Yeah, we haven't had an serious problems with crafting either.
The players at the table are generally eager to work with the GM to keep power balancing in line with what it should be for the AP we're playing. I would argue that crafting getting out of control (even though the rules allow it) is a symptom rather than the underlying problem.
Oh, well. If you all say that item crafting in your campaign is just fine, I guess I'll just leave it there. That nobody actually has tried to address the core point I was making, outside of "WBL is just a guideline" ( apparently just like the pirate code ) is a bit sad.
Oh, well. If you all say that item crafting in your campaign is just fine, I guess I'll just leave it there. That nobody actually has tried to address the core point I was making, outside of "WBL is just a guideline" ( apparently just like the pirate code ) is a bit sad.
Well, if you consider people saying that your analysis is mistaken is addressing your core point, then it has been addressed. Multiple times.
If the APs are built with 120% of what would match WBL - after assuming all resale items are sold for half price - that's the core variable in question. That's the deviation from the standard expectation of hoards being built based on market value, not PC resale value.
Since APs are the core business of Paizo and a ton of people are running them, it surely is a standard baseline to calculate with.
It may be the core of the business, but the Core Rulebook is the core of the rules, that is the baseline.
Also, I don't play APs so I might be wrong, but I'm under the impression that in most of them, Kingmaker aside, the PCs don't have months of cooldown between one adventure and the next, making it nearly impossible to craft anything big.
Just another option similiar to E6, havent used it yet but I think it would be fun. Basically I call it the Expert Game, everyone levels up whatever class or combo they want to level 10. After that, everyone multiclasses to the npc Expert class. This slows the pace of the game, provides for plenty of skill points and options, allows feat progression, extra hps etc and over time favors martial characters over casters. Most of the groups I have played in dont really have the skills or mindset for higher level play anyway, so this seems to be a way to continue running a moderately powered campaign. And since EVERYONE has to convert to the Expert class, no one should feel like their fav class is being picked on.
It may be the core of the business, but the Core Rulebook is the core of the rules, that is the baseline.
Yeah, and WBL there is what it is. APs have around 120% WBL with all items sold.
Also, I don't play APs so I might be wrong, but I'm under the impression that in most of them, Kingmaker aside, the PCs don't have months of cooldown between one adventure and the next, making it nearly impossible to craft anything big.
Most APs have some downtime between modules. It is always up to the GM to either extend it into some weeks or months or run the next module immediately. Normally I try to give the PCs a good amount of time off, so that the campaign doesn't feel too rushed.
Come on, man. APs are not built that way. Of course you can adjust homebrewn campaigns much easier, since treasure placement is entirely up to the GM. But with prewritten treasure hoards, you got to be aware of how they are built. APs normally build to WBL, with the 50% price reduction on every magic item already built in. Meaning they assume that players will keep nothing and sell everything.
Your assumptions are incorrect. The reason that the APs have double the WBL when you go through and add it all up isn't because they expect players to sell every item (although I am sure they factor that in to an extent.) The reason is that they expect PCs and NPCs to actually USE items during the course of play.
FROM the WBL guidelines:
Table: Character Wealth by Level can also be used to budget gear for characters starting above 1st level, such as a new character created to replace a dead one. Characters should spend no more than half their total wealth on any single item. For a balanced approach, PCs that are built after 1st level should spend no more than 25% of their wealth on weapons, 25% on armor and protective devices, 25% on other magic items, 15% on disposable items like potions, scrolls, and wands, and 10% on ordinary gear and coins.
If you go through and take 15% from the expected WBL at each level you'll see that it adds up to about half the amount by level 15 (the normal ap ending point)
Additionally you've got to factor in the fact that it's not just the PC's using consumables. If the NPC they are fighting has three cure serious wounds potions he's going to attempt to use them during the fight. Assuming that he gets a chance to use 2 out of the 3 before the pcs take him down that's 1500gp less for your calculations.
If I would want to stop GM'ing, I would. I'm fine with reworking things, but if there is a chance to cut one of the fundamental unbalancing factors of the game at the root, instead of parsing it off to the GMs, then I'd do it in an instant as one of the developers.
I've already instuted that houserule at my table and I expect it to save me a lot of headache and make the item creation feats something which a player takes because of loot customization. Hey, I'll you guys in a year and a half how it worked out.
Your assumptions are incorrect. The reason that the APs have double the WBL when you go through and add it all up isn't because they expect players to sell every item (although I am sure they factor that in to an extent.) The reason is that they expect PCs and NPCs to actually USE items during the course of play.
