Growing hostility against Paizo


Alpha Playtest Feedback General Discussion

1 to 50 of 444 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

I frequent several boards and noted many Paizo and Pathfinder threads. I've noted a marked change of tone of late, a growing hostility. They question Paizo's business practices to continue to support the 3.x system via OGL and the PfRPG. And there are a few new twists (to me, that is):

1) Companies can, apparently, support 4E products without going GSL (e.g., Kenzer, Redbrick, Goodman Games, etc.) and Paizo should so the same

2) Paizo should "grow some balls" and create a new rpg.

Has anyone else who frequents other boards noted the same as well?

Dark Archive

joela wrote:

I frequent several boards and noted many Paizo and Pathfinder threads. I've noted a marked change of tone of late, a growing hostility. They question Paizo's business practices to continue to support the 3.x system via OGL and the PfRPG. And there are a few new twists (to me, that is):

1) Companies can, apparently, support 4E products without going GSL (e.g., Kenzer, Redbrick, Goodman Games, etc.) and Paizo should so the same

2) Paizo should "grow some balls" and create a new rpg.

Has anyone else who frequents other boards noted the same as well?

I've noticed a handful of very vocal and agitated posters picking apart everything Paizo does with Pathfinder. They are changing things too much. They are changing things too little. They aren't making my houserules into canon.

I've seen all those complaints and then some. I've seen complaints where someone says that the way Pathfinder changed a single feat makes it a deal breaker for them. I think everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I think much of the "flaming" threads are started, sustained, and evolved by a very small segment of the gaming population. I think the anger stems from the success of Pathfinder and the misguided assumption on some folks part that "open playtest" means "adopting all my favorite houserules".

I also think that WotC is drumming up some of the negative sentiment because of Pathfinders success. I think WotC thought that Pathfinder would fail and then all those wayward stubborn 3.5 devotee's would fall in line to get 4e. That hasn't happened, and Pathfinder is turning into a phenominal product. Paizo doesn't need WotC sales numbers to be successful. They have said that many times. By all available measures (product sales, downloads of alpha playtest documents, general "buzz"), Pathfinder is being well recieved by a large segment of the gaming population. There are that handful that feel entitled to having all their ideas in print and throw a temper tantrum when it doesn't happen, but on the whole I think the reception to Pathfinder has been overwhelmingly positive.

Perhaps one of the Paizo folks can comment on that more directly, but that is my own take on it.

Liberty's Edge

Where they talking smack at?

Dark Archive

Heathansson wrote:
Where they talking smack at?

rpg.net seems to contain a disproportionate number of detractors. Interestingly, IMO, the site's a greater 4E supporter than DnD grand-daddy ENworld.


Brent wrote:
I also think that WotC is drumming up some of the negative sentiment because of Pathfinders success.

I think you should write an article for the Smoking Gun. It'd fit right in.

Honestly, if you're going to go around making this sort of sordid accusations you should at least provide something in the way of proof.

People on both sides of the fence are turning into rabid fanatics. Pathfinder is a giant target for those who turn their zealotry against 3E. That's all there's to it, IMO.

Liberty's Edge

joela wrote:
Heathansson wrote:
Where they talking smack at?
rpg.net seems to contain a disproportionate number of detractors. Interestingly, IMO, the site's a greater 4E supporter than DnD grand-daddy ENworld.

I found one thread there; got two pages into it, and it looked like

50/50 for/against; nobody going off or nothing.
I'll check it out, though.


joela wrote:

I frequent several boards and noted many Paizo and Pathfinder threads. I've noted a marked change of tone of late, a growing hostility. They question Paizo's business practices to continue to support the 3.x system via OGL and the PfRPG. And there are a few new twists (to me, that is):

1) Companies can, apparently, support 4E products without going GSL (e.g., Kenzer, Redbrick, Goodman Games, etc.) and Paizo should so the same

2) Paizo should "grow some balls" and create a new rpg.

Has anyone else who frequents other boards noted the same as well?

