Paizo needs to get their house in order


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 552 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adamantine Dragon wrote:

Ssalarn, again, I am not buying what you are selling. Yes, they are providing a context for people to exercise their own imagination. But that means within the context of specific rules. It may be counter-intuitive but it is a truism that creativity is generally enhanced by constraints. To say that having fewer constraints allows for more customization is an argument for NO rules, not an argument for contradictory and unclear ones.

I am a GM Ssalarn, and have been one for a long, long time. I will always make whatever adjustments I need to for my games to work.

But that is no excuse for the game designers to say "Hey, we have a spell called 'magic missile'. It might do d4 damage or d6 damage, it might be force damage or fire damage. We won't tell you that because we want you to exercise your own imagination."

You are an articulate and intelligent defender of Paizo's lack of consistency and decisiveness Ssalarn. But you are not convincing me.

Except they devs aren't confused about Magic Missile. If they were, I'd say it's a huge issue that reflects badly on them. Instead, they're unclear, or more likely conflicted, about some very peripheral issues that don't come up in the vast, vast majority of play sessions.

Should they clarify these things? Sure. Should they make it their top priority as a company and not put out new products until these issues are addressed, as has been suggested in this thread? No, of course not, that's wildly hyperbolic.

In other words, there is a mountain being made of a modest molehill in this thread. The issues being discussed are real, and they are really, really minor.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Ssalarn wrote:
Actually RD, Sean Reynolds came in and gave a very thorough explanation wherein he clarified that enemies moving on a diagonal do not magically teleport next to the reach wielder, but do in fact provoke when they leave the diagonal square to enter the space adjacent to the reach wielder (though they don't provoke by performing actions within the second diagonal). Does this weaken reach wielders? Yes. But it also maintains the logical consistency and depth of the grid-based map, so you don't have square fireballs, or the ability to move farther by always running at an angle.

Thank you for that. SKR's "explanation" serves as YET ANOTHER example of designers contradicting the RAW. The rules say nothing of the sort. The designers do.

Issues such as this need to be made consistent via errata or FAQ. Otherwise, confusion will continue unabated.

Lord knows, I am not going to be able to give SKR's explanation to my players. None of them will understand it (that or I won't be able to explain it to them properly). Even if by some miracle, I find a way to phrase SKR's ruling in such a way that my friends can comprehend it, none of them would accept such a non-nonsensical, verisimilitude destroying rule in a million years!

v3.5 had it right to begin with. A simple exception to the rule makes things SO much simpler in this instance.

The only people SKR's ruling actually pleases are diehard geometry loving mathematicians. It's been proven. They took a survey in the other thread.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

32 people marked this as a favorite.

What's taking us so long to clear up these issues is that we've got more on our plates than keeping our house "in order," unfortunately. The pace at which we produce products, which need to come out on as regular a schedule as possible due to our subscription models (a model that, by the way, makes what we do at Paizo possible since it allows us some resistance against the fickle whims of distribution and lets us observe and control a significant amount of our business which allows us to more accurately spend resources and money on things like print runs—something that a lack of played a MAJOR role in driving TSR out of business) means that the bulk of our time is spent working on upcoming products.

It's certainly frustrating to see errors show up in print, just as it is frustrating when two different philosophies of game design sometimes clash together. We're doing what we can to adjust things. We ARE working on solving the issue with the monk, but the timing of when we do that and release that information has to work hand in hand with other things, like our regularly scheduled production responsibilities, RPG Superstar, Mythic Playtests, Convention duties, licensing stuff (such as with the minis, comics, or Goblinworks), and vacations/personal lives.

To a certain extent, though, fans of the game need to help. First, but letting us know when we mess up is important. It might take several months or even a year or more to see that error corrected in print due to the time it takes for us to turn the metaphorically immense battleship that is Paizo Publishing, but if we don't realize or know we made a mistake, we can't fix it at all in the first place.

Second, being patient with us as we react to feedback is IMMENSELY helpful. Letting us know that there's concerns with the monk is certainly important, but gnawing and worrying and obsessing on this fact non-stop isn't very productive, and only really leads to flame wars and internet-fueled discontent. And realizing that no two people play the game identically (similarly to how no two people necessarily have the same emotional reaction to ANY work at art—there are folks who love Star Wars or Firefly or Doctor Who and folks who hate it, for example, and neither of them is "right") and thus accepting the fact that even in house at Paizo there are going to be differences of opinion and being at peace with that is also important.

Alchemical Constructs: I wanted to address this bit separately, because the fundamental idea of an alchemist creating a construct is not only a cool idea, it's one that's already existing in fiction, and one that makes a lot of sense in play... particularly for constructs like alchemical golems, flesh golems (Frankenstein was likely an alchemist, after all), and homunculi. That means that even if you do say that an alchemist doesn't count as a spellcaster for meeting the prerequisites of taking the Craft Construct feat, there ABSOLUTELY should be an alchemist discovery (or heck, even an archetype) that allows an alchemist to build constructs. Just because we haven't designed and published that option for players doesn't mean it doesn't exist. SHOULD we have published that rules option in the adventure that featured an alchemist with a construct minion? Yes. But we didn't, and I'd quantify that as an error. Some day in the future, we'll get rules for alchemest-created constructs into the game.


