Advanced Player's Gonzo Journalism, or Let's Read the APG


Product Discussion

201 to 250 of 270 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

TriOmegaZero wrote:
I believe the proper response is 'Then don't read it.'

But how can I know what not to read unless I read it first?

DID I JUST BLOW YOUR MIND?!?!?

Grand Lodge

If you had, I'd be asking for a cigarette, now wouldn't I? :P

But honestly, with the apparent familiarity some of the complainers have with AMiB, you'd think they'd know better than to waste their time reading his posts.

Sovereign Court

TriOmegaZero wrote:
I believe the proper response is 'Then don't read it.'

Did you say something?

Grand Lodge

Anyone else hear that droning?


A Miley Cyrus concert!
Where?

Dark Archive

Surly Troglodytes wrote:

A Miley Cyrus concert!

Where?

Ever since she got a fat face.


Michael Dean wrote:

Actually I was curious; what kinds of editing problems have you noticed a lot of? Are they stat block problems or spelling and grammar issues? Admittedly I haven't had a lot of time lately to really parse my Paizo buys, but I haven't noticed an unusually high number of editing errors in any case. Certainly no more than other major publishers. It's possible I've been overlooking any editing issues subconsciously because I've enjoyed the creative aspect of Pathfinder so much.

Thanks!

Well I've probably already ticked off most everyone I can so what have I got to lose? I'll post anyway.

Inexplicably, Paizo left out many rules from the SRD, including (but not limited to) burrow mechanics, a list of all bonus types, rules for how antimagic works (and many other various bits and pieces of the SRD that got lost somehow.) Most (all?) of these have YET to make it into one of the many reprints or official errata that have been released. If I recall correctly even one of the most recent errata's slipped by with almost nothing in it... accidentally (and unfortunately of course.)

The collaborators and volunteers on d20pfsrd.com have compiled a list of errata and mistakes that various posters have discovered. These have all been listed in a neat and tidy database format, but Paizo has opted to ignore all of that fan effort and instead create an entirely new FAQ system that basically asks the fans to go back AGAIN through the thousands of threads and flag the questionable ones. This has already been done once but that effort served no purpose apparently, even though a very large percentage of the FAQ candidate questions and subjects are ALREADY compiled on the site for easy reading and review.

The d20pfsrd.com Unofficial Errata DB

Here are some specific examples...

Look up the fun subject of horses and combat training (there are many posts on this subject... how does it work after all?)

Look up the subject of horses and the Advanced Template making them no longer animals. (+4 to all ability scores makes it no longer an animal)

Read about playtest Inquisitor Powers left in final rules

Core Rulebook Errata/Mistakes (611 posts)

Bestiary Errata/Mistakes (347 posts)

Errata for the Bestiary Errata/Mistakes

APG Errata/Mistakes (242 posts)

Adventurer's Armory (read the reviews)

Adventurer's Armory (read comments starting on page 4)

Messed up rules in APG

Read the "Cons" in this thread

Other random posts of interest:

Revised Campaign Setting

River Kings Map

Cleric of Aroden

Blood for Blood 1

Blood for Blood 2

Blood for Blood GM Reference

Kobold Stats

Mother of Flies

Believe me, I have only pasted a very limited snippet of actual errors. Some apologists will of course exclaim once again that any large effort is bound to have mistakes. I get that. But the second, third, fourth etc printings should not contain the very same mistakes that have already been discovered. Further, the same mistakes shouldn't then crop up in completely different books.

Paizo folks repeatedly and profusely apologize for error after error, insisting it will get better, yet it doesn't seem to.

You may note though that even given all of the above, I was giddy as a school girl to meet the various Paizo folks, talk to Jason, James, Erik, etc, and even attend the Pathfinder Rules Q&A at GenCon. I *love* the game, and it's certainly the only game for me. All I am saying is that they have a horrible editing process that they seem to acknowledge, but never improve. I've considered dropping my subscriptions but since I just give the books away on d20pfsrd.com anyway, it doesn't really matter that much to me.

