Many are players and not DMs.
This means they have little or no choice if it shows up in the game they're playing in. An option they despise may end up being members of the party or as enemies.
most criticism is the constructive kind. So it's mainly not people ranting about stuff and saying they would prefer it not being created. (like with most psionics threads)
People show what they don't like and offer ideas that they would prefer.
Or in other words, they show weaknesses of the class and offer fixes.
But you are right, those who like the class as is don't state that as outright as others.
|
Meaning if they do not want to play in a game with such elements and the other players do, they can choose to leave the game.
And then not have a Pathfinder game to play in at all. Depending on where you live, you might not have a lot of options.
Hopefully, everyone eventually ends up in the game they want to be in. But once new rules and classes get injected into the game, you are going to run into them in some way or another. The "just ignore it" argument doesn't quite work.
|
|
I don't care what people are playing if I'm playing. I really don't. You can ask anyone I play with here on the boards. I might goof on you, but that's about it.
Yucale, you're 13, you missed "splat hell" from WotC. When I run a game, I don't use a canned setting. I work my butt off to get my setting to have a certain feel, a mood, a look and all of that. And I don't have some things in my homebrew. There are concepts that don't fit, thematically.
The problem is, WotC gave players such a sense of entitlement about EVERYTHING that it's hard to find players who will set aside that sense of entitlement and play in a game that might not support their favorite concept. And if I relent and allow the concept, it weakens the feel for me. And if I'm not feeling it, I'm not going to do a good job.
One of the awesome sauces of Paizo is the playtesting. The time to bask in the glory of new playable options isn't here yet. This is the chance to be a part of the process and try to hammer out all of the flaws now, rather than being stuck with them after print. That's best done by trying to destroy it, anything that can stand up after being dipped into the internet rabid piranha pool is much more likely to be full on groovy.
This isn't as much of a rant, just something I'd like to come to the attention of the folks at paizo.
It seems to me, that once paizo announces something, the people who don't like said thing will be more vocal about their opinions than the people who do. This might possibly create the unfortunate illusion that it's more unpopular than it actually is.
My simple argument for the new material (ninjas, katanas, other controversial things) is:
1. If someone really doesn't like something, they could request that their GM bans it for the game in question.
2. The flip side of #1, it seems unfair to me that said things should be completely unavailable due to some people's preferences. It's not Core material, anyway.
3. It's a new RPG, and Paizo's done a pretty good job so far. Maybe they could avoid the pitfalls 3.5 (apparently) fell into?I'm just posting this because I'm rather excited about the new Ultimate books, and I'm already planning a ninja character :).
NOTE: This isn't essentially a 'more options the better' argument. With these books, the only fantasy concepts I can think of that aren't possible to work with Pathfinder would by psionics. But that's another can of worms entirely.... (yes, I am pro-psionics)
If you want it in your campaigns, you will allow it. If you don't want it, don't allow it. The rules are well balanced, though give me a standard Core Rulebook character to play any day over any other class.
Though I like the word caster. It is awesome. Totally dictating how the spells are shaped and worked.
I think that it is important to have a vocal audience because it helps refine an idea into a killer piece of game. That said, I will admit to being frustrated at the message-boards in trying to mine through countless posts in order to find a vein of constructive criticism.
FWIW, I would have to set my tent in the camp of people who does not wholly like what he see coming to Ultimate Combat. I generally stay quiet about design for the most part. This is primarily because there are so many more people out there --both within Paizo and without-- that do a way better job at the designing end of the game than I do (TriOmegaZero, I am looking at you). I also signed on to support Paizo as an adventure writer, so it is in my best interest to embrace future products from Paizo and its 3PPs.
In the end, I'll support Ultimate Magic and Ultimate Combat, regardless of how well I like the finished product.
Andrew Gale
SAGAWORK STUDIOS
|
|
Meaning if they do not want to play in a game with such elements and the other players do, they can choose to leave the game.And then not have a Pathfinder game to play in at all. Depending on where you live, you might not have a lot of options.
