|
don't think that's a very reasonable argument, and I don't see any reason why anyone should be sympathetic to it. I mean, no RPG is ever complete. Ever. There hasn't been a game invented yet that couldn't use another supplement.
Some generic rpgs are more complete than other rpgs. And whats wrong with wanting to have rules to cover everything. Serioulsy what is it with gamers and not wanting more option or the rules to allow you to do more
I don't think most people consider psionics a "missing gap." Psionics was always optional, all the way back to 1E, and was more or less never supported. TSR barely supported it, WOTC flat out didn't support it (just like they never supported anything but SRD Core), and if paizo does publish a psionics book, they'll be hard pressed to support it without annoying the many players and GMs who don't care for psionics -- and while I personally love psionics, I'm not suffering under the delusion that they're broadly popular.
Both 3.5 and 4E have official sourcebooks for psionics why not PF. And I do not care what wotc did on that issue. I am using Pathfinder and care what Paizo is doing about it. And why should the Paizo devs be held hostage by players who do not want the material. No one is forcing anyone to use it. If they spend too much time trying to please everyone then thety would never publish anything. No matter what they publish a certain segment of the community will complain about it. When did I say psionics was popular. Just that to compete with 3.5 and 4E its something that should be done in the future. But hey call me and everyone else who feels that way delusional.
You can sit there and pretend that the Expanded Psionics Handbook was essential to 3.5 in the same way the PHB, DMG and MM were, but that's simply not true by any reasonable standard. If the EPH is essential to your game, then there is Psionics Unleashed.
I may not have used psionics or epic play a lot when I ran 3.5 yet it was good to know that I had access to them. A player wants to use a non-standard race no problem. Tired of the core classes one had the option to use the psionic classes. My players were tired of low level games I had access to epic rules. I had all the bases covered and could pretty much run everything with just the core. Yes I can use PU but would prefer an official Paizo sourcebook for both psionics and epic play. As for "resonable standard" who standard yours. No thanks I rather use a more unbiased and objective standard thank you.
I can't even figure out what your reasoning is for why Psionics Unleashed isn't good enough. Because it's not paizo? So? Pathfinder is OGL, it's designed to be supported by multiple publishers. What do you have against Dreamscarred Press that you want paizo to publish what will essentially be the same book DP published, thus crushing DP's sales? How do you expect Paizo to make money off psionics when Dreamscarred has already sold most of the people who wanted a PFRPG psionics book the book they wanted? I mean I love psionics, and I really don't see how paizo could top Psionics Unlimited. Nor do I really want them to try.
News flash not everyone wants to use 3pp material. Espcially when they have access to a set of rules that cover it already. Like the two gamers in my group. And no I have nothing against DSP or PU. I like what they did with PU and recommend it. So stop jumping to conclusions and assumptions and puttiong words in my mouth. That being said if someone asks if their is offical support for psionics for PF I say no and point them to PU. Not everyone is happy to be told that. Not everyone is like you which you keep forgetting. As for DP its a risk they took when they published a book that Paizo may publish down the line. Just like any other 3pp publisher who does epc rules. Paizo never said they would not publish that material. They would at a later date. Why would you assume that Paizo would screw up a psionics books. Almost two years later and gamers still seem to have no faith in the devs. How about we actually see them publish a psioncs or epic book first before writing them off.
The same goes for Epic. It wasn't essential to 3.5, and pretending it was isn't going to win you the argument, it's just going to lose you credibility. Right now the Core rules already have rules for going beyond 20th level, so then it becomes a real question of just what exactly do people want in a Epic level book? Do you want a rehash of the Epic Level Handbook, which is regarded as one of the worst books in 3.5?
The fact that I could run any game in 3.5 from low level to high level. Standard races, non-standard races. With psionics or without I can do it. I have PU so can run psionics. They are working on a races book so that angle is covered. An epic book is in development in the future. So give enough time we can do all of the above. Until then as much as I like Paizo I have to be objective on what i can or cannot provide as oppsoed to 3.5 and 4E. I amy like an rpg and the company tha publishes it yet I refuse to look at either with rose colored glasses. As for my crediability. I care nothing at all what you think of it. Im not going to lose and sleep on it. Funny how you say that they should not publish an epic book because it will be a rehash. How you have such little faith in the devs and assume it will be a rehash. We do not know what it will be like. PU is mainly a rehash too imo. I do not see you putting that product down
An Epic level book is going to be real easy to mess up. Read through the threads of what people who like Epic level want and you'll find that you guys don't all want the same thing. Some of you want kingdom building rules and rules for interplanar diplomacy, others want rules for turning Pathfinder characters into Exalted. Paizo should let 3PP develop multiple tracks to support the multiple styles of high level play people want, rather than just rehash the ELH and make something nobody is going to be happy with.
For the most part Paizo imo has done a pretty good job with their books. Why would you think they would mess up an epic book. Have more faith in the devs. Either way Paizo will publish whatever book they want. No matter what the fanabse feels about it. You think that everyone wanted the APG or Ultimate Magic. Thery looked at the feedback and went with what the majority wanted. Either way imo Paizo wants to make PF as self contained as possible. Sure they may want to give 3pp the opportunity to do so. Yet not to the extent that to have everything you need one has to go the 3pp. Not a very smart business thing to do imo
However, I fully expect the general rules, just like the core rulebook, to have a little section talking about "beyond 36th level" just like the core rules talk about beyond 20th level.As would I. But you'll notice the existence of that section has done nothing about the "shouting match" for level 21+ play. What makes you think copy-pasting it and replacing the numeral 20 with 36 would prevent THAT "shouting match" ?
Well, I don't recall shouting much. Can't speak for others.
In any case, it's a toolkit. The current toolkit is fine, but it has limitations. Any new toolkit, I'm sure, will also be fine but will also have limitations ... but it will accomplish much that the current rule set cannot.
I suppose that at some point in the future there may be a call for something more, and there's nothing wrong with that. The key is that at this point in time, there's a call for material that goes beyond 20, that's all.
I keep reading this thread and wondering if the DMs y'all have played with have tried to put the 'epic' into the normal progression.
I mean, i can legitimately (without a new system) make a Barbarian hold off a horde of orcs without introducing any new systems or complexities, and do it at level 5... This game is plenty epic without going beyond 20th level.
There's nothing wrong with awesome low-level games; some of my favorite games have been low-level games.
The question is like saying "who needs wizards? Why not make an awesome game with just fighters, rogues and clerics?" I'm sure such a thing can be done, and I'm sure it'd be great, but some people like to play wizards.
But as dmchucky said, Paizo puts out enough books for everyone to get what they want. So why do you have to wish/insisnt for one (or a few books) that might not suit you not to be published?
He did say it and (if it were true) he'd certainly be rebutting my argument. However, it is just not true, for me at least and no doubt for many others. I could comfortably deal with twice the output from Paizo that I get now and there are a variety of things (both rules options and flavor-content, though I prefer the latter) which I'm not getting. I'd much prefer Paizo provide further planes/planets information sourcebooks and rules than high level content (off the top of my head - there are lots of other aspects of Pathfinder/Golarion I'd like them to expand as well and taking the game in multiple new directions is just not possible).
To be clear again though, I'm not insisting Paizo not publish what I dont want. I'm simply telling them that I have a preference for something else so that they have the most information when making their choices as to what direction to go in. As I read Gailbraithe, he's doing exactly the same.
To be completely honest, I'm stunned anyone manages to reach twentieth level anyhow. We've certainly never managed it - so my position isn't even that high level play is wrong/boring/broken/unplayable/unpopular or anything else. It's just irrelevant to me and there's so much more that would have relevance.We always do; we see no need to stop until we're forced to (they all die or, RAW we must stop at level 20). I have only had one game where we didn't get past level 10, but that's more due to a bunch of horrible rolls at the wrong time and my players got wiped out.
We just dont have the time (even if we were able to avoid dying). :(
|
|
All I've done in this thread is say I'm not interested in a Epic Level Handbook for Pathfinder, and especially don't want it supported in every book that comes out afterwards (since eventually that turns into a LOT of material I'm buying that is useless to me), and that I think that's better handled by 3PP. And I've pointed out that some of the arguments that people are using for an ELH are baseless and silly.