Well personally I don't care what they think. I only care what I think and I like pathfinder a lot and that's good enough for me. I hope pathfinder stays 3.5 and never ever goes 4.0, and I don't even hate 4.0 (although I don't use or recommend it) and I'm saying that. You know why? Cause A=It's good for everything out there not to be 4.0. B=I like 3.5 a lot more than 4.0 for various way over talked about reasons and so if everything in the cosmos goes 4.0 I'll have to delete all my rpg bookmarks and stuff.

Sovereign Court

Brent wrote:
I also think that WotC is drumming up some of the negative sentiment...

How do you think they are doing this?

Sovereign Court

Joela - are you just attempting to agitate here? Your last few threads have involved: "growing hostility against PAIZO" and "problems with 3.5" and "well now I'm definately sticking with 3.x NOT", and you seem to be a defender of 4e. So, please help me understand... are you asking us to comment about growing hositility, or is this thread an example of your own secret hostility? Your thread could have been called, "What are we saying to those who are hostile toward PAIZO?"

Everyone I've spoken with is favorable toward PAIZO. PAIZO has a reputation for having the highest quality product in the business. PAIZO's reputation is one of innovation and fantastic customer service. I am interested to hear what PAIZONIANS have to say about your question, but you've chosen to name the thread in a dirisive way that suggests a crisis or widespread hostility. Please explain, I am open to listening and correcting any misperceptions...

Liberty's Edge

At rpg.net, somebody started a thread that Wayne Reynolds was a dirty doublecrosser for doing 4e AND Pathfinder art.
Oooooh, really senses-shattering stuff, that.

Scarab Sages

joela wrote:


1) Companies can, apparently, support 4E products without going GSL (e.g., Kenzer, Redbrick, Goodman Games, etc.) and Paizo should so the same

Has this ever actually been confirmed by any of the three? I seem to remember Kenzer saying they were doing 4e without a license, but as far as i know GG has said squat, and redbrick...?

And as for the 'hostility', it appears to be the same smug attitude that led to stupidity like the 4vengers on Wotc site and some the worst excesses of the edition wars here. the attitude basically seems to be "since I like 4e it is inherently better. anyone who disagrees is stupid. I must use anger, threats, and smears to convince the heretics of the error of their ways, because I am insecure enough to be unable to tolerate someone believing differently than me."

too many people seem to feel they have to "win" with their opinions. They can't limit themselves to i like x more than y, b ut have to approach i like x so anyone who likes y should be executed. sad really.

Liberty's Edge

So that's two threads I found so far.

Dark Archive

I think that if you could get the information from the other boards (not likely to happen) you would probably find that, much like here, the same names pop up across most of the anti-Pathfinder boards. I have actually had a few cases where I contacted a person off-board at enworld and had them admit to me that they had created multiple aliases to flame Pathfinder. The reason vary but most have expressed a fear that Pathfinder will cut into sales of 4th edition and ultimately bring the whole industry down. I have tried to explain that their over dramatic apocalyptic views about Paizo and Pathfinder are ungrounded but they don't want to listen. (I do phrase it a little more empathetic than that though.)

Dark Archive

Pangur Bàn wrote:
Brent wrote:
I also think that WotC is drumming up some of the negative sentiment because of Pathfinders success.

I think you should write an article for the Smoking Gun. It'd fit right in.

Honestly, if you're going to go around making this sort of sordid accusations you should at least provide something in the way of proof.

People on both sides of the fence are turning into rabid fanatics. Pathfinder is a giant target for those who turn their zealotry against 3E. That's all there's to it, IMO.

I said "I think", ergo that is my opinion. I don't have to have evidence to support it because it is strictly a personal opinion. So before you jump down my throat perhaps you should read the entire post. I also made it clear in that post that I felt for the most part that support for Pathfinder and Paizo are overwhelmingly positive.

I'm not making an accusation, I am stating an opinion. So back off.

Scarab Sages RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

joela wrote:
2) Paizo should "grow some balls" and create a new rpg.

This is a thoroughly childish argument on their part.

