Something just occurred to me, and its probably nothing, but hear me out. I've seen a few threads that seem to be fairly far outside of the "norm" when it comes to how the rules should be changed, and what should be introduced. I've also seen some people here and there pick up on elements of the system that I didn't think most people were concerned about, and voice their concern about them.
My first instinct when reading these were that these guys are obviously entitled to their opinions, and everyone should be giving input at this point in time. I really didn't want to chime in on someone thread about one of their concerns just to say, "hey, cool, but I disagree." But then I a thought occurred to me.
If people tend to like something (not so much love something, but like it enough that they don't want or feel the need to see it changed), often they don't say much about it. If they really love something, they might chime in, and if they don't like it, they almost certainly will chime in. But if it just works, without any flash or passion, they tend to just go, "yeah, that'll do."
If no one does say, "I understand that you don't like this, but I think this works fine," then the only customer opinion on that given issue is now negative.
Maybe I'm just being obsessive, but now I'm starting to be concerned that I'll have to keep up with a lot more threads, to make sure that things that I think are OK aren't flagged as an issue, because something struck someone the wrong way, no one really wanted to add to the thread, and it just kind of gets shifted to the bottom of the forum, but its already been noted by the great guys at Paizo.
Keep in mind, I'm not suggesting anyone not post concerns, but I do think its probably best to try to voice those concerns in a thread that has already been well populated, because otherwise, others don't have a chance to really think over what you might be discussing. That's also not a suggestion that new threads shouldn't be started, but more of a concern that there are so many threads about issues that do dovetail on one another.
Anyway, its just a thought about some of the issues that might arise from this awesome experiment.
Maybe I'm just being obsessive, but now I'm starting to be concerned that I'll have to keep up with a lot more threads, to make sure that things that I think are OK aren't flagged as an issue, because something struck someone the wrong way, no one really wanted to add to the thread, and it just kind of gets shifted to the bottom of the forum, but its already been noted by the great guys at Paizo.
I am not yet prepared to get as concerned over this as you appear to be. This is for two reasons.
One: Jason Bulhman, and the whole Paizo staff as far as I can tell, have a vision. Pathfinder RPG is to essentially be 3.5 with a minimum of tweaks to improve it. As long as Jason remains strong towards this vision, and the rest of the staff help him if he wavers, there isn't much for us to be concerned about.
Two: There is still plenty of time. It isn't like you are going to get blindsided with a change yet. Within the last couple of weeks before release, I'd get more concerned. As of right now, if something catches the notice of the Development Staff, and you haven't noticed the point brought up, you will get to see it in the next test release. Then you can take the time to question why that came about, why it was needed, and protest it if necessary.
If you are like me, I am guessing the sheer amount of changes for the Alpha have you a bit concerned that the PRPG won't resemble 3.5 enough for you to be comfortable with it. But I am trusting as the project gets shook down it will get closer and closer to the system I fought to keep.
Its a good point. Sometimes I'm just kind of overwhelmed with what everyone wants to see implemented, especially when we've only had about two weeks to mull over the stuff that has been released so far.
I understand your concern and how you could be concerned that Paizo scrapped some new rules rather quickly. I think they scrapped them because they caused too great of differences with 3.5 compatibility and they simply realized those things would not work. Since 3.5 compatibility is one of Paizo's goals, it will be a little veto or override for some ideas.
I agree that people are being armchair designers (myself included). I think that Paizo and Jason will learn to sift through the comments and ideas to come up with a good system. If they don't we still have the fun choice of 3.5 and 4E! So we really can't lose, AND we will still have the Pathfinder Adventure Paths (with Curse of the Crimson Throne being awesome).
While it is exciting and interesting to follow this, don't get too emotionally invested :)
I think we're in the "wild idea stage" right now...Alpha versions. Usually, that means wild ideas by the designers only (as witnessed by Alpha 1). Only now they have asked all their fans and customers to weigh in...which means asking thousands of tinker-happy RPG players about their opinions on the designers' wild ideas, and about their own!
Asking one tinker-happy RPG player about his wild ideas for his favorite game invites hours of discussion.
They asked thousands. Literally.
I'd say wait for the Beta version to come out before seriously starting to look around the forum for stuff that shouldn't be left alone. Alpha is...well...wild growth. I trust Jason Bulmahn's mental filter enough to pick out the signals from all the noise. :)
|
There are many of us who are keen to contribute to the open playtest, but the alpha has only been publicly available for little over a week, and many of us haven't had time to do any actual playtesting yet (Easter weekend was a games convention here in Melbourne).
Even when my group does meet next week, the players will have had to updated their characters. We'll continue Burnt Offerings, and can report ACTUAL playtest feedback with their four characters through those specific low level encounters. But I'm sure they'll want to express concern for rules they're familiar with, but haven't had the opportunity to see in play.
I'm sure actual playtesting will start coming thick and fast, once play groups have adapted to this process. In the meanwhile, the feedback given has been very thought provoking and discussion worthy.
IIRC Jason Bulmahn said somewhere that this Open Playtest wasn't to be confused with an Open Design. Therefore, your fears might be unfounded. Paizo doesn't seem to be going for radical alterations to the system, they are mainly looking for *our* feedback to *their* ideas. So, as long as J.B. doesn't incorporate any of the "wilder" ideas into an official PFRPG release, everything should be fine.
I also haven't seen to much official response to most things discussed here, though they do respond to certain things and seem to have a general idea, what's going on here.
There's nothing wrong with collecting tips, as long as you make the choices what you do with them. ^^