dkeester's page

I have been discussing this here, on a private email list, and with a few other people IRL. I have also been thinking about it long and hard over the GenghisCon convention weekend. I have finally come to a conclusion.

The rules state that the effect ends because it was cast by a PC. That is fine, but it doesn't sit well with me as a player.

So, I am going to pay the 660 GP to buy off the spell effect. I know that I don't have to, but it makes more sense to me that I do this. The disconnect between ongoing spell effects as cast by an NPC versus those cast by a PC don't make much sense to me. I guess it fits with the "no PvP" rule, but it is still not quite right. For roleplaying reasons I am spending the gold. I just don't feel right taking advantage of a rules loophole to save a few hundred gold pieces.

Thanks everyone for your input.

Pages 3-4: Added the following under Core Assumption: “In addition to these printed materials, players and Game Masters are expected to have familiarity with the official Pathfinder Society Organized Play FAQ at paizo.com/pathfindersociety/faq. If a clarification on the FAQ pertains to your character, you are expected to bring a copy of the relevant sections to any Pathfinder Society Organized Play game.”

If a copy of the "relevant sections" is going to be required at the table, please provide a PDF of the latest version that is formatted for easy printing.

I don't have a smart phone, nor do I have a tablet. Also, one of the shops at which I play doesn't provide WiFi, so bringing a laptop is pointless. I need a convenient method to create a hard copy, and printing web pages from browser windows tends to waste more paper than is really necessary.

Thanks.

Up until now I have avoided playing the sanctioned modules. It seemed pointless to me. Yes, I would have fun playing the module, but part of my reason for playing PFS (or any long-term roleplaying event, e.g. a home group) is to see my character evolve. The current rules for sanctioned modules do not fit with that desire. They are just bolted on to the side, not integrated into the whole of the system. There is no real risk to my character and consequently no real reward and the character doesn't evolve. So, I like the proposed changes. It might make playing the modules more difficult if I don't have a character at or below the appropriate level, but that is a minor problem. The changes do make the modules more attractive to me.

I do have one concern relating to consistency. In the blog it states that when using a pregen the chronicle sheet must be linked to an existing character. I can accept that. (Heck, I might make a character just to link to and to outright play sanctioned modules. ^_^ ) I even like the idea that the chronicle can't be applied to the linked character until that character reaches the level of the module. It does strike me as inconsistent relating to death, however. If the chronicle cannot be applied positively until the linked character is at the level of the module, then it should not apply negatively until the linked character is at the right level. For example, if I have a 5th level character and I play a 9th level sanctioned module with a pregen while linking to my 5th level character, the chronicle shouldn't apply until that character is 9th level good or bad. Basically once my character reaches 9th level the chronicle applies and he dies. Why should I have to miss out on levels 6-8 of play with that character?

I'm honestly completely shocked that Paizo would attempt this.

Why? I'll keep it short and sweet.

1.) Several other, more recognizable, established I.P.s, backed by very large video game developers, have failed miserably trying to release MMOs. (See Conan, Star Wars Galaxies, Warhammer Online, Etc) Though I feel Pathfinder to be an above average brand, I highly doubt it has the number of fans that Warhammer, Conan, or god forbid Star Wars brands have.

2.) The average video game budget is $23 Mil. That's the average. MMO budget's far exceed this. WOW had a budget of 40 Mil back in 2004. It is reported that Star Wars will have a budget of $100 Mil. when it releases. Maybe I'm way off here, but does a small pen and paper company like Piazo really have that kind of capital draw to engage even the low end of that spectrum?

3.) The rate of washout in the MMO market is astounding. Very few franchises manage to hold on to their subscribers for long enough to establish the longevity that one would want from such a large investment. What happens when, like has been mentioned above, the Next Big Thing comes out and everyone who is only casually interested in the I.P. bails out?

Better to invest in the development of a good Single Player, or even better, a great internet served Multiplayer (Like NWN for example). Better yet. Invest in a highly functional, and robust online game table where people can play the table top virtually with friends from around the world.

+1 to Stickman for the above commentary.

I have been thinking how to respond to the PFO announcement since the site came back online yesterday, and I still have to go with my gut feeling. I don't see how this is anything but a bad move and a waste of resources for Paizo and Goblinworks.

