That is a legitimate complaint, and should be brought up in the AP/PFS forums.So far it has been limited to monsters {something they had always reprinted before, yes even open content} But they have started not reprinting non core items.
Honesty it was, and the folks who complained where shouted down as bringing up something that was not an issue or being to poor to buy AP's anyhow.
Anyhow It does not belong here I was just correcting you on that. It was easy to miss as it was buried in another topic and just put in under the radar with no warning. So many folks missed it.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
2. A big book of useful NPCs. In fact, I could handle more than one of these. One with humans of various classes and levels, one that has various humanoid races at different classes and levels, with lots of campaign niches covered.And even though I really am not a fan of expanded what gets fully stated out and what doesn't in the APs, in a product like this, I'd be fine with a 15th level cavalier that just has his stats and not full explanations of his abilities.
It seems like there's been two books like this in the relatively recent past plus the NPCs in the GMG. Is there something missing between those volumes that you think still need to be covered? Just curious - I'm pretty burned out on that particular category of books.
I'd like to see Paizo return to providing material that can be used after character creation.
Doesnt the Pathfinder Player Companion line fit this?
For me, the game is about more than building PCs and building NPCs to fight those PCs. Adventure content is what brought me to Pathfinder, and I think that "rule" books can be more than just character options.
Between the Adventure Paths (as of present there are seven and a half of them available) and the GameMastery/ Pathfinder stand alone modules as well as the Pathfinder Society mods which with just a little tweaking can be used as a standard mini adventure I dont see any particular lack of adventures. If that's what you meant by adventure content, that is.
I understand we're locked in for Ultimate Combat. After that, please, let's get back to more expansive, campaign-based material.
On the flip side, I dont particularly care for setting books. I LOVE that Golarion is fleshed out in the AP's as opposed to me having to sit and read setting books for each area. Discovering the world via the adventures has always felt more organic and less of a power dump of information.
New player options are not intrinsically a bad thing, but I would rather get them spread out in smaller books so that I can process them into my campaign. With these huge player option tomes, it really amounts to having another 300 page pile of rules to familiarize.
Youre giving the impression that you sit down with a book like UM and attempt to commit it to memory and are beholden to retain that knowledge to satisfy your players. I would submit that that way lies madness. Personally that's not what I handle it. I tend to skim the book for things that might interest me and revisit them later at my leisure. If one of my players wants to use something from the book they usually are courteous enough to tell me in advance so that I can go over what they want to use and we can discuss it, usually during e-mail.
For me it's never having to learn and support the contents of a 300 page book. It's about having to support parts of these books a little bit at a time. As a DM that's pretty much the only way that it's going to work. for me.
Who feels as I do?
Obviously I do not.
Who feels differently and why?
Obviously I do. Mostly because I think it's a little selfish to petition to take options away from a population just because you place a lot of pressure on yourself to absorb every rulebook (all THREE of them so far, Im including UC here,) to satisfy the whim of your players. YOU are a player too! Even if you are also the DM. You need to make sure that YOURE comfortable with the pace that things are introduced in your game. If your players are rational people they'll need to understand that just because they go and buy a book doesn't mean that you are obligated to use it in the game that you're running right now. At the least they're going to have to understand that they may have to wait until you can take a look at what they want.
I hope I'm not coming across like a jerk here. It's just that I'm of the mind If something is available and you dont want it, it's just easier to NOT BUY IT and tell your players that "I'm not supporting any Paizo splatbooks" than to try and convince Paizo NOT to make anymore splat books for the people who would buy it.
I think that with the success of the APG that there are an overwhelming amount of people who DO want these books otherwise I dont think that we'd be getting a UM and a UC.
It seems like there's been two books like this in the relatively recent past plus the NPCs in the GMG. Is there something missing between those volumes that you think still need to be covered? Just curious - I'm pretty burned out on that particular category of books.
Fair enough, but the NPC books are better for "the PCs wander off the beaten path and I need a gladiator now" kind of use than, "I'd rather not have to stat up NPCs for a campaign, so I'm hoping there is one that's just right for what I want."
It may not appeal to everyone, but take the "King" from the GMG. I wouldn't mind seeing entries for young, untried kings that ascended the throne early (low level characters, but perhaps "over geared" for their NPC level of equipment), wizard kings, and kings that don't have an overabundance of combat experience (only aristocrat levels, for example).
I'd like to see the difference between human bandits, orc bandits, and gnoll bandits, for example, and how you can use different feats and skills to show the cultural bias that each race might have and bring to the profession.
In other words, yes, the given options are useful as tools, and if you are only ever using them as tools, there are a good array of them. But if you really want to not worry much about generating any NPCs, there are still some places where the NPCs can be fleshed out and customized.
As I said, it could be I'm completely off my rocker on this one, and it wouldn't sell, so that's why I'm hoping that if people really wouldn't pick up a book like this, they will chime in and say so.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting. I wonder if that type of thing would work as a template system. So, you'd have generic bandit stats and then racial packages to provide for customization. That'd let you cram a bunch into a single page.
I'm not rabidly against NPCs, I mostly just wondered what else was left. Now I get where you're coming from.
