I hate to mention 4e....
They have an optional mechanic that is meant for games with low magic, and it was recommended for use in it's version of Dark Sun. Basically, as characters gain levels, they get increasing inherent bonuses to exactly the same things as your basic magic items do: attack, damage, AC, saves.
There have been non-fantasy d20 games where an increasing AC was part of each class's level progression table.
I'd also like to see an expansion of the Masterwork quality in games like this; some swords could get a bonus to attack, others a bonus to damage, others an extended crit range or multiplier, etc. depending on the skill-set of the weaponsmith. Armour/shields would be treated similarly. The very best would have two or more bonuses, and would be characteristic of famous smiths. 'Is that a Fabergé blade? I've never seen it's equal!'
Feel free to send me the royalties....! : )
Malachi, this is what I have done in low-magic 3.5 campaigns and I see no reason it wouldn't work in Pathfinder.
But I find it unsatisfying. It's a kludge that artificially "fixes" a problem that was created with arbitrary magic item power creep in the first place.
I have lots of thoughts about magic items in RPGs, most of them are probably quite radical. Among the most radical idea I have is the fundamental idea that ever-increasing magic items as your character grows, in my not-so-humble opinion, detract from the character's own growth and skills. If you take that +5 flaming bane greatsword away from your 16th level barbarian, he is mostly screwed.
If that is the case, then who is the real hero? The barbarian or the sword?
I want the barbarian to be the hero. In my ideal game any character could take a mundane weapon and be fully capable of performing his role competently. Magic items should enhance characters, but they should not overshadow them.
Just my $.02.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hey AD, I just wanted to say I'm sorry if you felt I was attacking you at any point personally in this thread. I do recognize some of the same issues you see, but I believe too much time is spent piling on the staff in these forums, without being accompanied by an appropriate amount of appreciation. I think you and I generally have pretty similar views about most things in this hobby based on other threads.For example, we both agree that James needs to get this book off the ground and into our hands.
No worries here Ssalarn. I realize that my style grates on people, it's happened too much to deny. I grew up with four older brothers and a father who put boxing gloves on us and told us to "work it out" when we had a problem, and he treated debate the same way. So I tend not to take things personally, but the reverse of that is that I also tend not to realize how something I say might be taken personally by someone else since it wouldn't bother me. And then someone responds aggressively to what I said and then I'm putting the boxing gloves on...
Sigh... You'd think at my advanced age I'd have grown out of that.
Books... I need to finish my own...
Design Manager
|
Although Unspeakable Futures (which is the name of this unpublished, long in design game by me) is where the first draft of the gunslinger class came from... the gunslinger touch AC issue that causes problems in Pathfinder doesn't cause problems in Unspeakable Futures, because guns work a little differently, and because the game is built from the ground up with the assumption that most PCs will be using ranged weapons, not melee weapons. It's sort of a reverse of the general expectation of D&D/Pathfinder in that regard.*** It's a science-fiction/fantasy hybrid though (sort of Fallout meets the Dark Tower meets Lovecraft), not just fantasy (like Dark Sun).That may be the single greatest sentence I've ever seen written. I volunteer to playtest this starting as soon as you can get something to me.
Just make sure any Cthulu-esque creatures have a good deflection bonus to AC, I have both hopes and fears related to the words "Dark Tower meets Lovecraft".
I just wanted to re-post this awesome bit from James since we're on a new page and people have a tendency to read the first and last pages of a given thread and skip the stuff in the middle.
I was kind of excited about the low magic conversion rules.
I wouldn't mind seeing "Unspeakable Futures" short stories :P Maybe as a precursor to the setting and to drum up appeal?
Greg
|
Creative Director
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
In any event...
I'm glad that it seems the thread's back on track. And I apologize to AD and anyone else who was annoyed by or insulted by my posts—that wasn't my intent when I replied to this thread but I absolutely see how some of the posts I made were insulting.
Sorry about that!
Before you post, it's worth stepping back and looking at what you're about to post with a critical eye, without the knowledge of what parts of your post are meant in a good natured jest and all that. Maybe throw in a few smilies to make it apparent you're not really trying to be mean spirited. Advice I try to follow myself, and will try to follow more diligently in the future.
And yes, I would love to get Unspeakable Futures out there for folks to check out... but in the meantime, I have a module to save!