The whole point (well not the whole point, but a by product that has become sort of a main point) of the OGL/d20 System is that companies can use the OGL/d20 System to create their own Lisenced games. Many companies have done so (including WotC). A short, (but by no means comprehensive) list just based on my own collection/experience are:
Ptolus (Monte Cook)
WARS (Mongoose)
Spycraft (AEG)
Red Star (Green Ronin)
True 20 (Green Ronin)
Star Wars (WotC)
d20 Modern/Future/Past (WotC)
Arcana Evolved (Malhavoc Press)
Sinister Adventures (Nic Logue)
and so on...
Pathfinder is no different to any of these other games in what it is trying to do (well besides Sinister, but Nic'd do 4e if he could I suspect), other than the fact that it is trying to do it to continue the legacy of 3.5, instead of converting to 4e.

Liberty's Edge

underling wrote:
joela wrote:


1) Companies can, apparently, support 4E products without going GSL (e.g., Kenzer, Redbrick, Goodman Games, etc.) and Paizo should so the same

Has this ever actually been confirmed by any of the three? I seem to remember Kenzer saying they were doing 4e without a license, but as far as i know GG has said squat, and redbrick...?

And as for the 'hostility', it appears to be the same smug attitude that led to stupidity like the 4vengers on Wotc site and some the worst excesses of the edition wars here. the attitude basically seems to be "since I like 4e it is inherently better. anyone who disagrees is stupid. I must use anger, threats, and smears to convince the heretics of the error of their ways, because I am insecure enough to be unable to tolerate someone believing differently than me."

too many people seem to feel they have to "win" with their opinions. They can't limit themselves to i like x more than y, b ut have to approach i like x so anyone who likes y should be executed. sad really.

Yeah, the 4e avengers really make me see the error of my ways.

Scarab Sages RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Heathansson wrote:

At rpg.net, somebody started a thread that Wayne Reynolds was a dirty doublecrosser for doing 4e AND Pathfinder art.

Oooooh, really senses-shattering stuff, that.

Oh noes, and he did Razor Coast for Nic... the dirty whore!!! ;)

Liberty's Edge

flash_cxxi wrote:
Heathansson wrote:

At rpg.net, somebody started a thread that Wayne Reynolds was a dirty doublecrosser for doing 4e AND Pathfinder art.

Oooooh, really senses-shattering stuff, that.
Oh noes, and he did Razor Coast for Nic... the dirty whore!!! ;)

Trying to get paid.....

people have no scruples!


Brent wrote:
I'm not making an accusation, I am stating an opinion. So back off.

Please. If I say I think you're an idiot (which I don't, but it should illustrate the point), am I just stating an opinion? And if so, is it an opinion that should be voiced publicly? I beg to differ.

Dark Archive

Zootcat wrote:
Brent wrote:
I also think that WotC is drumming up some of the negative sentiment...
How do you think they are doing this?

Well, there are the subtle things... Like having a Paragon Path in their PHB called the Pathfinder and having one of its abilities called "Wrong Step". There is the cancellation of both magazines, which Paizo had made into the best gaming supplements in the industry. How did cancelling them make sense if WotC didn't feel threatened by Paizo? The Mags could have served as a vehicle to promote 4e instead of a point around which more acrimony was thrown WotC way. So why cancel them a full year before 4e's release? Because they knew Paizo made a better product and wanted to try to force the revenue from that back their own way. So Paizo makes Pathfinder. I think that having an alternative like Pathfinder is a key cog in why many 3.5 players still refuse to go to 4e. My guess is WotC is not pleased. Further, why is it that at virtually every board where these sorts of debate are happening its always the same handful of people instigating things? Is it not a reasonable leap of logic to think that one of those folks could be doing something that WotC quietly asked them to, like say create negative internet buzz about Pathfinder?

Again, just an opinion. WotC handling of the 4e transition has made me think they are capable of anything, including slandering a competitor's product by having zealots go to that competitor's website to start inflammatory threads.

Scarab Sages RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Heathansson wrote:
flash_cxxi wrote:
Heathansson wrote:

At rpg.net, somebody started a thread that Wayne Reynolds was a dirty doublecrosser for doing 4e AND Pathfinder art.

Oooooh, really senses-shattering stuff, that.
Oh noes, and he did Razor Coast for Nic... the dirty whore!!! ;)

Trying to get paid.....

people have no scruples!

I tell ya, some people'll do anything for money...

