Kevin Mack's page

I just think it’s ridiculous and moronic that Paizos success came from presenting an alternative to the worst d&d edition ever published, and then they decided to give a big middle finger to all the fans of the game by making their 2nd edition essentially a clone of 4e. You exist because of how bad 4e was, and you did a 180 and made your own version of it.

I would have called it a masterstroke of marketing myself. I mean the fact that it's what 7ish years later and still going strong indicates going this route was not a mistake (and I say this as someone who prefers first and does think pf2e was at least heavily influenced by 4e.)

Oh the irony I find this quite perplexing since I would say it's the opposite way round. I mean they have literally been doing the whole Noctilla possible redemption thing since either early pathfinder or maybe the 3.5 erra wheras the Arzani one basically comes out of no-where (It is pretty well done though I will admit.)

Maybe it's less Gaslighting and more they assumed people would have been following her story up to this point and not wanting to use a lot of the space retelling a story they already told elsewhere? (Since she has had a deity article before plus numerous entries in other god books and guides.)

hate to be more negative but I see myself less likely rather than more getting ap's now Lot to plop down for a single purchase and previously I could buy the first volume and decide if I wanted the rest or not which I obviously cant do with this new format.

To be fair I am not actually against redemption stories Noctilia great redemption story, Arzani great redemption story. (Also funnily enough all 3 happening within a relativly short time frame of each other and Sorshen is the weakest redemption story of the 3 IMO.)

Oh also unleashing a small army of vampires upon the world once she woke up. that and the whole baving in the blood of people to become immortal so she could have that 'revelation' to begin with.

I'm no longer a subscriber to anything at Paizo, so I don't really care either way personally, but my reaction to this is that it's simply too complicated to care. I shouldn't need a spreadsheet to figure out what discount perk I get. Just make it similar to before - subscribe to X things and get Y discount. Gaming rewards is far less fun than playing the games Paizo makes.

I suspect part of the point is to reward customers who are frequent but arent subscribers (Like me) as well as subscribers

Kevin Mack wrote:

When one has a subscription, one can cancel it if finances aren't looking so hot, the product line does not draw interest, or access means change.

When one is signed onto this new program again, Paizo is a business, and is making the business choices that they feel are good for their model it forces a situation of expected participation that could cause dramatic concern for some.

and with this system for me at least there is no fiddly messing around with subscriptions for things I do or do not want or cant afford etc why am I suddenly going to decide Oh i'm not interested in x product but I'll buy it anyway to get x points I dont do that when I'm ordering my 40k minis so I dont see why it would happen with this

This new set-up feels predatory and aimed at keeping 'whales' hooked, while stringing along those of us who do not have massive resources and or access means in a vague hope of getting 'bonus points'.

I understand and respect Paizo wanting to make money.

However, this does not feel like the best way to do it, as it appears to punish people like myself.

or maybe your just looking at it the wrong way. I mean how is this any more or less 'predatory' as the current subscription service which also encourages you to buy more stuff?

Maybe it's just me. Maybe I just don't completely understand the new system, but this just seems like basically nothing more than the shady microtransactions stuffed in so many video games these days except for TTRPG's to me. It even seems to have the whole buy our gold to use for purchases included of various amounts.

I thought WOTC's old CEO tried or had plans to implement something of this sort for D&D that crashed and burned.

I think it is just you because the video game thing is having to trade real life money for fake video game money to buy stuff that often in the past would normally have just come with the game.

Now if paizo begins saying you need to spend £10 in order to get chapter 9 of the book you already bought or spend spend £20 in order to get the ultra deluxe super fighter of ultimate ownage then it might be close to the video game microtransactions but at the moment it's a reward scheme pretty much exactlly the same as every 3rd party website that sells tabeltop minatures Ive ever visited uses.

I'm sorry untill they start literally sending the pinkertons to peoples doors I'm going to be say anyone comparing this to the stuff WOTC has done is frankly being ridiculous.

Yes they are changing how the the thing works and yes that does mean some people are going to be worse off than under the old system but also some (Like me) will be better off and others will basically break even.

Admitadlly I'm very used to buying model gaming stuff (GW) from third party supliers who often have point reward systems which this pretty much exactly is with a few extra bits (points for birthdays.)

And again - the Drift travel that essentially makes the Starfinder setting possible is a product of a domino chain that starts with Casandalee's ascension. It feels really odd to minimize that!

Stop me if I'm wrong but technically is starfinder not a completly seperate timeline/ alternative timeline from the current golarion one so no quarantee what happens in one also happens in the other?

Is that not what they already have the module line for?

magnuskn wrote:

(Talked about slavery and drow...)

EDIT: Spoilering to prevent wall of text syndrome...

** spoiler omitted **...

That's the thing we're all ostensibly trying not to be.