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think one specific area of improvement is getting the FAQ system up to speed. Still.
Developers seem to have the time and see the need to make messageboard posts on certain topics (such as the mentioned diagonal issue for reach) but this doesn't show up in the FAQ. These posts themselves are pretty much copy-and-pastable into the FAQ. If there is something about the FAQ system which makes it less convenient to update than doing a messageboard post, then the website team should change that situation ASAP. I believe there is more of a 'pow-wow' process for approving FAQ entries, but FAQs can and have been updated themselves in the past (see Trip Weapons), and I think a fast, easy process, where errors can be fixed quickly when they happen, is superior to the status quo... Heck, put a 'pending' tag on new FAQs so people understand they may not be completely vetted yet, but it gets things flowing which is the current issue.
Players and GMs can't be expected to be up to speed on every messageboard post, and some of these issues are crucial for PFS where RAW is expected to be adhered to. Of course, given the state of several crucially important rules issues which haven't been fixed or clarified in any way, it's safe to say that NOBODY is ACTUALLY completely adhering to RAW in PFS because to do so wouldn't result in a functional game.
A high profile issue is the Vital Strike messageboard post clarifications from Mr. Bulmahn and Jacobs, whose implications also apply to other issues like Sunder. Since the issue was deemed important enough for MULTIPLE messageboard posts by those gentleman, I'm baffled how it isn't deemed important enough for a FAQ entry which would be more visible to ALL players. It baffles me why that issue (plus related topics like Sunder and other usages of Attack action) is not in the FAQ, yet several other issues HAVE received FAQs even though they are clearly much less important to the entire game, and are much less confusing in their actual rules language.
---------------------------------------------------------
The need for constant new product stream, which nearly overwhelms Paizo's capacities, is constantly stated as the reason why Errata/FAQs aren't given the attention they deserve. The current rules have several serious issues, as well as a host of lesser issues, which seem like realistically are too much for the normal Errata process to handle, at least if we are using past Errata updates to go by (I would hope that could improve, but depending on hoping isn't always the best policy).
My question is: would a 'Revised Edition', basically a comprehensive Errata Edition, that was signifigant enough to prompt 70% of Core Rules owners to re-purchase the Core Rule Book (in order to have the new Errata in Print), be sufficient to make the business case for doing such a product? Honestly, I can't see why not, and such a product would probably justify a very large print run, more than the CRB currently is created in (which would push profit margins up).
As is, every new edition of the CRB (with fairly minor Errata) is creating alot of sales without the cost of creating a new product... Now, of course there's the tendency to take those sales 'for granted' if they will sell with or without serious Errata updates, but if Paizo originally saw a good business case for the CRB without it's current level of sales, it certainly seems possible that they could put more resources into it appropriate to it's actual sales level.
If anything, I see the 3.0/3.5 example as a good model here... Perhaps such a 'Revised' Edition could even be allowed the scope to do some changes beyond mere Errata (such as the mooted change to Stealth/Perception - albeit in the absence of 'new' rules for those, I really wish the current rules could just be Errata'd enough to be clearer). Probably such a product could also justify some new art, which would also help sell it (e.g. to existing CRB owners). I am not talking about ANYTHING that could really be construed as a new edition of PRPG, 100% compatability with all other Rules and Golarion products would continue, it would just be a better product.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This Unspeakable Worlds sounds great, but it also sounds like taking it on would just create one more reason not to fix the Core game. I really think the Rules Product line is at a point where it doesn't need more expansions, but fixing the Core Rules themselves would improve the game. There's so many areas of Golarion that still await detailing, that I think we could hold off on having Vudra explored (necessitating Paizo's take on Psionics), and go more for other regions that don't need new rules sub-systems like that.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
re: Low Magic, I think an approach that recalibrates CRs would go a long ways to making it work more smoothly. Going thru the Bestiaries and comparing each monster, both alone, in homogenous groups, and in groups with other monsters/NPCs, in encounters against PCs built with Low Magic/Wealth rules, would provide the info to recalibrate them to such a game. That seems like the fundamental issue with Low Magic campaigns, it's not that the GAME 'doesn't work' with Low Magic, it's just the ASSUMPTIONS about what you can do/survive at a given level don't work anymore. Now, there could be further re-jiggering of Class Abilities to match this dynamic, but CR re-calibration seems like the fundamental issue. But as great as that sounds, PLEASE FIX THE CORE RULES FIRST!!! :-)
I think the best way to fix this type of concern is to do a new "adventures" style book like "Low Magic Adventures" (but with a different, catchier title) that presents detailed rules on how to take the Pathfinder rules from their current core assumptions and then build games and settings that model, say, a world like Westros or even real-world medieval or ancient world settings. And a companion volume called something like "High Magic Adventures" which would help you create settings like you see in Eberron or Harry Potter or Final Fantasy would be cool as well.
