3e and Pathfinder, faulty assumptions by developers.


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

151 to 200 of 806 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
Ashiel wrote:
If there was something other than just being contrary and trying to muddy any sort honest conversation that you were getting at then I'm all ears. Otherwise I'm just going to leave this conversation alone. Getting hammered by other posters for nothing leaves a bad taste in the mouth - especially when you're just trying to converse about not only your hobby but your community.

Gee how would you have responded if I'd called you foolish or suggested you lacked the comprehension of a nine year old?


Steve Geddes wrote:

You think that Paizo do a fine job, but that they occasionally drop the ball. They're only human after all and everyone makes the odd error from time to time. There are various desirable features a ruleset (or subsystem) should have and there are many examples where the amateur fans of the game have produced something which is superior (by that measure) than the 'officially sanctioned' product of the comparable time.

Is that wrong?

They occasionally drop the ball, and its inevitable that fans and other companies will produce some materials that's better or works well with the system. Do they fix the problems they create however? and do we know what the basic problems are with the game and how to help alleviate it when we add content, rather than making the same errors or making them worse?


Steve Geddes wrote:
Ashiel wrote:

Yet apparently it was such a big problem for you that I could suggest that someone else could have made something of a higher quality than the endless pages of garbage that haunts 3.5's reputation to this day, unless it had lots of dollar signs attached to it.

Oh - you were talking to me about that "Paizo fanboi" stuff? Pathfinder isnt even my preferred roleplaying game so no, I wasnt objecting to any post you made suggesting that someone else might have done something better. I was objecting to any suggestion that quality was objective - I thought you subsequently agreed with that?

Maybe we were in agreement and I didn't realize it. A lot can get jumbled in the threads sometimes. (-.-)

Quote:
My point has always been that, if you're an amateur, you should approach disagreements with the professionals from the point of view that you're probably missing something rather than from the perspective that they are.

That seems fair.

Quote:

Misrepresenting? I thought this was your position:

.
You think that Paizo do a fine job, but that they occasionally drop the ball. They're only human after all and everyone makes the odd error from time to time. There are various desirable features a ruleset (or subsystem) should have and there are many examples where the amateur fans of the game have produced something which is superior (by that measure) than the 'officially sanctioned' product of the comparable time.

Is that wrong?

Nope, pretty spot on. But I didn't mean to imply that you were misrepresenting my posts. Just that there were many posts that were misrepresented and that I might have missed yours through them.

Quote:
Gee how would you have responded if I'd called you foolish or suggested you lacked the comprehension of a nine year old?

I'm beginning to think this is a communication issue. I said don't be foolish, which you kind of were acting foolish when you tried to claim my example of a fanmade product being considered higher in quality by its critics than a similar professional sourcebook was the same as saying "people on the internet agree with me" and making an errant vaccination comment. I don't think this was unfair as it seemed like you were acting the fool to get my goat.

As for the nine year old thing, I never suggested that you lacked the comprehension of a nine year old. I said any nine year old could see the logical conclusion to a situation where one product isn't available versus another. I presumed that you were well aware of this and were just trying to be contrary.

And I'm sorry if I expect you to just be trying to be contrary. Perhaps it is a symptom I've developed posting on these boards. It's not uncommon for people to argue just to argue with no desire for truth or advancement of the conversation.

But I will say I would use the phrase again because it's a correct one. Most nine year olds could tell you the problem with the assumption that X was better than Y based on consumption when Y is not available.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

Fair enough. We're definitely going to approach these kinds of discussions from a different perspective (I think balance, consistency and completeness are not terribly important traits in a ruleset, for example - I'm willing to bet that view wouldnt sit well with you).

I would suggest we hold off on applying labels of foolish or 'understood by a nine year old' as it's hard not to take those things personally. If we engage again, I'll try and make wordier posts - I hardly went to much effort to be complete with rather a lot of 'reading between the lines' being implied. Sorry about that.


I think the whole quality is real or not goes back to the fact it is at it's heart subjective. Ashiel labels some feats as "non-functional", while some posters have also referred to the Rogue, Monk, and Fighter as. But obviously some people don't mind those classes and play them, which means that by there definitions those classes are functional.

I also feel it's a bit unfair to call out individual feats as if they were independent entities. They were packaged within a 200 + page rulebook. Really you should be judging these products at the level of the book, in which case I would say the developers probably do come off much better than an amateur.


Well I actually think Litany of Righteousness is pretty cool, even if you can't always get a full-attack on. You're still doing double damage on a hit, which is better than only doing a normal amount.