And your response? To threaten to scream at me forever, until I shut up and you get your way. Which is what most people call "having a temper tantrum."
Are you six years old? No? Then stop acting like it. Maybe you don't realize this chucky, but this is the internet. You can't actually scream at me. I can ignore you rather easily, and if you insist on presenting your argument as "agree with me or I'll have another temper tantrum" then the only thing you're accomplishing is making your side look really foolish and childish.
Is that really your goal here? To convince everyone that Epic level play only appeals to temper-tantrum throwing little crybabies?
If anyone is throwing a temper tantrum it is you imo. It was a pretty civil discussion until you started to post in the thread. You posted that you did not want epic rules and gave your reasons why. Then you expect everyone to take what you wrote as fact and when some like myself disagreed. Which from what I am seeing from your posts makes you unhappy. Did you think you would just strut into a thread show everyone the error of their ways and not expect some sort of reaction. I can respct that you do not want epic rules. Yet your going out of your way to be to confrontational imo. Are you trying to get this thread closed because ti looks like that to me.
Oh, so then you think that paizo should put out an E7 sourcebook, and provide continued support for E7 play? I mean, that would make it much easier on me, since if I want an E7 sourcebook, I pretty much have to write it myself.You think that every new bestiary should have about a third the number of monsters, with standard, mythic and E7 versions?
You think that when they get around to the Advanced Player's Guide 2 and add new base classes, those classes should come in standard, mythic and E7...
Now your being ridiculous. No one said that Paizo should support every version of D&D. Not myself or dmchucky69 or anyone else that I see in this thread. All I said was that I wanted Paizo to release an official psionic and epic book. You need to stop putting words in people mouths and taking posts and going out on a wholly unrelated tangent. Whats next your going to say either myself or dmchucky69 wants to see PF coversions for WOD, Hero System or Shadowrun. How you managed to make such a leap in logic just leaves me amazed is all I have to say.
|
Now your being ridiculous. No one said that Paizo should support every version of D&D. Not myself or dmchucky69 or anyone else that I see in this thread. All I said was that I wanted Paizo to release an official psionic and epic book.
I didn't see anything in his post that said Paizo should support ANY version of D&D, much less every version (and I damn well didn't see him suggest that Paizo do anything for 0E, 1E, B/X, BECMI, 2E, Rules Cyclopedia, 4E, etc).
What he said was that even among the minority that are so desperate for post-20 rules, there's little to no agreement on what those rules should actually consist of.
Please keep to the topic at hand and post nicely, please-and-thank-you.
|
Now your being ridiculous. No one said that Paizo should support every version of D&D. Not myself or dmchucky69 or anyone else that I see in this thread. All I said was that I wanted Paizo to release an official psionic and epic book.I didn't see anything in his post that said Paizo should support ANY version of D&D, much less every version (and I damn well didn't see him suggest that Paizo do anything for 0E, 1E, B/X, BECMI, 2E, Rules Cyclopedia, 4E, etc).
What he said was that even among the minority that are so desperate for post-20 rules, there's little to no agreement on what those rules should actually consist of.
Who says that we are a minority? You have NO POSSIBLE WAY of knowing how many people are there who would LOVE to get their hands on official paizo level 20+ content.
Most of some 80ish or so people i played with during my RPG time loved the idea of epic heroes and things that you could do with ELH, even with all it's brokennes. Some of the most fun sessions we had were epic level.
That is 80 people that i know in my city. And there are most certainly dozens more, if not hundred TTRPG players in my country. Then add other countries. And continents. I am sure that you could get a pretty hefty number of people who would love to get some 20+ love.
Is it a risk? Yes, but every book Paizo publishes is a risk. It's a risk worth taking.
Playing the game with E6 or E10 or whatever E ruleset is like taking a cake and eating a small piece and throwing out the rest in the trash, not even bothering to keep it for later or just taste it.
Why the heck did you pay for a book 14/20s of which you will not use? What is the point? It would be like getting the most high-end personal computer in the world and then turning Half-life 2 on and putting everything down on lowest in the details. Makes no sense whatsoever.
When i get a product i squeeze everything i can from it.
True, different people want different things, but here i detect a lack of trust in Paizo developers. They listen to the players and GMs, but they listen to smart suggestions and good, reasonable ones. And they pretty much said that if they are to make mythic rules, they will not stat up the gods and make them killable. Which is cool. that is the part i never liked anyway. What we all agree on however is that we want 20+ rules.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Playing the game with E6 or E10 or whatever E ruleset is like taking a cake and eating a small piece and throwing out the rest in the trash, not even bothering to keep it for later or just taste it.
Why the heck did you pay for a book 14/20s of which you will not use? What is the point? It would be like getting the most high-end personal computer in the world and then turning Half-life 2 on and putting everything down on lowest in the details. Makes no sense whatsoever.
See it's posts like this which I struggle to understand (especially since you follow up with 'different people like all kinds of different things').
You want 20+ play, I don't. You can lobby Paizo to produce it, I'll lobby them to produce something else instead. They'll do whatever they do and I'll buy all of it (and probably love it, I'll just love it more if it restricts itself to pre-epic play). Is there any need to say that my preference makes no sense?
(I'm not offended or anything, just puzzled since it seems like this is what you were objecting to previously when you thought anti-high level crowd were somehow disregarding/disrespecting your preferences).
I paid for a book, much of which I won't use, because the bits I will use are worth at least as much as the asking price. (Paizo would need to double their prices, before I'd start to pare back my purchases of their products). You really think that doesnt make sense?
|
|
Playing the game with E6 or E10 or whatever E ruleset is like taking a cake and eating a small piece and throwing out the rest in the trash, not even bothering to keep it for later or just taste it.
Why the heck did you pay for a book 14/20s of which you will not use? What is the point? It would be like getting the most high-end personal computer in the world and then turning Half-life 2 on and putting everything down on lowest in the details. Makes no sense whatsoever.
See it's posts like this which I struggle to understand (especially since you follow up with 'different people like all kinds of different things').
You want 20+ play, I don't. You can lobby Paizo to produce it, I'll lobby them to produce something else instead. They'll do whatever they do and I'll buy all of it (and probably love it, I'll just love it more if it restricts itself to pre-epic play). Is there any need to say that my preference makes no sense?
(I'm not offended or anything, just puzzled since it seems like this is what you were objecting to previously when you thought anti-high level crowd were somehow disregarding/disrespecting your preferences).
I paid for a book, much of which I won't use, because the bits I will use are worth at least as much as the asking price. (Paizo would need to double their prices, before I'd start to pare back my purchases of their products). You really think that doesnt make sense?
The point is, that i will tell Paizo that i would like them to make a 20+ book and that's it. I will let them decide. I will not actively campaign for it. The difference is that you would lobby against it because you don't want it. That's your prerogative. I disagree with that position, because i believe in live and let live policy. If something won't impact me in any way, why shouldn't i let it happen as long as it doesn't harm anybody else? That is why if Paizo decides to make an official Psionics book, you will not find me on a "do you want psionics" thread trying not to get the book published. Because i realize that there are people who, unlike me, like psionics, and want official support for it. Why is your money more important then my money? What gives you the right to demand something not be made? As previous and potential customers, you and i have the same relevance. You are no more important then i am, or less for that matter.
Let people have what they want. It will not impact you in any way, since you do not have to buy it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm obviously failing fairly hard at explaining what my actual position is, since I'm doing exactly what you say you're doing here:
The point is, that i will tell Paizo that i would like them to make a 20+ book and that's it. I will let them decide.
The difference is that you would lobby against it because you don't want it. That's your prerogative. I disagree with that position, because i believe in live and let live policy. If something won't impact me in any way, why shouldn't i let it happen as long as it doesn't harm anybody else?
Absolutely no reason. As I've been trying to say - if they make a 20+ book plus associated support it does have an impact on me because they will almost certainly make less of other things I'd like more.
Why is your money more important then my money?
It isn't. I should say what I want, you should say what you want. In fact, if anything, my requests should probably factor into Paizo's decision making less than yours - since I'm going to buy what they produce anyhow, even if it's an area I don't want.