I would buy the hell out of core book that functioned as a GameMastery Guide 2, focused on world building. A definite hole in the current core book line is a book focused on alternative setting campaigns with alternative rule sets to deal with low magic, high magic, monotheistic vs polytheistic vs atheist, and low tech to high tech settings.
|
Creative Director
|
That actually makes quite a bit of sense. Since Unspeakable Futures is where the Gunslinger was derived from, is the Grit system or something similar fairly prevalent? And if so is it class-based or something all characters would use? Does the system cling pretty closely to the traditional class layout with some setting specific options, or does it diverge into its own classes? I could see a lot of cool options here.
....
You should probably get this thing running so I can give you my money.
The grit system was not part of the original design at all—I believe Stephen added that mechanic to the class. The gunslinger in Unspeakable Futures has a lot of class abilities it gains at each level but they're not really customizable.
So uh...
""These are hardly typos or "less than stellar" product design. These are major issues that undermine their company's reputation. On these very boards there are threads addressing them with THOUSANDS of posts. Yet, nothing has really changed for the better.
It has done nothing less than to promote mass confusion in the Pathfinder roleplaying base on the issues at hand. Everywhere people are screaming "which is it Paizo!?" <-- metaphorically speaking
They can ignore it if they want, but the problem will only continue to grow.
I'd rather get it nipped in the butt before other, similar problems begin to arise. If they can't communicate internally better, than further confusing contradictions are inevitable.
Let's just get it fixed now, shall we?
notabot wrote:
Unless you are playing society, why does it matter? Just issue a table ruling and go with it.
The ability to house rule does not fix a broken rule. That is a common fallacy. And I would think that anything that is possibly damaging to a corporation's reputation should matter for OBVIOUS reasons. Undoubtedly people read these forums to gauge the quality of their product before purchasing. What do they find but a thousand page thread about how an extremely unpopular ruling has gone ignored by the game developers. When a corporation starts ignoring the needs and wants of its own customer base, it is only a matter of time before it loses said customer base.
Though Paizo remains popular, this past year has not been good for their reputation. There was the monk fiasco a few months back which caused a huge uproar, and though it's simmered a bit, continues to roar on today. Then there is the discontent among their customer base with their inconsistent Vital Strike rulings, which has only grown since the year before.""
Paizo doesn't listen to its costumer base on their wants and needs?
When thread, after thread, after thread asked for epic rules, or a variation thereof, and Paizo created Mythic Adventures, they were just ignoring everybody???
When people continued to want more and more about Baba Yaga, Irrisen, Winter Witches, etc and Paizo created an AP, Archetype/PrC combo, a campaign book, and perhaps more, that was just them saying "hey, forget what the fans want, we'll do things our way", right??
One of the most asked for APs has been a crusade to the Worldwound, so when Paizo gave us that, they clearly don't care about their fans.
More detail on the Dragon Empires, books on the celestials, a book about the Daemons, more PrCs, all of this and more has been asked by the fans, demanded in some cases, and we have or will get them all.
Just because they haven't fixed every. single. possible. error. or confusing rule, does mean they aren't listening to their fans, or even coming close to that.
The fact that James Jacobs has a thread that's 515 pages long with 25, 740 posts should be evidence that they listen to the fans.
The fact that pretty much every single person of any sort of import in the company has come on to these threads to talk to the fans should be evidence that they take their customers seriously.
By the way, the reason "Paizo needs to their house in order" is a hostile title is because it implying that they are in a chaos that needs to be fixed, that there is too much not working and very little that is. Just because you have a a personal history with the phrase that isn't hostile, doesn't mean its not.