Anyway, I hope that's at least somewhat enlightening.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The problem with community errata is that it creates a metric ton of fuzz.

Poster A: X is wrong, it should be +3.
Poster B: No, it's OK, Pathfinder changed Y to -2.
Poster C: Hey, but Complete Wazoo says it's +4.
Poster D: Disregard non-open WotC sources, guys.
Poster A: OK ... but I look at Cleric entry and heavy armor proficiency is missing
Posters B,C,D: NYAAAAARGH !

Also ... you might have more luck posting that all in a new thread, instead of piggybacking a MiB thread, because, erm, these tend to be flame-y.


MiB hasn't been in this thread for, like, two weeks - BUT. I. CANNOT. RESIST. POSTING. IN. IT. AND. BUMPING. IT. IN. THE. PROCESS.

Obvious Troll takes solace in the fact that Obvious Troll is apparantly not the only ship adrift on this particular ocean.


jreyst wrote:
Lots of interesting stuff, It didnt tick me off by the way.

.

I would say Paizo's worst enemy is time... They have a very tight schedule with limited resources.

They are under pressure to continue to produce amazing stuff at a constant rate....

Their own success is a bit of a millstone hung around their neck, they cant loose momentum, but they need to keep up their quality.

That being said it was mentioned that they are taking steps to fix this - hiring new staff setting up the Q&A. All of this takes time to implement and streamline. (I work for a very big bank, it can take a year for a change in procedure to work its way through). I would give Paizo a few months and maintain constant a constant dialogue.

Why not start up a thread with called "concerns with the SRD" consolidate all of the information in the thread and maintain it... Moderate it (ask for troll posts to be removed) and keep it as a fan repository for areas that Paizo can improve upon.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
A Man In Black wrote:
Solo Tactics is super awkward. I get what it does, but it took me a couple of readings. The Teamwork Feat implementation is interesting as an experiment but it's really out of place here; aren't inquisitors super-suspicious of their teammates? Why do they of all people get special abilities to work with their teammates? Flavor fail.

Actually it's flavor succeed. While Inquisitors aren't generally warm and cozy with their teammates, they're pretty good at getting them to work with him tatically (even if it's only to get him off of thier backs), the Inquisitor will be barking orders to his barely trusted teammates and while they won't have the true coordination of a fully integrated team, he will be able to get advantage of thier placement and actions.


Anyone get the feeling that MiB is sitting back and laughing at everyone having once again stirred up the hornets nest and retreated under a smoke screen?

Grand Lodge

Nope, can't say that I do.


The 8th Dwarf wrote:
jreyst wrote:
Lots of interesting stuff, It didnt tick me off by the way.

.

I would say Paizo's worst enemy is time... They have a very tight schedule with limited resources.

They are under pressure to continue to produce amazing stuff at a constant rate....

Their own success is a bit of a millstone hung around their neck, they cant loose momentum, but they need to keep up their quality.

Maybe they will eventually get that if they want to be a real game developer, they have to be a real game developer and their job isn't just writing APs or add-ons for another company any more. They ARE the other company.

Quote:
Why not start up a thread with called "concerns with the SRD" consolidate all of the information in the thread and maintain it

I don't think you even looked at jryst's post. And it doesn't even mention the exceedingly difficult forum design.


DM Wellard wrote:
Anyone get the feeling that MiB is sitting back and laughing at everyone having once again stirred up the hornets nest and retreated under a smoke screen?

Paranoia and conspiracy theories are best enjoyed in small to moderate doses.

Sovereign Court

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Nope, can't say that I do.

Did you say something?

;-)

The Exchange

DM Wellard wrote:
Anyone get the feeling that MiB is sitting back and laughing at everyone having once again stirred up the hornets nest and retreated under a smoke screen?

Yes.