FROM the WBL guidelines:
Table: Character Wealth by Level can also be used to budget gear for characters starting above 1st level, such as a new character created to replace a dead one. Characters should spend no more than half their total wealth on any single item. For a balanced approach, PCs that are built after 1st level should spend no more than 25% of their wealth on weapons, 25% on armor and protective devices, 25% on other magic items, 15% on disposable items like potions, scrolls, and wands, and 10% on ordinary gear and coins.
If you go through and take 15% from the expected WBL at each level you'll see that it adds up to about half the amount by level 15 (the normal ap ending point)
Additionally you've got to factor in the fact that it's not just the PC's using consumables. If the NPC they are fighting has three cure serious wounds potions he's going to attempt to use them during the fight. Assuming that he gets a chance to use 2 out of the 3 before the pcs take him down that's 1500gp less for your calculations.
Yeah, only that APs have about 120% WBL for a four person party which sells everything. If we take the actual value of things players normally keep ( which raises its value to 100% of market price ), the loot is worth even more.
And I have yet to hear of a GM who forces the NPC loot assignment table on his players.
Yeah, only that APs have about 120% WBL for a four person party which sells everything. If we take the actual value of things players normally keep ( which raises its value to 100% of market price ), the loot is worth even more.And I have yet to hear of a GM who forces the NPC loot assignment table on his players.
okay, I'll try this again with an example since you obviously missed the point.
WBL says that by level 2 you should have 1000gp.
During the course of going from level 1 to level 2 it's assumed that you will use 150gp in consumables, maybe a few CLW potions, maybe a scroll, maybe some charges of a mage armor wand, etc. Additionally it's assumed that the enemies you are fighting will use some consumables. Lets say they use another 150gp in items.
Now if you go through and just add up the value of all the treasure you'd see that each PC could earn 1300gp by the time they hit 2nd level, however since they and their enemies used items the "net" is only 1000gp, which is the expected WBL. If you continue to assume that 15% of the gross GP is "lost" at each level you you end up needing the gross earned amount to be 200% of the expected net retained amount over the course of the 15 level adventure. Accounting for the fact that developers build in a 20% (net) margin of error to make up for missed treasure the APs are built towards the WBL guidelines.
Yeah, only that it doesn't work that way in reality. Villains have better stuff to do than spend their action on chugging a Cure Not Enough Wounds potion, while four or more PCs are wailing on them. Players hoard consumables. Most of the time a group will not let an enemy disengage and retreat, so that he can actually heal himself up as described in his tactics.
"Nearly" double and it can get pretty near with the right amount of time and the right class.
Yeah, only that it doesn't work that way in reality. Villains have better stuff to do than spend their action on chugging a Cure Not Enough Wounds potion, while four or more PCs are wailing on them. Players hoard consumables. Most of the time a group will not let an enemy disengage and retreat, so that he can actually heal himself up as described in his tactics.It does if your villains have any sort of depth. Cure light wounds when several PCs are wailing on him for twice that each round? Probably not so much. Enlarge person, Shield of Faith, Barkskin, and/or stat enhancers when he hears them slaughtering the guards outside his throne chamber? Absolutely.
Well, if the AP gives him that kind of stuff... which does not happen all that often. I've also thought about just adding +5 Greater Magic Weapon oils to my opponents, but if you want to play opponents right out of the book, they are far, far from being even slightly min-maxed.
12 years of experience enough? What feat for...I've always been so confused about the anti-caster sentiment among d20 critics.
It's not a PvP game. It's a team game.
And Fighters have their role to play, just as Wizards do, in making sure the party can achieve its goals. A party of just Wizards is a weak party indeed.
And and and -- it's not as if players are assumed to always start out at level 20. Most campaigns and adventures never venture past level 15 at the highest, and what's wrong with theoretical class power shifting with levels, even if it could be established that this is so? Low-level gritty adventures should suit the Ranger, Rogue and Barbarian, that's precisely where they're designed to shine, and shine they do indeed. What's more pathetic than a spellcasting-focused Wizard at level 1? Do we hear a cacophony of whiners about how weak spellcasters are at the low levels where the vast majority of play actually takes place? And what about the restrictions of Time and Money on spellcasters? Those material components don't just afford themselves, you know. It's a bad DM who simply gives a Wizard all the time in the world to set up as elaborate a plot as he pleases: why do you suppose the Lich is such an archtypical BBEG? It's because he's had a thousand years to prepare for one epic combat. Behind every complaint about spellcaster power is a lazy or ignorant DM who won't or can't enforce the Rules As Written and/or can't or won't be intelligent about the world he's supposed to design.
