As far as Paizo remain publishing quality stuff I'll support them. No matter which system they use.
Go on Paizo!
QFT!
What does QFT mean?
|
Paizo just returned the loyalty I've been showing them for the last year or so. Thank you, Paizo, for choosing not to switch over to 4E for your main line, and for releasing the Pathfinder RPG. You've earned my continuing buying loyalty into the foreseeable future with this move, and that of my local gaming group (which numbers in the 20+ range). I don't have the words to express how happy this makes me.
And QFT = "quite freaking true".
Thanks again,
Jeremy Puckett
Now you have me confused ;) I thought it stood for "quoted for truth".
Now you have me confused ;) I thought it stood for "quoted for truth".
That too. ;) I've actually heard both, but I prefer mine. :p
Both applies though :)
yup me as well.
Currently printing the alpha book now to show my player and i hope to use the PF RPG as my mian book for now on!!
Well, I still support WotC.
This decision is lame. Paizo does a great job of writing adventures, but they do not have the staff to develop and maintain an RPG from the ground up. This decision is just the newest incarnation of grognardism. I think we need to send Erik Mona and the rest to move their lead minis around the sand table.
All that stuff you like about 3.5, the guys who made it are becoming shrill with optimism over the change to 4E.
Pathfinder RPG? Why? How can you hope to regain the balance lost from all the late edition combinations of prestige classes and feats that make a new edition so necessary?
|
Well for one thing all those prestige classes and feats, at least the ones from WOTC, are not availible under the OGL, so by creating thier own version of 3.5 they regain the game balance that was destroyed by WOTC in the later splat books of 3.5.
Oh and I now support Paizo even more, just subscribed to the Modules making my subscriptions cover everything Golarion.
|
barbican,
I understand that you are upset, but why do you have to insist on personal attacks towards the people and company that run these boards?
Your actions are pretty rude. It seems that you are getting on every thread where people are trying to support the company that has brought them so much fun in the game that they love, and are attempting to..troll.
Why? I just want to understand the mentality of someone who would do that.
thanks,
M.
I've come to paizo only because they start a new 3rd Ed. line.
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
Well, I still support WotC.
I would argue that supporting one game company does not preclude supporting another. I certainly intend to purchase the 4.0 books, for example.
Paizo does a great job of writing adventures, but they do not have the staff to develop and maintain an RPG from the ground up.
Well, since we're beginning with a time-tested game that's been in development for 8 years I'd say we're starting somewhere not so near the ground, but I understand your skepticism. We have an R&D staff of six full-time designers and editors, which must make Paizo among the two or three largest tabletop RPG companies in the business. We also have a deeper pool of quality freelancers than any other company in the industry, including Wizards of the Coast. How large of a staff do you think we'd need to pull this off to your satisfaction?
This decision is just the newest incarnation of grognardism. I think we need to send Erik Mona and the rest to move their lead minis around the sand table.
Oooh, oooh! That stings! I'm afraid all of my lead miniatures are imported Rackham sculpts from the last couple of years, and while I might enjoy a sand table if I were, say, running an adventure set in a desert or an arena floor or something, I vastly prefer my erasable Tact-Tiles. I understand some people play 3.5 without the 5-foot grid, but I am not one of those players. I think it probably is fair to call me a grognard, though.
Pathfinder RPG? Why? How can you hope to regain the balance lost from all the late edition combinations of prestige classes and feats that make a new edition so necessary?
I'm honestly not too concerned about unbalanced late-era 3.5 material that isn't available to us under the OGL anyway at the moment. Once we've made sure that the "core" is solid, we'll introduce several of our own additional classes and the like I am sure. If there's a lame, unbalanced class combo from some poorly designed book, I suggest that it is your right (even duty) as a GM to ban that from your table. It's what I do.
|
|
I would argue that supporting one game company does not preclude supporting another. I certainly intend to purchase the 4.0 books, for example.
This should be a given, but looking at message boards it looks quite the opposite.