Imagine selling your product to competing stores... what would Coke/Pepsi/[Insert Other Brand Name Here] think of that practice now, hmmm...


joela wrote:

I frequent several boards and noted many Paizo and Pathfinder threads. I've noted a marked change of tone of late, a growing hostility. They question Paizo's business practices to continue to support the 3.x system via OGL and the PfRPG. And there are a few new twists (to me, that is):

1) Companies can, apparently, support 4E products without going GSL (e.g., Kenzer, Redbrick, Goodman Games, etc.) and Paizo should so the same

2) Paizo should "grow some balls" and create a new rpg.

Has anyone else who frequents other boards noted the same as well?

I don't frequent a lot of "general interest" D&D boards besides this one. I rarely see anyone talking about Pathfinder (positive or negative), other than the occasional comment along the lines of "Changing X makes 3.5 worse, not better."

Comment #1 ("Paizo should support 4E") doesn't really sound too negative to me. Maybe it sounds worse in context.

Dark Archive

Pangur Bàn wrote:
Brent wrote:
I'm not making an accusation, I am stating an opinion. So back off.
Please. If I say I think you're an idiot (which I don't, but it should illustrate the point), am I just stating an opinion? And if so, is it an opinion that should be voiced publicly? I beg to differ.

I am not attacking a person directly. I am giving my opinion about a companies business practice in a thread in which that is the topic. So it is not the same thing as calling you a retarded insecure fanboy (which I am not, but it illustrates the point).

Dark Archive

Brent wrote:
Pangur Bàn wrote:
Brent wrote:
I'm not making an accusation, I am stating an opinion. So back off.
Please. If I say I think you're an idiot (which I don't, but it should illustrate the point), am I just stating an opinion? And if so, is it an opinion that should be voiced publicly? I beg to differ.
I am not attacking a person directly. I am giving my opinion about a companies business practice in a thread in which that is the topic. So it is not the same thing as calling you a retarded insecure fanboy (which I am not, but it illustrates the point).

{steps into the middle} Can't we all just get along guys?


Pardon the threadcrap, but:

Déjà vu.

or

Conspiracy Theory.

Either way, most of us have seen this movie...


Brent wrote:
I am giving my opinion about a companies business practice in a thread in which that is the topic.

No, you're not. You're making an accusation based on what you think is a company's business practice. Which incidentally means you are attacking people, even if not to their face.

David Fryer wrote:
Can't we all just get along guys?

At this point, no. Sorry.


I said in the other thread the same user started about the same topic:
This is the internet. If it exists, there are people whining about it.

Sovereign Court

joela wrote:

1) Companies can, apparently, support 4E products without going GSL (e.g., Kenzer, Redbrick, Goodman Games, etc.) and Paizo should so the same

2) Paizo should "grow some balls" and create a new rpg.

Who cares? Some people have an honest opinion and some are just trolls who have nothing better to do. Paizo can't make everyone happy.


joela wrote:
2) Paizo should "grow some balls" and create a new rpg.

But thats what Wizards of the Coast did. If Paizo didnt create Pathfinder RPG who would keep D&D alive? Obviously anyone who has said this has missed the point of Pathfinder.

Scarab Sages

David Fryer wrote:
Brent wrote:
Pangur Bàn wrote:
Brent wrote:
I'm not making an accusation, I am stating an opinion. So back off.
Please. If I say I think you're an idiot (which I don't, but it should illustrate the point), am I just stating an opinion? And if so, is it an opinion that should be voiced publicly? I beg to differ.
I am not attacking a person directly. I am giving my opinion about a companies business practice in a thread in which that is the topic. So it is not the same thing as calling you a retarded insecure fanboy (which I am not, but it illustrates the point).
{steps into the middle} Can't we all just get along guys?

no. ;)

Dark Archive

Pangur Bàn wrote:
Brent wrote:
I am giving my opinion about a companies business practice in a thread in which that is the topic.

No, you're not. You're making an accusation based on what you think is a company's business practice. Which incidentally means you are attacking people, even if not to their face.

David Fryer wrote:
Can't we all just get along guys?
At this point, no. Sorry.