2. A big book of useful NPCs. In fact, I could handle more than one of these. One with humans of various classes and levels, one that has various humanoid races at different classes and levels, with lots of campaign niches covered.
Have you checked out the Rival Guide? It isn't as big as it could be, but if it does well they may be convinced to do more. 40 NPCs from levels 3 to 20.
I would usually be quite happy to be buying more player options books, but things like this make me somewhat hesitant to do so.
While Paizo doesn't produce that many hardcovers (3-4 each year), they still produce as many books in total every month as WotC did. Since they have fewer employees (I think), that means the workload per book is higher. Editing mistakes, references to things that were cut or changed, and unclear rules are the main things that might be eliminated if even more time was spent on the books. So, it might be a good idea for Paizo to slow down in general, not just with their player options.
Interesting. I wonder if that type of thing would work as a template system. So, you'd have generic bandit stats and then racial packages to provide for customization. That'd let you cram a bunch into a single page.
I'm not rabidly against NPCs, I mostly just wondered what else was left. Now I get where you're coming from.
I'd actually go the other way with it. Unlike the 3.x DMG, I'd like to see a "dwarf rogue" statblock that was designed from the ground up with the assumption that a dwarf rogue has a different feel and personality than a human rogue than a halfling rogue. Painstakingly crafted, detailed statblocks, instead of the bare minimum.
I would enjoy just reading such a book, and I would certainly find use for the statblocks in my game. Because let's face it, a well-made statblock tells a story, and those stories can be as interesting as a monster writeup for sure.
Now that the pace of the thread has simmered down a bit (my exams went well BTW) I want to make some things clear.
I solicited people's opinions, including those that disagree with my post.
The one thing that outrages me is the number for people who have inserted arguments that nobody was making into the conversation, and in some cases continue to do so.
There are so many constructive ways to participate, this kind of thing was just completely unnecessary. In the cases where my own words were paraphrased or distorted into something I wholly disagree with, I am actually personally insulted.
I am very happy to see that despite this pointless attempt to sabotage a legitimate multi-faceted discussion, creativity has prevailed and we've seen some awesome book ideas. I only hope that we can keep the animosity to a minimum so that maybe, just maybe, the Paizo folks can stomach reading this thread long enough to harvest the creativity within.
Thanks for sharing, everyone!
I'd actually go the other way with it. Unlike the 3.x DMG, I'd like to see a "dwarf rogue" statblock that was designed from the ground up with the assumption that a dwarf rogue has a different feel and personality than a human rogue than a halfling rogue. Painstakingly crafted, detailed statblocks, instead of the bare minimum.
That's kind of what I was thinking when I threw in the bit about gnoll bandits. If you take a bandit, especially a chaotic aligned bandit, you don't think of co-ordinated attacks. On the other hand, gnoll bandits with teamwork feats would make perfect sense given their pack mentality and their dependance on one another, and general hatred of doing too much work alone without some help.
I'm not upset. I just feel the weight of Ultimate Magic's release bearing down on my campaign, and I realize that I've hit my personal limit.
I'd like to see Paizo return to providing material that can be used after character creation. For me, the game is about more than building PCs and building NPCs to fight those PCs. Adventure content is what brought me to Pathfinder, and I think that "rule" books can be more than just character options.
I understand we're locked in for Ultimate Combat. After that, please, let's get back to more expansive, campaign-based material.
New player options are not intrinsically a bad thing, but I would rather get them spread out in smaller books so that I can process them into my campaign. With these huge player option tomes, it really amounts to having another 300 page pile of rules to familiarize.
I don't even have adversarial players (although pity those who do when a book like this comes out) ... it's a simple matter that my players WILL read this book, and want the things in it, so I more or less have to read it also to keep them happy.
I know that James Jacobs has voiced a similar opinion, and so I am content in the knowledge that I'm not out in the cold on this issue. Still, I think feedback about the product lines is really important, so I created this thread for people to express their opinions.
Who feels as I do?
Who feels differently and why?
It's all opinion, so please state yours and leave other people to theirs.
Haven't read throught the entire thread, so if I've missed some new developments, I appologize.
I suppose I feel slightly differently in that the rules for Pathfinder started out huge and relatively complex and have only grown moreso with each new book of rules, albiet prodominantly on the PC side of the screen. I wouldn't be so concerned if not for the feeling that a large percentage of the new material in the later books appears to be rules for the sake of rules or new classes for the sake of new classes. There are a few gems here and there, (like rules for chases for instance), but there's not enough "gold" in each new book to warrant me to buy it lately, and I stopped buying rulebooks after the APG, which was a sort of hit-and-miss product for me.
I like rules and am not shy at having lots of them in fact if they bring new ways of playing a fantasy campaign to the table. But I like the whole to mesh together; not be new sub-systems added on to the plethora of existing sub-systems. I don't consider having a slew of new classes or a new way to cast spells or a new way to make an attack to be ground-breaking territory that will propel my games to new heights of fun.
But, for instance, rules for chases... now there's something I don't have to ad hoc when that situation comes up anymore.