Gregg, if the things I am talking about were complex issues requiring complete rewrites of significant portions of the rules to resolve, I would agree with you.

In fact in those cases I do agree with you. And there are plenty of those cases.

But there are plenty of simple, easy to answer questions that generate repeated massive tomes of posts that could be answered in five minutes with a simple "yes" or "no" and there is simply no way to convince me that doing so would negatively impact the rest of the work Paizo is doing.

"Does 'Instant Enemy' work with a ranger's 'Bane' bow?" Yes or no. End it. Get it done. Stop the insanity.

When there really is a major issue that is involved, say so. "We really can't address the vital strike issue because we've discovered it involves some core issues around the definition of 'attack action'. We'll get back to you on this but this is a top priority of our core game designers to resolve."

That's what they should do. Sometimes they do, and everyone says "cool, in the meantime I'll make my own ruling." Sometimes they don't, and when it is obviously a simple, straightforward question that only they have the authority to settle, it reflects badly on them.

For all my problems with 4e I will give them credit for actively looking for ways to resolve such questions. They went overboard with it which led to too much churn in their errata, but Paizo goes too far the other way.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

KHShadowrunner wrote:
Nicos wrote:

The FoB issue is a big mess so i understand that paizo team have not reached a consensus or whatever. But simple things like "is sunder a standard action?" should be easy to answer.

a) yes
b) No.

Is it not? I'm pretty sure that's outlined as early as Core... Maybe there's something I'm not seeing though that throws it into question.

The Sunder issue ties back into the "attack action" vs. "attack" issue, due to the horrendous phrasing in the ability "You can attempt to sunder an item held or worn by your opponent as part of an attack action in place of a melee attack". Some people think that this means that Sundering must be done as part of a standard action, others that it could be used whenever you would make an attack. Paizo so far has offered little insight into this, though whether that's because it's up for debate or part of an ongoing discussion, or they don't feel it needs clarification hasn't been specified.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Thank you for the additional insight, Mr. Jacobs.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

James Jacobs wrote:
*a detailed and articulate response*

Thank you. Thank you for your work and your insight, and for being the company that you are. Thank you for enduring the occasional verbally abusive tirade and still returning to the forums to offer insight into the how and why of your wonderful company. Thank you for a game that renewed both my own love of RPG's and that of many of my friends at a time where our interest in the hobby was dwindling. Thank you for being a company that listens to its fans and makes them a part of the game as more than just players, but contributors as well.

Thank you.


Ssalarn wrote:
KHShadowrunner wrote:
Nicos wrote:

The FoB issue is a big mess so i understand that paizo team have not reached a consensus or whatever. But simple things like "is sunder a standard action?" should be easy to answer.

a) yes
b) No.

Is it not? I'm pretty sure that's outlined as early as Core... Maybe there's something I'm not seeing though that throws it into question.
The Sunder issue ties back into the "attack action" vs. "attack" issue, due to the horrendous phrasing in the ability "You can attempt to sunder an item held or worn by your opponent as part of an attack action in place of a melee attack". Some people think that this means that Sundering must be done as part of a standard action, others that it could be used whenever you would make an attack. Paizo so far has offered little insight into this, though whether that's because it's up for debate or part of an ongoing discussion, or they don't feel it needs clarification hasn't been specified.

Just looking for an example of an attack action that is not a standard action? like maybe during an immediate action? But I don't know of anything off the top of my head that allows it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It would help me immensely just to know that Paizo is aware of these issues and they are on someone's task list to address.

My first real career was as the Publisher of a series of software products. We had lots of interest from our customers about our products, how they worked, what they were supposed to do, what was known to be an issue, and what we were working on resolving.

We chose to be completely open about it. We published our developer notes so that our customers could see exactly what we thought needed fixing, what we planned to do about it, how well that was going, and what else was on our list for each upcoming patch release.

It was no extra effort to publish that, since we had to keep track of that internally anyway. When our attention was directed by our users to specific issues, we would respond to them with notes from the developer or from me directly. If we chose not to "fix" something we explained why.

That seemed to work for us.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

KHShadowrunner wrote:

***stuff***

Just looking for an example of an attack action that is not a standard action? like maybe during an immediate action? But I don't know of anything off the top of my head that allows it.

When you take a full attack, you may make up to 5 (or more) "attacks". You may Trip in place of an attack, potentially tripping up to 5 (or more) times in a round. Moving 30 and then using a standard action to swing your sword is taking an "attack action". You could Vital Strike as part of such a maneuver, where you could not Vital Strike as part of one of the 5 "attacks" in a Full Attack. Charging is a special Full Round action. Since it is a Full Round action, you could not do something requiring a standard action (such as using Vital Strike). I don't want to derail this thread any further, but hopefully that helps a bit.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ssalarn wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
*a detailed and articulate response*

Thank you. Thank you for your work and your insight, and for being the company that you are. Thank you for enduring the occasional verbally abusive tirade and still returning to the forums to offer insight into the how and why of your wonderful company. Thank you for a game that renewed both my own love of RPG's and that of many of my friends at a time where our interest in the hobby was dwindling. Thank you for being a company that listens to its fans and makes them a part of the game as more than just players, but contributors as well.

Thank you.

LOL, this reads like fan mail.