Hopefully, everyone eventually ends up in the game they want to be in. But once new rules and classes get injected into the game, you are going to run into them in some way or another. The "just ignore it" argument doesn't quite work.
I am Banning all Archers in my Game!
The OP makes some really good points.
If you don't like the rules in a one of the RPG books, ignore them. If you're a player, make your opinion known to the GM--every GM I know that's any good does his or her best to cater to player interest. If you want to play with just the Core Rulebook, that's fine with us!
The idea with the rulebooks is to give folks more options that we feel could be fun and balanced. As with the APG, the new classes in UM and UC are concepts that we in the office would like to play with, and we think it's only fair to offer GMs and players the same opportunity. I believe firmly in the individual's ability to make decisions--for instance, while I vastly prefer low-level play, I'm happy to publish products supporting high-level folks, as it's my prerogative to decide when to cap my campaign. (Or, in a more general sense: I'm a vegetarian, but I don't campaign to keep others from eating meat, or stores from selling it.)
It's your table, your game, your setting. By all means, help us make the classes as balanced as we can possibly make them--that's what the playtest's for. But if you don't like the result, don't use them!
|
And then not have a Pathfinder game to play in at all. Depending on where you live, you might not have a lot of options.
Hopefully, everyone eventually ends up in the game they want to be in. But once new rules and classes get injected into the game, you are going to run into them in some way or another. The "just ignore it" argument doesn't quite work.
Yes, it does. If you don't want those rules in the game you play, then run the game yourself and make the rules. Otherwise, if your fellow players will not accommodate you, find a new game. If you can't find a new game, then you have to decide what is more important to you. Paizo is not responsible for your gaming group harmony. You are.
Paizo is not responsible for your gaming group harmony. You are.
This needs repeating.
|
|
I am Banning all Archers in my Game!Meaning if they do not want to play in a game with such elements and the other players do, they can choose to leave the game.And then not have a Pathfinder game to play in at all. Depending on where you live, you might not have a lot of options.
Hopefully, everyone eventually ends up in the game they want to be in. But once new rules and classes get injected into the game, you are going to run into them in some way or another. The "just ignore it" argument doesn't quite work.
I wanted to be a Druid anyway.
Also, I will now be ignoring rules I don't like.
Gunslinger, Ninja and Samurai strike me as odd choices of new classes to include in a martial handbook, being quite "un-fantasy" like or very narrow in concept (none of the three will be allowed at my table) while Magus absolutely makes sense in an arcane handbook.
More important is powercreep and watering down of roles that happened in 3.5 where with enough feats/abilities from the plethora of handbooks you could make a cheesy character with no weaknesses.
So far Paizo has managed to avoid that just fine.
Some may wish Paizo exerted the creative effort on something they will use.
|
|
Some may wish Paizo exerted the creative effort on something they will use.
That's a fair point, but "You can't please everyone all of the time". A lot of people want Ninja and Samurai. Far fewer people have a gun-using class as such a high priority, myself included, but there is a nation of gun-users in Paizo's proprietary setting. As someone who often runs games in Golarion, I am happy to see a good chunk of material (even if I think that material needs some work) to help me flesh that region out should I choose to use it and I suspect I am FAR from the only one who feels this way.
I'd say they're doing a pretty good job of pleasing the majority of people.
Some may wish Paizo exerted the creative effort on something they will use.That's a fair point, but "You can't please everyone all of the time". A lot of people want Ninja and Samurai. Far fewer people have a gun-using class as such a high priority, myself included, but there is a nation of gun-users in Paizo's proprietary setting. As someone who often runs games in Golarion, I am happy to see a good chunk of material (even if I think that material needs some work) to help me flesh that region out should I choose to use it and I suspect I am FAR from the only one who feels this way.
I'd say they're doing a pretty good job of pleasing the majority of people.
To me, this playtest is a hoot. The gunslinger isn't my choice, but the players I have are not saying I'm a nazi for not allowing it. They are finding out it is expensive, even with a leadership feat and gnome alchemist on your tab. Good deal!
