No one is really saying that the designers know more than we do. If anything, people here keep deriding them and calling them incompetent. All we are saying is that they know their job more than we give them credit for. If they truly thought they were smarter than us, why would they be looking over this decision again?
The main point was to show that just because you are a game designer that doesn't mean you automatically know more than someone who isn't.
I do not dispute this, but it is false dichotomy to assume the opposite is true as well. I've been in enough positions in the past when a 'know-it-all' with no training thought he could tell me something blatantly untrue while believing he was absolutely right for me to assert that I know more about the game than the people who made it. At the same time, I am commenting because in the past people have mentioned things in passing to me in my profession that I had completely forgotten about by focussing on what I thought was the problem. The devs are human, they make mistakes, but at the end of the day they are the ones making a living out of something that is to us a mere hobby, so they must know something!
That is why the style of criticism should always be "Excuse me, but have you considered...?" rather than "Hey stupid! you got this wrong!"
I'll take an expert over 99 amateurs every day of the week. (I mean in important things, not RPGs).
That goes doubly if they've thought about it carefully having been made aware of the plebs' viepoint.
The main point was to show that just because you are a game designer that doesn't mean you automatically know more than someone who isn't.I do not dispute this, but it is false dichotomy to assume the opposite is true as well. I've been in enough positions in the past when a 'know-it-all' with no training thought he could tell me something blatantly untrue while believing he was absolutely right for me to assert that I know more about the game than the people who made it. At the same time, I am commenting because in the past people have mentioned things in passing to me in my profession that I had completely forgotten about by focussing on what I thought was the problem. The devs are human, they make mistakes, but at the end of the day they are the ones making a living out of something that is to us a mere hobby, so they must know something!
That is why the style of criticism should always be "Excuse me, but have you considered...?" rather than "Hey stupid! you got this wrong!"
The criticism should be phrased like that anyway, in my opinion - even if they were stupid and had got it wrong.
Absolutely. Name-calling just annoys people and makes them less likely to place any value on your opinion.
I'll take an expert over 99 amateurs every day of the week. (I mean in important things, not RPGs).
That goes doubly if they've thought about it carefully having been made aware of the plebs' viepoint.
Ah, but ideas and imagination are equally important, in RPGs at least, don't you agree?
Master Arminas
More important. (I don't care about mechanics much at all).
I was just making the point that, if one expert is aware of 99 non-experts' views and thinks they're wrong, then you should bet with the expert.
|
To attribute to the developers the intention to deceive is a recipe for unhappiness. I have a friend who right now is in a very agitated state because he was deceived by one particular person. Since then, he attributes to the actions of all his friends an intention to deceive, exploit, and pursue selfish goals to the exclusion of consideration for his feelings. He has even gone as far as to say that his best friend inviting him on an expensive vacation (paid for in full) is "inconsiderate" because he is single, and his best friend is in a couple, and because he is not a beach person, and the vacation is on a tropical island. This is, of course, a twisted way to look at the world.
I think we've all met someone like that. (NSFW)
I was just making the point that, if one expert is aware of 99 non-experts' views and thinks they're wrong, then you should bet with the expert.
[sarcasm]No no, the experts are in a conspiracy to deceive us! they are all communists/fascists/socialists/fanatics/liberals/conservatives (take your pick or insert a political group you personally do not like) out to ruin our way of life! They are demonstrably wrong and only doing this for the money they screw out of us all![/sarcasm]
Wherever the expert says anything unpopular, there shall you find rabble-raisers with vested interests telling you the experts are wrong.
OT, an outsider's perspective on the hazards of being a game designer...
I imagine being in the position of being a games designer is very difficult. On one hand, you are probably quite good at certain things--maybe it's creative writing, maybe it's statistical analysis of game mechanics, maybe it's both. You probably have the ability to play out various scenarios in your head and determine the most likely outcome--that's a talent shared wit most gamers.
But there's only so much you can play out in your own head. The point of games is that they are played in a group. Whether competitive or cooperative, you bring lots of people into the carefully designed mechanical system you made, and they WILL break it at some point. Not to mention different play styles, different priorities, different house rules, different degrees of adherence to the rules makes reporting back to the designer a hairy prospect. You have to get a lot of playtesting data to understand how the system works and even then, only generally speaking.