Look, I like Paizo. I enjoy their products. I buy their products. I promote them by running games based on them. I give Paizo great kudos and have expressed my appreciation for them keeping the D&D game feel alive when Wizards seemed intent on destroying it. I converted my entire gaming group to Pathfinder, resulting in additional sales for Paizo.

But I am not aware of any company that deserves this sort of hero worship. They are a business doing their best to provide a product. Providing feedback to a company on a forum presented and promoted as a place to do exactly that is not a "verbally abusive tirade."

I appreciate that James and others from Paizo participate on these boards, but as much as I appreciate what they do, they are no more beyond reproach than any other business is. When they do something right, I applaud them. When they need a kick in the butt, I kick.

Because in the end it's my money that I'm spending.

Silver Crusade

Ravingdork wrote:
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
As usual RD is bringing a sledge to a tack driving contest...
I really have no idea what you're talking about.

Ooooohhhh! So THAT'S what a 'spork' is!

Paizo Employee Creative Director

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Adamantine Dragon wrote:

It would help me immensely just to know that Paizo is aware of these issues and they are on someone's task list to address.

Adamantine Dragon wrote:
I appreciate that James and others from Paizo participate on these boards, but as much as I appreciate what they do, they are no more beyond reproach than any other business is. When they do something right, I applaud them. When they need a kick in the butt, I kick.

Waiting for my applause or my kick for attempting to help you immensely by letting you know that Paizo is aware of these issues and we're trying to address them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adamantine Dragon wrote:

Gregg, if the things I am talking about were complex issues requiring complete rewrites of significant portions of the rules to resolve, I would agree with you.

In fact in those cases I do agree with you. And there are plenty of those cases.

But there are plenty of simple, easy to answer questions that generate repeated massive tomes of posts that could be answered in five minutes with a simple "yes" or "no" and there is simply no way to convince me that doing so would negatively impact the rest of the work Paizo is doing.

"Does 'Instant Enemy' work with a ranger's 'Bane' bow?" Yes or no. End it. Get it done. Stop the insanity.

When there really is a major issue that is involved, say so. "We really can't address the vital strike issue because we've discovered it involves some core issues around the definition of 'attack action'. We'll get back to you on this but this is a top priority of our core game designers to resolve."

That's what they should do. Sometimes they do, and everyone says "cool, in the meantime I'll make my own ruling." Sometimes they don't, and when it is obviously a simple, straightforward question that only they have the authority to settle, it reflects badly on them.

For all my problems with 4e I will give them credit for actively looking for ways to resolve such questions. They went overboard with it which led to too much churn in their errata, but Paizo goes too far the other way.

Insofar as there is insanity around any concrete examples mentioned in this thread, I would suggest that it's due to people getting het up about trivia that doesn't impact the vast, vast preponderance of games. It doesn't mean that when those problems come up, they shouldn't be addressed as the devs make the decisions and get the time to hammer out the details and tell the world. As James has explained, that process generally takes longer than it would in a perfect world, and it takes infinitely longer than the people who scream about it over and over in threads would like it to (their demanded time frame is "nowNowNOW!!!!!!!!!"). The devs haven't gotten around to discussing the Instant Enemy and Bane thing and issuing a resolution -- they've got s**t to do, like making sure the company brings in enough money to stay in business. But if you can keep a straight face while telling me that the Instant Enemy/Bane combo or Vital Strike/Spring Attack issues are major, game-derailing issues that require priority attention, then your definition of "major," "game-derailing," "require," and "priority" differs radically from mine.


James Jacobs wrote:
Adamantine Dragon wrote:

It would help me immensely just to know that Paizo is aware of these issues and they are on someone's task list to address.

Adamantine Dragon wrote:
I appreciate that James and others from Paizo participate on these boards, but as much as I appreciate what they do, they are no more beyond reproach than any other business is. When they do something right, I applaud them. When they need a kick in the butt, I kick.
Waiting for my applause or my kick for attempting to help you immensely by letting you know that Paizo is aware of these issues and we're trying to address them.

So, James, where is the link to the list so I can review it and see where "Instant enemy and Bane" is listed?

Just for one example.

And where is your applause? It was in this part, which you apparently didn't read: "Look, I like Paizo. I enjoy their products. I buy their products. I promote them by running games based on them. I give Paizo great kudos and have expressed my appreciation for them keeping the D&D game feel alive when Wizards seemed intent on destroying it. I converted my entire gaming group to Pathfinder, resulting in additional sales for Paizo."

Does kudos have to be wrapped in sugary adoring prose like Ssalarn for you to register it? If so you'll find yourself disappointed by my kudos.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

11 people marked this as a favorite.
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
*a detailed and articulate response*

Thank you. Thank you for your work and your insight, and for being the company that you are. Thank you for enduring the occasional verbally abusive tirade and still returning to the forums to offer insight into the how and why of your wonderful company. Thank you for a game that renewed both my own love of RPG's and that of many of my friends at a time where our interest in the hobby was dwindling. Thank you for being a company that listens to its fans and makes them a part of the game as more than just players, but contributors as well.

Thank you.
LOL, this reads like fan mail.

LOL, that reads like nerd rage.

I'm perfectly fine with folks complaining about Paizo and telling us how we messed up and what we're doing wrong and all that. That's how we as a company can grow and become better.