It's not a ridiculous strawman, it's a legitimate point that's being made by using absurdity. It's directed at those that have posted "I'm not buying UM or UC or any other player option books past APG". If that is your choice, then you are already a non-customer. Paizo has to listen to the people actually spending money.Can we not use ridiculous strawmen? So far this thread has done well avoiding a fight, but here you're actually inviting one.
kthxbai.
I'm still a customer, I'll purchase Adventure modules on a case by case basis, I'll purchase flip mats, item cards, bestiaries and other products just not over bloat rules books unless something really catches the eye.
V3.5 splat books became abundant, silly, erroneous and rule breakers, I bought them all until the very last. Once the tiny options were integrated to my campaign it became a logistical nightmare with pre printed modules, Npc stat blocks were rendered almost useless, spell lists and other options required tweaking or re writing just to challenge the players because the RAW encounters were de valued!
If the new Ultimate book rules are written into the future products in a way that you don't require the actual hardcover to run the specific encounter or challenge then so be it, that would be fine.
Example :- xxx can be found in product xxx on page xx this provides a xxx bonus to xxx.
But if it forces you to purchase the product then that is a cynical marketing tactic which I won't pander to!
Example :- xxx can be found in product xxx on page xx
NYYYYYYYOOOOOOOOOOOOOORGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!
I'm not upset. I just feel the weight of Ultimate Magic's release bearing down on my campaign, and I realize that I've hit my personal limit. (snipped for length)
I feel a bit the same way.
Generally, I am not a fan of splatbooks. I don't have time to read a million books and figure out how they may or may not fit my world. The thing I truly hate hearing most coming out of my players' mouths is, "Can I have X from this book that isn't Core?" Because it means more. work. for. me. That is all. Usually the requests are actually quite reasonable. But I still have to figure out if it all works etc. and it's a pain in the rear end (especially if I'm just learning a system).
THAT SAID: The APG was a big fat exception for me. I didn't love every page, but the value of most of what was offered made me excited both as a player and as a GM because I could see clearly---for the most part---how certain things could be incorporated into play and I liked the options they offered, and everything seems relatively well balanced. And it gives both me and the players more choices (I love the additional combat maneuvers added because it actually helps me as a GM make a call about a weird maneuver might work). But even then I still have to go through and go--this, works; this, gotta go. More work. More potential dealing with players who want X. "Say no." Of course. But unfortunately players are free willed creatures with whom you generally try to keep amicable relations with, and that conversation of saying no can sap a lot of energy out of you, especially if you want it to end with both of you still relatively happy. But---the APG content---worth the hassle for me. I'm actually not using it for my current campaign, because it came out mid campaign with characters already built and we were still getting used to core Pathfinder, but I definitely will use it in the future.
I'm not so sure about Ultimate Magic or Ultimate Combat. While I trust Paizo will deliver good content, I still have a low saturation point for this kind of material. Right now, I'm pretending they don't even exist--the campaign I'm running is one session or so away from ending anyway. I may eventually buy the .pdfs and take a look at them that way, but I'm not even planning to buy them hardcover (unless I REALLY like what I see when I get the .pdfs). Most of my interest is in very specific things--I want to see what, if any, Divine Prestige classes they put in Ultimate Magic. And I'm interested in Ultimate Combat's Gunslinger for a future steampunkish campaign setting idea I have at some point. Stuff for very specific uses, not general, standard fantasy campaign stuff.
I absolutely understand why other people like player option splats, especially when I myself can get occasionally excited about stuff like the APG. I absolutely understand why players ask for X in X book, because it's new and exciting and helps add to their concept (hopefully), and I've felt the same way about certain characters of mine. But I also feel a lot of... weariness about player option books. My initial, instinctive reaction to hearing about the Ultimate Books was, "Oh no." (And I know for some, that first reaction was "yay!". I am different from other people. Other people are different from me. This happens from time to time in the universe, from what I understand.)
So what would I like to see for new books instead?
- In depth, campaign world building guides. The GMG brushes the surface of subjects that could go much deeper. Especially a urban adventure book---one of the few 3.5 supplements I adored was Cityscape, and I think Paizo could take a general concept of a book like that and run with it in a whole, exciting new direction.
- Little booklet/.pdfs that just detail a location. Not an adventure or module, just some maps and description of an area that a GM could throw into an adventure. Maybe include some NPCs to go with it. NO idea what the saleability of something like that would be, but this is a wishlist, so.
- A monster design guide. This could actually also be a player option book that shows how to make "monstrous PCs" if such a thing would be doable in a non-ridiculous way.
- Big ol' book o' generic NPCs (could also be usable by players for ready-made cohorts and followers)---of ALL levels and CRs. I think there was a Golarion specific something that came out like this already, but it only had low CR NPCs in it IIRC so I didn't get it because I was (am) running a high level campaign. Plus, my campaign was in my own world so Golarion specific stuff is useless to me. (I understand I am totally in the minority here.)
|
+1 to the OP.