The Samurai and Ninja, I can't wait to see them in action!
Some may wish Paizo exerted the creative effort on something they will use.
This assumes that creativity is just a resource that you can expend on what ever you want. My experience is that once i've got an idea in my head it won't go away until I do something with it. I really can't do anything else until I write it down or something. What's worse is that it tends to infect others around me. I have to imagine Paizo and other game companies experience the same problems at times.
Actually, with some minor tweaking the Samurai could easily be turned into an Elven Knight.
It's funny, I always associated samurai more with dwarves myself.
When I think of dwarven stuff (maybe just a prejudice from the campaign I play in) I think of the stereotype for German engineering. Solid, and function overwhelming form. The thought of everything being a work of art plays more into my thoughts on the elven stereotypes.
Which is a shame, since dwarves in stories are well know for their craftsmanship with stone and metal mediums.
Dont worry its not just noobs
Ive been playin since 2nd edition I love new classes
( I love new paizo play tested classes even more cause that means they are balanced and playable)
Dont worry its not just noobs
Ive been playin since 2nd edition I love new classes
( I love new paizo play tested classes even more cause that means they are balanced and playable)
Eventually a split occurred within the recent world history where the other classes turned against the warrior class, similar to what led to Japan's Meiji era. The seperatists actually embraced the use of guns though and managed to at least strike out on their own successfully, which in the long run, was a big blow to the traditionalist. So I had guns and Samurai all at once.
Elves, on the other hand, were recent arrivals. Immortal Fey lords and ladies trying to keep their realm connected to the mortal realm essential go to sleep and "dream" of a mortal life. Because the Elves at least know that, if they die, they will wake up in their real self, they tend to have wild behavior. It's sort of like how some people play video games, doing crazy things with out regard fo the character's life. Half Elves were the completely mortal children of elves.
I can't say that I've ever had a game where some one absolutely refused to play a game because of the material that was being used. I dislike Forgotten Realms yet I've played in games that've used it. I don't like the Summoner class yet have no problem playing in a game where another player is playing one. I find it odd that some one would react so forcefully to something in a game that they weren't running. I can see people reacting this way to playing an evil campaign, but not one with, for example, the Magus class in it.
No person is an island. Ideas for games or characters you play in a game do come from your brain, but always with a fair amount of outside inspiration to help it along.
I have a gun-slinging vampire villain in my game already. I have a player using a homebrew ninja class and two more players using samurai from the Oriental Adventures book (3rd Ed) in two separate games. This new material may not be incorporated, then again, it just might. To close myself off to the idea of something new is draconic in a bad way and a disservice to my players.
How's that for a high horse ;P
|
|
I am Banning all Archers in my Game!Meaning if they do not want to play in a game with such elements and the other players do, they can choose to leave the game.And then not have a Pathfinder game to play in at all. Depending on where you live, you might not have a lot of options.
Hopefully, everyone eventually ends up in the game they want to be in. But once new rules and classes get injected into the game, you are going to run into them in some way or another. The "just ignore it" argument doesn't quite work.
I wanted to be a Druid anyway.
Also, I will now be ignoring rules I don't like.
I honestly am not quite sure where most people must doing their gaming at. I have gamed for about 30 years, and I generally find some gaming friends around to play with. As friends we generally come to a consensus pretty easily without fist fights, protests in streets and riots.
90% of the time we wind up hearing something like "Hey, I'm running Kingmaker, wanna play?" Generally I don't hear many people reply with "Oh yes, but ONLY if you run it with all elves, oriental and steam punk elements. WHAT!?! You REFUSE to submit to my DEMANDS! I shall NEVER acknowledge your existence again you dire bastard from hell. I hope you DIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEE!"
Instead I usually hear "Yeah okay sounds fun." End of story.
The ones who freak out... I think they play World of Warcraft anyway and think REAL RPGs are on the computer...
:-)
[this is a humorous post to point out that things are not as dire as they may seem]