I'm NOT FINE with folks belittling and insulting other posters on these boards when they compliment us, especially if that insult uses something like "fan mail" in a context and way to deride the entire concept of someone enjoying something.

Mocking someone for being a fan is one of the most annoying and childish things a fan can do. And if you're not a fan of Paizo and Pathfinder... I wonder why you're bothering to post on these boards in the first place.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:


Waiting for my applause or my kick for attempting to help you immensely by letting you know that Paizo is aware of these issues and we're trying to address them.

Sometimes you can get both at once, such as the time when Queen Victoria simultaneously gave The Doctor a Knighthood and declared him an Enemy of the British Empire, creating the first Torchwood as a result.


James Jacobs wrote:
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
*a detailed and articulate response*

Thank you. Thank you for your work and your insight, and for being the company that you are. Thank you for enduring the occasional verbally abusive tirade and still returning to the forums to offer insight into the how and why of your wonderful company. Thank you for a game that renewed both my own love of RPG's and that of many of my friends at a time where our interest in the hobby was dwindling. Thank you for being a company that listens to its fans and makes them a part of the game as more than just players, but contributors as well.

Thank you.
LOL, this reads like fan mail.

LOL, that reads like nerd rage.

I'm perfectly fine with folks complaining about Paizo and telling us how we messed up and what we're doing wrong and all that. That's how we as a company can grow and become better.

I'm NOT FINE with folks belittling and insulting other posters on these boards when they compliment us, especially if that insult uses something like "fan mail" in a context and way to deride the entire concept of someone enjoying something.

Mocking someone for being a fan is one of the most annoying and childish things a fan can do. And if you're not a fan of Paizo and Pathfinder... I wonder why you're bothering to post on these boards in the first place.

Well, I guess I had a higher opinion of you than you deserved James. My mistake.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Adamantine Dragon wrote:

It would help me immensely just to know that Paizo is aware of these issues and they are on someone's task list to address.

Adamantine Dragon wrote:
I appreciate that James and others from Paizo participate on these boards, but as much as I appreciate what they do, they are no more beyond reproach than any other business is. When they do something right, I applaud them. When they need a kick in the butt, I kick.
Waiting for my applause or my kick for attempting to help you immensely by letting you know that Paizo is aware of these issues and we're trying to address them.

So, James, where is the link to the list so I can review it and see where "Instant enemy and Bane" is listed?

Just for one example.

There is no link. I don't have answers for everything. No one here at Paizo does. And we have to take care NOT to just render answers off the cuff because, as you've seen in this and other threads, that leads to confusion and gnashing of teeth when it becomes apparent that Paizo is not a hivemind and that its employees have different interpretations of how to solve different problems. Furthermore... we can't just immediately drop everything and reply to/solve every single possible error or address every clarification in real time. Because we have other jobs apart from customer service. By posting this, for example, I'm putting of the development of a very very late project that's in pretty bad shape—what's the better use of my time? Answering questions/customer service? Or getting a late product back on schedule?

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

Adamantine Dragon wrote:

***STUFF***

LOL, this reads like fan mail.

Look, I like Paizo. I enjoy their products. I buy their products. I promote them by running games based on them. I give Paizo great kudos and have expressed my appreciation for them keeping the D&D game feel alive when Wizards seemed intent on destroying it.

But I am not aware of any company that deserves this sort of hero worship. They are a business doing their best to provide a product. Providing feedback to a company on a forum presented and promoted as a place to do exactly that is not a "verbally abusive tirade."

I appreciate that James and others from Paizo participate on these boards, but as much as I appreciate what they do, they are no more beyond reproach than any other business is. When they do something right, I applaud them. When they need a kick in the butt, I kick.

Because in the end it's my money that I'm spending.

It is a little fan-mailey, but that's fine. I'm a fan. They do amazing things and take criticism with aplomb and an open ear. They supplanted D&D as the preeminent RPG in the world precisely because of the quality of the work they produce, their regular communication with their fan-base, and the fact that these forums and their playtests give every player a certain amount of ownership and investment in the product. Paizo doesn't need you kicking their butt. They're aware of the issues that are out there and have asked people to have a certain amount of patience and understanding while they work on them. You are demanding immediate gratification as though the $20-$50 you spent on a book entitles you to a shareholder's voice in the company. It does not. I work in a field where I deal with hundreds of overly entitled people every day who all think it's the job of every person at my company to immediately drop whatever we're doing to address whatever is currently causing them discomfort, whether the error is real or perceived. On those occasions where I do, in fact, drop what I'm doing (often something of far greater import) to immediately address their concern, it doesn't help my company at all, and I'm typically never thanked for doing it. People doing a good job deserve to be told so, not be subjected to the childish rants and told how they're running their wildly successful company the wrong way because I (meaning you) know better.


Ssalarn wrote:


It is a little fan-mailey, but that's fine. I'm a fan. They do amazing things and take criticism with aplomb and an open ear.

Really? Not today it seems.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
*a detailed and articulate response*

Thank you. Thank you for your work and your insight, and for being the company that you are. Thank you for enduring the occasional verbally abusive tirade and still returning to the forums to offer insight into the how and why of your wonderful company. Thank you for a game that renewed both my own love of RPG's and that of many of my friends at a time where our interest in the hobby was dwindling. Thank you for being a company that listens to its fans and makes them a part of the game as more than just players, but contributors as well.