I've hit my limit as well... well at least my wife's limit anyhow, as she's mad a D&D again due to all the monthly purchases. I was able to fool her for a bit saying "It's not D&D... D&D is OVER honey! this is Pathfinder and they're just publishing a couple of books to replace the player's handbook and monster manual with new better rules... I swearzzz!"
So wow... that was two years ago I guess.... O_O
It's not a ridiculous strawman, it's a legitimate point that's being made by using absurdity. It's directed at those that have posted "I'm not buying UM or UC or any other player option books past APG". If that is your choice, then you are already a non-customer. Paizo has to listen to the people actually spending money.Can we not use ridiculous strawmen? So far this thread has done well avoiding a fight, but here you're actually inviting one.
kthxbai.
I'm still a customer, I'll purchase Adventure modules on a case by case basis, I'll purchase flip mats, item cards, bestiaries and other products just not over bloat rules books unless something really catches the eye.
And that was the point I was making with the absurdity. You state you are a customer, but no longer of the rules crunch, only the Adventure Modules, Flip Mats, Item cards, and Bestiaries. My point was, at this point, you have self-removed yourself from the "Customer of RPG Core Books" market. It is not that you don't buy anything, but you do not buy the things you are saying you don't want anyway. So... as a business, would I listen to the person who has said "I am satisfied now" and not make more books, or would I listen to the current customers who are spending money on the product line, and have evinced every intention to continue spending money?
When a company does a market survey, they don't ask people who don't buy widgets what they would like in a widget. They ask people who buy widgets.
Ah yes, Anti-Player Entitlement Movement.
We meet again.
-1 to the OP and -1 to everyone who hates more options. This was a ridiculous argument back when the APG came out and it remains so. The success of these books speaks volumes (and many more to come). Players, on average, outnumber GM's 4 to 1. So who do you think Paizo will cater to? You think you can fabricate arguments and shake your tiny fist to get what you want? Really?
No one can play a Summoner in my games. I even warn Conjurers ahead of time to be wary. I don't tolerate players who take a long time on their turns, but I also don't feel the need to be a jerk about it. Everyone understands why and no one pushes the issue. If someone became convinced that a Summoner was the only way they could ever know joy again, then I would discuss it with them, but probably still say No Thank You.
I have no ability to sympathize with GM's who take issue with more splat books. You don't need to carry the books around, memorize them or even buy them! Heck, most of what Paizo publishes ends up on d20pfsrd.com or the Archives of Nethys. There are even multiple wiki's dedicated to Golarion specific stuff. If I wanted to be a mooch (or, to be fair, if I suddenly found myself jobless) I'd resort to online references and call it good at that.
Some people have asked that a page number be included when a non-core book is referenced. I half agree, the book should be referenced, maybe even stick the rules in a sidebar, but you can still Google most of what's in these books and find an answer.
I GM with a laptop and never need to carry books around. Most of my players have laptops. I suppose if your group consisted of people with no access to such technology or if your riding these forums on a library computer then you might have a legitimate argument.
Oh wait, no you don't. Regardless of your situation in life if you want something bad enough you will make the sacrifices to get it. Otherwise you're only complaining to get some attention because you can't have what you want handed to you.
These books are necessary to the continued survival of this company. Books like this will continue to be published. If you don't like them then stop being wishy washy and say NO to your players every once in awhile.
Believe it or not, they'll actually respect you for it.
NOTE: I am obliviously very angry about this thread. I am angry that people can be so selfish and obtuse when trying to get their way. You don't have to buy, memorize or even reference everything Paizo releases, but telling this company to stop making excellent products is like telling someone to kill themselves.
When Paizo stops making quality products, people will stop buying them. Maybe then you can all have your own way.
If you are obviously very angry, you might want to take a step back and relax. This is something on which people have strong opinions both ways and I don't think it won't do much good if one puts out posts that are full of emotion. I would suggest you hold off on that post and pull it back to look at it when you feel less angry about it.
stuff
+1 to most all of this. I don't necessarily agree with the way you run y our game...BUT THATS FINE. I wouldn't dream of FORCING you to allow options you think are disruptive to you GM style. Nor would I try to hinder someone who likes all those things.
The AP/PFS issue is a legitimate one, but still one where I think the anti-options crowd are in the wrong. Other than that leave it up to the individual GMs and gaming groups to decide what is allowed and what isn't.
Everything you buy is either fluff or rules. Fluff doesn't really sell unless it has some crunch or rules or options packaged with it. I remember people complaining when 3.0 came out about how its a miniature game now and blah blah blah grognard BS. You can roleplay in any RPG, from Paladium to Amber to going outside and playing cowboys and indians. I want rules, I want structure, I want cerebral puzzles and challenges and as a player I want options. Everything else comes from the imaginations of the players and the GM.
So when people start complaining that Pathfinder is a rules heavy game...it seems really intuitively obvious for it to be so, and oxymoronic to say so. Chess is a rules heavy game. You can't move a knight straight forward for instance or capture your own piece. No one complains about this fact, because that's how you play the game. There's two parts to RPGs, the roleplaying and the game, and it's up to each table to decide what balance is best, but I personally think they are both very important.