What gives you the right to demand something not be made?
I'm not demanding anything - I've explicitly stated that many times. I'm telling them what I want (more non-epic rulebooks and support books).
As previous and potential customers, you and i have the same relevance. You are no more important then i am, or less for that matter.
As I mentioned - I'm less important than you wrt this decision (though probably more important in terms of volume of sales). As people - we matter the same. Irrespective, our relative importance by any metric isn't really relevant to whose interests we should argue for. You should press your claim and I should press mine.
Let people have what they want. It will not impact you in any way, since you do not have to buy it.
Do you acknowledge (even if you disagree) that this is not my position? I don't think I should have anything to say about issues which have no effect on me at all (you wont see me making any comment on the Planet Stories subscriptions, for example). You seem to skip over the issue of opportunity cost every time it comes up. It does impact me if a hypothetical 'planehopping' supplement is delayed due to them squeezing in an epic rulebook, even though I dont have to buy it. I don't get my preferred supplement.
|
|
Well, as James Jacobs said, they plan all their books at least a year in advance, so there will be no loss of things, nor will they squeeze in something and push out something else.
They, i am pretty sure of this, very carefully plan things. They very carefully decide what idea will be made into a book next. And since you buy everything that they churn out, i see no evil in them making a 20+ that you might even end up liking and actually trying it out.
Same thing with an AP that may go into the epic levels.
I understand now that your position is not of 'do not make' character, but 'make this instead' character. Which is pretty much the same, but still nicer.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This has gotten really heated in my absence, but I will try to cool my own jets and stick to "just the facts, ma'am."
Right now in terms of High-Level content, I have procured almost everything I can.
I have in my library:
Rules Compendium (has basically encapsulated BECMI)
Dark Dungeons (a retro-clone thereof)
High Level Campaigns (sad, 2E revised high-level material)
The Primal Order (non-specific high-level and immortal game mastery guide)
ELH (under my bed, I read a little every night, even though I've been through it dozens of times, dreaming about Paizo's restructure)
The Immortal's Handbook: Ascension (legit but overwhelming 3PP support for 3.X)
The Immortal's Handbook: Bestiary (makes ELH monsters look like kobold children with one level of commoner)
I also have materials that support Higher Level thematic components:
The Castle Guide (from 2E)
The Stronghold Builder's Guidebook (3E)
The Book of the River Kingdoms (GREAT compiled rules for Kingdom Building based on Kingmaker)
Numerous tomes on Deities and Demigods, Planar Travel, Archdevils and Demon Princes etc, that can't be overcome in Low- or Mid-Level play.
I know there's a couple more out there, but what's the point? I play Pathfinder now. What good is another 3PP 3.X book based on substandard outdated material from ELH going to do me? Trivial help, compared to what the REAL THING could offer...
Will I buy Paizo's an Advanced Gamemastery Guide for High Level Play, and will I buy The Mythic Handbook? Betchorarse I will!
Jeez, I'll buy multiple copies and gift them to my GM and fellow players if it will expedite the schedule for these things.
I'll buy one for Galbraithe and Kthulhu and Steve and whoever else doesn't want one, too, so that Paizo can stop seeing their posts as anti-support and lost money for their High Level material.
(Don't quote me on that, if times is hard, ya' know, I am less likely to buy multiple copies for those who won't use them. But I will sell extra organs and bodily humours to afford my own. I don't need my left kidney THAT badly...)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, as James Jacobs said, they plan all their books at least a year in advance, so there will be no loss of things, nor will they squeeze in something and push out something else.
If they can only make 20 books in a year and they decide to produce 5% Epic rules sourcebooks, the consequence is they only produce 19 pre-20th level books a year instead of 20. That's the loss.
They, i am pretty sure of this, very carefully plan things. They very carefully decide what idea will be made into a book next. And since you buy everything that they churn out, i see no evil in them making a 20+ that you might even end up liking and actually trying it out.
That's the main reason I buy everything - those Paizo products I was 'meh' about pre-release have often been the most pleasantly surprising. I have no doubt I'll enjoy whatever epic ruleset they come up with. I'd just enjoy lots of other things more.
|
|
I didn't see anything in his post that said Paizo should support ANY version of D&D, much less every version (and I damn well didn't see him suggest that Paizo do anything for 0E, 1E, B/X, BECMI, 2E, Rules Cyclopedia, 4E, etc).
I will just respectfully disagree. The impression I got was that because some of us really want epci rules that were going to demand all types of products be made for use with othrr D&D products. Nowhere was that posted anywhere in the thread
What he said was that even among the minority that are so desperate for post-20 rules, there's little to no agreement on what those rules should actually consist of.
We may not be a majrotiy yet imo we are definately not a minority. I think their is enough of a demand for epic level play. I would not be surprised within 2-3 years the deamnd increase alot.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We may not be a majrotiy yet imo we are definately not a minority. I think their is enough of a demand for epic level play. I would not be surprised within 2-3 years the deamnd increase alot.
What he said was that even among the minority that are so desperate for post-20 rules, there's little to no agreement on what those rules should actually consist of.
My impression is also that there's significant demand for it - furthermore, I think a "12-20 level GM book" would probably boost that demand by removing some of the stigma associated with high level play.
|
|
Just to let Gail know; I'm a bit older than 6 years old. I'm 45.
And if I'm throwing a temper tantrum than obviously you are as well. To quote Pat Garrett in Young Guns II; so ain't we both content...
So have a happy Independence Day and we'll see you around the game table. At least until we hit Epic levels...
:P
|
|
Both 3.5 and 4E have official sourcebooks for psionics why not PF.
Because paizo, and Lisa in particular, paid attention to what WOTC did right and what they did wrong, and has concluded that one of the things they did wrong was release material and then fail to support it.
And I do not care what wotc did on that issue.
Which is why your arguments ultimately don't make sense.
And why should the Paizo devs be held hostage by players who do not want the material. No one is forcing anyone to use it.
You are being completely unreasonable, do you understand that? You aren't even attempting to deal with the arguments presented, you're just maligning anyone who disagrees with you.
If paizo publishes a psionics book, then paizo must support psionics in Golarion. They have made that promise to Pathfinder players, that they will not repeat the mistakes of WOTC and fail to support their own products. That means that if they release a psionics book, there will be psionics in the adventure paths, the player's companions, the pathfinder chronicles, and the bestiaries.
Which means that if they do release a psionics book, people who don't want psionics are forced to buy supplemental material for the psionics book even if they have no desire to buy the main psionics book.
So this "holding the devs hostage" argument is nonsensical. People who don't want psionics (or epic, or E6, or any other variant of the core game) don't want to have to spend money on psionics material, which they will have to if you get your way.
Why don't you address that argument instead of accusing people who disagree with you of "holding the devs hostage?"
As for "resonable standard" who standard yours. No thanks I rather use a more unbiased and objective standard thank you.
A reasonable standard is an unbiased and objective standard.
News flash not everyone wants to use 3pp material.
Newsflash yourself: Paizo is a Third Party Publisher. Pathfinder is a 3PP variant of D20 3.5. If you're playing Pathfinder you're already using 3PP material.
This is why your argument is so nonsensical. There aere three possibilities:
1) You want psionics rules that work with Pathfinder and you don't care if Paizo supports those rules in its other products. If this is the case, then Psionics Unleashed should be all you need. (This is my position.)
2) You want Paizo to release their own Paizo branded psionics books and you want Paizo to support those rules in its other products. If this is the case then you are trying to force everyone to use psionics or waste their money on material they don't need, in which case your argument that people who don't want psionics are "holding the devs hostage" is disingenuous. It's just a smear tactic to intimidate people into shutting up so you can get your way, which is underhanded and dishonest.
3) You want Paizo to release their own Paizo branded psionics books and you don't care if Paizo supports those rules in its other products. If this is the case then you simply fetishizing the Paizo brand name, and you have no substantive argument. There is ultimately no real difference between using a Paizo published version of the EPH updated to PFRPG and using Psionics Unleashed - unless you want to make the claim that the guys at Dreamscarred Press are a bunch of morons who turned out a garbage product, and the paizo crew couldn't help but do better.
