My guess? Several reasons:
1. People who had problems with major elements of 3.5 probably won't be happy with a game with a stated purpose of preserving backwards compatibility.
2. Others who liked 3.5 probably don't see the point, or even worse, see Pathfinder as a D&D knock-off.
3. Many people driven away from Paizo's boards by the 4E hate went to those places (I did for quite a while), and some of them now have an axe to grind.
4. Tearing something down is easy.
...and those probably just scratch the surface.
|
My guess? Several reasons:
1. People who had problems with major elements of 3.5 probably won't be happy with a game with a stated purpose of preserving backwards compatibility.
2. Others who liked 3.5 probably don't see the point, or even worse, see Pathfinder as a D&D knock-off.
3. Many people driven away from Paizo's boards by the 4E hate went to those places (I did for quite a while), and some of them now have an axe to grind.
4. Tearing something down is easy.
...and those probably just scratch the surface.
In my Book Pathfinder IS D&D now...
--Coup d'Vrock!
|
In the end, there is only one value that is used to determine the love or hate of something....
And right now I'd say over 50,000 Beta playtest downloads and selling out of the printed version on day 1 is a strong indication that Pathfinder is well loved.
I'd be interested in seeing Sales history though once PFRPG is released.
If my decades of gaming have taught me anything, they've taught me that there will always be angry corner cases out there railing against some other aspect of the gaming industry. I'd like to stress, however, that taking this conversation down the road of "X website hates Pathfinder!" won't lead to anything positive. So let's avoid the cross-board bashing.
If my decades of gaming have taught me anything, they've taught me that there will always be angry corner cases out there railing against some other aspect of the gaming industry.
I'll add to that, Mr. Frost: The is no such thing as bad press.
Every time someone voices their issues with Pathfinder, another person who wants to distance themselves from that style of play gets the chance to discover it.
|
|
If my decades of gaming have taught me anything, they've taught me that there will always be angry corner cases out there railing against some other aspect of the gaming industry. I'd like to stress, however, that taking this conversation down the road of "X website hates Pathfinder!" won't lead to anything positive. So let's avoid the cross-board bashing.
Yeah, I don't want this to become a flame post or edition war thread or any of that other bad stuff that is just no fun. I was just kinda shocked to see a lot of negative PFRPG comments out there on the other community boards, and was hoping to learn of the history behind it.
I even remember Jason making a post once where he expected a negative response when posting to one of the other boards.
|
I have not yet BEGUN to hate! :P
And on a serious note, the Den explains why.
And before anyone gets the wrong idea, I'm subscribed to Pathfinder, if you didn't catch that.
Maybe in the end all press is good press, but all inter-board interaction is not good. I hope we all act in such a way as to not stir-up unneeded and unwanted strife. I think lots of us feel like we've been exposed to more ill feeling than we'd have wished for ourselves or others.
EDIT: I wonder if the Paizo chatroom isn't a better place to get this question answered, Perram.
|
|
I have not yet BEGUN to hate! :P
And on a serious note, the Den explains why.
And before anyone gets the wrong idea, I'm subscribed to Pathfinder, if you didn't catch that.
mmm oh that thread
i saw it in the weekend... stopped reading after the 3rd pointok they have reason in many points...
but in one of those they say they were banned because they gave decent reports werebanned for doing that instead of just saying "cool!" by experience i know that many of this said nothing but crap
ok yes, they had good and interesting points... you don't go offending everyone and their mothers just ebcause you want or are not listened
one of my ebst friends agrees wholeheartedly with that thread, e has complaine here about a lot of things, in sarcastic mode, but not with threats or insults... so he is still around here... sometimes... but maybe not well liked :P
i myself think that Pathfinder bothched a few thigns... i wills ee when my copy arrives... meanwhile in the home rules i expose how we play... right now we live and die with a convination of rules supported by the BoXM of Monte Cook...
so we are happy
Maybe in the end all press is good press, but all inter-board interaction is not good. I hope we all act in such a way as to not stir-up unneeded and unwanted strife. I think lots of us feel like we've been exposed to more ill feeling than we'd have wished for ourselves or others.
Nope, I'm sticking with it.