Kinda like the whole "Porch Monkey" scene in Clerks II.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This Unspeakable Worlds sounds great, but it also sounds like taking it on would just create one more reason not to fix the Core game. I really think the Rules Product line is at a point where it doesn't need more expansions, but fixing the Core Rules themselves would improve the game. There's so many areas of Golarion that still await detailing, that I think we could hold off on having Vudra explored (necessitating Paizo's take on Psionics), and go more for other regions that don't need new rules sub-systems like that.
Unspeakable Futures is not a Paizo product. It's a James Jacobs project. One I started working on back in 2000 or thereabouts, when the brand new 3rd edition d20 system inspired me to do just that—to see if I could build a d20 science fiction game. Sicne then, I've revised it to utilize the d20 Call of Cthulhu Rules, the d20 Modern Rules, the 3.5 D&D rules, and most recently, the Pathfinder rules.
It's not something that Paizo's design team is working on, since I've not allowed anyone but me to work on it, since it's my little vanity project. Something I'd love to publish at some point—be it through Paizo, through Kickstarter, or simply on a website as a PDF.
My current job duties prevent me from going full-guns-forward on the project, of course, so of late I've only been tinkering with the rules here and there, and periodically running Unspeakable Futures games at PaizoCon or for my friends.
Again... it's not something that Paizo is being "distracted" by, nor is it an attempt by the design team to tinker with new rules for a different game. It's certainly MY attempt to tinker with rules for a different game... but I'm not on the design team, nor am I currently working on the project in a significant way. Paizo keeps my freelance writing hours pretty full with projects these days...
|
Design Manager
|
The grit system was not part of the original design at all—I believe Stephen added that mechanic to the class. The gunslinger in Unspeakable Futures has a lot of class abilities it gains at each level but they're not really customizable.That actually makes quite a bit of sense. Since Unspeakable Futures is where the Gunslinger was derived from, is the Grit system or something similar fairly prevalent? And if so is it class-based or something all characters would use? Does the system cling pretty closely to the traditional class layout with some setting specific options, or does it diverge into its own classes? I could see a lot of cool options here.
....
You should probably get this thing running so I can give you my money.
I'm curious about this. I could totally see how the Grit system could have been grafted on to a base class to add a little bit of MAD and some resource management to make it more interesting though.
People CARE about this game. RD and many of the subsequent posters are among the best, brightest and most articulate people on these forums. Paizo is to be congratulated on producing such a huge devoted base of "gamers".
Characters builds can be affected by these rules nuances. We care about our characters, the rules interpreatations that affect them lead to this thread and MANY others that make this such a vital community!
Cheers to ALL involved
|
Creative Director
|
I'm curious about this. I could totally see how the Grit system could have been grafted on to a base class to add a little bit of MAD and some resource management to make it more interesting though.The grit system was not part of the original design at all—I believe Stephen added that mechanic to the class. The gunslinger in Unspeakable Futures has a lot of class abilities it gains at each level but they're not really customizable.That actually makes quite a bit of sense. Since Unspeakable Futures is where the Gunslinger was derived from, is the Grit system or something similar fairly prevalent? And if so is it class-based or something all characters would use? Does the system cling pretty closely to the traditional class layout with some setting specific options, or does it diverge into its own classes? I could see a lot of cool options here.
....
You should probably get this thing running so I can give you my money.
I'm more than happy to chat about Unspeakable Futures or design theories/philosophies about gunslingers or anything else... but we should move that topic off to another thread so we can keep this one on topic, which is about getting Paizo some constructive criticism.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can understand the view of the OP and others for whom rules inconsistencies are a problem. Nonetheless, I wanted to put a differing perspective (just because I've stayed quiet before only to watch things change on the grounds of "feedback indicating people were unhappy").
Paizo is my favorite RPG publisher and what attracts me is the focus on quality. My view of quality though has very little to do with rules inconsistencies - I'm of the view that no RPG will ever be completely consistent and that it just doesnt matter when such things come up. What I value is the depth of the world, the interconnections between the differing product lines and the constant tinkering with format and willingness to try different approaches. All of that would be damaged (it would seem to me anyhow) in an attempt to scale back production schedules in the hopes of reducing rules inconsistencies.
For my part*, the rules glitches are very infrequent and easily tolerable. I think the balance of quality/quantity is decently placed and would be disappointed to see a reduction in product volume in the hopes of tracking down the kinds of issues the OP refers to.