And it's not always easy to run a playtest or get the data. I think the open playtest for Pathfinder was brilliant and is part of why the game very generally speaking has had a lot of success (and I am certain 5e's open playtest is directly inspired by Pathfinder's success).
(And it does not surprise me that the monk issue with flurry is to do with a change that was made post beta and thus never saw massive scale playtesting.)
But playtesting, and open playtesting in particular, also involves a lot of bickering and contentiousness over small things--I remember the beta playtest and people would get downright rabid with each other over the craziest things. If Paizo had enough staff capacity that they had one person who's job it was just to collate data from the message boards and other playtesting sites, organize it, and present it to the designer--work as a "middle man" between the gamers and the designers--it probably would help a lot (with the hugely massive caveat that the "middle man" could be trusted to provide all the feedback accurately with a good sense of priority). A lot of times it's the developers themselves trying to directly gather the feedback (Jason, Sean, Stephen, for example) and then they get bogged down in the bickering we get ourselves engaged in--and it can and will get aimed at them if they show up. And that can affect how they gather the information needed to design the game in the best way possible. Not because they don't know what they're doing, but simply because when anyone is that deeply stuck within the mire of gamer discourse, it becomes extremely difficult for even the most saintly of individuals to not take things personally (and the designers taking things personally is often where the system implodes most--but with all that's aimed at them--how could they not?), separate the wheat of the good feedback from the chaff, and move on and do what's needed.
It's also intensely time consuming--time that could be spent actually writing and playing in playtests of their own.
But however it's done and the data has to be gathered--because you can't design something meant to be enjoyed by people without being certain that people are actually enjoying it. It's a crazy process that by it's nature that can never be certain.
|
rabble rabble rabble. +1.
I don't think monks have quite been gimped to the point that their class purpose is trivial and that they provide only flavor benefit instead of helping a party. Still, there are many side by side comparisons that have been done by people exemplifying just how poorly he stacks up to the rest of the martial classes. I think a complete retooling of his abilities, subsequent play test, and a release of Monk 2.0 is a reasonable request to see a class that is on the very of unplayable be brought back to the forefront as a strong option.
If they want him to be a TWF at full BAB, but restricted to monk weapons and UAS, then give him those abilities. If they want a unique ability that functions like it, then give it comparable strength and reasonable limitations. not this bastard version of TWF/BAB that is unwieldy and wrought with language problems. Clear explanations of your exact intent for a class ability going to painful and mindnumbing lengths to insure no ambiguity, still saves the time of FAQ rulings and the hassle of errata management.
I don't think monks have quite been gimped to the point that their class purpose is trivial and that they provide only flavor benefit instead of helping a party. Still, there are many side by side comparisons that have been done by people exemplifying just how poorly he stacks up to the rest of the martial classes.
It is possible to make an effective core monk - but it's not easy! You have to blow all your feats on it, and even then you will be ineffective against some foes. It's not like the other classes where you have several options - some better than others, but all of them effective, and any newcomer can make them work. The monk isn't like that, but it should be.
|
|
The monk's main problem is it's too much of a MAD class that doesn't get enough for the amount that you have to invest in it.
very true.
You wanna hit things? Okay, pump Str.
You want to be fleet of foot and take advantages of enemy openings too? Better add some Dex
You want to actually be able to survive combat since you aren't wearing armor? Few points to Con.
Feel like being a smarter fighter to work around your low AC and want to use combat manuevers/combat expertise? Welcome to a min 13 Int my friend.
Want to up your AC even further since you can't wear armor and want to make use of certain monk styles? Wisdom is your pal.
You want people to like you? Not even the makers of the game like your class (j/k). Enter Charisma, you're only dump stat.
While the clarification is a nerf in the sense that it makes (some) monks worse than before, that's not really the primary reason it's horrible. "Monks are not a very powerful class, mechanically" is a true statement, and something that it's fine to be unhappy about, but I worry that power-level concerns muddy the waters surrounding the clarification, which did essentially nothing to the iconic barefisted fighter monk. While it's good to recognize that the clarification took an unimpressive option (weapon monk) and made it weaker/more expensive/more limited, and thus was, in fact, a rotten move from a balance perspective, monk power-level woes aren't really the core issue, and the clarification isn't really a balance issue at all - it's a rules-breaker issue with some minor balance side effects.