The more people complain about Pathfinder, the more people have heard of it, the more people can check it out for themselves. Opposition is a sure sign of success.
Complainers on forums have a lot less influence over purchases than they might like. Hey wait, that's me. *poof*
|
And on a serious note, the Den explains why.
"Trollman"? Wasn't he...? Nevermind. Talk about extremely bias.
Yup. Basically, naysayers don't like Pathfinder RPG's take on the SRD since it wasn't done their way (note the emphasis).RPG.net, ENWorld, mostly, also The Gaming Den.
Yeah, that's pretty much it, I think.
Also, I think that some people have the idea that expressing an idea in the most nasty way possible makes it more insightful or authoritative or entertaining.
E.g.
"boring" comment --> I don't care for the new rounds/day mechanic for bardic music.
"pizzazz" comment --> The Pathfinder bard rapes a baby while eating a baby and punching a baby in the stomach. Also, it made a baby cry.
So let's avoid the cross-board bashing.
How about cross-dressing?
Maybe in the end all press is good press, but all inter-board interaction is not good. I hope we all act in such a way as to not stir-up unneeded and unwanted strife. I think lots of us feel like we've been exposed to more ill feeling than we'd have wished for ourselves or others.Nope, I'm sticking with it.
The more people complain about Pathfinder, the more people have heard of it, the more people can check it out for themselves. Opposition is a sure sign of success.
Complainers on forums have a lot less influence over purchases than they might like. Hey wait, that's me. *poof*
Heh. This reminds me of the I hate Paizo SO much thread. If only.
Well I know that Barrok's Tower is looking forward to Pathfinder. We do a lot of different systems (some are staying "pure 3.5" some are going to pathfinder, some are playing 4e) but over all we get along on it all.
|
|
Well I know that Barrok's Tower is looking forward to Pathfinder.
Oh! Never heard of this site. Thanks!
|
|
"Trollman"? Wasn't he...? Nevermind. Talk about extremely bias.
And on a serious note, the Den explains why.
Yeah, I found it very interesting that the infamous Frank Trollman was the author / originator of that very anti Pathfinder and, let's face it ... anti Paizo thread.
I wonder what would happen if a number of people went over there and posted some more balanced opinions ...
Hmmm ...
|
|
Probably the same thing that always happens when someone tries to change anothers viewpoint on the internet. Flames and drama. After all, we're already getting comments about the posters character and not his points. It's hardly likely to evolve rather than devolve.
Edit: For evidence I present the Official 4E Critique and Rebuttal thread.
You have only to look at the way Trollman talks about S K Reynolds and his books to realize that this whole FAQ is nothing you should take too seriously. The Paizo community dared to disagree with him, so now he is sulking.
Edit: Sorry, TriOmegaZero, you posted while I was constructing my post. There are two things to note: he managed to nullify many of his points because he was (and is) not able to communicate in an acceptable form. His message was (and is): I am nobody whom you can take seriously. And second: he seems to be unable to accept that some points he presented were not so absolute and undeniable as he seems to think of them. In other words: His points are not the god-given truth to the gaming community.
I wonder at times if part of this isn't a couple guys from Wizards of the Coasts marketing going around and posting on all the gaming websites. On the up side Pathfinder is getting a lot of press, on the down side the games reputation is basically mud with a large segment of the gaming community right now. I don't think Paizo realizes just how much of a PR problem they have.
I wonder at times if part of this isn't a couple guys from Wizards of the Coasts marketing going around and posting on all the gaming websites. On the up side Pathfinder is getting a lot of press, on the down side the games reputation is basically mud with a large segment of the gaming community right now. I don't think Paizo realizes just how much of a PR problem they have.
Maybe I'm just naive, but I think that's a little paranoid. The posts are just the rabidly anti-Paizo folks venting their opinions. As for the reputation of Pathfinder in the gaming community: As far as I can tell, the jury is still out, which makes sense, since the game hasn't been released. Once it is, it will succeed (or fail) on its own merits.
I don't think going over there and starting a virtual shouting match is a good idea, either. I'd never even heard of that site until very recently.
Nothing positive can come of this thread. We don't discuss people who've been banned (there have only been a handful) and we really don't like cross-board drama. I'm going to lock this thread.