Frankly, I don't think the paizo crew could do better (except in terms of presentation, since they have larger art budgets), but that's not because I "lack faith" in the paizo devs, I just think the guys at DP are really good when it comes to psionics. Their material has won awards, is widely respected, and was considered the best psionics support under 3.5.
So what's you position? 1, 2 or 3? Because it has to be one of those positions.
Also, I find your constant questioning of my faith in the devs very weird. I like the crew at paizo, they put out good stuff, but I don't have [i]faith]/i] in them. They aren't gods. They're just a bunch of gamers who make a good game.
I think maybe you're putting too much faith in the devs, and treating the game too much like a religion.
Espcially when they have access to a set of rules that cover it already. Like the two gamers in my group. And no I have nothing against DSP or PU. I like what they did with PU and recommend it. So stop jumping to conclusions and assumptions and puttiong words in my mouth.
Dude, I asked you some questions. How is that putting words in your mouth? Don't accuse me of jumping to conclusions when I'm trying to ask you questions to clarify your argument. I'm treating you with respect, you're insulting me. It's kind of BS.
Like this nonsense:
Do you want a rehash of the Epic Level Handbook, which is regarded as one of the worst books in 3.5?Funny how you say that they should not publish an epic book because it will be a rehash. How you have such little faith in the devs and assume it will be a rehash.
Except I never said that. I find it really rude that you demand I not put words in your mouth, which I haven't done, and then turn around and put words in my mouth. I ASKED YOU A QUESTION.
Do you want paizo to release a rehash of the Epic Level Handbook? Yes or no? If yes, then how do you respond to the fact that most people hated the Epic Level Handbook?
If you don't want a rehash of the ELH, then what do you want? Because a lot of people want a lot of different things, which makes it really difficult for paizo to make a product that won't end up a failure.
|
|
Just to let Gail know; I'm a bit older than 6 years old. I'm 45.
And if I'm throwing a temper tantrum than obviously you are as well.
I didn't say you were throwing a temper tantrum, I said you are threatening to throw a temper tantrum.
You have, in this thread, threatened to scream until you get your way. That is the definition of a temper tantrum. Do not try to claim this is a two way street. See, I'm 35, and I know that if I say that I'm going to scream until I get what I want that people will treat me like a spoiled little brat. Somehow you managed to get to the ripe old age of 45 without realizing that threatening to scream until you get what you makes you look ridiculous.
It's inane. It's childish. And you're the only one doing it.
I'm trying to be as polite as I can given the circumstances and the moderation of this board, but seriuously chucky. You're making an absolute fool of yourself. You are behaving in a way that is embarrassing for an adult.
A 45 year old man should be able to use reasoned arguments to support his position, and should be able to accept not getting his way if his arguments are insufficient to win the case. Threatening to scream until you get your way is not acting like a responsible, reasonable adult. It's acting like a brat.
Is that really what you want us all to think? That you're a 45 year old man-child who can't be reasonable? That you're so pathetic that despite being old enough to have adult children you act like an adult child?
I'm not trying to humiliate you here, but I do seriously wonder if you realize that you're humiliating yourself.
Wow, tough crowd.
In any event, here's one other thing to consider - a healthy business grows, and a business grows by expanding its markets. Now, there's two main ways they can expand: sell to a larger market, and sell more to the existing market. Clearly, doing both is best.
Either way, it's very likely that this is not a zero sum game. In fact, if it is a zero sum game, I suspect the business side of Paizo would be unhappy because this would be evidence of a soft market, and given Lisa's recent comments in another thread, Paizo keeps doing better and better, which will allow them to add staff and thus add to their capabilities and production schedule.
What can we do? Stop bickering and support expansion of the market. Push for all content - Tian Xia books and psionic books and epic books and low-level books and modules of all levels and everything else.
Trying to get Paizo to narrow their focus to just what you want is a great way to slow their business, and I'm looking to have them grow as a business.
That is one reason why I had our group retire our long-standing D&D campaign (even though it had just transitioned to 4e), that's why I've pulled all Pathfinder material into my high-level 3.5e game, and that's why I'm looking forward to not just epic rules, but psionic rules, oriental rules, and the lot - not necessarily because I personally want them, but because with their presence the entire brand is stronger.
Sheesh.
(edit, as these showed up while I was posting)
If paizo publishes a psionics book, then paizo must support psionics in Golarion ... Which means that if they do release a psionics book, people who don't want psionics are forced to buy supplemental material for the psionics book even if they have no desire to buy the main psionics book.
So this "holding the devs hostage" argument is nonsensical. People who don't want psionics (or epic, or E6, or any other variant of the core game) don't want to have to spend money on psionics material, which they will have to if you get your way.
Fair enough.
But, using your logic, won't there be some people who argue against anything Paizo publishes? And given that someone out there will argue against everything published, what would you recommend Paizo do?
I ask because it sounds to me like you're recommending they stop creating new content. New adventures and monsters seem to be okay, but no new content. Is that actually what you're advocating?
|
|
Now your being ridiculous. No one said that Paizo should support every version of D&D. Not myself or dmchucky69 or anyone else that I see in this thread. All I said was that I wanted Paizo to release an official psionic and epic book. You need to stop putting words in people mouths and taking posts and going out on a wholly unrelated tangent. Whats next your going to say either myself or dmchucky69 wants to see PF coversions for WOD, Hero System or Shadowrun. How you managed to make such a leap in logic just leaves me amazed is all I have to say.
Actually, chucky said exactly that. Direct quote: "Paizo puts out enough books for everyone to get what they want. What is selfish is to deny any one group their niche product."
If it's selfish to deny the group that wants Epic 20+ their niche product, then it's selfish to deny the group that wants Epic Seven+ their niche product.
Playing the game with E6 or E10 or whatever E ruleset is like taking a cake and eating a small piece and throwing out the rest in the trash, not even bothering to keep it for later or just taste it.
Why the heck did you pay for a book 14/20s of which you will not use? What is the point? It would be like getting the most high-end personal computer in the world and then turning Half-life 2 on and putting everything down on lowest in the details. Makes no sense whatsoever.
Because it's more fun for me to play that way. Are you going to accuse me of badwrongfun? What's it matter to you how I want to play?
I'm not trying to get paizo to support the style of play I want. I'm quite happy to accept that I want a variant of the core game, and that will mean extra work for me. You guys are the ones who want all of the rest of us to have to pay for your fun even if we're not into it.
If it's selfish to deny the group that wants Epic 20+ their niche product, then it's selfish to deny the group that wants Epic Seven+ their niche product.
To be fair, I believe there is a difference. The existing published rules cover levels 1-20, so something like E6 is a variant rule system, not an addition to the existing rule system.
The APG, Ultimate Magic and the upcoming Ultimate Combat are additions to the existing rules - they don't replace published rules with something else. Similarly, psionics (for example) would be an addition.
If my understanding of E6 is correct, it's not an addition to the rules; it's a variant that removes a lot of the rules for levels 7-20. So if my understanding of E6 is correct, it would be like having psionics rules that say "okay, now you can't use clerics and wizards - use these other classes instead."
I could certainly be wrong, but the way I understand it, E6 fragments the market, while things like psionics and above-20 rules expand it.
|
|
Gailbraithe wrote:
If paizo publishes a psionics book, then paizo must support psionics in Golarion ... Which means that if they do release a psionics book, people who don't want psionics are forced to buy supplemental material for the psionics book even if they have no desire to buy the main psionics book.
So this "holding the devs hostage" argument is nonsensical. People who don't want psionics (or epic, or E6, or any other variant of the core game) don't want to have to spend money on psionics material, which they will have to if you get your way.
Fair enough.
But, using your logic, won't there be some people who argue against anything Paizo publishes? And given that someone out there will argue against everything published, what would you recommend Paizo do?
I ask because it sounds to me like you're recommending they stop creating new content. New adventures and monsters seem to be okay, but no new content. Is that actually what you're advocating?
No, that would be ridiculous.
I think paizo should focus their energy first and foremost on supporting the game that already exists (Core 1-20), because obviously we are all playing that game.