I had a situation with someone who was insulting PF for not allowing him to do what he wanted. I said, hey, if you want to do that find a way to do it in the rules, and was accused of being too much of a rules lawyer. Look, if you want to freeform roleplay, if that is your thing, more power to you. This just might not be the game for you, however.
Where is this rant going? I'm just sort of sick of the anti-gamist, anti-rules snobbery and grognardism in this thread and on the boards in general. I know I'm happier as a player when I have more, cooler, better, shinier options. I also know that as a GM I have the most fun when my players are having fun. Just keep that in mind. It's a few bucks or a few hours perusing a webpage, but in the end it is worth it to be able to say YES to a player than NO.
If you are obviously very angry, you might want to take a step back and relax. This is something on which people have strong opinions both ways and I don't think it won't do much good if one puts out posts that are full of emotion. I would suggest you hold off on that post and pull it back to look at it when you feel less angry about it.
Heheh. I found the juxtaposition of your post's content and your avatar to be rather amusing.
In any case, I remain confused by what the people do want who don't want more books, and if they're not intending to buy more books why they care?
And yes, I do understand the concerns of the Adventure Path crowd - I just don't agree with their concerns. Sorry :)
I,personally,can buy one ultimate magic-sized hardcover a month.Me and my players play a lot,and we prefer to generate a character concept,play it,and forget about it.At least for a couple of years.Right now there is still not enough options for me and my group.
Base book was good,APG was awesome,UM-good(i didn't like words of power,but all else is good)UC-remains to be seen.
But at the end of 3.5 cycle i had 8 class books,4 races books,4 elemental books,1 spell-dedicated book,Icarnum,Tome of Battle,Tome of Magic and about 100 Dragon magazines.It's like,what,20 hardcovers?
I still have to reuse them,but i don't want to.
I want new Pathfinder content,because it's mostly BETTER.
So,please,MORE player-option mega-books.
Preferably one per quarter for at least five years.
Ah yes, Anti-Player Entitlement Movement.
Except, no, that's not what I'm saying at all.
And I've said it several times. I have no adversarial players and I don't give a damn about controlling access to powers.
You guys keep fighting imaginary opponents while the rest of us try to come up with something creative.
Seriously, having my intentions misrepresented as some overplayed crap from the WotC era is really, really driving me nuts.
Personally, I believe that if you don't like the books you don't have to buy them or use them. I would like to see more content for GM's to use. I don't want future books like UM and UC to be replaced with campaign specific rulebooks. Personally, I GM my own campaign world and don't have much use for things of that nature. Although I welcome gunslingers, I won't use them in my current campaign. Although, I'm sure I'll be running another campaign that will allow gunslingers, ninjas, etc. in the future. Why deny me such rules when I'm perfectly willing to use them. Can't we all just get along? :D
I have always done my own world from scratch, and yet I love all the campaign sourcebooks - they provide a wealth of material (and the rules content is good as well).
Where is this rant going? I'm just sort of sick of the anti-gamist, anti-rules snobbery and grognardism in this thread and on the boards...
What. the. hell. dude. What the hell. Who said any of this? I'm reaching critical mass here.
THE WHOLE THREAD IS A PETITION FOR MORE RULES — JUST NOT EXCLUSIVELY CHARACTER OPTIONS.
<ragequit>
I completely agree with the OP; the GMs for our group are talking about not allowing UM and UC because it gets into the 3.5 rule bloat we were happy to escape with Pathfinder. And for all the "no but really we want more options" people, you all chose to escape 3.5 for here too. APG/GMG were about enough for us.
The pace is too fast for Paizo as well - I think in general I felt that a lot in the APG needed to get baked a little more, and a lot of the mini rules sets in the GMG are really just too mini to be useful. Take your time, make it better rather than higher quantity. From the previews it doesn't look like this is on an upswing (the gun rules, ick, and weird classes I would generally not allow in my average campaign - should be more of an specialized OA book for ninja and samurai). Lots of content plus inconsistent quality leads to the 3.5e malaise.
Here's what I'd like to see out of Paizo instead.
- More NPC books
- "Book of Lairs" miniadventures
- "Dungeon Magazine" style short adventures
- more/better modules, especially ones that are designed with an eye to plugging into the APs
- Equipment books, but way better thought out and edited than Adventurer's Armory
- Dungeon Master's Design Kit - like the 1e one, just rip it off and reprint it even.
I wouldn't mind an NPC book where kings are not level 20 and run of the mill city guards and pick pockets are not level 5. I know the game goes to level 20 and all but 90% of humanoids would be less then 5th level, heck most under 3rd.
I'm posting from a player's perspective, not a GM's perspective. From a GM's point of view, I can see how all these player option books coming out one after the other could be intimidating.
However, keep in mind that most options in these books won't be used by your players, and the only ones you'll really need to be familiar with are the options your players actually want to use.
Speaking for myself, the issue I have is not that there are too many options, it's the opposite: most of the feats/archetypes/options that I saw in the PF Corebook and APG sucked. In fact, and this has been a failing of D&D since 3E (and still a failing in 4E as well): about 4 out of every 5 feats in the core books are either situationally or marginally useful, or not at all.