Regardless of where the classes end up in terms of the nebulous, unquantifiable quality called "power", characters must still survive and gain "power" throughout their adventuring careers -- don't just assume that all characters will do so! Early game survival is still a balancing factor. Those d10 HD and that Full BAB and that Full Plate Mail shouldn't be written off so casually.
Sounds like someone doesn't have nearly as much experience with the 3.X or d20 system as he thinks.
Big whoop. How many of us here can say we have over 30 years total experience in the game? A lot more than you think. And that means, for most of us, that we have all the same experience with d20 and its immense brood of bastards as you do. In the end, it doesn't change the fact that each of us has another thing in common, as well as our opinions, and that that thing stinks just as much.
You came here to start trouble, really. By your own admission, you avoided Pathfinder until recently. Pathfinder exists to keep 3.5 alive, as has been stated, so nothing you could say will be a surprise - again, as was stated by others - and no argument you could start is one that hasn't been hammered out. Not only here on these boards, but all the way back to the early days of the WoTC boards, which by the way, I contributed to myself (as did many others here) for many years.
Old and wise saying: "a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." Einstein's take: "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and hoping for a different outcome."
Insane, small mind noted. Move along, please.
"Nearly" double and it can get pretty near with the right amount of time and the right class.I asked how.
If you got CWI and Craft Arms and Armor, you got nearly everything covered. What else do you want, a detailed breakdown of every item? You can do that on your own, I really don't need that kind of hassling, especially since it is quite apparent that people now are just turning up to get some additional digs in.
Fair enough on some points. The consequences of magic item crafting seem to vary wildly between individual GMs, although I still postulate that this is kind of Oberoni fallacious thinking "Well, in MY campaign it isn't an issue, because I can adjust more easily to a real existing imbalance than other GMs".
There's no fallacy here expect your idea that you've somehow proven this to be a real existing imbalance and not just something you've had trouble dealing with.
But I disagree that we should take WBL only as a "guideline". Around which assumptions are CRs crafted? I am quite sure "four player characters, 15 point buy, WBL" are the three main points where the point of orientation lies.
And I disagree that CRs have any kind of guiding assumptions at all. They're something that has been around for a very long time (and no, I don't know which version they originally came from) and have been adjusted and readjusted until they felt right. No one ever sat dow and did any actual math to make them definitely work.
Now, I'll agree that the standard test for whether a CR is about right is to make a standard party of 4, give them WBL appropriate gear and have them fight the thing. However, this only shows it's CR within about plus-or-minus one, since tactics, terrain and luck can make a huge difference.
So, saying WBL is important to CR is just not right. It really isn't that simple.
Besides that, you never addressed my comments about WBL between levels, or WBL bumps from dragon's hoards or other large hauls. And I mean that those, by themselves without crafting, are larger swings than what you get from crafting in a normal campaign.
And I still say that adjusting for WBL disparities is actually the most difficult of possible adjustments to make. More players? More opponents. Better attributes? Advanced template. Better WBL? Uh, well, how much, which items, what can I do to make NPCs better without further deluging the party with more money?
And again, that's entirely subjective. Also, I don't get why you think monsters need to match PCs point for point. More players? Better gear. Better attributes? More monsters. Etc.
It is because of this that I regard magic item crafting to be in need of some balancing and I'd rather find a solution which cures the problem at the root than just leave it up to each GM to deal with it in its own manner.
As long as you agree that that is only the root of your problem and not some previously never-before-realized root of everyone's problems.
After all, it is not as if the perceived issue with the Monk is best solved with saying "Let every GM make his own version of the class!".
Expect that's completely backwards. Everyone but you is saying to use the version in the book.
"Nearly" double and it can get pretty near with the right amount of time and the right class.I asked how.
Well, since magnuskn won't:
Assume your party has a wizard with CWI and CMAnA. Note that this is already two crafting feats. Two feats is a significant expense. Even with wizard bonus feats, many people already prefer to take metamagic.
Also assume the party's level 10 (just a random level). That means that each character should have around 62,000 gp just as they level. (In an actual game, it would be exceedingly unlikely that they'd have exactly that.)
For just the wizard's gear, my wizard would probably have something like the following if I build him at level 10. Let's use a familiar to avoid the added complication of a bonded item, but not an advanced wand-wielding familiar to avoid that complication.