Thank you.
LOL, this reads like fan mail.

LOL, that reads like nerd rage.

I'm perfectly fine with folks complaining about Paizo and telling us how we messed up and what we're doing wrong and all that. That's how we as a company can grow and become better.

I'm NOT FINE with folks belittling and insulting other posters on these boards when they compliment us, especially if that insult uses something like "fan mail" in a context and way to deride the entire concept of someone enjoying something.

Mocking someone for being a fan is one of the most annoying and childish things a fan can do. And if you're not a fan of Paizo and Pathfinder... I wonder why you're bothering to post on these boards in the first place.

Well, I guess I had a higher opinion of you than you deserved James. My mistake.

Sorry to disappoint you, then. It just bothers me when people on these boards mock other people on these boards. And it bothers me that when I come on these boards to do exactly what you're demanding we do that you turn around and use that against me.

Dark Archive

Personally though it is a bit annoying getting a book of new goodies only to have the best ones I find eventually withdrawn or worse, errated to the point of uselessness. Now would it matter much normally, no but I play a good deal of society sooo.... yeah

I guess my thought was that paizo really needs a play test team or something. That way stuff that looks tooo good can be ran through something and then judged if broken. Some kind of positions best filled by a group of seasoned munchkins able to spot exploits and give it the hammer before the presses...

Shadow Lodge

11 people marked this as a favorite.

Well, that escalated quickly.


James, having been the Publisher of a series of subscription based software products I am well aware of the pressure you are under. That's why I suggested you just post your own plans so we can see what you are doing.

That's what I did.

It worked.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:


Sorry to disappoint you, then. It just bothers me when people on these boards mock other people on these boards. And it bothers me that when I come on these boards to do exactly what you're demanding we do that you turn around and use that against me.

With all due respect James, I hope you are just having a bad day. I've mostly found your participation on these boards to be professional and customer focused.

Customer is a key word too. Because you see James I am NOT a "fan".

I am a "customer".

That's an important distinction for a professional content producer to understand.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Sporge wrote:

Personally though it is a bit annoying getting a book of new goodies only to have the best ones I find eventually withdrawn or worse, errated to the point of uselessness. Now would it matter much normally, no but I play a good deal of society sooo.... yeah

I guess my thought was that paizo really needs a play test team or something. That way stuff that looks tooo good can be ran through something and then judged if broken. Some kind of positions best filled by a group of seasoned munchkins able to spot exploits and give it the hammer before the presses...

To be perfectly frank, what would solve a LOT of this would be for us to cut the amount of products we're producing in half. That'd give us a LOT more time for everyone, from designer to developer to editor, to be more aware of what's going on in each of the product lines. Keeping all of these metaphorical plates spinning at once is a big job, especially when we keep adding more plates because folks keep asking for more plates... ;-P

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

Adamantine Dragon wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:


It is a little fan-mailey, but that's fine. I'm a fan. They do amazing things and take criticism with aplomb and an open ear.
Really? Not today it seems.

You call coming into a hostiley titled thread to address the concerns of the posters there, and then asking that everyone treat other posters with respect something other than acting with aplomb? James came in and directly addressed the concerns it was made to bring up, and was greeted with derision. I don't know if you are being intentionally hostile, or if your communications are just coming off as confrontational, but James has given as complete an explanation as could possibly be expected, and done so with a respect that you haven't returned.


10 people marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
I'd rather get it nipped in the butt

Dear nitpicker,

I've totally ignored everything else you've said today to focus on this one tiny mistake in your posting. The correct phrasing is 'Nip this in the bud', as in, a flower bud. Not a rear end.

Assuming you are going to demand exact precision from Paizo, please at least commit to the same precision in your posts, rather than making mistakes like this.

Thanks.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Sporge wrote:
I guess my thought was that paizo really needs a play test team or something. That way stuff that looks tooo good can be ran through something and then judged if broken. Some kind of positions best filled by a group of seasoned munchkins able to spot exploits and give it the hammer before the presses...

You are absolutely right. As we've seen, public playtesting has limited effectiveness. Public playtesting turns the ironing-out of rules issues into a competition of whose post can best attract developer response.

Instead, a closed-group of volunteer playtesters who have shown to be good at identifying rules issues would be much more effective and efficient. And the only compensation they'd need are little taglines next to their forum names and maybe their names in the finished product.

-Matt


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ssalarn wrote:
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:


It is a little fan-mailey, but that's fine. I'm a fan. They do amazing things and take criticism with aplomb and an open ear.
Really? Not today it seems.
You call coming into a hostiley titled thread to address the concerns of the posters there, and then asking that everyone treat other posters with respect something other than acting with aplomb? James came in and directly addressed the concerns it was made to bring up, and was greeted with derision. I don't know if you are being intentionally hostile, or if your communications are just coming off as confrontational, but James has given as complete an explanation as could possibly be expected, and done so with a respect that you haven't returned.

Ssalarn, I respectfully disagree. Other than suggesting that your comments were a bit fan mailish I have been nothing but respectful, and have been particularly respectful of James, which has not been reciprocated.

I would be more impressed with James' appearance here if he had provided much beyond "Hey, I'm a really busy guy, and some of this stuff just isn't that important compared to the really big stuff I have to do!"