If paizo is going to expand the game, my preference would be for lateral expansion not vertical expansion. I would rather see more 1st-20th level base classes, more 1-20 CR monsters, and more 1st-9th level spells than see 20+ levels for the existing base classes, CR 20+ monsters, and 10th+ level spells. Because the first kind of material is more useful to more players than the second kind. Regardless of where you end your campaigns, new base classes are useful. 20th+ level expansions of the existing base classes are useless for groups that end their campaigns at or earlier than 20th level.
That's my opinion, and my reasoning for that opinion. You may have a different opinion. That's entirely fair. In the end, I would hope that paizo considers all of the various opinions, and then makes decisions based on which opinions are the most broadly popular.
If most people want Paizo to release a slightly tweaked version of Epic rules that is very close in style to the Epic Level Handbook, then that's what Paizo should release.
If most people want a radically different sort of Epic Level Handbook that focuses entirely on kingdom and nation building, interplanar diplomacy, and the quest for godhood, then that is what Paizo should release.
If most people just plain don't want an Epic Level Handbook because it will mean ongoing Epic Level Support, which will mean ongoing distraction from the core game (because it will become part of the core game that requires support), then Paizo should leave Epic level material to the third party publishers.
You notice the consistent thread there? It's what most people want. That's what Paizo should do. Not a difficult concept to grasp.
The issue in this thread is that some of the people who want an Epic Level book are engaging in various underhanded and disingenous arguments in an attempt to invalidate and denigrate the opinions of people who don't want
You have chucky, threatening to scream until he gets his way. Which means that chucky can't respect the right of people who disagree with him to state their opinion. He wants us all to be silent so that our opinion won't be counted, so that it will appear that most people want high level support. I call BS on that tactic. Threatening to scream until you get what you want is childish, immature, and completely embarrassing when done by a 45 year old man. And when you add in the fact that it's the internet and ignoring his screams is actually really easy, it's not just childish, it's kind of moronic.
You have various people, such as memorax, using variations on the "everyone who disagrees with me on the direction that paizo should go is selfish/holding the devs hostage/etc" argument. This argument is ridiculous, because it cuts both ways.
This is not a moral argument. There is no right or wrong in this argument. Attempting to portray people who disagree with you as bad people who are causing you harm by having a different opinion is disingenuous nonsense. That's why I'm calling it out.
At the end of the day, I would rather Paizo not put out an Epic level sourcebook any time soon. Other people have different opinions. Those other people are not bad people, they are not immoral people, and they are not doing something wrong by wanting an Epic level sourcebook.
But as soon as they start claiming that I am a bad person, that I am doing something immoral, that I am somehow causing them harm by disagreeing with them, then they are disingenuous people, and I will continue to point that out.
You see the difference there? The difference between me and chucky, between me and memorax? I can respect their opinion, even if I don't really understand their reasoning (I'm trying!), while they neither respect other people's opinions, try to understand their reasoning, or even show some basic civility by not threatening and maligning those who disagree with them.
|
|
If it's selfish to deny the group that wants Epic 20+ their niche product, then it's selfish to deny the group that wants Epic Seven+ their niche product.To be fair, I believe there is a difference.
Sure, there's plenty of difference in a broad context. But the differences can't be addressed in the context of chucky's claim that every niche should be served. In that context, there is no difference between Epic 20+ and Epic 6+. Both are niches, and according to chucky, all niches should be served.
Every niche will never be served. We know that from Lisa Stevens own comments about why TSR went bankrupt (fragmenting the market) that paizo won't do the same. That's why there won't be a campaign setting other than Golarion.
But of course, when chucky said that all niches should be served he was being disingenuous. He never believed that all niches should be served. He believes his niche should be served, and will apparently make ridiculous arguments (like claiming all niches should be served)
If my understanding of E6 is correct, it's not an addition to the rules; it's a variant that removes a lot of the rules for levels 7-20. So if my understanding of E6 is correct, it would be like having psionics rules that say "okay, now you can't use clerics and wizards - use these other classes instead."
Supporting E6 would require that paizo publishes alternative statistics for all CR 10+ monsters, and that the last four books in any AP would have to have dual statistics for all the encounters (since the first two books in any AP tend to cover levels 1-6). It wouldn't eliminate anything from the game unless Paizo decided to ONLY support E6.
Not that I'm seriously advocating Paizo support E6. I think that would be ridiculous, since while E6 may appeal to some people, it obviously doesn't appeal to most.
Unlike some of the people in this thread, I can accept that what I want is at odds with what most Pathfinder players want, and I have no intention of attacking other players for badwrongfun, or accusing them of being bad people, or threatening to scream until I get my way.
'Cuz I'm actually a grown-up.
But, using your logic, won't there be some people who argue against anything Paizo publishes? And given that someone out there will argue against everything published, what would you recommend Paizo do?
I ask because it sounds to me like you're recommending they stop creating new content. New adventures and monsters seem to be okay, but no new content. Is that actually what you're advocating?
No, that would be ridiculous.
I think paizo should focus their energy first and foremost on supporting the game that already exists (Core 1-20), because obviously we are all playing that game.
If paizo is going to expand the game, my preference would be for lateral expansion not vertical expansion. I would rather see more 1st-20th level base classes, more 1-20 CR monsters, and more 1st-9th level spells than see 20+ levels for the existing base classes, CR 20+ monsters, and 10th+ level spells. Because the first kind of material is more useful to more players than the second kind. Regardless of where you end your campaigns, new base classes are useful. 20th+ level expansions of the existing base classes are useless for groups that end their campaigns at or earlier than 20th level.
That's my opinion, and my reasoning for that opinion. You may have a different opinion. That's entirely fair. In the end, I would hope that paizo considers all of the various opinions, and then makes decisions based on which opinions are the most broadly popular.
Oh, I very clearly have a different option, but not a contrary one. It's my belief that the market is big enough for both, and by expanding in what I now conclude is three* directions, the game will be all the stronger.
Direction 1: New spells, monsters, prestige classes, etc. No extensions to rules, but new options for existing classes.
Direction 2: New base classes and alternate options for existing classes. This involves extensions to rules to support the new classes, but no major new directions. Haunts probably fall in this category too.
Direction 3: Major rules expansions. Words of power (slipped cleverly into Ultimate Magic), psionics, epic rules, and the like all fall into this category.
You notice the consistent thread there? It's what most people want. That's what Paizo should do. Not a difficult concept to grasp.
Well, the part I have issue with at all is the assumption that most people do not want an epic book published. I could just as easily argue that most people do - there is plenty of vocal support, just as there is plenty of vocal opposition.
My guess is there's really no way to know, and what's really going to bake Paizo's noodle is how to decide on such things. I guess that's why Erik Mona and James Jacobs get paid the big bucks to make those kind of decisions. Just like we all get paid the big bucks to run games :)
If it's selfish to deny the group that wants Epic 20+ their niche product, then it's selfish to deny the group that wants Epic Seven+ their niche product.To be fair, I believe there is a difference.Sure, there's plenty of difference in a broad context. But the differences can't be addressed in the context of chucky's claim that every niche should be served. In that context, there is no difference between Epic 20+ and Epic 6+. Both are niches, and according to chucky, all niches should be served.
Every niche will never be served. We know that from Lisa Stevens own comments about why TSR went bankrupt (fragmenting the market) that paizo won't do the same. That's why there won't be a campaign setting other than Golarion.
But of course, when chucky said that all niches should be served he was being disingenuous. He never believed that all niches should be served. He believes his niche should be served, and will apparently make ridiculous arguments (like claiming all niches should be served)
Sure, but no fair dismissing my statement that E6 and above-20th level gameing are different based on what chucky was saying. I'm not saying every niche should be served - I'm saying it's reasonable to expect the game to expand and not necessarily reasonable to expect rules to be published that fragment it.
Above-20th rules and psionics rules do not fragment the rules. They may only appeal to a subset (just like oriental rules/creatures), but they do not create multiple incompatible games.