Again, no you are wrong. If I were attacking people, I would point out your insecurity about any criticism of WotC. Or how you feel the need to jump to the defense of a company that told 3.5 players they could play 4e or feck off, because you think calling them out on it is a reflection on your own character. But guess what fanboy? We don't have to do that at all. So why don't you go cry to WotC mods to have me banned. Oh wait, this isn't WotC. Too bad for you, I will try not to call you out for crying like a baby when you come back to argue some more.

That is a personal attack. Tell the difference now Einstein?

Sovereign Court

Brent wrote:
I am not attacking a person directly. I am giving my opinion about a companies business practice in a thread in which that is the topic.

At the top of the 4e boards, it says this:

"Personal attacks or insults directed at other members of the Paizo community, or other companies in the industry, will not be tolerated."

Bold text mine. I think you are inching a little to close to the precipice.

Dark Archive

I know to some people D&D is life. I enjoy it, my friends enjoy it, my wife tells me I enjoy it to much sometimes. But guys, seriously...it's just a game. No one is making us switch to 4e, just like no one is making us stay with 3x. Just relax and play the game you enjoy. All this 4e/3x/pathfinder hatred is only going to end up hurting our beloved RPG industry.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Optimistically, I think this says people worry that there won't be a company with Paizo's production values in the 4.x market. Not to slam GG or Kenzer in any way.

Joela, I find that I myself question your motivations as well.

As to the complaints, while I have neither the time nor the desire to read them, it seems more of the same noise.

Really, my seperation for WotC was financial. I bear no malice for 4.x players, can't they show the same decency?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

joela wrote:

I frequent several boards and noted many Paizo and Pathfinder threads. I've noted a marked change of tone of late, a growing hostility. They question Paizo's business practices to continue to support the 3.x system via OGL and the PfRPG. And there are a few new twists (to me, that is):

1) Companies can, apparently, support 4E products without going GSL (e.g., Kenzer, Redbrick, Goodman Games, etc.) and Paizo should so the same

2) Paizo should "grow some balls" and create a new rpg.

Has anyone else who frequents other boards noted the same as well?

I'm about to head into work, so I'm not gonna make a HUGE response quite yet... but while I've seen some negativity toward Paizo about what we're doing, the fact remains that I've seen more positive elements from customers and readers than ever in the past half-decade or so I've been at Paizo. We have fans running websites dedicated to Paizo, chatrooms for us, they've ordered us pizza on days we're on huge deadlines, and they even threw together a small convention for all-things Paizo. Beyond that, our numbers (both sales and in registered users at paizo.com) have been steadily climbing ever since we started Pathfinder. Things are looking very good here, and the increased visibility in the industry is putting Paizo in front of more eyes than ever before. Some of those eyes are bound to disagree with us.

So, is there a growing hostility? Yes, but only because Paizo is growing and because our customer base is growing... and said customer base seems to be QUITE happy with what we're doing. The "growing hostility" is actually, proportionally speaking, smaller, I suspect, than in the company's early days when things like Dungeon's subscriber section, Polyhedron, and some other elements got us a LOT of detractors. Things actually feel VERY positive right now to me.

As for the GSL... it'll more or less have to be rewritten from top to bottom to be at least as friendly toward 3rd party publishers as the OGL before we'd consider using it for Pathfinder products. Likewise, I'm not interested in walking legal tightropes and "faking" 4th edition content without signing on to the GSL. And on top of that, one of the reasons Paizo's growing more successful is that we have a lot of folk here who are very familiar with the 3rd edition rules; learning a new set of rules and becoming adept enough at them to function as editors would take a huge amount of work, and since we're still establishing ourselves as a game publishing company independent of official D&D licenses like the magazines, that type of hit to productivity isn't in Paizo's best interests at all anyway.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Also... keep it civil, folks, please. If you can't post without insulting people, you shouldn't post at all; feel free to talk about the idea of a "growing hostility" toward Paizo in this thread, but don't wander off-topic into personal attacks. That's not cool.


Ever since Wizards decided not to go OGL with 4E, I think the RPG industry has gotten tense and preparing for a fight or change, which also causes tension. What direction is the market going to turn? Stick with 3E or switch to 4E or lose interest altogether? It's actually an exciting point for role-playing. FantasyCraft is supposed to come out whenever they schedule it.