I also don't think that Combat Maneuvers are all that hard to pull off or bad. This is coming from high level (15+) play. Is it a 100% success? No, but, I'm of the opinion that most options shouldn't be completely absolutely free of failure. Tripping is arguably the hardest one to pull off because of quadrupeds and snake-like creatures.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ciretose wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:

The audience for RPG rules are people who play RPGs, not the hardcore ones who post on a forum. (Presuming your 9/10 statistic was accurate).

.
"Lots of people on the internet agree with me" is not actually substantiation or we'd be outlawing vaccinations.
The idea that sales records are an indication of the quality of a product is an extremely faulty premise and is often more reliant on marketing and financial backing than the actual quality of the product.

Uh...no it isn't.

People pay money for products that they believe are worth paying money for.

If people aren't willing to buy your product, the fact that a group of people on a messageboard forum thread you choose to frequent like it means pretty much nothing in the broad scheme of things.

To quote you toward someone else in the thread.

Ashiel wrote:


Stop being foolish.

Since I've actually worked in distribution(I was a salesperson for a major game distributor when 3e hit.) I've seen a LOT of great games get little to no sales traction because of a lot of that had nothing to do with how great their games were. They didn't make a lot of money because the distributors didn't believe in them so they under ordered, they lacked for money themselves so while their ideas were great their products looked like crap so no one bought it. Hell Major RPG companies with proven track records made big risk gambles that when they didn't take off hurt them immeasurabley. When WEG went under we received every single TORG item they had for free, we literally just paid shipping, they just wanted it out of the warehouse. Remember the white wolf aberrant scion skirmish game that WW bought the machines to produce the mini's for before they didn't sell. On the other hand the head of sales for the star wars CCG was an awesome salesperson, even if he knew nothing about the game, so he managed to push it to a level it wouldn't have had especially in non RPG/book store sales. SO yes as a matter of fact sales, while a factor, isn't the be all and end all of how good a product is.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steve Geddes wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
If there was something other than just being contrary and trying to muddy any sort honest conversation that you were getting at then I'm all ears. Otherwise I'm just going to leave this conversation alone. Getting hammered by other posters for nothing leaves a bad taste in the mouth - especially when you're just trying to converse about not only your hobby but your community.
Gee how would you have responded if I'd called you foolish or suggested you lacked the comprehension of a nine year old?

It's only an attack when other people do it.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:
I said don't be foolish, which you kind of were acting foolish...
Ashiel wrote:
I said don't be foolish, which you kind of were acting foolish As for the nine year old thing, I never suggested that you lacked the comprehension of a nine year old. I said any nine year old could see the logical conclusion to a situation where one product isn't available versus another.

So basically what you are saying is that you did actually say he was foolish and had the comprehension of a 9 year old, you just don't think you should have to apologize for it, and he should stop being mad at you.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
proftobe wrote:


Since I've actually worked in distribution(I was a salesperson for a major game distributor when 3e hit...

And I've seen a lot of people who thought they were smarter than the people who actually get paid to do the job, really suck at the job.

The point is that the logic of "Non-professionals do a better job" is ridiculous. This isn't to say that non-professions can't on occasion come up with something really good, in the way that I can hit a 3 pointer every once in a while while playing basketball.

It is to say Michael Jordan would kick my ass if we went head to head at basketball.

And it is to say that if someone is paid to do something by a large number of people, and you want to be paid by those same people and aren't, the odds are very good it is because that person is better at the job than you are.

Quite often I see people on this forum shouting about how great their ideas are, and how much better they could do things if they were in charge. Then you see what they propose and you understand why no one put them in charge.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

You cannot compare sports (which are based off physical performance) to writing up a set of rules (which is based off mental factors), Ciretose. That's not even comparing apples to oranges. It's more like comparing apples to freaking grenades. Also, name some examples of those incompetent people shouting about their poorly planned out ideas instead of just stating something with nothing to back it up. Because really, I have seen people who do a better job than Paizo ever has and who never got paid for it (or have their works ignored because it's 3PP), Kirth being one of them, while you are here claiming these people are a myth.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Icyshadow wrote:
Because really, I have seen people who do a better job than Paizo ever has and who never got paid for it (or have their works ignored because it's 3PP), Kirth being one of them, while you are here claiming these people are a myth.

I don't recall Ciretose ever saying that talented and gifted amateurs did not exist. What I have seen him say is that, contrary to what some posters have been representing, they are not hiding around every corner and lurking on every forum just waiting to break out from under the thumb of the man and put everything that has come before to shame.


Sturgeon's Law is something I like to believe in.