Malaclypse wrote:
DM Wellard wrote:
Anyone get the feeling that MiB is sitting back and laughing at everyone having once again stirred up the hornets nest and retreated under a smoke screen?
Paranoia and conspiracy theories are best enjoyed in small to moderate doses.

That isn't all that's best enjoyed in small doses.


Cartigan wrote:
The 8th Dwarf wrote:


I would say Paizo's worst enemy is time... They have a very tight schedule with limited resources.
Maybe they will eventually get that if they want to be a real game developer, they have to be a real game developer and their job isn't just writing APs or add-ons for another company any more. They ARE the other company.

They know they are ONE of the OTHER companies. As much as they would like they do not have anywhere near the resources of Hasbro. They also have existed as a "Game Developer" (in the sense of basing the rules around a system of their own design) for a very short time - TSR/WOTC/HASBRO has around 30 years of experience.

Paizo has made a start at developing a system and a successful one at that. I find in comparison to other game companies the quality of their product is up there with the best, the originality of their approach second to none and the openness and the willingness to talk about why and what they do the icing on the cake.

Cartigan wrote:
The 8th Dwarf wrote:
Why not start up a thread with called "concerns with the SRD" consolidate all of the information in the thread and maintain it
I don't think you even looked at jryst's post. And it doesn't even mention the exceedingly difficult forum design.

I did and I offered it a suggestion - Its not a perfect solution and jryst probably has better ideas of his own. There are two options in this world Cartigan you can pop up in threads and be a voice amongst others(especially in threads that are obviously antagonistic, or threads that are troll threads that are thinly disguised as humorous) or you can organise and present your case strongly so others will take notice.


The 8th Dwarf wrote:


I did and I offered it a suggestion

Which jreyst pointed out has been done thrice.

Liberty's Edge

Personally I like the FAQ tag system Paizo recently implemented. It's simple, pretty elegant and we are already starting to see the fruits of our labor.

I guess I just don't understand why a few people seem to jump at every opportunity to bash or be antagonistic to the company that works so hard to give us the game and supporting products we love.

And to bring this back to the topic of the APG ... yes there are some errors, some fairly unfortunate. Does that bum me out? Sure. Am I confidant that Paizo hates that errors are in the book and that errata will be issued soon? Yes.

Am I going to crucify them for it?

NO.


Marc Radle wrote:
Personally I like the FAQ tag system Paizo recently implemented. It's simple, pretty elegant and we are already starting to see the fruits of our labor.

I would like it, but this forum system doesn't make it stand out as much as it really needs to.

Something needs to be done separate from the forums. Sure, its great that the devs come here and reply to threads and all but this game REALLY needs an official FAQ and the devs obviously want everyone to agree with them.
What I would suggest is that they create a devFAQerrata blog and address common issues in it. It would both provide a single place that is easy to find plus - theoretically - sort through (I don't think it will be from what I've seen of the site) and give the devs somewhere to flat state out and explain their line of thinking without having to pretend forums aren't forums.

Grand Lodge

Even if the blog doesn't have a decent search function, Google's 'site' qualifier would still be available. I used it on the forums while waiting for the new search function to come on line.

Also, I don't blame AMiB for not posting recently considering the amount of off-topic and threadcrapping posts going on.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Also, I don't blame AMiB for not posting recently considering the amount of off-topic and threadcrapping posts going on.

What, you mean the last 4 out of 5 pages? Some threads devolve into 100% OT within minutes.

But, yeah, I agree. It would be nice if there could be one "civil APG rules ironing thread," in which we could discuss which APG rules work, which need modification (and how to do so), and which ones simply need to be deep-sixed -- without being branded as vile traitors, wrongbadnofun party-poopers, or whatever. I was sort of hoping this thread would be that one, despite MiB's pseudo-Trollman commentary tone (which seemed to rub everyone the wrong way).


jreyst wrote:

There are about 4-5 individuals that practically live on the forums and have a tendency to savage anyone who they feel isn't up to their intellectual and/or Pathfinder rules proficiency level. They make a point of quickly becoming aggressive and offensive towards posters. It is why I am thankful for the "Ignore User" Greasemonkey script. My board reading is much more pleasant when I do not have to read posts by those individuals continually belittling others. It'd be nice if some of these users received some sort of warning, but it hasn't seemed to have happened yet.