Part of the reason it's important to recognize this is that if the mess the clarification made looks like it's primarily a balance issue, it potentially attracts the wrong reaction. Monks could use a little love in the balance department, but barefisted monks aren't really any weaker than they were a month ago - near the bottom of the totem pole, but still fully capable of contributing just fine to the success of a party. The monk's low power level is the picture frame being a bit askew; something that might be nice to get to eventually, but not something that you can't live with. The clarification breakages are the carpet on fire.
The other part of the reason that I think entangling the two issues is something to be cautious of is that it does a disservice to the balance issues. Even if they take what I feel is the sensible route and just make the rules work how everyone was playing them in the first, place, that just rewinds us to a world where monks are best off most of the time using a single weapon in two hands or grabbing a bow. While I think there should be a place for such concepts in the game, having the default best option for the brawler/kung fu class to be riddling someone point-blank with arrows or beating them with a sword or a polehammer feels a little... not the best.
The monk's main problem is it's too much of a MAD class that doesn't get enough for the amount that you have to invest in it.very true.
You wanna hit things? Okay, pump Str.
You want to be fleet of foot and take advantages of enemy openings too? Better add some Dex
You want to actually be able to survive combat since you aren't wearing armor? Few points to Con.
Feel like being a smarter fighter to work around your low AC and want to use combat manuevers/combat expertise? Welcome to a min 13 Int my friend.
Want to up your AC even further since you can't wear armor and want to make use of certain monk styles? Wisdom is your pal.
You want people to like you? Not even the makers of the game like your class (j/k). Enter Charisma, you're only dump stat.
I've managed to make a monk work by basically ignoring strength and charisma, blowing feats on Weapon Finesse and Agile Maneuvers, and living with a low con so I can boost intelligence enough to get Combat Expertise at later levels to get some of the Greater maneuvers.
|
|
true, you can get away with a little tweaking. at the end of the day, its still a MAD class with a need for a bunch of feats to overcome holes and there are series of compromises.
they must be specialized and researched to fit the specific role you want them to play. being able to get a 15 point buy without mapping out some(most) of your feats later and expect to blissfully waltz thru most of the encounters is a hard deal for the monk, whereby you thru a fighter or a wizard in the same spot and watch them shine regardless of conditions
true, you can get away with a little tweaking. at the end of the day, its still a MAD class with a need for a bunch of feats to overcome holes and there are series of compromises.
they must be specialized and researched to fit the specific role you want them to play. being able to get a 15 point buy without mapping out some(most) of your feats later and expect to blissfully waltz thru most of the encounters is a hard deal for the monk, whereby you thru a fighter or a wizard in the same spot and watch them shine regardless of conditions
+1.
The monk's main problem is it's too much of a MAD class that doesn't get enough for the amount that you have to invest in it.
agreed you need at least 3 good stats and I can't think of anyone else that dependent.
So I decided to start futher hunting for Devs statements on this from the past I'll be posting them as i find them
First up from the pre development forums.
Jason Bulmahn (Lead Designer) Oct 17, 2008, 02:18 PM Flag | List
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----
+ This issue is an odd part of the rules, with two system essentially trying to do the same thing... sort of. The question comes down to this.. is flurry of blows a special action, in which case, you could not use it in conjunction with TWF. I tend to think that it is, but it is open to debate.
In either case, some clarification in the rules here is needed.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Here we see that they are two systems trying to do the same thing...Sort of. This thread was about combining the two.
Have any of the developers chimed in on this yet?
I know they were looking into the matter.
If they have posted in another thread could someone please link it in here.
Thanks!
Not that i know of
The developers are currently exploding due to having to get UE out the door.
Director of Game Design
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry folks,
I know we sorta dropped a grenade on this issue and then left the room, but we've been a bit swamped trying to get the Gencon books out the door. We will revisit this issue once the current crisis is averted.
Hang in there.. we will find a reasonable solution for this one.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry folks,
I know we sorta dropped a grenade on this issue and then left the room, but we've been a bit swamped trying to get the Gencon books out the door. We will revisit this issue once the current crisis is averted.
