bwmathis's page

7 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS


Krome wrote:
At any moment WOTC can take your idea, make it their own and put it in the SRD preventing you from selling or supporting your own original idea and product.

This is completely false. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, in the GSL that allows WotC to appropriate anyone else's IP.


seekerofshadowlight wrote:
well to me it doesnt feel like spells they feel like magic ablitys but not something i invoke ,not a combination of arcan gestures and words not a complex formula for unleshing power. just spell like abilitys like a beholders or a mind flayers . so no they dont "feel" like spells to me

Then I can't really see how 3e spells were spells, since all you needed to do was use a standard/full-round attack (same effort as a single attack or a full attack action), which made them just "magic abilities." There was no complex formula to "I cast Magic Missile." that "I use Spring Attack." didn't have.


Mike McArtor wrote:
There are spells in name only, from what Jason was telling us. They are no different from the fighter's abilities or the rogue's abilities.

So, you're saying that because it's a consistent power mechanic instead of completely separately rules for entire groups of classes, that it's no longer a spell, despite obviously magical effects (like an illusion, light, or missiles of arcane force springing from your fingertips)?


Razz wrote:
Son fans are really upset, some even stating that 4E killed him. (not that I believe that, I have no clue to what his views are to it at all, but I wouldn't push it aside either. It's possible.)

The man was almost 70 years old, and lived through two strokes, a near heart attack, and an inoperable cardiovascular disease.

If anyone believes a 4th Edition of the game he co-invented over 30 years ago killed him, then they are beyond stupid.


KaeYoss wrote:
You know, I can't help but feel indirectly insulted by this. I'm sure that wasn't your intention, but wording is as important as intent.

I've seen plenty of Paizo fans jumping to all kinds of conclusions based on next to nothing, since we have had very little solid information until recently. If you're one of those who did so, why should you feel insulted for me simply pointing out the truth?


I know that it is optional, but that's not the point.

That is entirely the point. Your posts are all rant with little fact or cohesive argument.

It's the attitude that they can nickel and dime their customers, who they obviously see as sheep more than people, to death, and they should love them for it.

Got any kind of logical argument for this? I see Paizo putting out all kinds of supplements, like item cards, and yet they're not trying to nickel and dime their customers? What is the metric you're using? Size of company?

Their greed has blinded them.

Thanks, but when I want melodrama, I'll stick to Shakespeare.

You still have to subscribe to the DDI and pay an additional fee to unlock the online portion of the book. This used to be a free web enhancement. Soon you will have to pay 10-15 dollars a month plus who knows how much per book to get those web enhancements. I think we can bank on some choice parts of the books being intentionally left out, so they can hit you with these charges.

Man, I'd love to be able to construct arguments like you do... without the need for things like facts.

1. The e-version you're talking about is a complete digital copy of the book that incorporates errata and error-fixes. So, it's basically a PDF version that auto-updates for a few dollars more (price of a cup of coffee is the statement). And you do not have to be a D&DI subscriber in order to unlock an e-version, you simply have to pay a fee around $1-$2. Perusing their store, Paizo would charge me 13.99 for a PDF copy of Pathfinder #1 in addition to the 19.99 I would have to pay for a physical copy.

2. Free web enhancements will still exist, alongside Dragon and Dungeon-based supplementary material.

Hey WotC! Greedy much?

Get your facts straight.


James Jacobs wrote:
It's worth bearing in mind that (from everything I've heard about it, at least) the DDI virtual table thingy isn't required to play 4th edition. It's there for players who want to game via the internet. The game itself supposedly still works the same it always had as a tabletop game; with the three core books and pencils and paper and dice and nothing else required.

Good to see you still only concern yourself with facts, rather than jumping to any conclusion you can, like a good deal of your customers. This level-headed and professional view is why Paizo is on top of the d20 game.