The only beef I have with Paizo is that they used to pick on me back in junior high and now I'm a lot bigger and I think it's time for a rematch! XD

JP


Brent wrote:
That is a personal attack. Tell the difference now Einstein?

Care to comment on my point about your baseless accusation, or are you going to keep tiptoeing around that one?

Dark Archive

joela wrote:
Has anyone else who frequents other boards noted the same as well?

No.

A bunch of enthusiast on the plus side, another made of 4E-hyped fanboys on the minus side, a lot of people (both 3.X or 4E supporters) just showing interest.

No growing hostility whatsoever.


If I encounter anyone talking smack about Paizo, I'll just politely express my approval for all that Paizo does and leave it at that. The other party will then look small for promoting their cynical propaganda and I will appear comparatively tall. So tall in fact that I'll then adopt a big blue bull, name it Babe, and take it along with me as I cut down redwoods for my toothpicks. And my best friend will be the Green Giant, his three hos, and little sprout, and we'll all picnic together. It may seem like a lofty goal, but, fail to plan and you plan to fail.


Pangur Bàn wrote:
Brent wrote:
That is a personal attack. Tell the difference now Einstein?
Care to comment on my point about your baseless accusation, or are you going to keep tiptoeing around that one?

Wow ... this is like watching a couple of 5 yos fighting over who gets to play with the ball first. Quit the attacks, quit the goading, or quit posting. Anything else demonstrates a lack of decorum and leads to serious doubts concerning the speaker's reliability.

Dark Archive

Pangur Bàn wrote:
Brent wrote:
That is a personal attack. Tell the difference now Einstein?
Care to comment on my point about your baseless accusation, or are you going to keep tiptoeing around that one?

I did if you would just read further down in my next post. I pointed out all the reasons I felt the way I felt. Did you read that post? Do I need to copy and paste it? If so here it is again....

Well, there are the subtle things... Like having a Paragon Path in their PHB called the Pathfinder and having one of its abilities called "Wrong Step". There is the cancellation of both magazines, which Paizo had made into the best gaming supplements in the industry. How did cancelling them make sense if WotC didn't feel threatened by Paizo? The Mags could have served as a vehicle to promote 4e instead of a point around which more acrimony was thrown WotC way. So why cancel them a full year before 4e's release? Because they knew Paizo made a better product and wanted to try to force the revenue from that back their own way. So Paizo makes Pathfinder. I think that having an alternative like Pathfinder is a key cog in why many 3.5 players still refuse to go to 4e. My guess is WotC is not pleased. Further, why is it that at virtually every board where these sorts of debate are happening its always the same handful of people instigating things? Is it not a reasonable leap of logic to think that one of those folks could be doing something that WotC quietly asked them to, like say create negative internet buzz about Pathfinder?

Again, just an opinion. WotC handling of the 4e transition has made me think they are capable of anything, including slandering a competitor's product by having zealots go to that competitor's website to start inflammatory threads.

Dark Archive

Ixancoatl wrote:
Pangur Bàn wrote:
Brent wrote:
That is a personal attack. Tell the difference now Einstein?
Care to comment on my point about your baseless accusation, or are you going to keep tiptoeing around that one?
Wow ... this is like watching a couple of 5 yos fighting over who gets to play with the ball first. Quit the attacks, quit the goading, or quit posting. Anything else demonstrates a lack of decorum and leads to serious doubts concerning the speaker's reliability.

I will NOT back down. I am TIRED of being muscled around on this website by every 4e supporter who thinks they have the right to control what I think. I refuse period. I don't care what I look like but I will NOT back down. I have given answers to his questions. I have supported my position and I will not be forced into taking this sort of crap. I have nothing better to do with my time and I am prepared to fight this endlessly. I have posted PAGES of balanced thoughts on the 4e/3.5 conflict and have tried to be balanced in all of them. Look at my recent post registry if you don't buy that. Its all there in print. I get hit in the face enough I WILL hit back, and I will not relent.


joela wrote:

I frequent several boards and noted many Paizo and Pathfinder threads. I've noted a marked change of tone of late, a growing hostility. They question Paizo's business practices to continue to support the 3.x system via OGL and the PfRPG. And there are a few new twists (to me, that is):

1) Companies can, apparently, support 4E products without going GSL (e.g., Kenzer, Redbrick, Goodman Games, etc.) and Paizo should so the same

2) Paizo should "grow some balls" and create a new rpg.