- +1 haramaki, 1153 gp (no spell failure, to be further enchanted later)
- +1 mithral buckler, 2155 gp (also no spell failure)
- ring of sustenance, 2500 gp
- ring of protection +2, 8000 gp
- lesser metamagic rod of reach, 3000 gp
- handy haversack, 2000 gp
- annihilation spectacles, 25000 gp
- cloak of resistance +3, 9000 gp
- headband of vast intelligence +2, 4000 gp
- plus 5192 gp in mundane gear, portable alchemical labs, potions, wands and other stuff
Now, that's with no crafting. With the two crafting feats, I can save half on most wondrous items and armor (no weapons here). That's the haramaki (down to 653 gp), the buckler (1655 gp), the haversack (1000 gp), the spectacles (12500 gp), the cloak (4500 gp) and the headband (2000 gp). That's a total savings of 21000 gp. (The spectacles were about half that.) Now, with the extra 21000 gp, I'd probably mostly upgrade stuff. Most other stuff I'd want would be too expensive for now.
So if I managed to spend that 21000 gp only on further crafting, that'd bring my effective wealth up to 104000 gp, which is 167.7% of my WBL and about +2 effective WBL. A fighter relies heavily on arms and armor, so the results there would probably be the same.
+2 WBL at the price of two feats seems about right. More rods and rings would be nice, and I probably wouldn't buy a staff unless I made it myself, but those cost even more feats. I also didn't account for crafting consumables, which has the potential to save quite a bit, but since you don't get to see it all at once, most people don't notice.
The down side: it'd take 84 days to craft everything just for myself (after spending the extra 21000 gp). Now, that'd probably have been spread over the past 5 levels, but if I'm crafting on the go, that'd be 336 days. Even taking the DC bump to speed things up, that's still a lot of time. (And it's not clear that that bump really lets you cut down on the number of days. It could be interpreted as just using less time per day. I don't know which is RAI, but I think more people interpret it the first way.)
Of course, a dwarf wizard with the right traits and feats could get things done much faster, but that's a character that's spent a lot of personal resources on this one focus and should be good at it.
Agreed. Extrapolating, you could actually double your wealth with one feat if you spent every penny on only one type of magic item. That's unlikely, but not quite impossible. A wizard could get by with just wondrous items (rings, rods, wands and potions are nice though) and a fighter could get by on just arms and armor (but they'd have to give up cloaks of resistance, rings of protection and amulets of natural armor).
More practically, if you had just those two feats, you could cover all the big six, and a fighter really could get by with just those.
Actually, a monk might could get by with just wondrous items, but I haven't actually checked.
Edit: Also, double wealth at level 10 would require 124 days of crafting for one person, by default at least.
Yeah, I said "nearly" doubling for a reason, because 100% efficiency ain't really possible. It still is a substantial benefit, which no other feat can nearly duplicate.
Also, I am bowing out. I am really not in the mood to further deal with people who use a tone which I can only interpret as "getting in someones face".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have not read all the post, but since the last page everyone seemed to be civil. If they have not been civil then flag them.
Probably the best method, but since I already said that I am conceding the argument quite a few posts above, guys like ImperatorK don't get to make demands of me anymore. I hate that kind of attitude, where after an argument is over, someone else jumps on top of the guy who lost the argument ( that'd be me ), just to score a few more points. :-/
|
The real problem in Pathfinder....
The fact that Paizo signed off on the Ring of Continuation certainly counts.
Assume your party has a wizard with CWI and CMAnA. Note that this is already two crafting feats. Two feats is a significant expense. Even with wizard bonus feats, many people already prefer to take metamagic.Also assume the party's level 10 (just a random level). That means that each character should have around 62,000 gp just as they level. (In an actual game, it would be exceedingly unlikely that they'd have exactly that.)
For just the wizard's gear, my wizard would probably have something like the following if I build him at level 10. Let's use a familiar to avoid the added complication of a bonded item, but not an advanced wand-wielding familiar to avoid that complication.