My personal experience has been luckily very different. In the last couple of years I was able to play AD&D, BFRPG, D&D 3.5, GURPS, HARP, Call of Cthluhu and some free-form games.
|
|
Well, I still support WotC.
This decision is lame. Paizo does a great job of writing adventures, but they do not have the staff to develop and maintain an RPG from the ground up. This decision is just the newest incarnation of grognardism. I think we need to send Erik Mona and the rest to move their lead minis around the sand table.
All that stuff you like about 3.5, the guys who made it are becoming shrill with optimism over the change to 4E.
Pathfinder RPG? Why? How can you hope to regain the balance lost from all the late edition combinations of prestige classes and feats that make a new edition so necessary?
Well Well Somebodys on a soapbox it seems. They have been doing an outstanding job.
Maybe they realize that not everyone were mindless sheep who had to grab up and use every single WOTC splatbook. Many of Us will never miss those Prestige classes and feats. Paizo had done recently what WOTC has not been able to do. Continue To Produce Quality stuff, Keep thier customers informed, Produce a Gaming Magazine, Post Useable stuff online, Personally find time to answer questions on the Forums, Embraced User electronic versions of thier Maps for use in VTTs. Deliver products on time.
I will stay in the SANDBOX with the Paizo Group and play with my Lead and Pewter before I play with WOTC and thier plastic.
I'll be in the Pathfinder. =)
|
|
Well, I still support everyone who produces a good, quality game that involves casting spells, stomping through dungeons, and fighting dragons.
I expect that's going to include WotC, because I've seen the 4e rules and I like 'em. I'll be playing that.
But I -don't- think I can convert any of my existing campaigns to 4e. I've mentioned that to Erik, though the poor guy hasn't had a chance to make the determination himself.
So if Paizo is going to keep giving me new stuff for my existing campaigns, yeah I'll be supporting Paizo too without a doubt. There's nothing from paizo I haven't loved, and I look forward to seeing the next step in 3e gaming.
My plan to to keep playing both versions of the game. I don't see any reason why I can't do that, and Paizo is going to make it worth my time to keep some of my favorite campaigns around for longer than i thought.
As for Paizo's ability to support a pathfinder RPG, I am amazed anyone would doubt it. The talent they already have on-staff is amazing, the RPG Superstar program proves they can drum up new talent no one else has tapped, and there are a lot of freelancers (myself included) who love working for them. Their experience running Dragon and Dungeon means they can wrangle schedules and deadlines like no one else, and I don't see any reason to think that would stop.
I get two rpgs now, and I couldn't be happier.
Well, I still support WotC.
This decision is lame. Paizo does a great job of writing adventures, but they do not have the staff to develop and maintain an RPG from the ground up. This decision is just the newest incarnation of grognardism. I think we need to send Erik Mona and the rest to move their lead minis around the sand table.
All that stuff you like about 3.5, the guys who made it are becoming shrill with optimism over the change to 4E.
Pathfinder RPG? Why? How can you hope to regain the balance lost from all the late edition combinations of prestige classes and feats that make a new edition so necessary?
I greatly supported WoTC when 3.0 and the 'relaunch' of 3.5 happened. Fresh air and fresh moves around our tables.
But after that, their products became poorly imagined books full of uninteresting rules whereas third party publishers produced lines, books and settings more and more interesting.And now, D&D 4 is announced, another way to have players (and RPG compagnies through their petty 5000$ fee) spit their money once again, destroying long loved settings (FR 4 ? Please, it's a rape no less !).
So when I read news for a new exciting setting like Pathfinder full of ideas, energy, adventure and moreover a shared passion, I say 'all aboard !'.
No offence meant but I think WotC really broke the dreams and the pleasure of many gamers around, that's why we can feel so much anger about D&D 4. A feeling that was never that great when the other editions arrived.
|
(FR 4 ? Please, it's a rape no less !)
Obviously you're unhappy, but ease off on the histronics, please. That's an unbelievably ugly word being thrown around in a very cavalier manner, and I for one am offended.
Your favored gaming setting has been changed in ways you don't like. That's an unpleasant situation, but it is far, far less than a rape.