* My part as an admitted "loose with the rules" style player.
I think it's important to understand that Paizo's general reputation on the forums may not be the same as their general reputation as a publisher in the market and amongst players that don't use the forums.
@james,
Honestly what would be helpful would an idea of when you think a monk fix will occur if any and maybe some ideas on what you are throwing around? sean has stated he wants to redesign the class is this the basic thinking with in Paizo? also I guess sunder is kind of a big deal but it seems to me that it is a simple yes or no answer i don't see many huge repercussions form an response.
besides that a numeria Ap/ adventure would be sweet.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was going to write a somewhat rambling post, but I pretty much realized that James sufficiently explained it when he walked into the thread. The long and short of it is simply that there are a limited number of hours in the day and Paizo's business model dictates pretty heavily as to where those hours go.
As a customer, I find that most of the major issues are appropriately dealt with in a very timely fashion. The issues that aren't dealt with quickly are due to time and complexity. I also find that my wallet opens up pretty regularly for Paizo products, so, on the balance, they must be doing right-enough by me, which means that they have my vote of confidence.
|
I just want one thing: Don't take away or House Rulling rights.
Yeah, when i have a car with a windshield broken i expect it to be fixed, but rolling playing games are not a product that can be compared with cars, toasters or blenders. It is more like a play, or a film.
In a film, you get unexplained loose ends (did the whipping-top stopped spinning or not?) , cut scenes (what happened with Saruman?), and little flaws (Black Widow's hair must be HEAVY!). In the case of a play, this feature is even more pronounced, no acting being the same as the last one).
What i want to say is that role playing games must be design to leave rooms to the players interpret the rules as they find most enjoyable. If a monk can flurry with one hand, so be it! If not, are you ok with that? Good! otherwise, just ignore this kind of interpretation.
Eventually, those issues will be fixed, meanwhile, remember thar pathfinder is compatible with 3.5, that said, all third party products are game to fix you problems, even the 3.5 rules of the most famous RPG in the world. (I for one, use a original mechanic for monk's flurry that blends pathfinder's with 3.5 rules. My game collapsed in flames? no.) If you want, you can even fix the perceived flaws in the system with original mechanics or house rules, if you wish.
Malachi Silverclaw, you idea of new mastework qualities? i did them, it's a very good idea (even to fix magic items dependence).
Well, that's it, my two nickels, of i go then.
By the way, the reason "Paizo needs to their house in order" is a hostile title...
I think Ross Byers already covered this, if Paizo had a problem with the title they would change it. Continuing to attack the thread title, or the premise of the thread, isn't productive and he requested that people cease that type of commentary here.
Unless you are playing society, why does it matter?
And it so happens that lots of people play PFS, where adherence to RAW is an explicit rule. And Paizo is hoping for many more people to play PFS.
Who'dve thought?
|
I just want one thing: Don't take away or House Rulling rights.
Yeah, when i have a car with a windshield broken i expect it to be fixed, but rolling playing games are not a product that can be compared with cars, toasters or blenders. It is more like a play, or a film.
In a film, you get unexplained loose ends (did the whipping-top stopped spinning or not?) , cut scenes (what happened with Saruman?), and little flaws (Black Widow's hair must be HEAVY!). In the case of a play, this feature is even more pronounced, no acting being the same as the last one).
What i want to say is that role playing games must be design to leave rooms to the players interpret the rules as they find most enjoyable. If a monk can flurry with one hand, so be it! If not, are you ok with that? Good! otherwise, just ignore this kind of interpretation.
Eventually, those issues will be fixed, meanwhile, remember thar pathfinder is compatible with 3.5, that said, all third party products are game to fix you problems, even the 3.5 rules of the most famous RPG in the world. (I for one, use a original mechanic for monk's flurry that blends pathfinder's with 3.5 rules. My game collapsed in flames? no.) If you want, you can even fix the perceived flaws in the system with original mechanics or house rules, if you wish.
Malachi Silverclaw, you idea of new mastework qualities? i did them, it's a very good idea (even to fix magic items dependence).
Well, that's it, my two nickels, of i go then.
Please post them, or PM me if it's too much of a derail. : )
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just want one thing: Don't take away or House Rulling rights.
Um, how could this possibly be achieved? Clones of James Jacobs being sent to your living room to enforce RAW?