I would rather see this time, money, and effort put into expanding the Pathfinder RPG. For example, it could go to hiring more staff so that release schedules could go from "will be released sometime in December" to "will be released on December 18." Specific, reliable release schedules would go far towards making Paizo a bigger success. Or it could go towards the development of more Flip-Mats and Map Packs. These resources could also go towards developing mapping tools, or supporting Hero Lab so that they finally get the Mac version out. Some of these resources could possibly go to WizKids to finally get the Pathfinder Battles minis out the door. They have been delayed too many times.

The MMO market has a very small number of success stories (WoW, EVE, EQ perhaps, Second Life) and a huge amount of failures and also-rans (RIFT, DDO, Aion, Final Fantasy 14, LotRO, Age of Conan, Warhammer Online, and Hellgate to name a few). The MMO field is overcrowded. I don't see how PFO can be anything more than just another fantasy MMO. I hope that I will be proven wrong, but until then I will remain skeptical.

The bottom line for me is that Paizo is a small company that has been successful in a niche market. I work in the computer industry. I have seen what happens when a small company in a niche market tries to make the jump to a new, much larger market. So far I haven't seen it be successful.

Even though Goblinworks is a separate company, when the s*** hits the fan there is going to be a temptation to "borrow" resources from Paizo to prop up Goblinworks whether that be money, computers, or staff. If this happens it will damage and possibly deep-six both companies. Again I hope that this doesn't happen, and that I am proven wrong.

So please, for the love of Abadar, stick to your core competency. Stick to paper and dice RPGs. You still have room to grow in that market.

Finally, I have a question. Why did you guys take the whole Paizo.Com site offline yesterday to make this announcement? I realize it was a PR stunt, but in my opinion it was a amateurish one. As far as I am concerned this announcement didn't warrant taking the entire site offline. Also, I was trying to access the forums while the site was offline, which did nothing but frustrate me. Something else to consider, since you run an online store from your website taking the entire site offline perhaps cost you several sales. Further, Paizo.Com is your main point of presence to the rest of the world. In the Internet age if your website is offline (and it should never be offline), as far as your customers and users are concerned your entire company is offline. For example, during that site outage I had no way to contact customer support if I had needed to do so since I don't have the support email address or phone number memorized.

Thank you Evil Lincoln for starting this thread. I have several points that I would like to add to the conversation.

First, one example of things being spread out and hard to find is the rules for tumbling though an enemy occupied square. (Thanks to Drogon for pointing this out to me.) That is the best example that I have heard so far of hard to reference rules in the CRB.

Second, put me in the "hell yeah" category. I want a CRB that is more usable than the current one. A drastic reorganization is necessary. This does not require a Pathfinder 1.5. In fact changing the rules to a 1.5 edition would lose me as a Paizo customer. It is unnecessary. I will give an example in Chaosium. The Call of Cthulhu rules are in their sixth edition now. They are still compatible with the first edition as published in the 1980's. The rules have never had a drastic change like 2e->3e->3.5->4e editions have. Guess what, Chaosium is still in business. They still sell product. They even reprint supplements every now-and-then and sell them even though supplements which were published in the 1980's are compatible with sixth edition. They don't require a drastic rewrite every few years to sell more product. They have a sustainable business model built around a stable ruleset. If Chaosium can do it, so can Paizo.

Third, I agree with Dwilimir. I didn't play much 3.x and am having a hard time mastering the rules for PFRPG. I even read through the CRB cover to cover and have been playing PFS three to four sessions every month for a year now. I need a book with a more usable layout.

Fourth, I would also like a more modular game. I like the Beginner Box. I like the rules-lite presentation. Presenting the rules in a way that makes it easy to create "Pathfinder Basic" using the CRB would be a good thing if Paizo won't turn the BB into its own line. I don't have time or inclination to disentangle the rules.

Fifth, I would like to see all the classes in one place, all the feats in one place, all the spells in one place, etc. I don't like having to cart around CRB, APG, Ultimate Magic, Ultimate Combat, and more.

Sixth, there is one thing that I would remove from the CRB completely. Get rid of the Prestige Classes. I am playing an Arcane Trickster in PFS. He is level 10. Compared to other single-class level 9-10 characters he is rather weak. The base classes are so good in Pathfinder (especially once you add in Archetypes) that the Prestige Classes are pointless dead weight. I think they can be dropped completely from the game with nobody shedding a tear. None of the other PFS players that I know here in Colorado use the Pr Classes in the CRB.