I've been there, and one thing I knew is that as the Publisher, I never said stuff like that to my customers.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
To be perfectly frank, what would solve a LOT of this would be for us to cut the amount of products we're producing in half. That'd give us a LOT more time for everyone, from designer to developer to editor, to be more aware of what's going on in each of the product lines. Keeping all of these metaphorical plates spinning at once is a big job, especially when we keep adding more plates because folks keep asking for more plates... ;-P

I always did like how Paizo took their time with the production of their products, releasing only a few hardcovers each year, to ensure that a fine quality product was the end result (compared to other RPG companies, some of which release errata and books each month like candy on Halloween). I would not mind at all if you guys continued that trend.

Most of my complaints generally resonate with designers' online rulings, and how many of them either don't improve the game, or actually damage it.

Ultimately ruling that Vital Strike and its ilk could not be combined with charging or Spring Attack, for example, was a huge blow against everyone who ever considered playing a good mobility build. You guys have since released "patches" in the form of things like archetypes, but it still leaves me wondering: Why'd you rule that way in the first place?

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:


Sorry to disappoint you, then. It just bothers me when people on these boards mock other people on these boards. And it bothers me that when I come on these boards to do exactly what you're demanding we do that you turn around and use that against me.

With all due respect James, I hope you are just having a bad day. I've mostly found your participation on these boards to be professional and customer focused.

Customer is a key word too. Because you see James I am NOT a "fan".

I am a "customer".

That's an important distinction for a professional content producer to understand.

I'm a customer too. A customer who literally owns every core product and the vast majority of the ancillary products as well. This gives me astonishing insight into the sheer volume of material Paizo produces, as well a great understanding of both how many members of the community contribute to the product, and how small the staff actually is for a company whose products (released on a near monthly basis) are purchased and enjoyed at an international level. You can have an unhappy customer, and life goes on. Fans are the ones who buy the things you put out, the good and the bad, and share them with their friends, creating new fans, and new customers. Who would you keep happy?


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Guys, the more important issue is that alchemists will be able to make constructs.

Homunculi throwing bombs, animate flasks running towards those you wish to help (with infusion, of course!), misunderstood horrors brought back to life from disparate body parts, balms to temporarily grant life to everyday objects...

Paizo Employee Creative Director

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:


Sorry to disappoint you, then. It just bothers me when people on these boards mock other people on these boards. And it bothers me that when I come on these boards to do exactly what you're demanding we do that you turn around and use that against me.

With all due respect James, I hope you are just having a bad day. I've mostly found your participation on these boards to be professional and customer focused.

Customer is a key word too. Because you see James I am NOT a "fan".

I am a "customer".

That's an important distinction for a professional content producer to understand.

You could certainly say that this thread's title and the way that several posts are worded turned this rapidly into a bad day for me, yeah.

Personally, I find the word "fan" to be borderline offensive. When I talk about the people who like Paizo products, I generally really try to use words like "customers" or "folks" or "readers" or "gamers" or the like. "Fan" is a word that's used too often to apply to people who are very passionate about something that someone else feels is a frivolous waste of time, and as such has a lot of baggage associated with it for me.

Your use of the word "fan mail" and the way you used it is what helped make my normal day into a bad day, and the escalation from there was pretty swift.

So... I get the fact that folks are frustrated by all the problems brought up in this thread.

I think it's pretty obvious now that I'm if not AS frustrated by this, I'm possibly MORE frustrated by it than anyone who's posted on this thread, since to a certain extent, it's my job to make sure these types of things don't happen in our products, and when they do happen, I generally take it as an example of me failing to do my job.

So if we can agree to leave it at that, that's probably best for all involved.

* * * * * *

We know there's a problem, we're working on solving it, we're not going to give folks total transparency into how we're solving it, and it'll be an ongoing process since as we fix one issue, a new one may have popped up. Sorry it's happening, be patient with us once you inform us, and keep us updated when something new manifests. And don't take the lack of responses to every problem on this board as proof we're ignoring you.

Because we're not. If we ignore our customers, we die. You're the ones who keep us in business, and that's what keeps Paizo alive.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Ssalarn wrote:
...a thread with such a hostile title...

Please know that I've never found the phrase "get the house in order" to be a hostile one. My father used it all the time while I grew up and it was always said with authoritative fondness. Obviously, my experiences with the phrase differ from those of others.

Had I known it was going to elicit this kind of reaction, I would surely have selected a different thread title. Apologies to all.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ssalarn, I not only purchase Paizo products, I converted my entire gaming group and they all have purchased Paizo products as well.

Where you and I seem to be getting crossways is that I view Pathfinder as a product. It's a rules system that allows me to run my campaign in a manner that is more consistent with the original rules set that it was created in than the 4e stuff that Wizards foisted on me.

Every game system has flaws. Every company has limitations. But overall Pathfinder is still the best system out there that I can use to continue running my campaigns. So I will stick with it until something better comes along.

In the meantime I have no problem with me or any other customer saying "Hey Paizo, here are some things I think you could work on that would make your product, which is currently the best in the market, even better."

I fail to see why anyone in the position James Jacobs is in would expect anything else. I am very surprised by the thinness of his skin today. I expect there's something else going on, because as I said, generally speaking I have been impressed with James. I am going to chalk this up as an anomolous interaction.


Ravingdork wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
...a thread with such a hostile title...