Also, there is a very strong "fan-boy" factor on these boards and any negative comments will very quickly be attacked. Its fairly pointless to try to say anything negative about anything Paizo does so generally it comes down to "if you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all" which, of course, just feeds into the fanboy-ism. In all honesty I have been continually frustrated by the editing process at Paizo, frustrated almost to the point of considering canceling my subscriptions, but until now I have held my tongue. The reality though is that the situation is clearly not improving, no matter how much various individuals curse the problem. This is something that had better seriously receive some attention. There is a very strong, growing sentiment among many I have spoken or communicated with regarding the horrible editing on book after book and its reaching a breaking point.

Ok, commence savaging.

I completely agree with this statement. But that is the internet for you. I combat the agressiveness with silliness. It sometimes works and sometimes in hilarious ways.

Also, to those who say, "Then don't read them" sometimes you don't know you are walking into a mine field until you are halfway into it and by then you can't go back.

Grand Lodge

Still doesn't excuse the ones complaining 'all his posts are like this'.


Marc Radle wrote:


I guess I just don't understand why a few people seem to jump at every opportunity to bash or be antagonistic ...

Some over react. I just want them to use the list we made, and that another poster took the time to compile for them. I think the FAQ feature is good, but I still don't have the core books because the issues that come up everyday in the threads have not been fixed in the book yet. I don't expect for all of them to be fixed, but the last errata did not register on my errata radar. I am also waiting for the 2nd printing of the APG to come out. I do have the bestiary though, and I am thinking of getting the mext edition of that one, and putting the first on up on or selling it to one of the people here.

If they only fixed two things a day that is about 40 per month at least. Some of these might require some thought, but some things are just misworded, and could be fixed with a "it works this way....".
I would also rather have a pdf document for an FAQ that tabs on the website with the answer. That way I don't have to copy and paste to wordpad to carry it with me.

PS: I am not upset. I just want questions answered. :)


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Still doesn't excuse the ones complaining 'all his posts are like this'.

True. But some of those people are trying to stop the flames. Which is like trying to stop a tsunami. The rest are just posting to post and are therefore irrevelant(sp?).


I've been through cursory reading of most important sections of APG, and I must say that for every great little thing, I get another which makes me very cautious about APG content.

For example, a spell with instantaneous duration which forces its targets to make a Will save afterwards. I.e. the spell is not in the effect anymore, but whoever interacts with its results will have to make a Will save. In addition, this Will save replaces mechanism already covered by things like Disguise skill. (Sculpt Corpse spell)

If anything, it is as if a guy with a brilliant idea but little actual design experience created this... and there are many, many spells like that - spells, which replace skill checks, spells, which take away saves or introduce their own little mechanics altogether.

Regards,
Ruemere

PS. I do hope that somebody does a lot more checking before releasing Ultimate Magic - otherwise, I will simply ban it from my game for not being in line with Core Rulebook.

Sovereign Court

Kirth Gersen wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Also, I don't blame AMiB for not posting recently considering the amount of off-topic and threadcrapping posts going on.

What, you mean the last 4 out of 5 pages? Some threads devolve into 100% OT within minutes.

But, yeah, I agree. It would be nice if there could be one "civil APG rules ironing thread," in which we could discuss which APG rules work, which need modification (and how to do so), and which ones simply need to be deep-sixed -- without being branded as vile traitors, wrongbadnofun party-poopers, or whatever. I was sort of hoping this thread would be that one, despite MiB's pseudo-Trollman commentary tone (which seemed to rub everyone the wrong way).