However, 10% is still a lot of homebrew works to go through.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Or as my dear departed grandfather used to say, "if you search through enough dung you are sure to find a diamond. But you will still be covered in dung."

Spoiler:
He used a less forum friendly word than dung though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
ciretose wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
I said don't be foolish, which you kind of were acting foolish...
Ashiel wrote:
I said don't be foolish, which you kind of were acting foolish As for the nine year old thing, I never suggested that you lacked the comprehension of a nine year old. I said any nine year old could see the logical conclusion to a situation where one product isn't available versus another.
So basically what you are saying is that you did actually say he was foolish and had the comprehension of a 9 year old, you just don't think you should have to apologize for it, and he should stop being mad at you.

FWIW, Ashiel and I have pretty much worked out our misunderstanding via pm. I think it's fair to say we were having two different conversations.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
Icyshadow wrote:
You cannot compare sports (which are based off physical performance) to writing up a set of rules (which is based off mental factors), Ciretose. That's not even comparing apples to oranges. It's more like comparing apples to freaking grenades. Also, name some examples of those incompetent people shouting about their poorly planned out ideas instead of just stating something with nothing to back it up. Because really, I have seen people who do a better job than Paizo ever has and who never got paid for it (or have their works ignored because it's 3PP), Kirth being one of them, while you are here claiming these people are a myth.

I think it's about percentages. I mentioned Einstein doing great physics as a patent clerk and I think that's a relevant analogy. The amateurs might come up with a new theory of gravity, but mostly they're trying to build perpetual motion machines. Mostly - the output of the professional is going to be better than the output of an amateur, even though there are some hobby geniuses and some lousy professionals.

I think the lesson there is that, if you're an amateur in a debate with a professional, you should give them a serious listening to. Don't stop arguing your case, but operate from the position that you're probably wrong rather than the expert.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oh for god's sake. You guys act like it takes some kind of talent for rpg design.

It doesn't. It's probably for the best that they understand the rudiments of probabilityand statistics, but I believe there have been successful game designers that haven't.

MOST of the people who post on this site, or any gaming site have the chops to be successful game designers. It just takes getting the gig and getting to to it every day. Being around others doing the same thing will improve your expertise at it. Having somewhere where it is no problem to find people to be in your game, and being able to try out what you have just created with other people helps too.

Tell me something. Do you think being a game designer takes more "talent" than being an insurance adjuster? Do you think game designers have shown more command of statistics than actuaries?

Think writing the prose of the lore, and the non-fiction of the crunch is special?

Well to me, the prose abilities of most developers is ... wanting to say the least. Face it, the fiction based on game worlds is in general pretty bad. Of ones written by people behind the scenes by game staff, the only one I can think of that was halfway decent were the Dragonlance books by Weis and Hickman. And that isn't going to make people compare it to books that are accepted as classics in the fantasy literature realm.

Don't get me wrong, there have been good books based on game systems or derived from gaming, Malazan, Paksenarrion, Feist, etc.

But when I read a book written by a game developer, I am surprised when it doesn't totally suck.

And as far as writing about the rules, I don't have much to say other than we have tons of good tech writers hawking their abilities all over the internet and eternally temping from job to job in real life.

The fact is just about anyone who posts on a game board could do about as well as a dev if they were hired to do the job.

Running a game company is another matter. Guys like Steve Jackson are pretty special in that regard.

I could write lots more, but that is pretty much what I think about the matter.

Now maybe the thread can go back to the original purpose of the thread.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
sunbeam wrote:

Oh for god's sake. You guys act like it takes some kind of talent for rpg design.

It doesn't. It's probably for the best that they understand the rudiments of probabilityand statistics, but I believe there have been successful game designers that haven't.

MOST of the people who post on this site, or any gaming site have the chops to be successful game designers. It just takes getting the gig and getting to to it every day. Being around others doing the same thing will improve your expertise at it. Having somewhere where it is no problem to find people to be in your game, and being able to try out what you have just created with other people helps too.

Tell me something. Do you think being a game designer takes more "talent" than being an insurance adjuster? Do you think game designers have shown more command of statistics than actuaries?

RPG designers are better at designing RPGs than insurance adjusters. They are worse statisticians than actuaries are.


@Sunbeam

With the kind of explosion of a post you just gave, I think the name Solarbeam would fit you better.

I mean that as a compliment, by the way :D


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Icyshadow wrote:
You cannot compare sports (which are based off physical performance) to writing up a set of rules (which is based off mental factors), Ciretose. That's not even comparing apples to oranges. It's more like comparing apples to freaking grenades. Also, name some examples of those incompetent people shouting about their poorly planned out ideas instead of just stating something with nothing to back it up. Because really, I have seen people who do a better job than Paizo ever has and who never got paid for it (or have their works ignored because it's 3PP), Kirth being one of them, while you are here claiming these people are a myth.