This just isn't an issue. Of course, Paizo promotes their PFS Organized Play system where adherence to RAW is mandatory.The RAW being Errata'd to be internally consistent and WORK doesn't impact on anybody who wants to diverge from RAW.
It has never bothered me that an NPC can do things that my PC cannot. Is this weird?
I assume that NPC's will occasionally be half-dragons or liches or monks that can do things that I cannot do. I assume this because I assume that NPC's do not need balance. They can be as randomly powerful or pathetically mundane as the story requires of them.
I do not need a ruleset that absolutely governs such things.
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
@james,
Honestly what would be helpful would an idea of when you think a monk fix will occur if any and maybe some ideas on what you are throwing around? sean has stated he wants to redesign the class is this the basic thinking with in Paizo? also I guess sunder is kind of a big deal but it seems to me that it is a simple yes or no answer i don't see many huge repercussions form an response.besides that a numeria Ap/ adventure would be sweet.
I'm not part of "operation monk fix" but I've been told it's being taken care of. Since that's quantified as errata, and since it's company policy to link errata updates to the release of a new printing of the book being errataed, and since it's also company policy to not reveal when a book is being reprinted until we actually ship that reprint out to distribution...
...all of that means that I can't really say when the monk fix will hit. I know that's frustrating. I can certainly find out if this is the type of thing we can do an "early release" for in the form of a blog post or something, though.
We'll see.
|
|
I just want one thing: Don't take away or House Rulling rights.Um, how could this possibly be achieved? Clones of James Jacobs being sent to your living room to enforce RAW?
It was only a joke, but was worth it, envision those guys invading my gaming table point what i'm doing "wrong" was very funny. I would say: "Shut up, take a seat and grab a character sheet! we will roll some dice!"
@james,
Honestly what would be helpful would an idea of when you think a monk fix will occur if any and maybe some ideas on what you are throwing around? sean has stated he wants to redesign the class is this the basic thinking with in Paizo? also I guess sunder is kind of a big deal but it seems to me that it is a simple yes or no answer i don't see many huge repercussions form an response.besides that a numeria Ap/ adventure would be sweet.
I'm not part of "operation monk fix" but I've been told it's being taken care of. Since that's quantified as errata, and since it's company policy to link errata updates to the release of a new printing of the book being errataed, and since it's also company policy to not reveal when a book is being reprinted until we actually ship that reprint out to distribution...
...all of that means that I can't really say when the monk fix will hit. I know that's frustrating. I can certainly find out if this is the type of thing we can do an "early release" for in the form of a blog post or something, though.
We'll see.
roger that! thanks for the update
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It was only a joke, but was worth it, envision those guys invading my gaming table point what i'm doing "wrong" was very funny. I would say: "Shut up, take a seat and grab a character sheet! we will roll some dice!"I just want one thing: Don't take away or House Rulling rights.Um, how could this possibly be achieved? Clones of James Jacobs being sent to your living room to enforce RAW?
Yeah, I was about to post: "But if they do actually get the cloning process to work, don't give up hope, just make sure to keep plenty of cookies and other treats on hand to keep the Paizo Clones content!" :-)
oh the mythic play test is amazing I was thinking of making Sthrahd form Return to castle ravenloft a mythic vampire.
Well i for one love just about everything that paizo puts out..some things more then others, but wow just look the varsia companion art and tell me these guys dont care about quality.
And to james its all good man..one of the things i like the most about coming to this website is the fact that you guy are here...really here, talking to people..sharing your creative ideas..i think it makes all of us at home feel closer to the whole creative process....
I buy unspeakable futures day one..in whatever format it finds itself.
i loved gamma world.nuff said
the one thing that drives me nuts is not paizos fault..i buy most of my books from amazon..my family has amazon prime..and i try to get everything you guys publish..money wise im just not able to keep up if i buy everything from the website..i wish i could..but amazon has one messed up shipping scedule with your products..it drive me nuts that i have to wait months..do you have any idea why this is..i asked amazon and i dident get a clear reponse...