You rebel scum...er, I mean... you vile traitor.


Kirth Gersen wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Also, I don't blame AMiB for not posting recently considering the amount of off-topic and threadcrapping posts going on.

What, you mean the last 4 out of 5 pages? Some threads devolve into 100% OT within minutes.

But, yeah, I agree. It would be nice if there could be one "civil APG rules ironing thread," in which we could discuss which APG rules work, which need modification (and how to do so), and which ones simply need to be deep-sixed -- without being branded as vile traitors, wrongbadnofun party-poopers, or whatever. I was sort of hoping this thread would be that one, despite MiB's pseudo-Trollman commentary tone (which seemed to rub everyone the wrong way).

Hey, I'd support that, too, as long as nobody gets again into the mindset that making raspberries at the developers is good argumentation. Avoiding the word "broken" would also help.


magnuskn wrote:
Avoiding the word "broken" would also help.

How would avoiding the word 'broken' help?

Liberty's Edge

Malaclypse wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Avoiding the word "broken" would also help.
How would avoiding the word 'broken' help?

Well, I think he was kidding a little ...

Seriously though, I think most people understand that 'broken' is a black and white term - there's really no room for grey. Something either IS broken or it ISN'T. Plus people tend to use the term to try and push their opinion off as fact.

Rules in a game like D&D or Pathfinder are rarely 'broken'. A given rule or class or magic item or feat ... whatever ... might feel unbalanced to a certain person or too powerful for their campaign. That's a reasonable response. Declaring something 'broken' is not.

Plus, it sounds kind of childish ... I always picture someone writing it on a message board like they stamping their feet and throwing a little fit ;)

Liberty's Edge

Malaclypse wrote:


How would avoiding the word 'broken' help?

Let's turn that question around. How is using the word 'broken' helpful, given that there are many more constructive ways of saying the same thing, and knowing that using it tends to incite flamewars?


Jeremiziah wrote:
Malaclypse wrote:
How would avoiding the word 'broken' help?
Let's turn that question around. How is using the word 'broken' helpful, given that there are many more constructive ways of saying the same thing, and knowing that using it tends to incite flamewars?

It's short and precise. But that's not the point. People interested in discussion the topic at hand will not get upset just because someone uses the word 'broken'. And people who do pretend to get upset because of it can be dismissed as trolls from the start.

THE WORD 'BROKEN'
Aura strong divination; CL10th
Slot -; Price free; Weight None
DESCRIPTION
Using this word will cast the spell 'Detect Troll' on the thread. Trolls and people not interested in the topic who simply want to push their opinion onto everyone else will have to make a will save (DC: 10 + the reader's INT modifier). Upon failing the will save, they will get upset and start to write long meandering posts not related to the thread topic. They can now easily be recognized and can safely be ignored by those with a desire to contribute meaningfully to the discussion.

Scarab Sages

Can that be attached to a Greater Glyph of Warding?


Malaclypse wrote:
Jeremiziah wrote:
Malaclypse wrote:
How would avoiding the word 'broken' help?
Let's turn that question around. How is using the word 'broken' helpful, given that there are many more constructive ways of saying the same thing, and knowing that using it tends to incite flamewars?

It's short and precise. But that's not the point. People interested in discussion the topic at hand will not get upset just because someone uses the word 'broken'. And people who do pretend to get upset because of it can be dismissed as trolls from the start.

THE WORD 'BROKEN'
Aura strong divination; CL10th
Slot -; Price free; Weight None
DESCRIPTION
Using this word will cast the spell 'Detect Troll' on the thread. Trolls and people not interested in the topic who simply want to push their opinion onto everyone else will have to make a will save (DC: 10 + the reader's INT modifier). Upon failing the will save, they will get upset and start to write long meandering posts not related to the thread topic. They can now easily be recognized and can safely be ignored by those with a desire to contribute meaningfully to the discussion.