And once again I say I can make a better fighter than the PF fighter because I don't have a deadline. However if I had to go up against SKR or Jason in a contest while creating a new class with a short deadline I am sure that at least 9 out 10 times my idea will not be chosen.

That is not a knock against Kirth, but it is the likely result when some of us non-professional that know the rules are up against against an established professional.

Real life situation: I was in the military, and some contractor with a master's degree in engineering was trying for 8+ hours to fix one of our electronics systems. Well he left, and less than 20 minutes later I fixed the problem, and no, I was not standing over his shoulder watching what he had already tried.
I am sure that even though I had my one moment of glory you had better odds of going with the engineer when something broke down.

Conclusion: They exist, but they rare enough to almost be a myth.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
sunbeam wrote:


MOST of the people who post on this site, or any gaming site have the chops to be successful game designers.

Every year RPG Superstar proves this theory wrong.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Steve Geddes wrote:
sunbeam wrote:

Oh for god's sake. You guys act like it takes some kind of talent for rpg design.

It doesn't. It's probably for the best that they understand the rudiments of probabilityand statistics, but I believe there have been successful game designers that haven't.

MOST of the people who post on this site, or any gaming site have the chops to be successful game designers. It just takes getting the gig and getting to to it every day. Being around others doing the same thing will improve your expertise at it. Having somewhere where it is no problem to find people to be in your game, and being able to try out what you have just created with other people helps too.

Tell me something. Do you think being a game designer takes more "talent" than being an insurance adjuster? Do you think game designers have shown more command of statistics than actuaries?

RPG designers are better at designing RPGs than insurance adjusters. They are worse statisticians than actuaries are.

And who's to say the insurance adjuster isn't also a RPG designer? I'm sorry but the reality is that RPG design doesn't require significant investment of time or effort (compared to say, engineering or medicine). The Bar isn't set very high. That isn't a knock on RPGs or their designers, it is simply a reflection of the fact that games designers are not experts (because the field rarely displays the depth necessary for there to be "experts" in the sense you are using the term in), or at least very few of them are.

I wouldn't presume to tell an astrophysicist his business, He's an expert after all, and I'm not qualified in that field. However, I and many others on this forum are perfectly qualified to discuss pen & paper RPGs on equal footing with Paizo (and WotC for that matter) staff.

Liberty's Edge

Icyshadow wrote:
You cannot compare sports (which are based off physical performance) to writing up a set of rules (which is based off mental factors), Ciretose. That's not even comparing apples to oranges. It's more like comparing apples to freaking grenades. Also, name some examples of those incompetent people shouting about their poorly planned out ideas instead of just stating something with nothing to back it up. Because really, I have seen people who do a better job than Paizo ever has and who never got paid for it (or have their works ignored because it's 3PP), Kirth being one of them, while you are here claiming these people are a myth.

People would actually pay money for Kirth's product. And people actually have.

And because you think it is a better job doesn't mean it is a better job. I am very fond of my daughters colorings. I don't think it is going to make the cut for a Gallery Show.


ciretose wrote:
And because you think it is a better job doesn't mean it is a better job.

Doesn't this ring true for you as well?

Liberty's Edge

Icyshadow wrote:
ciretose wrote:
And because you think it is a better job doesn't mean it is a better job.
Doesn't this ring true for you as well?

Yes.

You really don't get me, do you?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
Assuming_Control wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
sunbeam wrote:

Oh for god's sake. You guys act like it takes some kind of talent for rpg design.

It doesn't. It's probably for the best that they understand the rudiments of probabilityand statistics, but I believe there have been successful game designers that haven't.

MOST of the people who post on this site, or any gaming site have the chops to be successful game designers. It just takes getting the gig and getting to to it every day. Being around others doing the same thing will improve your expertise at it. Having somewhere where it is no problem to find people to be in your game, and being able to try out what you have just created with other people helps too.

Tell me something. Do you think being a game designer takes more "talent" than being an insurance adjuster? Do you think game designers have shown more command of statistics than actuaries?

RPG designers are better at designing RPGs than insurance adjusters. They are worse statisticians than actuaries are.

And who's to say the insurance adjuster isn't also a RPG designer? I'm sorry but the reality is that RPG design doesn't require significant investment of time or effort (compared to say, engineering or medicine). The Bar isn't set very high. That isn't a knock on RPGs or their designers, it is simply a reflection of the fact that games designers are not experts (because the field rarely displays the depth necessary for there to be "experts" in the sense you are using the term in), or at least very few of them are.