Last thing i loved the x-mas card
Although Unspeakable Futures (which is the name of this unpublished, long in design game by me) is where the first draft of the gunslinger class came from... the gunslinger touch AC issue that causes problems in Pathfinder doesn't cause problems in Unspeakable Futures, because guns work a little differently, and because the game is built from the ground up with the assumption that most PCs will be using ranged weapons, not melee weapons. It's sort of a reverse of the general expectation of D&D/Pathfinder in that regard.*** It's a science-fiction/fantasy hybrid though (sort of Fallout meets the Dark Tower meets Lovecraft), not just fantasy (like Dark Sun).That may be the single greatest sentence I've ever seen written. I volunteer to playtest this starting as soon as you can get something to me.
Just make sure any Cthulu-esque creatures have a good deflection bonus to AC, I have both hopes and fears related to the words "Dark Tower meets Lovecraft".
Even if this is your side product, I would lovd to help test it! Sucks on Vital Strike/Spring Attack, but I can live with it. Only time monk FoF blows came up, he was a weapon master and I ruled he switched hands like some super fence with a free action in between the flurry sequence. He was flurrying with a finesseable temple sword. Would this work in Society no, but home game, yes.
Otherwise I generally love your products flaws and all, why because you guys give a s@!t, which means a lot. Keep up the good work. My .02¢ thanks.
|
|
I keep hoping that the reason there is so much pressure on the folks on James' staff is because they are working on a PF 2.0 that fixes some of the horrible design flaws they inherited.
Nope. We're not working on a 2nd edition of the game. Launching a 2nd edition of a game when the 1st edition is still increasing in popularity is not a good idea. Maybe once we get the idea that Pathfinder's reached a sales plateau we'll start working on a 2nd edition, but until we get the feeling that we're reaching or have reached such a sales plateau... we're not going to devote much resources in house to fixing something that our sales numbers are telling us isn't, overall, broken.
The reason there's pressure is because we're producing a LOT of product, and we need to keep them on schedule. We've managed to get the Pathfinder Adventure Path line on schedule, and now we have to keep running full speed with that schedule to keep it on schedule, but at the same time have to ramp up to get the other lines on schedule... some of which (like the modules) are WAY off schedule.
We've been hiring a fair number of new employees to help with this—the fact that we hired Adam Daigle to help with the Adventure Path is essentially what allowed the Adventure Path to get on schedule. But it's a slow process—and one complicated by the fact that we're actually running out of room, physically, to put all the employees we need into our two-story building.
It's kind of a good problem to have, though! :)
So let me get this straight.
As long as you are making money you aren't going to worry about fixing the things that are broken.
|
Another issue I just recalled, is Paizo products showcasing alchemist NPCs with the ability to make constructs--something which is not explicitly possible in the rules (as alchemists, according to Paizo, are not spellcasters).
Wait a sec... where does it say alchemists are NOT spell casters? I thought James said they were...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So let me get this straight.
As long as you are making money you aren't going to worry about fixing the things that are broken.
I don't think that's a fair representation of what has been said by the Paizonians that have posted in this thread, nor in other areas on the site.
They have stated that they are working on it behind the scenes, and that a fix is in the works. They have also stated that it is important to both them and the company, as well as highlighted some of the issues that make it difficult for them to squelch issues like this with brute force.
|
|
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.When looking at things from a bottom line standpoint, it's not always true that ramping back production will lower profit. The over saturation of markets with content can turn off potential customers (I know it hurt the Rifts line from Palladium, but they shot themselves in the foot repeatedly in other ways too). Also price delegation could swing the profits as well, so there are options.
However, I do not know nor begin to claim to have a grasp of Paizo's business model! We merely offer food for thought, and generally I have trust that you guys know what you're doing.
Thread: Paizo needs to get their house in order
Result: Paizo staff all make a house call to talk about their order!
Neat. =^.^=
If you want to know what not to do and the effects of putting out too many books too fast then look towards 4th edition D&D.
There is such a thing as book bloat.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's important to understand that Paizo's general reputation on the forums may not be the same as their general reputation as a publisher in the market and amongst players that don't use the forums.Um ... huh?
I'm the only one in my group who knows there's a "monk problem". I presume he meant something like that.
I'm the only one in my group who knows there's a "monk problem". I presume he meant something like that.I think it's important to understand that Paizo's general reputation on the forums may not be the same as their general reputation as a publisher in the market and amongst players that don't use the forums.Um ... huh?
What is the problem?