Yesterday in the Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion channel, a thread was posted expressing consternation about a perceived lack of communication, spurned by the Runesmith/Necromancer playtest ending without a post about it on the website; though there were posts to Facebook and bluesky, and a concern for the company given the departure of certain developers.

It was not, general, a happy nor positive thread, though there was some push back trying to paint a somewhat brighter picture.

As of when I last read the thread, last night, the mood was dour. However, it had not devolved into personal attacks, hatred, or the like.

So I was very surprised this morning to find that thread deleted. Not shutdown, not locked, simply gone, as though it never existed.

Now, PF2 General may not have been the best venue for that thread, so I see every potential reason to move it somewhere more appropriate.
It's possible it might have devolved into something awful, as hinted at above. Perfectly reasonable to lock the thread and delete the hate.

But I think deleting the thread entirely goes too far, into the realm of over-moderation. I've done a bit of community moderating, certainly not on the scale of Paizo, though. One thing I've found pretty consistent is that the best way to upset people who are discussing something they don't like about an organizationis to shut down that conversation. It swiftly takes people from reasonable and upset/unhappy to furious and vindictive.
It's a great way to get people to leave your community forever.

It's kind of sardonically funny. The thread with a major theme of concerning lack of communication gets silently deleted.

I love Pathfinder. I quite like Paizo, generally. I disagree with the way they handled this situation and I think it does themselves more harm than good.

If you, fellow forum poster, feel a desire to post in this thread, I implore you to keep a civil tone. Open, honest, but...

I clearly havent been paying much attention which developers have left recently?

Yeah honestly curtain call probably has way to much of it especially the second book where out of a 72 page adventure about a quater of it is victory point skill system after victory point skill system.

I dont think that is the final cover art.

I feel that if Arazni (a lich) and Nocticula (a demon lord) can change their ways, surely a human such as Sorshen can change too.

I would also argue there is a big diffrence in that those two never really had a choice in the matter whilst Sorshen willing chose to do all that stuff (Also dosent help in the ap itself it comes across less as wanting redemption and more sick of the other runelords with a dose of not wanting ganked by the next adventuring party that comes along)

Paizo has THREE of these same characters:

Arazni, Nocticula, Shorsen

Each of them is IRREDEEMABLY EVIL. One is a bloody handed tyrant manipulator and schemer, the other is a DEMON PRINCESS, the last has controlled the bodies of others for millennia to do what they want, and advocated that more of this is better than less.

They do like, one kinda altruistic thing, and BOOM. REDEEMED.

They make for fun villains. They do not make for fun patrons.

As for me, Arazni is PERMA-DED in my homegame. She ain't gonna make that transition to divinity.

To be fair of those 3 the only one who I hate getting the redemption ark is Shorshen. As said Arazni was forced into the evil role and Nocticula If memory serves they had been working on her redemption arc before pathfinder was even pathinfer (Ie still 3.5) Shorshen on the other hand is a person that is a mass murderer, a manipulator, a slaver and well considering the number of concubines and her area of magic specalty certain other unfortunate suggestions as well.

On the matter of Arazni becoming one of the core 20 maybe I'm misremembering or new lore has been added in since the end of 1e but the impresion I had always got was she was completly uninterested in the whole being a goddess and followers thing so does strike me as a bit of a change in attitude to me.

Honestly I feel this thread is starting to do a pretty good job on showing why there is a downturn (Archaic website aside)

As much as I would like to say Direct sequels I suspect at that point your just as well going back to doing 6 part AP's

Although I will say if by indirect sequals you mean stuff like the runelords trilogy I am quite found of that.

As much as I would like to say Direct sequels I suspect at that point your just as well going back to doing 6 part AP's

I could be wrong but I'm not sure he means litterly Dungeon magazine but rather the same format.

Honestly might have worked better if they had held off for a few months on this one..

So is this another mega dungeon ap? Just me or has there been a lot of these for 2e (Seven dooms, ghostlight and now this one.Oh also that absolm module If it ever comes out I'm guessing.)

Yeah have to say I think I prefer the 6 part Ap's myself (A couple of the 3 part ones have felt like they could have done being longer IMO)

A release date for dead God's hand would be nice.

Still not entirly clear why drow needed to be removed but the current version of Kobolds got to stick around (Since if I'm not mistaken the reptile part is more wizards thing than what Kobolds in folklore look like)

Also could always revive that one in Katapesh (If memory serves they have been hinting it is already doing so.)

Huh Arazni becoming one of the core 20 seems a bit odd to me (and I say this as someone who likes her character.) Since as Magnuskn said she dosent seem to be the want to be worshiped type (and I especially dont see her as wanting to take Iomedae's place if she were the deity that kicks it.)

Oddly only one I could see working would be Urgathoa (Either Arazni or The tyrant killing her to get his phylactery) and Arazni getting given the position (Would also be a possible step towards having more none evil undead in the setting.)