If my understanding of E6 is correct, it's not an addition to the rules; it's a variant that removes a lot of the rules for levels 7-20. So if my understanding of E6 is correct, it would be like having psionics rules that say "okay, now you can't use clerics and wizards - use these other classes instead."Supporting E6 would require that paizo publishes alternative statistics for all CR 10+ monsters, and that the last four books in any AP would have to have dual statistics for all the encounters (since the first two books in any AP tend to cover levels 1-6).
That is exactly my point. E6 is not a rules addition, it is a variant rules system - that's why it requires double-publishing to support it in addition to the core rules.
It wouldn't eliminate anything from the game unless Paizo decided to ONLY support E6.
Yes, if you put in terms of publishing both sets of rules simultaneously it doesn't eliminate anything from the game - so long as they publish two versions of everything. Just like Pathfinder doesn't eliminate 4e, so long as a publisher publishes a 4e version of a module.
That's entirely different than rules additions. Rules additions do not require double-publishing. Expansions to the rule set, for example words of power or additional classes like the Samurai, do not require invalidation of existing rules - you can have a standard adventure path with a Samurai without removing anything. There's no need to publish two versions of a module in order to include words of power, or Samurai, or Oracles. The same would be true of psionics, or above-20th rules, or any other rules additions Paizo chooses to make.
You cannot have a standard adventure path with E6 - as you say, if you want to publish an E6 adventure you either have to discard the core rule set or you have to publish two versions - it's not an expansion, it's a fragmentation.
In any case, I realize you're not advocating for official published E6 support. I'm just trying to get the whole E6 thing off the table because I believe it's irrelevant to the discussion, while your comments about what you would like to see published are 100% relevant.
My biggest gripe with 20+ level games is the abundance of teleport and similar.
I don't have that big of a problem with it. I just accept that having any sort of terrain or distance as an obstacle is usually pointless. Not *always*, but usually.
It's both good and bad that Anticipate Teleportation and Halaster's Teleport Cage aren't part of Pathfinder :)
|
|
Well, the part I have issue with at all is the assumption that most people do not want an epic book published. I could just as easily argue that most people do - there is plenty of vocal support, just as there is plenty of vocal opposition.
I have not made any such assumption, nor have I argued such.
I don't think there is any point to arguing whether there are more people who do or don't want it. I'd rather do a poll and see the results than argue about what the poll results would be if we did a poll.
Which is why I take offense to some people in this thread attempting to silence opinions that conflict with their own by maligning and threatening people of that opinion. Because this thread is essentially that poll.
Sure, but no fair dismissing my statement that E6 and above-20th level gameing are different based on what chucky was saying. I'm not saying every niche should be served - I'm saying it's reasonable to expect the game to expand and not necessarily reasonable to expect rules to be published that fragment it.
No, what's unfair is you attempting a counter rebuttal of my rebuttal of chucky's argument with an argument that does not in of itself support chucky's argument. That's moving the goalposts.
The statement you responded to was a rebuttal of chucky's specific argument, not a rebuttal of all possible arguments, and it's not fair for you to expect my argument to work as a rebuttal of an entirely different argument than the argument it was in response to.
I'm not really interested in arguing the merits of Paizo supporting E6, since I am not actually asking Paizo to support E6. I only brought up the possibility of Paizo supporting E6 as a reductio ad absurdum of chucky's argument. The idea that Paizo should support E6 is ridiculous for many reasons, most of which are obvious and none of which are particularly important. The point of my comment about E6 was only to illustrate that if we took chucky's claim ("all niches should be supported") as a valid claim then we must agree to ridiculous conclusions; namely that paizo should support E6.
And, point of fact, I actually said E7, which is a variant of E6 that I am the sole proponent of. Because if, as chucky claims, Paizo should support all niches, then that must include a niche of one (namely me).
Since you're not defending chucky's claim, the entire point is moot.
|
|
The Immortal's Handbook: Ascension (legit but overwhelming 3PP support for 3.X)
That's less of a high-level supplement than a "holy crap, the DM let us be gods, but there's still things that are vastly VASTLY more powerful than us" type of a deal.
I'll buy one for Galbraithe and Kthulhu and Steve and whoever else doesn't want one, too, so that Paizo can stop seeing their posts as anti-support and lost money for their High Level material.
I call utter BS.
|
|
Low level stuff tends to be VERY BORING. I want the stuff that's high level, where all of the options aren't extremely limited.
Super-high level stuff tends to be even more boring, with the added bit of gameplay grinding to a halt while everyone calculated up dozens of bonuses or chooses from one of hundreds of options available to them. Paizo can only simplify post-20th level so much, as a 3.5-based game, it's still going to be awkward and unwieldy as hell. It gets to that point BEFORE 20th level.
The Immortal's Handbook: Ascension (legit but overwhelming 3PP support for 3.X)That's less of a high-level supplement than a "holy crap, the DM let us be gods, but there's still things that are vastly VASTLY more powerful than us" type of a deal.
I'll buy one for Galbraithe and Kthulhu and Steve and whoever else doesn't want one, too, so that Paizo can stop seeing their posts as anti-support and lost money for their High Level material.I call utter BS.
Well, burned your bridge there, haven't you? :P
But yeah, you're right, utter BS.
And there's NO WAY Gailbraithe is gonna have anything to do with these rules, as he's made painfully obvious. In fact, it would be a cruelty the likes of which the Marquis de Sade would be hard pressed to replicate, if we were to put Mythic Rules in his Christmas stocking.
On the upside, Steve said he'd probably get it even if he wasn't going to use them, so there's one.
That said, I will point my GM and fellow players whom I DO know to buy the book[s] should they be released before the End Times. Of course, as the great Kthulhu, you have direct control over when the aforementioned Apocalypse will be coming.
Still, I admit defeat. And that I was spouting off. I am [somewhat] humbled.
R'lyeh, r'lyeh, Kthulhu fhtagn!
|
|
And there's NO WAY Gailbraithe is gonna have anything to do with these rules, as he's made painfully obvious. In fact, it would be a cruelty the likes of which the Marquis de Sade would be hard pressed to replicate, if we were to put Mythic Rules in his Christmas stocking.
Meh. It would just join my copy of the Epic Level Handbook, which was given to me in 2002, read once, and hasn't been opened since. Never had a need to read it again.
Yes pleas!
more ADVP from lvl 1-20. like shackled city, age of worms and so on!
at my table i get questions like: why is the base classes from lvl 1-20 when most adventures stop at lvl 15 or sooner.?
I have not made any such assumption, nor have I argued such.You notice the consistent thread there? It's what most people want. That's what Paizo should do. Not a difficult concept to grasp.Well, the part I have issue with at all is the assumption that most people do not want an epic book published. I could just as easily argue that most people do - there is plenty of vocal support, just as there is plenty of vocal opposition.
You're absolutely right; I misread the context of your statement, I had assumed that since the discussion was about above-20, you were talking about above-20, rather than in a more general sense.
Sure, but no fair dismissing my statement that E6 and above-20th level gameing are different based on what chucky was saying. I'm not saying every niche should be served - I'm saying it's reasonable to expect the game to expand and not necessarily reasonable to expect rules to be published that fragment it.No, what's unfair is you attempting a counter rebuttal of my rebuttal of chucky's argument with an argument that does not in of itself support chucky's argument. That's moving the goalposts.
The statement you responded to was a rebuttal of chucky's specific argument, not a rebuttal of all possible arguments, and it's not fair for you to expect my argument to work as a rebuttal of an entirely different argument than the argument it was in response to.
I'm not really interested in arguing the merits of Paizo supporting E6, since I am not actually asking Paizo to support E6. I only brought up the possibility of Paizo supporting E6 as a reductio ad absurdum of chucky's argument.
Yep, got all that. But I think you missed my point because of your focus on what chucky's saying and on E6 (E7, E(whatever) ... the same argument applies to all) - I'm ignoring all of that and was trying to make my very own point.
My guess is the failure is my fault due to a difference in how we're using terminology. For me:
niche - a small part of the rules only attractive to a subset of people that expand the rules without changing them.
alternate rules - incompatible changes to the rules system.