So for me, playing a Fighter, it's very easy choosing which options I take: the ones that can be used fairly regularly and don't suck, which is a very small minority of what's available. Unfortunately, even though PF is vastly superior to 3E or 3.5E, it still falls victim to the old problem of if you're not a caster, you can't do anything cool.
4E addresses this issue(please don't flame me, I'm not trolling anyone, just expressing a viewpoint since I play both systems) with the powers you can choose. A martial character can choose a combination of feats and attack powers, which makes them as cool to play as casters.
I'm still hoping that PF will introduce some cool "weapon styles" or "fighting styles" with some cool attacks/maneuvers which can complement feats and add something equivalent to the power system for martial characters in 4E. I haven't heard anything like that coming for the UC book, so probably not I guess.
|
|
Ultimate Combat will really show what happens. If that book is poorly balanced, then I'll stop buying. It's about quality, not quantity. I stopped buying WotC 3.5 when the Completes had tons of crap in them.
Rules bloat will happen. I'm more interested to see how much balance Paizo can maintain as I don't think they do a good job at it with non-3.5 related content (like all of Core basically).
Realizing that my earlier post makes me sound like a bit of a naysayer, let me add one other thing: I will continue to buy other Paizo products, even if I am not buying every hardback release in print.
The philosophy exhibited in the AP line, for example, is that content from the hardbacks will be used and supported, without full reprints of rules explanations for a given feat, spell, race, or character class - but because all of this is open content, it's easily accessible online.
That means that, even if I don't own Ultimate Wombat, if one book of Jade Regent features a super awesome encounter with a half-fiend wombat lich antipaladin that uses UC feats and spells from UM that I direly want to run against my players, I can still buy that AP volume and get full wombat rules from an internet resource.
I have full rules support, and Paizo has sold a module. Win, and win.
EDIT: And I don't have to let my players run wombat liches just 'cuz I use them. Double win.
I think I'm done GMing Pathfinder anyway except for PbP APs.
I don't have time to run Pathfinder games even when I'm unemployed. If I'm going to run stuff in the future it will be SW or FATE based. I love Paizo, I love Pathfinded, and I love the APs, I just don't have time to run this stuff as a 40yo father of nearly teenage boys.
Realizing that my earlier post makes me sound like a bit of a naysayer, let me add one other thing: I will continue to buy other Paizo products, even if I am not buying every hardback release in print.
The philosophy exhibited in the AP line, for example, is that content from the hardbacks will be used and supported, without full reprints of rules explanations for a given feat, spell, race, or character class - but because all of this is open content, it's easily accessible online.
That means that, even if I don't own Ultimate Wombat, if one book of Jade Regent features a super awesome encounter with a half-fiend wombat lich antipaladin that uses UC feats and spells from UM that I direly want to run against my players, I can still buy that AP volume and get full wombat rules from an internet resource.
I have full rules support, and Paizo has sold a module. Win, and win.
EDIT: And I don't have to let my players run wombat liches just 'cuz I use them. Double win.
+1....though I love character options and want to see more. I don't even consider them rules bloat as their are usualy built on existing rules. But I agree with the above post in that because a company produces something not for you...how is it bad? Why the hate(from some not Evil Lincoln) or anger if they published a book that you guys don't want?
I am asking this honestly? I like everything Pazio puts out...except the modules(I perfer 100 timess to run my own stuff) so I don't need them. And I would ignore the APs except there have important infomation about the world I need? Where is the indignation about this 'dishonest' policy? Is this not similiar to what they do if they start publishing non-core stuff in the AP?
The reason I am not outrage by this is they do put out good product...but I understand they have to make money.
Anyway why is it big deal that the published a npc out of a non-core material...just change it. A Ninja becomes a rogue...and Gunslinger become a ranged focus fighter or ranger...etc. I mean do people run everything as written?
Wow..... that was a lot to sift through. Here's my 2cp, as both a GM and a Player:
I love options. I love the APG. My favorite PCs/NPCs to make and run are ones that play up an interesting concept, something a little outside the box. With more character options, more feats, more archetypes, I can customize a character into just about anything I want. I'll be getting UM (it's already paid for and I have player who desperately wants to try out a Magus), and most likely will pick up UC.
That said, I'll be happy if Paizo really is done with big Player Option books for a while. I'd rather see books that go in depth into the crunch of the game, itself. I love the idea of an in depth look at skills. I think Craft needs to be seriously looked at, even if it's only to publish an alternate system. Also, I run a homebrew game, so the more generic the setting, the better. I did buy the Inner Sea Guide, but mostly to mine it for ideas.
Some other books I'd like to see:
- A Big Book of NPCs. I'd like it to have other races statted up, as well, not just Human Monk 5, Human Fighter 4/ Rogue2, etc.
- A guide to sliding the power scale up and down. I'm not sure who said it first on here, but I like the idea of having a book of mechanics to take your game Epic, or keep it low level like E6.
- MOAR MONSTORZZ! I love me some Bestiaries.
- I'd put in a vote for a Kingmaker-style kingdom builder source book, but it looks like a 3PP has that handled, and handled well.