Well seems to be one called Tan Ripper and one called Rip Tanner and they seem to have the same Mo (No posts some favorites and a bunch of textless reviews ranging from 1 to 3 stars Although in Rip Tanners case are admitadly a few 4 and 5 stars as well.)

To be honest I felt the last 3 ap's could have each done being a book or two longer (Gate walkers and stolen fate while I really like them felt rushed in a few places and the Dwarf one could possibly have done with ending at a higher lvl.)

Any new upcoming adventures (Ap or Module?) likely to be announced at any of these panels

Possible the old gaods falling/ new gods rising could refer to Razmir?

I suspect with all the other changes they have mentioned this seems even less likely to see the light of day at least not without a fair amount of reworking it's start.

You can keep cycling through every single creature in the game to try to make your point that you wish that Drow didn't have to go, but I promise you that the folks at Paizo have thought about all of this a lot more than any of us have and did not make their list of creatures that have to go without careful thought.

Honestly I couldent care less if they stayed or went. I feel my point is being missed here or I'm not explaining it very well (Honestly probably the latter).

Also as I mentioned elsewhere I'm honestly suprised they dont seem to need to change Kobolds since unless I am mistaken Kobolds as little lizard creatures were as much Wizards of the coasts as Drow or color coded dragons

Wotc doesn’t own “person with fiendish blood”.

They DO own “evil demon worshipping white haired sensual clothed matriarchal dark elves living underground”.

The two are no way in comparable, I’m not sure how many times this needs to be said or why.

To play devils advocate a bit one of the things ive seen brought up previously in other companys doing this sort of thing is that under the current legal system it's less wherether they own x or not and more can a company survive being taken to court over x

Must admit thing I'm more worried about is how the change is going to affect one of my favorite pathfinder NPC'S Koriah Azmeren since the discovery of the drow is a large part of her background and it seems there answer from what I have read elsewhere is she 'fiddled with the truth a bit.'

Ectar wrote:

I'm still hoping to hear something about Shraen:

the city of Drow who got ousted from Zirnakaynin for worshiping Urgathoa instead of a demon lord, traveled to Vask, transformed themselves into undead along the way, and have a new city.

Like, a significant portion of their backstory is based on getting ousted from Zirnakaynin. Just up and replacing them with Sekmin, even undead Sekmin, loses a lot of development from the Extinction Curse AP.
It's a really cool city, and I'm just worried it's going to lose a ton of appeal in the transition, whatever that ends up looking like.

Have nothing to reveal about Shraen yet, but my gut feeling is to find a way to have it still be Urgathoa worshiping elves who end up there. They don't have to be drow, since the story of them here is not about them being drow and playing to the OGL tropes that we can no longer use in print once we switch to ORC products.

Whether they are cavern elves, or an Urgathoa cult who fled Kyonin or Celwynvian, or potentailly even aquatic elves or something wild like that... dunno. I wouldn't expect to hear much more from us on this specific topic for a while, though.

Out of intrest is there a reason you couldent just go with the Drow were all cavern elves all along route and just port over the stuff from second darkness (Perhaps minus the uh more questionable parts) to them?

Yeah articles is better would probably have been a better idea to have just made this one more parts rather than cut the articles.

I have long loved the drow (and yes, a certain ranger and his city of birth have a lot to do with that). I look forward to seeing how Paizo will handle them going forward. I don't think it should take much beyond a rename and a reemphasis of things that they are already doing or starting to do. If that means I won't get another trip to Zirkaynin for a long time (if ever), well, I know who's really to blame for that. I will just have to content myself with whatever awesomeness I get instead.

Yeah I would think a re-name would surfice for the most part

Have to say pretty disapointed and more than a little skeptical about this doing all that well (Reaction in general seems to be mixed at best.) I fear it will suffer the Pathfinder online fate.

Honestly between 6 bestiaries the NPC codex and all the statted up characters in various 1e books I find it's fairly easy to switch 2e for 1e characters like 90% of the time same for monsters (Either a direct switch or in the case of new 2e monsters something in 1e thats fairly close.)

Uh far as I know they have just done what pathfinder did? (Ie they integrated them in the human entry.)

To be fair with all the drama thats being attatched to the Gyrax name recently I can see why they would keep quiet about that part.

Really hopping this may come back especially since this and the 5e abomination vaults are what I was most looking foreward to and it look likely neither is going to happen.

Cant say I really say I see it myself. I mean stop me if I'm wrong but wasent Yuna a full on pc and actually did things in combat and stuff? Also wasent sin more of a big lizard than a whale (I distictly remember it having an arm you blast off at one point)

I dont understand why you need to play something in order to review it I mean after all hasent James Jacobs himself said these are intended almost as much to be read as to be played? Plus if at the end of the day if something reads so bad you dont want to play it is that not a valid reason for a bad review? (I mean end of the day he has paid money for the product and if a person dosent like it they dont like it.)