I would like it known that I've never found the phrase "get the house in order" to be a hostile one.

Had I known it was going to elicit this kind of reaction, I would surely have selected a different thread title.

RD, that's what I meant by bringing the sledge to the tack contest.


James Jacobs wrote:
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:


Sorry to disappoint you, then. It just bothers me when people on these boards mock other people on these boards. And it bothers me that when I come on these boards to do exactly what you're demanding we do that you turn around and use that against me.

With all due respect James, I hope you are just having a bad day. I've mostly found your participation on these boards to be professional and customer focused.

Customer is a key word too. Because you see James I am NOT a "fan".

I am a "customer".

That's an important distinction for a professional content producer to understand.

You could certainly say that this thread's title and the way that several posts are worded turned this rapidly into a bad day for me, yeah.

Personally, I find the word "fan" to be borderline offensive. When I talk about the people who like Paizo products, I generally really try to use words like "customers" or "folks" or "readers" or "gamers" or the like. "Fan" is a word that's used too often to apply to people who are very passionate about something that someone else feels is a frivolous waste of time, and as such has a lot of baggage associated with it for me.

Your use of the word "fan mail" and the way you used it is what helped make my normal day into a bad day, and the escalation from there was pretty swift.

So... I get the fact that folks are frustrated by all the problems brought up in this thread.

I think it's pretty obvious now that I'm if not AS frustrated by this, I'm possibly MORE frustrated by it than anyone who's posted on this thread, since to a certain extent, it's my job to make sure these types of things don't happen in our products, and when they do happen, I generally take it as an example of me failing to do my job.

So if we can agree to leave it at that, that's probably best for all involved.

* * * * * *

We know there's a problem, we're working on solving it, we're not going to give folks total transparency into...

Understood James. I apologize for my part in making your day worse. I disagree with how you interpret "fan" but that's a different conversation. Keep up the good work, but please be willing to listen to informed, respectful criticism. Which is what I think I provided.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm new to this forum, forums in general, the Internet, computers....

I've been playing since the late '70s, and for over 30 years the only thing I had to understand the game were the rulebooks. Now, in the last 2 or 3 months, not only do I have the (varying) thoughts of a huge number of posters with (varying) degrees of sanity...er, I mean, ability..., but I've also had access to the thoughts of various devs. They actually post on here! Isn't that amazing! I absolutely love it!

Of course, I'm spoiled now. Now, I expect instant gratification of my every question posted on these threads, mentioning my name and personally thanking me for making the entire community a better place. They should be sending me fan mail! : )

Mr. Jacobs, human nature is what it is. If a thread appears that indicates a need for a ruling on a major game mechanic (attack vs. 'attack action'/choosing between attack and full-attack/action cost-if any-for changing grip on a weapon), then the debate will get more and more fractious until a dev responds. Although we'd like that response to be a definitive ruling, even a response like, 'We are working to resolve this very issue!' will calm us down. Because we don't know that your working on it but haven't told us yet, or are not working on it at all! Human nature.

I am a fan of Paizo and I don't care who knows it. My recent discovery of a continuing interaction with the designers of Pathfinder made me love Paizo even more! That we get so passionate in our debates merely indicates that we care about this game so much, and that reflects well on Paizo.

So, forgive us our trespasses, and ANSWER THE DAMN QUE....sorry....sorry....human nature, and all that....

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cheapy wrote:

Guys, the more important issue is that alchemists will be able to make constructs.

Homunculi throwing bombs, animate flasks running towards those you wish to help (with infusion, of course!), misunderstood horrors brought back to life from disparate body parts, balms to temporarily grant life to everyday objects...

"Animate flasks running towards those you wish to help..."

Cheapy.... Thank you.
Lol!

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Ravingdork wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
...a thread with such a hostile title...

Please know that I've never found the phrase "get the house in order" to be a hostile one. My father used it all the time while I grew up and it was always said with authoritative fondness. Obviously, my experiences with the phrase differ from those of others.

Had I known it was going to elicit this kind of reaction, I would surely have selected a different thread title. Apologies to all.

A different title alone would not have stopped this thread from doing what it did.


Cheapy wrote:

Guys, the more important issue is that alchemists will be able to make constructs.

Homunculi throwing bombs, animate flasks running towards those you wish to help (with infusion, of course!), misunderstood horrors brought back to life from disparate body parts, balms to temporarily grant life to everyday objects...

Once again, Cheapy FTW.


Gregg Helmberger wrote:
Cheapy wrote:

Guys, the more important issue is that alchemists will be able to make constructs.

Homunculi throwing bombs, animate flasks running towards those you wish to help (with infusion, of course!), misunderstood horrors brought back to life from disparate body parts, balms to temporarily grant life to everyday objects...

Once again, Cheapy FTW.

Sigh.. add it to the list...


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Don't argue with James Jacobs!

Argue with Sean Reynolds. He often doesn't make sense and it's funny when he's mad. :)

Seriously though, JJ, I've enjoyed and appreciated every post you've made. At no point have you ever been derisive or indirect, and you have remained incisive.