-A PFRPG version of Unearthed Arcana. I still use my old one for fleshing out weird ideas/homerules.
Like I said earlier, I love options. I'd just like to see Paizo take a look at options for the actual game itself, not just player options.
-The Eel
(sorry if this rambles... it's been a long day and reading this thread fried my brain)
One thing I will say is that many of the GMs on here complaining about player options seem fairly selfish to me. I mean, I don't hear them complaining about Paizo publishing Bestiary 2, or another module, or another setting book.
Many of the negative posters on here seem like the kid who has all the toys and plays by himself, then screams at and hits any other kid that wants to play.
|
|
One thing I will say is that many of the GMs on here complaining about player options seem fairly selfish to me. I mean, I don't hear them complaining about Paizo publishing Bestiary 2, or another module, or another setting book.Many of the negative posters on here seem like the kid who has all the toys and plays by himself, then screams at and hits any other kid that wants to play.
Well I will be the first.I as a GM love,buy and own every Paizo Pathfinder product for 3.5 an the PF system and I am not complaining about anything that they produce, my complain is about the speed at which it is produced.This doesn't come for a situation of not having the funds, it comes from the aspect of absorbing all the info and wondering if the well is going to run dry in the near future and turn in to the pit of ugliness that 3.5 became with all of the stuff produced.
Well I will be the first.I as a GM love,buy and own every Paizo Pathfinder product for 3.5 an the PF system and I am not complaining about anything that they produce, my complain is about the speed at which it is produced.This doesn't come for a situation of not having the funds, it comes from the aspect of absorbing all the info and wondering if the well is going to run dry in the near future and turn in to the pit of ugliness that 3.5 became with all of the stuff produced.
One thing I will say is that many of the GMs on here complaining about player options seem fairly selfish to me. I mean, I don't hear them complaining about Paizo publishing Bestiary 2, or another module, or another setting book.Many of the negative posters on here seem like the kid who has all the toys and plays by himself, then screams at and hits any other kid that wants to play.
I find this odd, since WoTC was producing 15 books a year there toward the end across all it's lines. That is, a book every 3 weeks just about.
Paizo is producing a book every four months or so. APG landed 6 - 8 months ago. The Core Rules about 8 or 9 months before that. UM and UC are landing 3 - 4 months apart, but that's almost required because UM and UC are the equivalent of all the Completes rolled up together. So, we'll get UM and UC, and then B3. Then it'll be next march or so before we get another crunch book. So the next crunch book beyond UM/UC is a year away.
Not sure how that is 'Too fast'.
|
|
Well I will be the first.I as a GM love,buy and own every Paizo Pathfinder product for 3.5 an the PF system and I am not complaining about anything that they produce, my complain is about the speed at which it is produced.This doesn't come for a situation of not having the funds, it comes from the aspect of absorbing all the info and wondering if the well is going to run dry in the near future and turn in to the pit of ugliness that 3.5 became with all of the stuff produced.
One thing I will say is that many of the GMs on here complaining about player options seem fairly selfish to me. I mean, I don't hear them complaining about Paizo publishing Bestiary 2, or another module, or another setting book.Many of the negative posters on here seem like the kid who has all the toys and plays by himself, then screams at and hits any other kid that wants to play.
I find this odd, since WoTC was producing 15 books a year there toward the end across all it's lines. That is, a book every 3 weeks just about.
Paizo is producing a book every four months or so. APG landed 6 - 8 months ago. The Core Rules about 8 or 9 months before that. UM and UC are landing 3 - 4 months apart, but that's almost required because UM and UC are the equivalent of all the Completes rolled up together. So, we'll get UM and UC, and then B3. Then it'll be next march or so before we get another crunch book. So the next crunch book beyond UM/UC is a year away.
Not sure how that is 'Too fast'.
I am speaking of the 3 to 4 books a month spread across all of the different lines. Players Companions,Campaign Setting,Modules,Adventure Paths and then Core on top of that. Luckily I pretty much skipped 3.5 playing other systems.
Realizing that my earlier post makes me sound like a bit of a naysayer, let me add one other thing: I will continue to buy other Paizo products, even if I am not buying every hardback release in print.
The philosophy exhibited in the AP line, for example, is that content from the hardbacks will be used and supported, without full reprints of rules explanations for a given feat, spell, race, or character class - but because all of this is open content, it's easily accessible online.
That means that, even if I don't own Ultimate Wombat, if one book of Jade Regent features a super awesome encounter with a half-fiend wombat lich antipaladin that uses UC feats and spells from UM that I direly want to run against my players, I can still buy that AP volume and get full wombat rules from an internet resource.
I have full rules support, and Paizo has sold a module. Win, and win.
EDIT: And I don't have to let my players run wombat liches just 'cuz I use them. Double win.
+1 Very much
I think what EL was voicing, and somehow got misread by half the people posting as some kind of player vs GM thing, is that he is experiencing "System Mastery Ubiquity, Resulting in Fatigue Syndrome". It is a mild depression that is caused by the feeling that the density of rules (which some people are calling "options" or "optional rules") has increased beyond the point at which he can remain interested. Its a little like finishing a 12 course meal, and then someone bringing out 14 more courses. Sure, its delicious, and you can say your full, but a certain point just looking at the amount of food still in front of you starts making you ill.