Greg
Heh. I'm very sure I couldn't do it justice, nor that it will help to go through it here. As Ravingdork mentioned though - the rules are intended to allow some things and disallow others, yet some Paizo adventures have monks in them who appear to be acting contrary to those intentions. (Plus a whole bunch of other stuff, but that's the key point for this thread, I think).
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm the only one in my group who knows there's a "monk problem". I presume he meant something like that.I think it's important to understand that Paizo's general reputation on the forums may not be the same as their general reputation as a publisher in the market and amongst players that don't use the forums.Um ... huh?What is the problem?
Greg
That there is a Monk class in the game.
-Skeld
|
Creative Director
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
So let me get this straight.
As long as you are making money you aren't going to worry about fixing the things that are broken.
Nope. It means that after many years of not being able to afford enough employees to do what we want to do, we now CAN afford enough employees, even if that means things are getting cozy in some parts of the building.
We're worrying about fixing things. If we weren't, we would have ignored this thread, among other things.
Wheels are in motion, folks, and they just got greased to make those wheels go faster. This thread got some folks' attention, in other words! :-)
By the way. I wish it clear: though I disagree with a number of James' decisions (undead being but one), I also fully support his right to tell us, "No, that's not how it works in canon Golarion." as, you know, he's the creative director. It's frustrating at times when he tries to get the Core Rules to reflect Golarion canon, but it's also understandable, as he doesn't want to continually make huge amounts of change between the two.
Further, I fully support Paizo. Adventure Path Subscriber (and planning on remaining so) and pretty much Paizo products are where my and my wife's "fun funds" go pretty exclusively these days (as children are tremendously expensive).
I do not wish my earlier post construed in any way other than, "Hey, yeah, it's a thing that happens some time and we get frustrated about it, so it's likely something that would be good to look at, preferably sooner than later for me; at the same time Paizo's awesome, and I wish them well, and understand they've got lots of hard work.", which is really all I was trying to say.
Also, James, you're awesome. I disagree with you about undead (), psionics (), and many other things, but you're totally an awesome guy!
|
|
So let me get this straight.
As long as you are making money you aren't going to worry about fixing the things that are broken.
Nope. It means that after many years of not being able to afford enough employees to do what we want to do, we now CAN afford enough employees, even if that means things are getting cozy in some parts of the building.
We're worrying about fixing things. If we weren't, we would have ignored this thread, among other things.
Wheels are in motion, folks, and they just got greased to make those wheels go faster. This thread got some folks' attention, in other words! :-)
Well thank God almighty!
That's one of the reasons why Paizo is doing better than Wizards of the Coast when it comes to RPGs at the moment.
Wheels are in motion, folks, and they just got greased to make those wheels go faster. This thread got some folks' attention, in other words! :-)
good to hear!
Just finished reading this whole thread. Wow.
So at this point I only have one thing to say:
I want Unspeakable Futures.
Ok, I will return to Lurk Mode......
In any event...
I'm glad that it seems the thread's back on track. And I apologize to AD and anyone else who was annoyed by or insulted by my posts—that wasn't my intent when I replied to this thread but I absolutely see how some of the posts I made were insulting.
Sorry about that!
Before you post, it's worth stepping back and looking at what you're about to post with a critical eye, without the knowledge of what parts of your post are meant in a good natured jest and all that. Maybe throw in a few smilies to make it apparent you're not really trying to be mean spirited. Advice I try to follow myself, and will try to follow more diligently in the future.
And yes, I would love to get Unspeakable Futures out there for folks to check out... but in the meantime, I have a module to save!
James, no need to apologize to me, I appreciate the private exchange we had and as I have said there and publicly, I've got a pretty thick skin anyway.
I do apologize myself. I think the "fan mail" comment is what set things off and I was not intending that to be mocking or condescending, although re-reading it now I can see how it could be taken that way. I truly just thought it was funny and was sharing my amusement. :)
In spite of the bit of unpleasantness, I think that this has been a useful thread and some good conversation has occurred, and I do very much think that it demonstrates one of the great strengths of Paizo, the willingness of people like you and the dev team to interact directly with the folks who buy your stuff and use it as a significant part of our daily life. As I said before, keep up the good work and I'll try to use more smiley faces. :)
Not that it's likely to help. :P
Well, as long as I can whistle the Futures, I guess they can be Unspeakable...