I dont think anything is broken unless it cause problems for a high percentage of groups. I will choose 90% as an arbitrary number. That is why I think the term should not be used unless you can say it is an issue for pretty much everyone.

Pun Pun I think could fall into the broken category. Most other things I would say are not broken, and the DM just has not figured out how to deal with them yet.


Jeremiziah wrote:
Malaclypse wrote:


How would avoiding the word 'broken' help?

Let's turn that question around. How is using the word 'broken' helpful, given that there are many more constructive ways of saying the same thing, and knowing that using it tends to incite flamewars?

Ahhh.... But you are assuming that use of a word - "broken" in this case - that is very common parlance in nearly every venue of gaming (video games, rpgs - tabletop and larp, wargames, etc.) is know to incite flamewars.

Yes, I am sure some of the people that use it on these forums know exactly what it will do to the blood pressure of the more conservative of regulars.

But you can never assume that everyone who uses it is going for the reaction.

And I find it very funny that those the seem to support Paizo, and their goals of friendly and welcoming forums, expect others to know exactly how to change their common speech patterns to appease those that feel this forum is theirs, and theirs alone.

"Broken" is commonly thrown around to refer to anything that does not work as intended. Just like if your TV needs to be turned on and off at least 3 times before it works - even if it works perfectly fine after it does start - is considered "broken."

WTF, Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, What The Hell, and many other more inflamatory phrases are in common usage in many circles.

But they aren't allowed here because some posters can't give the user the benefit of the doubt.

Friendly indeed.


Disenchanter wrote:


And I find it very funny that those the seem to support Paizo, and their goals of friendly and welcoming forums, expect others to know exactly how to change their common speech patterns to appease those that feel this forum is theirs, and theirs alone.

"Broken" is commonly thrown around to refer to anything that does not work as intended. Just like if your TV needs to be turned on and off at least 3 times before it works - even if it works perfectly fine after it does start - is considered "broken."

WTF, Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, What The Hell, and many other more inflamatory phrases are in common usage in many circles.

But they aren't allowed here because some posters can't give the user the benefit of the doubt.

Friendly indeed.

I am all for the discussion of, rules that are causing problems... I would like it done politely and in a manner less akin to flame baiting. WTF is What the Fvck, where I grew up saying the word Fvck is considered to be rude. "Broken" is something my almost 3 year old would say after shoving a peanut-butter sandwich into the dvd player.

Starting a thread "Rule X is/might/will cause problems in my game" is concise and less likely to start flame wars as the language is neutral.

"OMG, *face-palm*, WTF, WTH, This Broken rule suxxors" can be read by a lot of people that love the game and the company and that have long history of a community that hasn't started threads like this (often) as hate for Paizo and the nice people that work for the company.
So yes a large portion of the community are going to be defensive and yes they will come into the thread armed for bear because the thread title is indicating that they should do so.

You are speaking to a wide and diverse community from all over the world with a lot of different beliefs and different ideas about good manners. If its considered kinda rude in one circle you can bet that is very rude in others.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

Cartigan wrote:

What I would suggest is that they create a devFAQerrata blog and address common issues in it. It would both provide a single place that is easy to find plus - theoretically - sort through (I don't think it will be from what I've seen of the site) and give the devs somewhere to flat state out and explain their line of thinking without having to pretend forums aren't forums.

You mean something like this, this, or this?


Ross Byers wrote:
Cartigan wrote:

What I would suggest is that they create a devFAQerrata blog and address common issues in it. It would both provide a single place that is easy to find plus - theoretically - sort through (I don't think it will be from what I've seen of the site) and give the devs somewhere to flat state out and explain their line of thinking without having to pretend forums aren't forums.

You mean something like this, this, or this?

whipcrack sound effect


Ross Byers wrote:
Cartigan wrote:

What I would suggest is that they create a devFAQerrata blog and address common issues in it. It would both provide a single place that is easy to find plus - theoretically - sort through (I don't think it will be from what I've seen of the site) and give the devs somewhere to flat state out and explain their line of thinking without having to pretend forums aren't forums.