If feeling SMURFy makes you feel small and a little blue, you sometimes want to know if anyone else feels that way. Don't begrudge someone for wondering if not wanting "more" is reasonable.
Edit- while I shamelessly tried to get that acronym to work, I am not trying to be sarcastic or anything. I sympathize with my esteemed GM. And this comes from someone who loves rules crunch. We play a complicated game that we all have had years to digest. Everyone has got their limit, and some day realizes their game is complicated enough. If you have not reached that point, more power (er rules?) to you. But in the end its about fun, and more rules/books != more fun by their nature.
Ah yes, Anti-Player Entitlement Movement.
We meet again.
-1 to the OP and -1 to everyone who hates more options.
I don't think most people here are saying they hate more options. I, for one, love options. I just think I enjoy them more when they're spread out a bit more.
If Ultimate Combat comes out in October, that'll be three big books full of juicy options in 12 months. According to other people in this thread, Paizo has indicated that there won't be another book like that for quite a while. Personally, I'd rather have three big books spread out evenly over two years rather than three books in year 1 and nothing in year 2.
Hey, I like James Bond movies too, but three in one year would have me saying "Enough already, give it a rest for a while".
Ah yes, Anti-Player Entitlement Movement.
We meet again.
-1 to the OP and -1 to everyone who hates more options.
I don't think most people here are saying they hate more options. I, for one, love options. I just think I enjoy them more when they're spread out a bit more.
If Ultimate Combat comes out in October, that'll be three big books full of juicy options in 12 months. According to other people in this thread, Paizo has indicated that there won't be another book like that for quite a while. Personally, I'd rather have three big books spread out evenly over two years rather than three books in year 1 and nothing in year 2.
Hey, I like James Bond movies too, but three in one year would have me saying "Enough already, give it a rest for a while".
OTOH my martial class players would feel kind of neglected if there is a pause of a year between the caster and martial sourcebooks.
|
Yeah the APG was my last "option" purchase. I had my fill of the tidal wave of "cool" PC options years ago.WHY DO YOU HATE PAIZO?!?
I don't hate Paizo, I sport Big Blue on my right shoulder, I love everything else they do. Another part of it is I just don't have the funds to keep up with 2-3 new source books a year. With my schedule it's best to keep the rules simple. The APGs, and other fine products they release are definitely worth my time however.
OTOH my martial class players would feel kind of neglected if there is a pause of a year between the caster and martial sourcebooks.
That's why I like the APG concept better than "Complete X" or "Ultimate X" books. But that's a different topic.
I love these options books even though I like the APG structure better than any complete/ultimate and would prefer APG 2 over ultimate "_" 2. Besides the APG had new traits, favored class bonuses, Prestige classes, and magic items. I like new options for classes but it felt that sorcerers got shafted in this book, oh there are plenty of options, I just feal that got more for a single character to use. The wizard got arcane discoveries, oracles have revelations(with extra revelation feat), bards have music abilities, witches have more hexes(extra hex feat), etc. I was really hoping for some bloodline "feats" or feats to improve or add new uses for those 3+cha/int/wis abilities a day. I am still happy tha Paizo is even doing these compete books though there are just some things I would like to see in these books.
I love these options books even though I like the APG structure better than any complete/ultimate and would prefer APG 2 over ultimate "_" 2.
Yeah, I think a lot of the pushback on this comes from people who, having seen ten years of rules bloat in Pathfinder's parent system, are worried that every hardback release is going to be something in the vein of Ultimate Magic 2 and Ultimate Combat 5. I really think, though, from what James Jacobs and other staff members have said in other threads, that those fears will be assuaged in good time.
The concerns are not unreasonable, though, considering the glut of options books players and GMs have seen come before with the "Complete" series in both AD&D 2E and 3.X. I'm still a little gun shy about it, even though I know better from reading designer and developer comments.
Yeah, I think a lot of the pushback on this comes from people who, having seen ten years of rules bloat in Pathfinder's parent system, are worried that every hardback release is going to be something in the vein of Ultimate Magic 2 and Ultimate Combat 5.
Either that, or books like Magic of Incarnum and Power of Faerun (e.g. niche stuff that's of limited interest). Or both. Or just saying "to heck with it" and releasing Pathfinder, Second Edition. :-)
One all-encompassing APG-like book a year would be awesome.
I basically hit my limit with the APG. That's not to say that I have no interest whatsoever in Ultimate Combat and Ultimate Magic, but it's certainly diminishing returns for me at this point. I don't really care about fifty new spells or fifty new feats (maybe 10% of which I'll find interesting).
+1.
Actually, I support Paizo doing whatever they need to do to stay in business. I'd rather that involved writing more adventures or providing more campaign setting material or something than new character build options but obviously that's not the case. Still, when I'm in the DM chair I have to say no to everyone who wants to bring material post APG into the game. That disappoints my players and makes me feel bad and that's where I get frustrated by all these new books.