(FR 4 ? Please, it's a rape no less !)Obviously you're unhappy, but ease off on the histronics, please. That's an unbelievably ugly word being thrown around in a very cavalier manner, and I for one am offended.
Your favored gaming setting has been changed in ways you don't like. That's an unpleasant situation, but it is far, far less than a rape.
You're obviously right. My words have gone further than my thougts. I apologize for these harsh words.
I have to say though that I'm not a native english speaker. Please pardon this.
Nonetheless, I remain sad beacuase of the moves of WotC, and very pleased by Paizo's decision.
|
CEO
|
You're obviously right. My words have gone further than my thougts. I apologize for these harsh words.
I have to say though that I'm not a native english speaker. Please pardon this.
Nonetheless, I remain sad beacuase of the moves of WotC, and very pleased by Paizo's decision.
M4sk:
You can always go back and edit your previous post to remove the offensive words if you wish.
-Lisa
M4sk:
You can always go back and edit your previous post to remove the offensive words if you wish.
-Lisa
Unless it has changed, only within an hour of posting.
they do not have the staff to develop and maintain an RPG from the ground up.
Nor the need. They'll tweak 3.5, not re-invent the die.
This decision is just the newest incarnation of grognardism.
You say that as if it's a bad thing.
If not supporting 4e and their new game is being a grognard, then I'll wear that honorific with pride
I think we need to send Erik Mona and the rest to move their lead minis around the sand table.
Can you tell me where I can find that sand table? I'm very interested!
All that stuff you like about 3.5, the guys who made it are becoming shrill with optimism over the change to 4E.
Monte's raving about 4e?
If you mean wotc: Of course they're full of optimism. They have to be. If they said: "Well, we're not very fond of our new rules, but it's the best we could come up with, maybe a couple of you guys can actually like it", they would have to be send to K uger Industrial Smoothing to work.
Pathfinder RPG? Why? How can you hope to regain the balance lost from all the late edition combinations of prestige classes and feats that make a new edition so necessary?
Late edition combinations of PrCs and feats (something wizards is guilty of, by the way) don't necessitate a new edition. Just a banning of said late edition stuff. Or a half-decent DM. Those guys rock.
And I might add that late edition work is probably a good indicator of what the new edition will look like. Don't like the last couple of books wizards has released? 4e will probably be all like this, so how's that for balance?
You're obviously right. My words have gone further than my thougts. I apologize for these harsh words.
But not by far, if you ask me. What they've done to the realms is very ugly, too.
I guess what really bugs me is all the people who are talking about what a great change 3.0/3.5 was and then freaking out that WotC would continue to change the game. It makes both financial and creative sense for them to reimagine the entire game engine and rebuild from the ground up. Simply tweaking the 3.5 rules was not going to achieve this goal.
Also, those of you who love 3.X Forgotten Realms, remember that they moved all kinds of geography and storyline stuff around from 2nd Edition to 3rd. One of the developers working on that change has a story in his blog about cutting up a map of the 2nd ed Realms and moving around the pieces around.
Things change. It has happened before. It will happen again. I am sorry that WotC is jerking people around with the GSL, but it is there intellectual property. There is no doubt some important reason that requires lawyering and business modelling to iron out.
As for p***ing off Erik Mona enough to get the "quote/response/quote/response" treatment, uh, sorry, uh, thanks for your years working in this industry. I probably should not have used your name when I was just trying to invoke the powers that be at Paizo. It is just sad that you guys have decided to break away from the main body of gamers. I think sticking to 3.5 will mean that you will have a very devoted but very small fanbase that will have a tough time growing.
Not true, if even a quarter of the current users of 3.5 came to Pathfinder Paizo would make a vast amount of more money I reckon, and it could happen, because 4e is a clean system, but it's a far stretch from current D&D, it's driven more heavily by industry and finance than previous incarnations and it has a touch of Warcraftism, I like WoW but not on my tabletop.
As for growth, DM's and players bring many more people to a game like D&D than any advertising campaign, nerds are notorious for going with the game system that suits them best and espousing its virtues, which has only inflamed the 4e vs. 3.5e 'debate'.