You mean something like this, this, or this?

A blog that's updated less frequently than weekly isn't much of a blog.

The Exchange

Ross Byers wrote:
You mean something like this, this, or this?

I didn't even know those existed. I feel like I missed the marketing :(

Liberty's Edge

Ross Byers wrote:

You mean something like this, this, or this?

Hey Ross, do you have any insight into why these FAQ's are popping up so much under the RADAR? As you can see, many people do not even know about these!!!

It would seem as though there should be a big announcement letting everyone know, especially since so many people have been complaining about the lack of FAQs? Any idea when more answers will be popping in, when easy to find links will appaear all organized in one easy to find FAQ section on the site and, last but not least ... WILL there be a big official unvailing once the system is 100% up and running?

Thanks!!!


Malaclypse wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Avoiding the word "broken" would also help.
How would avoiding the word 'broken' help?

Because it is so damn overused that I instantly dismiss any thread which includes the word in its title. Anything anyone doesn't like instantly gets labeled as broken, so the word has lost much of its meaning and gained a huge annoyance factor.


magnuskn wrote:
Malaclypse wrote:
How would avoiding the word 'broken' help?
Because it is so damn overused that I instantly dismiss any thread which includes the word in its title.

Great, this means its working, keeps the thread on topic and the trolls away.

Thanks for your feedback.


Malaclypse wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Malaclypse wrote:
How would avoiding the word 'broken' help?
Because it is so damn overused that I instantly dismiss any thread which includes the word in its title.

Great, this means its working, keeps the thread on topic and the trolls away.

Thanks for your feedback.

You can keep your backhanded insults where the sun doesn't shine. But okay, you are already in that select group of people who cannot help themselves but post in that "I demand that my will be obeyed!" style which starts more flamewars on this board than anything else. Have fun.

Can we get an ignore function, PLEASE?


Ross Byers wrote:
Cartigan wrote:

What I would suggest is that they create a devFAQerrata blog and address common issues in it. It would both provide a single place that is easy to find plus - theoretically - sort through (I don't think it will be from what I've seen of the site) and give the devs somewhere to flat state out and explain their line of thinking without having to pretend forums aren't forums.

You mean something like this, this, or this?

Yes, that would be good. But you know, in a centralized location.


magnuskn wrote:
Malaclypse wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Malaclypse wrote:
How would avoiding the word 'broken' help?
Because it is so damn overused that I instantly dismiss any thread which includes the word in its title.

Great, this means its working, keeps the thread on topic and the trolls away.

Thanks for your feedback.

You can keep your backhanded insults where the sun doesn't shine. But okay, you are already in that select group of people who cannot help themselves but post in that "I demand that my will be obeyed!" style which starts more flamewars on this board than anything else. Have fun.

Can we get an ignore function, PLEASE?

Now wait...of the two of you, which one just posted something along the lines of "I dislike it, it annoys me, therefore thou shalt not use teh wordz or else"??

I would argue that it is just such an attitude as your own that starts the flamewars.

The biggest lesson to be learned on the Paizo boards over the last few months is that apparently what is okay for the fanboys is not okay for the critics.


I find it interesting that the highly flammable "Fanboy" accusation gets thrown around by somebody accusing a person of trying to start a flame war.

The lesson I learned was that people who a happy to talk about a problem with the rules but are asking people not to be jerks in the way that they discuss it get tarred with fanboy.

I think there are some issues with the rules (there will all ways be problems with the rules) I happily read though threads, to pick up on stuff that may affect my game so I know how to deal with a problem if it crops up.

I just get tired of the jerkiness, sense of self entitlement and the lack of patience.

201 to 250 of 270 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Paizo Products / Product Discussion / Advanced Player's Gonzo Journalism, or Let's Read the APG All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.