Now, this is really my fault for using a definition of niche that suits my purposes - kind of how lots of people say "well, level 12-20 play can be epic!" I should just call it "incompatible changes to existing rules" vs. "compatible expansions to existing rules". It's just that they're so long :)
My point is that I'm in support of compatible expansions to existing rules, for they increase the potential market without requiring extra work in the form of multiple versions of the same material.
I'm against incompatible changes to existing rules, for they require extra work to produce the same material - now, as you say, there has to be both an E6 and non-E6 version of an adventure path.
Both result in material that some subset of Paizo customers may not want, but only the rules changes involve rules that cannot all be used. Someone may not want psionics, but they could use them in their core campaign, which is not true, by definition, of incompatible changes.
|
Super-high level stuff tends to be even more boring, with the added bit of gameplay grinding to a halt while everyone calculated up dozens of bonuses or chooses from one of hundreds of options available to them.
I don't have a problem with that, as long as people aren't intentionally do so to get people upset.
Because this thread is essentially that poll.
I run Paizo APs or the equivalent only, Castle Whiterock, Dragon Lord, Drow War, Burning Sky, and others. No homebrew, no single modules.
So for purposes of this poll count five votes for to NOT produce post level 20 rules and to NOT produce Paizo Psionics.
Two of us DM and are subscribers (me and another) and three are only Players (although I think one also subscribes).
-- david
Papa.DRB
Now, I would purchase a rulebook with post level 20 rules if that portion of the book was 1/3 or less of the book and the rest was dedicated to levels 13-20. Also, if I was going to purchase Psionics it would be from Dreamscarred Press.
|
|
Because paizo, and Lisa in particular, paid attention to what WOTC did right and what they did wrong, and has concluded that one of the things they did wrong was release material and then fail to support it.
How do you know that publishing a psionics book was wrong for Wotc. Neither of us has the sales numbers. Just because you think it was a mistake does not mean it did not make them money or that they were wrong for publishing one. Remember Paizo never said they would not publish a psioncs book just not now.
Which is why your arguments ultimately don't make sense.
Why because I think Pathfinder as an rpg can stand on it's own without being in the shadow of 3.5. That the Paizo devs have shown us that they have done a good job and do not need to look back all the time and check to see what the Wotc devs did with 3.5. We need to stop assuming that the Paizo devs are clueless and that they will mkae the same mistakes that Wotc.
You are being completely unreasonable, do you understand that? You aren't even attempting to deal with the arguments presented, you're just maligning anyone who disagrees with you.
So basically if I do not agree with you 1000% I'm being unreasonable and maliging anyone that disagrees with me. LOL. That some interesting logic you have there. Paizp may listen to the fanbase yes yet that does not mean they will listen to them completely. You know how much flak they received for the APG and UM. If they listened to everyone who asked for no new content they would never publish any new content.
If paizo publishes a psionics book, then paizo must support psionics in Golarion. They have made that promise to Pathfinder players, that they will not repeat the mistakes of WOTC and fail to support their own products. That means that if they release a psionics book, there will be psionics in the adventure paths, the player's companions, the pathfinder chronicles, and the bestiaries.
Which they can easily. they release a psionic book tied to no setting then release a psionics of Golarion sourcebook seperately and there you go. One book for those who do not play in or use Golarion and one for those that do. Again with Wotc has done. You have a real hangup when it comes to Wotc do you know that. As for psionic stuff showing up in later sourcebooks so what. You think that later books will not include stuff from the APG, UM, UC or any other book that has new material. Your basically saying that while they should publish ne material it should not show up in later products. Why not that makes no sense and you can ignore whatever you do not want to use
Which means that if they do release a psionics book, people who don't want psionics are forced to buy supplemental material for the psionics book even if they have no desire to buy the main psionics book.
That's the risk you take when you buy books from a publisher that releases new rules, options, feat, spells on a regular basis. Do you think that spells from UM will never show up in an AP. Or that an NPC in a an AP will not have a feat taken from the APG. It makes no sense for the Pazio devs not to use the new material in later books. We use the newer material why would the people who creayed the material in the first place not use it themselves. Asn has been said before no one is forcing anyone to buy anything. Sorry but that's not a valid argument against new material. I have enough APS I'm not forcing myself to buy more. I see no need for the Halflings or Orcs of Galoriaon book I'm not forcing myself to buy them.
So this "holding the devs hostage" argument is nonsensical. People who don't want psionics (or epic, or E6, or any other variant of the core game) don't want to have to spend money on psionics material, which they will have to if you get your way.
As I said it's a risk every gamer takes when they buy from any rpg publisher that release new rules material. Why would they not include newer rule material in their products. It makes no sense for Paizo to release a psioincs book and then to never have it show up in later books. As some of the fanbase such as myself would want it in the books. Majority rules and if the majority want it the majority imo should get it. Otherwise you will never get new material ever.
Why don't you address that argument instead of accusing people who disagree with you of "holding the devs hostage?"
Wen your telling an rpg publisher not to publish new material without a valid reason then yes I accuse posters of holding the devs hostage. And no because your forced to use it and buy it is not a valid reason. If I was a dev my response would be "don't like it don't buy it".
A reasonable standard is an unbiased and objective standard.
LOL.. ROFLOL. Your being oh so very unbiased and objective. Your main argument is that you do not want epic or psionics because you will be forced to buy it and use it. That to you is being unbiased and objective.
Newsflash yourself: Paizo is a Third Party Publisher. Pathfinder is a 3PP variant of D20 3.5. If you're playing Pathfinder you're already using 3PP material.
Not anymore. Once they published thier own core book with their own brand and logo they graduated to publisher. They have their own game with it's unique feel. I may not like everything they have done yet to group them in the same category as say Dreamscarred Press not the same level at all anymore.
2) You want Paizo to release their own Paizo branded psionics books and you want Paizo to support those rules in its other products. If this is the case then you are trying to force everyone to use psionics or waste their money on material they don't need, in which case your argument that people who don't want psionics are "holding the devs hostage" is disingenuous. It's just a smear tactic to intimidate people into shutting up so you can get your way, which is underhanded and dishonest.
You do realize that later products stand a very good chance of having material from later releases right. That we may see a Magus or Oracle show up in an AP at a later date. Or did you think that the devs are going to ignore the options they themselves developed for the rpg. So if a psionics book is every released from Paizo then it will appear in later APs and sourcebooks where approriate. Not every AP needs psionics or new material included in it. And please don't play the victim card. No one is telling anyone to keep quiet. Who is intimidating anyone not to post. So far the yes for epic materai outweigh the no. Are you now going to accues myself and other posters of rigging the voting process.
3) You want Paizo to release their own Paizo branded psionics books and you don't care if Paizo supports those rules in its other products. If this is the case then you simply fetishizing the Paizo brand name, and you have no substantive argument. There is ultimately no real difference between using a Paizo published version of the EPH updated to PFRPG and using Psionics Unleashed - unless you want to make the claim that the guys at Dreamscarred Press are a bunch of morons who turned out a garbage product, and the paizo crew couldn't help but do better.
Since I want an official product I must be fetishizing the Paizo brand name. Really. that's the best you could come up with. Where did I say that the guys at DP are bad people. This the second time you accused me of this. If anyone your the one who seems to have a thing against them. Then you wonder why I accuse you of putting words in peoples mouths and going on tangents in posts. U choose postion 2.
Frankly, I don't think the paizo crew could do better (except in terms of presentation, since they have larger art budgets), but that's not because I "lack faith" in the paizo devs, I just think the guys at DP are really good when it comes to psionics. Their material has won awards, is widely respected, and was considered the best psionics support under 3.5.
Until they actually do a psionics book I think it's way too early and ufair to pass jusgement. I'm not saying the Paizo devs are gods. I'm just gettin tired of them announcing a new product and posters assuming they will make the same mistakes as Wotc. The APG was announced cries of rules bloat and Paizo making the mistakes of the past. UM same thing. UC probably the same thing. See I like to pass judgment on an actual product. Not make assumptions about a product before it is released
I think maybe you're putting too much faith in the devs, and treating the game too much like a religion.