- +1 haramaki, 1153 gp (no spell failure, to be further enchanted later)
- +1 mithral buckler, 2155 gp (also no spell failure)
- ring of sustenance, 2500 gp
- ring of protection +2, 8000 gp
- lesser metamagic rod of reach, 3000 gp
- handy haversack, 2000 gp
- annihilation spectacles, 25000 gp
- cloak of resistance +3, 9000 gp
- headband of vast intelligence +2, 4000 gp
- plus 5192 gp in mundane gear, portable alchemical labs, potions, wands and other stuffNow, that's with no crafting. With the two crafting feats, I can save half on most wondrous items and armor (no weapons here). That's the haramaki (down to 653 gp), the buckler (1655 gp), the haversack (1000 gp), the spectacles (12500 gp), the cloak (4500 gp) and the headband (2000 gp). That's a total savings of 21000 gp. (The spectacles were about half that.) Now, with the extra 21000 gp, I'd probably mostly upgrade stuff. Most other stuff I'd want would be too expensive for now.
So if I managed to spend that 21000 gp only on further crafting, that'd bring my effective wealth up to 104000 gp, which is 167.7% of my WBL and about +2 effective WBL.
But where is that initial investment value coming from? Where did you get that 21,000 gp on the further crafting? Was it all cash or was it from selling other magic items and other things that get sold for half price? If you had to sell 42,000 gp worth of magic items to get the 21,000 gp to craft from, that's not doubling anything. That's a wash.
In order to show that you're exceeding your expected WBL, you have to show that you're getting more out than you're putting in. The source of what's going in needs to be accounted for. As I posted before, if all the PCs get is cash, then, yes, you can use crafting feats to increase your gear's value above WBL. But that's not the typical case with respect to treasure received in the course of an adventure. A lot of it is sold for half price - pushing the crafting feats into the service of preserving value, rather than expanding it.
That example was of building a new character at level 10 (one of the only circumstances WBL has ever been invoked in any of the games I've played BTW), so all of the initial 62,000 gp would be cash-equivalent. The 21,000 was what I would have saved by crafting everything I could. The 42,000 was the wealth gained from addition crafting of the saved 21,000.
This breakdown would not work out as well for a character that reached level 10 through play for exactly the reasons you state. (No adventure that I know of gives only cash.)
For example, if you sold off a 10,000 gp item (getting 5,000 gp back) near the end of level 9 so you could afford to make those spectacles, you'd end up with only 159.7% of WBL instead of 167.7% (if I did my math right). In practice, you'd end up selling a lot more than 10,000 gp before level 10.
|
Could it be that APs give treasure generously because they assume you'll be buying a lot of magic items instead of making them yourself, because of the time pressure?
Don't forget that there's two kinds of time pressure here. Besides adventuring, you also can't start crafting until you actually have the feat. Are you taking item creation feats at the very first opportunity, or do you use wizard bonus feats (which means you don't get CWI and CMAA until level 10)? If you take crafting feats at the first opportunity, you'll be relatively weak at that level, until the crafting investment starts to pay off.
And I agree that WBL is used in the wrong direction a lot. A GM could go "wow, this party has wealth that's at +2 WBL, I can just put in an additional monster in every encounter and they'd be able to deal with that." Use WBL as an indicator of whether a character is strong or weak for his level.
Anyway, after reading all this, I've become intensely curious about how the item creation system will work out. I was inclined to be restrictive as a GM, but now I just want to see how bad (or not) it'll get if I use it strictly as-is.
James Jacob has stated that treasure in APs is so generous because the players aren't expected to find everything (quote linked earlier in this thread), plus they do account for losses from consumables (but no mention of losses due to selling).
Also, I think you're right about how WBL is meant to be used, but I don't know of any dev comments either way there.
|
|
Still not seeing the doom and gloom of a ring of continuation that some see on these boards. How many groups of players you know are going to patiently save 56K to get one item for one member of the party. I sure as as hell know that I would be spending that much on other improvements.
Timestop + Ring of Continuation = Instant Win Button
You can literally stop the game, sleep for 8 hours, memorize spells for that specific encounter, get throught it, rinse, and repeat.
Essentially, you sacrifice 1 9th level spell slot in order to have infinite reaction time to ANYTHING that happens.
The martial equivalent would be to have a sword that when drawn, causes all enemies to fall over dead, no save. Only that wouldn't be quite as good.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Still not seeing the doom and gloom of a ring of continuation that some see on these boards. How many groups of players you know are going to patiently save 56K to get one item for one member of the party. I sure as as hell know that I would be spending that much on other improvements.Timestop + Ring of Continuation = Instant Win Button
You can literally stop the game, sleep for 8 hours, memorize spells for that specific encounter, get throught it, rinse, and repeat.
Essentially, you sacrifice 1 9th level spell slot in order to have infinite reaction time to ANYTHING that happens.
The martial equivalent would be to have a sword that when drawn, causes all enemies to fall over dead, no save. Only that wouldn't be quite as good.