James Jacobs wrote:
To be perfectly frank, what would solve a LOT of this would be for us to cut the amount of products we're producing in half. That'd give us a LOT more time for everyone, from designer to developer to editor, to be more aware of what's going on in each of the product lines. Keeping all of these metaphorical plates spinning at once is a big job, especially when we keep adding more plates because folks keep asking for more plates... ;-P

Would it benefit to have a poll for this? I, for one, would vote in favor of more quality assurance in exchange for less production.


I would like to add my voice and say, I'm perfectly capable of deciding how to implement the rules in my game and work with the people I play with. Paizo rules clarifications are nice, but not necessary for a pen and paper role playing game.

Paizo, you do a great job and there will always be problems or misunderstandings in a complicated rule system. I will never lose any sleep over monks. :)


With regards to the hardcovers, since most of the "low hanging fruits" have been picked already (what's left? Ultimate Skill and Advanced Psionics Guide?), I wonder what effect, if any, new hardcovers will have on being able to respond to issues.

I don't think it's unfair to say that it's not too rare to hear "We'll deal with issue X when we have more time after event Y", where Y is a hardcover, PaizoCon, or GenCon. And then when that event passes, and the Y+1 shows up, pushing the issue back further. Would the less obvious hardcovers mean more time would be needed to be spent on them to get a coherent theme?

I'm also hoping that the hiring of Logan will help alleviate pressure.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

GrenMeera wrote:

Don't argue with James Jacobs!

Argue with Sean Reynolds. He often doesn't make sense and it's funny when he's mad. :)

Seriously though, JJ, I've enjoyed and appreciated every post you've made. At no point have you ever been derisive or indirect, and you have remained incisive.

James Jacobs wrote:
To be perfectly frank, what would solve a LOT of this would be for us to cut the amount of products we're producing in half. That'd give us a LOT more time for everyone, from designer to developer to editor, to be more aware of what's going on in each of the product lines. Keeping all of these metaphorical plates spinning at once is a big job, especially when we keep adding more plates because folks keep asking for more plates... ;-P
Would it benefit to have a poll for this? I, for one, would vote in favor of more quality assurance in exchange for less production.

It would certainly benefit if we at Paizo were to do a questionnaire or survey or something like that. We only recently hired a marketing person, and so the possibility of surveying our customers is finally now something that is an actual possibility in the future.

The problem with ramping back the rate of what we publish now is that would make Paizo less money, and that's not something that's really an option.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

GrenMeera wrote:

Don't argue with James Jacobs!

Argue with Sean Reynolds. He often doesn't make sense and it's funny when he's mad. :)

Seriously though, JJ, I've enjoyed and appreciated every post you've made. At no point have you ever been derisive or indirect, and you have remained incisive.

James Jacobs wrote:
To be perfectly frank, what would solve a LOT of this would be for us to cut the amount of products we're producing in half. That'd give us a LOT more time for everyone, from designer to developer to editor, to be more aware of what's going on in each of the product lines. Keeping all of these metaphorical plates spinning at once is a big job, especially when we keep adding more plates because folks keep asking for more plates... ;-P
Would it benefit to have a poll for this? I, for one, would vote in favor of more quality assurance in exchange for less production.

It'd be interesting to see the poll, though I know polls tend to be stilted to the negative since people as a rule don't necessarily get worked up over things they think are working fine, while people who feel there's an issue are typically quite vocal and attentive.

I'm personally of the opinion that I like the current availability of new product, and make my purchases with the understanding that the first run may have one or two things to hammer out that'll be addressed in later printings and errata, but I understand the people who want it perfect the first time through. To each his own, I suppose!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
To be perfectly frank, what would solve a LOT of this would be for us to cut the amount of products we're producing in half. That'd give us a LOT more time for everyone, from designer to developer to editor, to be more aware of what's going on in each of the product lines. Keeping all of these metaphorical plates spinning at once is a big job, especially when we keep adding more plates because folks keep asking for more plates... ;-P

As an obsessive customer, I would be very happy to see the amount of products Paizo is producing slow down some, as long as it wasn't an issue of jobs getting cut in the process. If the workload is that heavy though, it sounds like some people are being overworked and something could be done to balance the workload without loss of employment.

I love Player Companions. I buy them all when they come out, or as soon afterward as I can afford to do so. However, I was perfectly happy with them coming out every two months (sometimes with a bit of a delay that pushed one back to three months). In general, about two or three during the course of an Adventure Path was fine.

It seems like things have been more hectic around Paizo even as some productions have been increased, like moving to monthly Player Companions and the decision to produce a set of Face Cards for every Adventure Path. (I really like that decision because the Face Cards are great at the table, but hard to recycle in a campaign, so more is better.) Then there's the miniature lines, and the anniversary editions, and the launch of the comics. Well, at least the RotRL anniversary editions are done now.

But seriously, if the schedule is too full to keep up with, then it should be spread out some so quality doesn't suffer. I don't want anyone to lose a job because their product's production time got extended and they're no longer necessary on staff. However, if their workloads can be reduced just enough to improve things, without anybody getting cut over it, that seems like a good thing.

I realize that some products are on a very fixed schedule, notably the Adventure Paths are supposed to come out monthly. The other product lines could probably do with a bit more flexibility between monthly and every two months though, so the staff doesn't have a collective heart attack.

I guessing this argument has probably not just ruined your day but also upset your stomach. Don't let the forums give you an ulcer.

51 to 100 of 552 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Paizo needs to get their house in order All Messageboards