Hell, I was brought to D&D by an issue of Dragon under Paizo's helm, but I've made at least twenty other people players of 3.5, and I think it's safe to say I'll convert, and so will they. I may buy the 4e PH, but it's just not the system for me. Pathfinder RPG is.
I think it's that demographic which Paizo are aiming for. And I hope they succeed tremendously because with the amount of work, vision and love they pour into their products they deserve too. And their customers love them for it.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
Paizo does a great job of writing adventures, but they do not have the staff to develop and maintain an RPG from the ground up.
One thing they have is hundreds of willing playtesters all talking to each other openly about what can and should be fixed.
Why does this just seem so right to me?
|
|
I guess what really bugs me is all the people who are talking about what a great change 3.0/3.5 was and then freaking out that WotC would continue to change the game.
3e was and is a great system. But it is not a perfect system (if there can be such a thing in an RPG). Thinking that 3.0-3.5 could use some fixes is not the same as thinking that 4.0 has the answers.
I think you will find most 3e proponents are not against new rules, new books or even new settings. They are merely not too thrilled about the specific rules they have seen coming lately from WotC.
While I understand why Paizo is doing this, I can't say I really like it. In my opinion, there's just too much wrong with 3.5 that these alpha rules are not addressing. Adding slight rules tweaks and increasing single-class powers is just putting lipstick on a pig...which is my own opinion of 3.5....especially post 10th level play.
Right now I'm trying to decide whether I should cancel my Paizo subscription in light of the recent news. I was hoping that Golarion and the modules would switch to 4e, which I like what I'm hearing of, but its not, so I gotta decide what I want to do. I don't relish the idea of paying money for something I'm going to work on to use. That defeats the whole purpose of buying a module in the first place.
That said, I think Paizo is a great company and I have never seen better customer service from a company. (Gaming or otherwise) Their product support is something that I will definitely miss if I decide to abandon the setting. Business-wise, WotC has screwed the pooch on how they are handling rolling out the 3rd party support, which is sad, but ultimately, I want a different system than 3.5, and I like what I see from 4e.
So its going to be a hard decision for me.
You know, I'm in an odd place, I have friends who are directly employed by WoTC and I'll purchase 4ed to support them, but from everything I've seen, 4E doesn't really thrill me. Congratulations to Paizo for seeing a HUGE gap WoTC left (basically saying that 4E isn't going to really be backwards compatible with 3.5) and jumping on it. Kudos all around. It was great to see the e-mail in my inbox when I got to work.
Okay, I confess, I don't understand this fight... I never did.
How does which game I choose to play, or paizo chooses to play, negatively effect anyone so that they have to lash out.
I mean, it gives me, as a consumer, more choices. I love having choices. I will pick up pathfinder stuff (don't let the lack of tags fool you, all the family subscriptions are on my husband's account) and, frankly, the 4e stuff too.
Why? While I love Pathfinder, a lot of the plots get complicated. I personally like that, but my gaming group is mostly casual players. What I've heard of 4e makes it sound like they may have a better time playing the new edition. That doesn't make me love pathfinder any less, it just means I get the best of both worlds... I get to do both.
But if I didn't and had to choose... I wouldn't be lashing out at anyone. Choose what game you're going to play, that's fine... but PLEASE, there's no need to to make disparaging remarks about Erik Mona and his sand table. I mean, he might not be offended, but other grognards here, myself included, might be.
I know I'm just text on a screen and a picture to you, but I'm still a person. try to remember that when you post. The internet is NOT a license to be mean.
- Ashavan
Okay, I confess, I don't understand this fight... I never did.
How does which game I choose to play, or paizo chooses to play, negatively effect anyone so that they have to lash out.
I mean, it gives me, as a consumer, more choices. I love having choices. I will pick up pathfinder stuff (don't let the lack of tags fool you, all the family subscriptions are on my husband's account) and, frankly, the 4e stuff too.