Has anyone else who frequents other boards noted the same as well?

(Edit for clarity: This is an irreverant, humorous, observation)

I do not frequent other boards, so had not particularly noticed this, but when I read this post, for a moment I took you to be a rabid Paizo supporter, Joela, trying to rally the Paizo posters to go off and storm the message boards of the infidel hordes... :D

'Oh hush the noise, ye men of strife, and hear the angels sing'
-Line from the christmas carol 'It came upon the midnight clear'.


*sigh*

Liberty's Edge

The Jade wrote:
If I encounter anyone talking smack about Paizo, I'll just politely express my approval for all that Paizo does and leave it at that. The other party will then look small for promoting their cynical propaganda and I will appear comparatively tall. So tall in fact that I'll then adopt a big blue bull, name it Babe, and take it along with me as I cut down redwoods for my toothpicks. And my best friend will be the Green Giant, his three hos, and little sprout, and we'll all picnic together. It may seem like a lofty goal, but, fail to plan and you plan to fail.

SMAWT!

(that's "Intelligent" in baby babble).


Just to point out on the whole "WotC fears Paizo, that is why they pulled the Mags" thing. If I am remembering right, WotC didn't renew any of their 3PP contracts about the time 4e was being announced. This was not limited to only Paizo. I would say it was more about them trying to get all their content under their own control than any fear for another company.

Sorry to interrupt. Please continue with your regularly scheduled flaming.


brent wrote:

I will NOT back down. I am TIRED of being muscled around on this website by every 4e supporter who thinks they have the right to control what I think. I refuse period. I don't care what I look like but I will NOT back down. I have given answers to his questions. I have supported my position and I will not be forced into taking this sort of crap. I have nothing better to do with my time and I am prepared to fight this endlessly. I have posted PAGES of balanced thoughts on the 4e/3.5 conflict and have tried to be balanced in all of them. Look at my recent post registry if you don't buy that. Its all there in print. I get hit in the face enough I WILL hit back, and I will not relent.

And the only way to get them to leave and stop muscling people around is to ignore them and stop engaging in their style of tactics. I has nothing really to do with how you look; it has to do with how you make gamers in general look. As an avid an 27-year veteran of gaming, I *feel* that your tone insults those of us gamers who are wise enough to step back from a fight just as much as his tone and goading insults us.

And quite frankly, if you have to "win" on an internet message board, you either need to get out more or get counselling.

Don't feed the frakkin trolls.

Dark Archive

I have a growing hostility towards concern-trolling.

No wait, it's not really growing, it's pretty much the same as it's ever been...

Some people like 4E. Some people like 3.5. Some people think Paizo's products are beautiful and their customer service is the best in the industry. Some people think Paizo are cheating whores for continuing to use ideas that TSR generated over the last 35 years to steal money from those nice folk at Hasbro who are the current holders of the IP.

Wah. Like what you like, I'll like what I like, and our wildly divergent tastes mean that I'm less likely to sleep with your girlfriend.

Vive la difference.


Brent wrote:

I did if you would just read further down in my next post. I pointed out all the reasons I felt the way I felt.

*snorts*

"All" the reasons comes down to:
1) the existence of a 4E "Pathfinder" path with a "Wrong Step" ability. If this has anything to do with Paizo it's a tribute, not a sneer.
2) the cancellation of the mags which, while I consider it deplorable as well, makes perfect sense from their DDI POV.
3) an utterly paranoid conclusion which you somehow label a reasonable leap of logic. People that post on different fora and are vocal are vocal on all these fora? That just doesn't make sense. There must be something evil behind it.

1 to 50 of 444 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / Alpha Playtest Feedback / General Discussion / Growing hostility against Paizo All Messageboards