Hang in there.. we will find a reasonable solution for this one.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Thank you for letting us know that this is still on your list, Mr. Bulmahn. The majority of us here on these boards are well aware of the busy and time-consuming activities that keep you guys jumping in an effort to retain the high level of quality found in Pathfinder and other Paizo products.
We will await the final decisions of you and your team with anticipation, however. Once again, Sir, thank you for keeping us informed and up-to-date, and thank you for your hard work on the game that we all love.
Master Arminas
|
Sorry folks,
I know we sorta dropped a grenade on this issue and then left the room, but we've been a bit swamped trying to get the Gencon books out the door. We will revisit this issue once the current crisis is averted.
Hang in there.. we will find a reasonable solution for this one.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Thanks!
On the one hand, I'm really relieved to see you guys touching base with us again. :) Honestly, for this monk fan at least, it's been hard not to feel a bit down in the dumps about this class lately.
On the other hand, I have to admit I'm a bit worried. If this issue is going to get targetted after the GenCon releases, what does that mean for any potential monk-help in Ultimate Equipment, be it wraps or soemthing else flavored for the monk? (which is how this recent upset started actually...)
Could monks get something that actually helps in UE and have that needs to be changed later? Could the re-examination of the monk be constrained by developments in UE? Or could stuff in UE actually show some of the monk re-evaluation in progress?
Could monks get something that actually helps in UE and have that needs to be changed later? Could the re-examination of the monk be constrained by developments in UE? Or could stuff in UE actually show some of the monk re-evaluation in progress?
I'm not going to lie, when I read this, I was totally expecting some sort of cartoon narration of will so and so triumph over so and so and a "Find out next time.." ending :P
Sorry folks,
I know we sorta dropped a grenade on this issue and then left the room, but we've been a bit swamped trying to get the Gencon books out the door. We will revisit this issue once the current crisis is averted.
Hang in there.. we will find a reasonable solution for this one.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo PublishingThanks!
On the one hand, I'm really relieved to see you guys touching base with us again. :) Honestly, for this monk fan at least, it's been hard not to feel a bit down in the dumps about this class lately.On the other hand, I have to admit I'm a bit worried. If this issue is going to get targetted after the GenCon releases, what does that mean for any potential monk-help in Ultimate Equipment, be it wraps or soemthing else flavored for the monk? (which is how this recent upset started actually...)
Could monks get something that actually helps in UE and have that needs to be changed later? Could the re-examination of the monk be constrained by developments in UE? Or could stuff in UE actually show some of the monk re-evaluation in progress?
While I think the monk is good (pre-flurry debacle), I too word love to see some cool monk items that can be cheaper than the Amulet of Mighty Fists.
My own suggestion for 'cheaper than AOMF' has always been monk wraps...
Monk Wraps : These leather wraps come in pairs, and must be worn either on the hands (taking up the gloves slot), or else on the feet (taking up the boot slot).
They can be enchanted in the same way an amulet of mighty fists is enchanted (enhancement, melee special abilities, etc). The cost is based on the final effective bonus level. Wraps, like an amulet of mighty fists, does not require an enhancement bonus before melee special abilities are applied. The wearer can only gain the benefits when making unarmed attacks with the two appendages that are equipped with the wraps. For example, if a monk were wearing a pair of wraps on his hands, and wielding a sai in his left hand, he could flurry to do damage with the sai and his right hand, but not his left. Although they come in pairs, the wraps are enchanted as if one object.
(+1) 4,000 gp, (+2) 16,000 gp, (+3) 18,000 gp, (+4) 64,000 gp, (+5) 100,000 gp
MDT, I am kind of leery of that pricing. You need two (at a minimum) to cover all of your unarmed strikes--but that puts the total price above an Amulet of the Mighty Fists. If you need two sets, that puts the price at 8,000 gp vs. 5,000 gp (+1), 32,000 gp vs. 25,000 gp (+2), 72,000 gp vs. 45,000 gp (+3), 128,000 gp vs. 80,000 gp (+4), and 200,000 gp vs. 125,000 gp (+5).
That isn't cheaper than the AMoF, my friend. Now, if a single pair (hands or feet) applied to ALL unarmed strikes made by the character; yes, I'd applaud and call it a day. But if have to own and wear two, the individual price should be lowered. Otherwise, the AoMF winds up being less expensive and consumes fewer slots as well.
Master Arminas