Why? While I love Pathfinder, a lot of the plots get complicated. I personally like that, but my gaming group is mostly casual players. What I've heard of 4e makes it sound like they may have a better time playing the new edition. That doesn't make me love pathfinder any less, it just means I get the best of both worlds... I get to do both.
But if I didn't and had to choose... I wouldn't be lashing out at anyone. Choose what game you're going to play, that's fine... but PLEASE, there's no need to to make disparaging remarks about Erik Mona and his sand table. I mean, he might not be offended, but other grognards here, myself included, might be.
I know I'm just text on a screen and a picture to you, but I'm still a person. try to remember that when you post. The internet is NOT a license to be mean.
- Ashavan
Well said!
|
Okay, I confess, I don't understand this fight... I never did.
How does which game I choose to play, or paizo chooses to play, negatively effect anyone so that they have to lash out.
I mean, it gives me, as a consumer, more choices. I love having choices. I will pick up pathfinder stuff (don't let the lack of tags fool you, all the family subscriptions are on my husband's account) and, frankly, the 4e stuff too.
Why? While I love Pathfinder, a lot of the plots get complicated. I personally like that, but my gaming group is mostly casual players. What I've heard of 4e makes it sound like they may have a better time playing the new edition. That doesn't make me love pathfinder any less, it just means I get the best of both worlds... I get to do both.
But if I didn't and had to choose... I wouldn't be lashing out at anyone. Choose what game you're going to play, that's fine... but PLEASE, there's no need to to make disparaging remarks about Erik Mona and his sand table. I mean, he might not be offended, but other grognards here, myself included, might be.
I know I'm just text on a screen and a picture to you, but I'm still a person. try to remember that when you post. The internet is NOT a license to be mean.
- Ashavan
As far as I'm not a Vancian wizard I can remember how to play both systems. I'll purchase 4E basics. I tried to say with this thread that good adventures are my priority. Dont' care about the system. So if keeping in 3E will make better Paizo products it will be welcome.
|
CEO
|
While I understand why Paizo is doing this, I can't say I really like it. In my opinion, there's just too much wrong with 3.5 that these alpha rules are not addressing. Adding slight rules tweaks and increasing single-class powers is just putting lipstick on a pig...which is my own opinion of 3.5....especially post 10th level play.
Blackotter:
Just to be clear, the alpha rules that we have up right now are only a small part of the Pathfinder RPG rules. Jason is working on more of the rules and we will release them in installments in the coming months. If there are problems with 3.5 that you aren't seeing addressed, there is a very good chance that they will be addressed in an upcoming alpha release. But let your voice be heard on the alpha playtest forums. Trust me, I am constantly badgering Jason about some rule or another that needs to be nerfed!
-Lisa
Blackotter:
Just to be clear, the alpha rules that we have up right now are only a small part of the Pathfinder RPG rules. Jason is working on more of the rules and we will release them in installments in the coming months. If there are problems with 3.5 that you aren't seeing addressed, there is a very good chance that they will be addressed in an upcoming alpha release. But let your voice be heard on the alpha playtest forums. Trust me, I am constantly badgering Jason about some rule or another that needs to be nerfed!
-Lisa
Thank you for the response Lisa. I'll post my grievances with the current system and see if Jason thinks the same way.
Its this kind of support that makes it very hard to give up on Paizo.
I guess what really bugs me is all the people who are talking about what a great change 3.0/3.5 was and then freaking out that WotC would continue to change the game.
You gave the answer yourself: 3e was a great change. But 4e, in my opinion (as well as a lot of people's out there), is a bad change.
Not all change is good.
It makes both financial and creative sense for them to reimagine the entire game engine and rebuild from the ground up.
When someone changes a game's story and rules to the extend it's practically another game but won't admit it because a new name would sell less, I call that false advertising.
It is just sad that you guys have decided to break away from the main body of gamers.
Paizo isn't breaking away from the main body of gamers. They're breaking away from wizards.
In my opinion, it's wizards who broke away from the main body of gamers when they made their new edition as incompatible as possible with older editions. They just hoped that the main body would follow them.