I'm not one of those fans who wears rose colored spray painted black when it comes to an rpg company, it's products or the devs. I do take issue that everytime a new sorucebook that has new rules and options is viewed with a sense of doom and gloom by a minority of posters. "Can't release book xyz they will screw it up" being repeated over and over again does get tiring. Funny how if it's a book a certain posters do not want to see Paizo will screw it up. If it's something they want to see Paizo is aces in their books. Have all their releases been perfect no. Does not mean that Paizo will automatically screw up an epic or psionic book.
Dude, I asked you some questions. How is that putting words in your mouth? Don't accuse me of jumping to conclusions when I'm trying to ask you questions to clarify your argument. I'm treating you with respect, you're insulting me. It's kind of BS.
How about the fact that keep accusing me of disliking PU and Dreamscarred Press. That I want to silence or intimidate any negative feedback against epic rules. I'm also not the one being very confrotional in his posts. I disagreed with you and was vocal about it and now that seems to bother you. I love how I'm the one being insulting yet I should not feel insulted when soneone accuses me of disliking an rpg company when I never said I did. Before accuse posters of insulting you make sure you do not do the same.
Do you want paizo to release a rehash of the Epic Level Handbook? Yes or no? If yes, then how do you respond to the fact that most people hated the Epic Level Handbook?
To maintaion backwards compability their has to be a certain amount of rehash. Just like their was a decent amount of rehash in PU. If gamers did not want to repurchase rehashed product why buy PF in the first place. Thier is only so much the devs can do with existing material and offer something new. That's the problem with backwards compiabity. You have to keep the material usable while offering new material. In this I do not envy the devs
People who want official rules for epic play eat little babies for Christmas.
I hear by declare that veal is a tasty, succulent dish to serve for your Christmas festivities.
Mmmmm. Christmas veal.
My impression is also that there's significant demand for it - furthermore, I think a "12-20 level GM book" would probably boost that demand by removing some of the stigma associated with high level play.
I would love to see more support for levels 12-20.
I would also buy books for levels 20+.
But I've never had veal at Xmas. :(
I like the idea of 20+ content, I have a campaign designed around the players going to 30th level.
I tell them if they plan on staying in one class to level 20 then to think about multi-classing or taking a prestige class.
It be helpful to have a book or two with content that has CR20+ encounters, or content designed for 20+ level.
As for title for the content if I had a choice I'd go for legendary.
My impression is also that there's significant demand for it - furthermore, I think a "12-20 level GM book" would probably boost that demand by removing some of the stigma associated with high level play.I would love to see more support for levels 12-20.
I would also buy books for levels 20+.
But I've never had veal at Xmas. :(
That's because you're too busy eating poor defenseless babies! Good though, aren't they? :)
|
|
That's because you're too busy eating poor defenseless babies! Good though, aren't they? :)My impression is also that there's significant demand for it - furthermore, I think a "12-20 level GM book" would probably boost that demand by removing some of the stigma associated with high level play.I would love to see more support for levels 12-20.
I would also buy books for levels 20+.
But I've never had veal at Xmas. :(
I recommned a side order of Soylent Green. I heard its to die for.
That's because you're too busy eating poor defenseless babies! Good though, aren't they? :)My impression is also that there's significant demand for it - furthermore, I think a "12-20 level GM book" would probably boost that demand by removing some of the stigma associated with high level play.I would love to see more support for levels 12-20.
I would also buy books for levels 20+.
But I've never had veal at Xmas. :(
Eh, skins a little too tough for my tastes.
Now kittens, that's the way to go.
|
|
So basically if I do not agree with you 1000% I'm being unreasonable and maliging anyone that disagrees with me. LOL. That some interesting logic you have there.
You are being completely unreasonable, do you understand that? You aren't even attempting to deal with the arguments presented, you're just maligning anyone who disagrees with you.
Except that isn't what I actually said. But thank you for demonstrating my point. You don't have to agree with anyone, but ignoring the arguments being presented is not acting reasonably.
If paizo publishes a psionics book, then paizo must support psionics in Golarion. They have made that promise to Pathfinder players, that they will not repeat the mistakes of WOTC and fail to support their own products. That means that if they release a psionics book, there will be psionics in the adventure paths, the player's companions, the pathfinder chronicles, and the bestiaries.Which they can easily. they release a psionic book tied to no setting then release a psionics of Golarion sourcebook seperately and there you go. One book for those who do not play in or use Golarion and one for those that do. Again with Wotc has done. You have a real hangup when it comes to Wotc do you know that. As for psionic stuff showing up in later sourcebooks so what. You think that later books will not include stuff from the APG, UM, UC or any other book that has new material. Your basically saying that while they should publish ne material it should not show up in later products. Why not that makes no sense and you can ignore whatever you do not want to use.
No, memorax, that is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what I'm saying. Do you get that? Let me make the point clear:
I'm saying that the new material they publish should be supported in later products, because that's what Paizo promised they would do. WOTC failed to support their own material, Paizo promised they wouldn't make that same mistake. I expect Paizo to make good on that promise.
Which means that if paizo adds something like psionics or high level play to the game, I expect that to be supported in later products. And while you're right that I can ignore that material if it doesn't appeal to me, I still end up paying for it.
Which is why your whole "holding the devs hostage" argument is a load of BS.
Gailbraithe wrote:
Which means that if they do release a psionics book, people who don't want psionics are forced to buy supplemental material for the psionics book even if they have no desire to buy the main psionics book.That's the risk you take when you buy books from a publisher that releases new rules, options, feat, spells on a regular basis. Do you think that spells from UM will never show up in an AP. Or that an NPC in a an AP will not have a feat taken from the APG. It makes no sense for the Pazio devs not to use the new material in later books.
THAT'S MY ENTIRE FRAKING POINT!!!!
We use the newer material why would the people who creayed the material in the first place not use it themselves. Asn has been said before no one is forcing anyone to buy anything. Sorry but that's not a valid argument against new material. I have enough APS I'm not forcing myself to buy more. I see no need for the Halflings or Orcs of Galoriaon book I'm not forcing myself to buy them.
Yes, actually, it is a valid argument against new material. Because if I don't use psionics and 25% of Bestiary 4 is new psionic monster, then when I buy Bestiary 4 only 75% of the book is useful to me.
You're right, I could just stop buying Pathfinder books entirely, but surely you can see how that is not a good strategy for paizo?
As I said it's a risk every gamer takes when they buy from any rpg publisher that release new rules material. Why would they not include newer rule material in their products. It makes no sense for Paizo to release a psioincs book and then to never have it show up in later books. As some of the fanbase such as myself would want it in the books. Majority rules and if the majority want it the majority imo should get it. Otherwise you will never get new material ever.
But people who want psionics are not the majority. Which is the whole farking point.
You do realize that later products stand a very good chance of having material from later releases right. That we may see a Magus or Oracle show up in an AP at a later date. Or did you think that the devs are going to ignore the options they themselves developed for the rpg.
Yes, memorax, I do realize that. Again:
I notice you didn't tell me which position you support. I am trying really hard not to insult you, but I seriously think you have extreme reading comprehension problems. This conversation really feels like I'm talking to a particularly obtuse wall.
I'm done talking to you, memorax. As far as I can tell you aren't capable of understanding other people's positions, aren't capable of explaining your own, and are a completely unreasonable person.
I mean seriously, look at this garbage:
Do you want paizo to release a rehash of the Epic Level Handbook? Yes or no? If yes, then how do you respond to the fact that most people hated the Epic Level Handbook?To maintaion backwards compability their has to be a certain amount of rehash. Just like their was a decent amount of rehash in PU. If gamers did not want to repurchase rehashed product why buy PF in the first place. Thier is only so much the devs can do with existing material and offer something new. That's the problem with backwards compiabity. You have to keep the material usable while offering new material. In this I do not envy the devs
WHY CAN'T YOU JUST ANSWER THE FARKING QUESTION??? Why the runaround? Why don't you ever answer the goddamn question you are being asked?
It sounds like you want a rehash of the ELH. It sounds like you don't care that pretty much everyone hated the ELH. And it sounds like the only reason you want it is because WOTC did it, which makes your comments about me being obsessed with what WOTC did just laughable.
Don't bother responding, I'm not going to read your response. Because however you respond, I am pretty sure it will have NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT I SAID.