That item is clearly an error.
Kthulhu, your uber-beloved Tome of Horror Complete is full of those. Like bad CR's or miscalculated skills. Or even errata to the original books that was not incorporated into the Complete edition.
Does it make it a crap book? Hell no. Did you foam at mouth about it? No you didn't. But now you're nerdraging over a single item in a Paizo book.
So, like, knock it off.
|
|
Do you really think giving a monster an extra skill point or having the CR be a bit low is the equivalent of an item of Insta-Win?
Hell, even if you outlaw the Timestop use, it's still broken beyond belief.
My problem is that Paizo apparently OKed the item. The company that so many of you hold up as the messiah of gaming can't realize that such a completely broken item might not be a good idea.
I think it would be fair to say that most of us don't agree with the item. I will admit I have not read every post, but those I did skim would like errata or to have the item thrown into the pit of non-existence.
|
|
Do you really think giving a monster an extra skill point or having the CR be a bit low is the equivalent of an item of Insta-Win?
Hell, even if you outlaw the Timestop use, it's still broken beyond belief.
My problem is that Paizo apparently OKed the item. The company that so many of you hold up as the messiah of gaming can't realize that such a completely broken item might not be a good idea.
*shrug* somebody didn't look the item over, or he did look and he forgot to include adjustment in the file, or he did include it but it got cut by accident in editing. It's the same as getting skills on a monster wrong, missing out a landmark on a map, or making an NPC a Cleric 4 in one book and Druid 5 in another book, unless you're beholden to some conspiracy theory.
But apart from that, tell us where the bad Paizo touched you. Maybe it was SKR? I heard he likes to drive an ice cream truck around. Except, you know, there's no ice cream inside.
Yeah, sometimes really, really bad stuff slips through. Antagonize, this ring and a few other things, like some of the new spells. While I don't grudge them a few mistakes, one wonders how they survived the editorial process. And no, saying "It's just one item/feat/spell in a huge book!" doesn't make those things any less unbalaced.
My problem is that Paizo apparently OKed the item. The company that so many of you hold up as the messiah of gaming can't realize that such a completely broken item might not be a good idea.
Part of why I consider them so great is the way they react to problems that slip through. I don't expect my messiahs to be perfect. How they handle their mistakes is to be admired too.
I hope they're out celebrating their ennies success rather than combing through the forums during gen con looking for recently discovered errors to address. When they get back, I expect an errata, a clarification or an explanation as to why this item is fine.
Yeah, sometimes really, really bad stuff slips through. Antagonize, this ring and a few other things, like some of the new spells. While I don't grudge them a few mistakes, one wonders how they survived the editorial process. And no, saying "It's just one item/feat/spell in a huge book!" doesn't make those things any less unbalaced.
I suspect "the editorial process" is bigger, more complicated, more time pressured and more chaotic than us non-professional-editors realize.
Yeah, sometimes really, really bad stuff slips through. Antagonize, this ring and a few other things, like some of the new spells. While I don't grudge them a few mistakes, one wonders how they survived the editorial process. And no, saying "It's just one item/feat/spell in a huge book!" doesn't make those things any less unbalaced.I suspect "the editorial process" is bigger, more complicated, more time pressured and more chaotic than us non-professional-editors realize.
I'm sure it is. But if even after large protests the really offensive stuff doesn't get corrected ( and Antagonize has not been, as I looked up right now. Making the DC from "laughably easy" to "a bit less laughably easy" does not fix the problem ), one has to wonder how things like these keep happening.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, sometimes really, really bad stuff slips through. Antagonize, this ring and a few other things, like some of the new spells. While I don't grudge them a few mistakes, one wonders how they survived the editorial process. And no, saying "It's just one item/feat/spell in a huge book!" doesn't make those things any less unbalaced.I suspect "the editorial process" is bigger, more complicated, more time pressured and more chaotic than us non-professional-editors realize.
P'shaw. We're GAMERS posting on a GAMER forum, that means we're automatically:
1) Monte Cook-level designers
2) Wolf Baur-level writers
3) Oxford/Harvard/MIT Univ. Publishing editors and developers
4) Lisa Stevens-level business managers
5) Cosmo-level customer service experts
6) Scott Rouse-level brand managers
7) Ed Greenwood-level continuity specialists
8) Erik Mona-level publishers
How did that not dawn upon you yet, I fathom. (/sarcasm, in case)
It sometimes seems like it, huh?