers good and it won't matter.

Andoran

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The book shall be titled Finger Wiggling 1402.


Pathfinder Tales Subscriber

I bet Paizo will use the title Grimoire when they publish a book that is just (or mostly) new spells.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Mairkurion {tm} wrote:
I bet Paizo will use the title Grimoire when they publish a book that is just (or mostly) new spells.

This would be a good bet.

A big book of all spells is not a terrible idea for a book. And if we use the word "Grimoire" on something else before then... we just rob ourselves of the perfect title for that book.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Gorbacz wrote:

Sniff... evil man, that Eric Mona.

BTW - am I the only person who gets a brothel in Melbourne as the second Google result for "Ultimate Magic" ? :)

Heh ... nope, comes up as the FIRST result for me.

Maybe the title of this book is generating some good traffic for that place ...


Erik Mona wrote:
3. ONE WORD: All other base classes are ONE word. This one should be no different.

I really wish I'd have been active in the forums when you posted this because I think sacrificing clarity for consistency is a no-win scenario. I would have suggested Arcane Warrior. When I think of a "Magus", I really don't think of a hybrid class at all.

Oh well. I guess that'll teach me.

Qadira

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Erik Mona wrote:

Guys, the title for this book is not really up to a public vote. I appreciate that there might be a better title out there, or that some of you would rather it be called something else, but it is not changing at this point.

Feel free to post alternative suggestions and what have you, but please understand that they will not be used. You might as well suggest alternative names for the sorcerer class or the Council of Thieves Adventure Path.

<snif> Fine, I'll just have to publish the Codex Whammijammious myself! <goes off and sulks>


Kirth Gersen wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
We're locked in with magus.

Bummer. Every time I play a gish, I'll invariably picture some dude in a turban with a box of myrrhh.

I'd associate magi with Testament, rather than Pathfinder!

Agreed on this.

I also agree with another poster that since the plural of "Magus" is "Magi" -- it is going to mess with perceptions of the prolific "Staff of the Magi" and similar iconic items.

Really, of all the amazing suggestions offered, that's the best they came up with? Why did they even bother to solicit suggestions if they were just going to go with the most generic (and largely inaccurate) term?

Don't get me wrong, I really, really appreciate the fact that Paizo reaches out to the community in a way no other game developer does that I am aware of. And I realize that a side effect of that is the more people you ask, the more there is going to be a portion of people who will disagree and not be pleased. But still...

Also, declaring that it's "locked in" well before publication seems a bit... eh, overly hardcore. But it's not my company.

Well, good luck, Paizo. This is a tough crowd to please when it comes to spell-warrior classes. If the past is an indicator, the content will surpass the labels by far, at least.

Paizo Employee Publisher, Chief Creative Officer

Loopy wrote:
Erik Mona wrote:
3. ONE WORD: All other base classes are ONE word. This one should be no different.

I really wish I'd have been active in the forums when you posted this because I think sacrificing clarity for consistency is a no-win scenario. I would have suggested Arcane Warrior. When I think of a "Magus", I really don't think of a hybrid class at all.

Oh well. I guess that'll teach me.

If it makes you feel better, it probably wouldn't have mattered. Right or wrong, this criteria was not negotiable.

Osirion

another_mage wrote:
Erik Mona wrote:
Grimoire _might_ be a good name for a book containing only spells, but then again probably not because most of the book buyers won't know what it means.

I bought one.

So did plenty of others, I'm guessing.

I contributed about 200 spells to that book, although only a dozen or so made it in.

The best thing about Magus is that it's practically got 'gish' right there in the name. Just pronounce it 'maygesh' as if Sean Connery was slurring it, and you've got the best of both worlds!


DeathQuaker wrote:
I also agree with another poster that since the plural of "Magus" is "Magi" -- it is going to mess with perceptions of the prolific "Staff of the Magi" and similar iconic items.

Suggest the plural of the PF class "Magus" not be "Magi". Instead, I suggest "Maggies". =D


DeathQuaker wrote:
Also, declaring that it's "locked in" well before publication seems a bit... eh, overly hardcore. But it's not my company.

If I had to guess about the biggest reason for this, I believe it would be because of the tendency for arguments to never stop. People continually suggesting names that are "obviously so much better" or even "perfect."

I'm going to guess that Paizo staff has already considered the pros and cons of the names suggested and the name chosen. The people arguing about it just present practically no new information that Paizo staff hasn't considered. So that after the new round of arguing, Paizo would just come to the same conclusion as before.


Erik Mona wrote:

this criteria was not negotiable.

"This criterion." Criteria are plural.

I wouldn't have mentioned it, except that the plural of "magus" came up as well...


pres man wrote:
DeathQuaker wrote:
I also agree with another poster that since the plural of "Magus" is "Magi" -- it is going to mess with perceptions of the prolific "Staff of the Magi" and similar iconic items.
Suggest the plural of the PF class "Magus" not be "Magi". Instead, I suggest "Maggies". =D

I heartily approve of this. Of course, then in my world, they'd have to specialize in using their magic to make golems out of paper (obscure anime reference is obscure).

Also, my nickname in college was Maggie (despite my given name being Rebecca. Don't ask.). So added bonus. :)

Blazej wrote:
DeathQuaker wrote:
Also, declaring that it's "locked in" well before publication seems a bit... eh, overly hardcore. But it's not my company.
If I had to guess about the biggest reason for this, I believe it would be because of the tendency for arguments to never stop. People continually suggesting names that are "obviously so much better" or even "perfect."

Have you ever been to a gaming message board? ;)

This has now started an argument that will continue on for at least 10 years, including starting flame wars between people who like "Magus" and people who will still insist upon using "Gish." :)

Quote:


I'm going to guess that Paizo staff has already considered the pros and cons of the names suggested and the name chosen. The people arguing about it just present practically no new information that Paizo staff hasn't considered. So that after the new round of arguing, Paizo would just come to the same conclusion as before.

See, much as I love Paizo, I'm not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that they really thought long and hard about it. Having worked for a couple (very small) publishing companies, I am well aware of the tendency to stick to RUSHRUSHRUSHWENEEDADECISIONANDWENEEDITNOWWHOCARESIFITSUCKS rather than to carefully debate or think out anything. 90% of the time this is, to be fair, because THERE IS NO TIME TO THINK. But it's a shame that the other 10% of the time, the mentality still applies.

And they may well have thought about it and just thought it was the bees' knees for reasons I may never understand. Such is life. I will somehow be able to get on in life, even knowing that this base class (that I probably won't use in my games anyway since I tend to stick to "core rulebook only") doesn't have a name I am particularly fond of. :)

I can still whine and argue about it, however, because I AM a gamer on a message board after all. ;)


I still vote for Warlock or Mystic


MerrikCale wrote:
I still vote for Warlock or Mystic

Me too. Oh well, it could have been worse.

Osirion

Stuffy Grammarian wrote:
Erik Mona wrote:

this criteria was not negotiable.

"This criterion." Criteria are plural.

I wouldn't have mentioned it, except that the plural of "magus" came up as well...

Ya know they had Criteria, as in more then one thing :) It was just the two words one used as an example.


seekerofshadowlight wrote:
Ya know they had Criteria, as in more then one thing :) It was just the two words one used as an example.

I'm aware that there were more than one.

If more than one had been intended to apply, "these criteria" would have been the thing to say, rather than "this criterion." In no way can "this criteria" ever be considered correct English, however -- even if Richard Nixon used to think it was.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16, 2012 Top 32

Set wrote:
The best thing about Magus is that it's practically got 'gish' right there in the name. Just pronounce it 'maygesh' as if Sean Connery was slurring it, and you've got the best of both worlds!

Set, you're a total genius! Now, whenever I read "magus," I'll think "magish," and the class name will fit perfectly.


when i hear magus i think soceror supreme, i think ultimate magus or arcane lord, dr strange, the last image that comes to my mind is a gish. wierd choice.

Shadow Lodge

I rather like it, and it honestly makes about as much sense as Warlock or Mystic (both of which I thought were poor choices to begin with. Warlock being far too heavily used already)

Cheliax

MerrikCale wrote:
I still vote for Warlock or Mystic

Take your silly voting nonsense to Andoran and await your extinction with the other hippies. }>


Epic Meepo wrote:
Set wrote:
The best thing about Magus is that it's practically got 'gish' right there in the name. Just pronounce it 'maygesh' as if Sean Connery was slurring it, and you've got the best of both worlds!
Set, you're a total genius! Now, whenever I read "magus," I'll think "magish," and the class name will fit perfectly.

Or take it one step further and call the class "Mage-ish". Because that's what it is. LOL


I don't think that Magus will be replacing fighter/mage or the dreaded "gish" in gamer vernacular... especially with the Magi plural (bringing up images of the three wise men in the bible visiting baby jesus)... it also sounds too much like the generic "Mage". Warlock would have been better, had it not been saddled with other game related baggage (then folks would be talking about Pathfinder Warlocks, 3.5 Warlocks and 4th ed Warlocks... most uncool)

Sorry to sound like sour grapes paizo... but you may not have killed "gish". Alas! But I don't think any of the other suggestions were better either, so Magus is an okay term.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Definitely didn't kill gish. Gish is now the catch-all term for a f/mu class of any style or combination.

Magus is just another attempt at a Gish archtype.

And no, didn't particularly like the name, either. magus brings up pure spellcaster to me, not a combo class.

==Aelryinth

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Gish has been in the game vernacular for decades. Since 1st edition D&D.

If in another 25 years the term "magus" has become the replacement for "gish" I'll be happy. For me, at least, it gives ME a word to use when talking about a fighter/wizard that Paizo customers will understand, and prevents me from using the word "gish" entirely which is Fine With Me.

Shadow Lodge

Magus is a class, Gish is a squishy concept that might or might not apply to any given arcane class which enables weapon use and spellcasting. A meta-class if you will.


The term magus does not fit the concept. A magus is a follower of Zoraster, or one of the three wise men, which seems to imply we'll get yet another primary caster like a wizard or sorceror, with a few combat abilities tacked on. We already have a fine mage/fighter in the eldritch knight. What we don't have is a fighter/mage. MAgus does not invoke an image of a badass fighter who can also sling spells. It invokes images of a scholarly wizard or alchemist, which we already have.
What's the rational on settling on this particular name?

751 to 800 of 846 << first < prev | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / General Discussion / Let's Dish Gish All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©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.