I wouldn't presume to tell an astrophysicist his business, He's an expert after all, and I'm not qualified in that field. However, I and many others on this forum are perfectly qualified to discuss pen & paper RPGs on equal footing with Paizo (and WotC for that matter) staff.

You can get better and become an expert in just about anything. The fact it's easy to learn the basics doesn't imply it's impossible to be an expert.


Steve Geddes wrote:
Assuming_Control wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
sunbeam wrote:

Oh for god's sake. You guys act like it takes some kind of talent for rpg design.

It doesn't. It's probably for the best that they understand the rudiments of probabilityand statistics, but I believe there have been successful game designers that haven't.

MOST of the people who post on this site, or any gaming site have the chops to be successful game designers. It just takes getting the gig and getting to to it every day. Being around others doing the same thing will improve your expertise at it. Having somewhere where it is no problem to find people to be in your game, and being able to try out what you have just created with other people helps too.

Tell me something. Do you think being a game designer takes more "talent" than being an insurance adjuster? Do you think game designers have shown more command of statistics than actuaries?

RPG designers are better at designing RPGs than insurance adjusters. They are worse statisticians than actuaries are.

And who's to say the insurance adjuster isn't also a RPG designer? I'm sorry but the reality is that RPG design doesn't require significant investment of time or effort (compared to say, engineering or medicine). The Bar isn't set very high. That isn't a knock on RPGs or their designers, it is simply a reflection of the fact that games designers are not experts (because the field rarely displays the depth necessary for there to be "experts" in the sense you are using the term in), or at least very few of them are.

I wouldn't presume to tell an astrophysicist his business, He's an expert after all, and I'm not qualified in that field. However, I and many others on this forum are perfectly qualified to discuss pen & paper RPGs on equal footing with Paizo (and WotC for that matter) staff.

You can get better and become an expert in just about anything. The fact it's easy to learn the basics doesn't imply it's impossible to be an expert.

Hence "or at least very few of them are".


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Actually it is not that easy to be a game designer, because you have to be able to appeal to almost everyone no matter their style of play, and with the houserules I see suggested by some of the people here the ability to appeal to wide audience is something they don't have.

I also see a lot of people with blinders on, and they like to make arguments based on contrived situations. Yeah they have fun at their home games, but designing for the masses is not their forte.

Being an expert is also about being able to read the market and give them what they desire. Knowing the RAW and being good at math are not enough.

Many of the better game designers not only need to have an understanding of mechanics so they make classes, feats and so on, but you have to be able to write stories also, at least for Paizo.

Most people can do neither, some can do one OR the other. Few can do both.

Yeah it requires a lot of natural talent, and it is not something you can really learn in a college. With that said I think the word "professional" fits better than expert.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
Assuming_Control wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
Assuming_Control wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
sunbeam wrote:

Oh for god's sake. You guys act like it takes some kind of talent for rpg design.

It doesn't. It's probably for the best that they understand the rudiments of probabilityand statistics, but I believe there have been successful game designers that haven't.

MOST of the people who post on this site, or any gaming site have the chops to be successful game designers. It just takes getting the gig and getting to to it every day. Being around others doing the same thing will improve your expertise at it. Having somewhere where it is no problem to find people to be in your game, and being able to try out what you have just created with other people helps too.

Tell me something. Do you think being a game designer takes more "talent" than being an insurance adjuster? Do you think game designers have shown more command of statistics than actuaries?

RPG designers are better at designing RPGs than insurance adjusters. They are worse statisticians than actuaries are.

And who's to say the insurance adjuster isn't also a RPG designer? I'm sorry but the reality is that RPG design doesn't require significant investment of time or effort (compared to say, engineering or medicine). The Bar isn't set very high. That isn't a knock on RPGs or their designers, it is simply a reflection of the fact that games designers are not experts (because the field rarely displays the depth necessary for there to be "experts" in the sense you are using the term in), or at least very few of them are.

I wouldn't presume to tell an astrophysicist his business, He's an expert after all, and I'm not qualified in that field. However, I and many others on this forum are perfectly qualified to discuss pen & paper RPGs on equal footing with Paizo (and WotC for that matter) staff.

You can get better and become an expert in just about anything. The fact it's easy to learn the basics doesn't imply it's
...

I was responding to this:

"(because the field rarely displays the depth necessary for there to be "experts" in the sense you are using the term in),"

It doesn't need "depth". Bridge is a far simpler game than any RPG, yet the professionals are almost archetypal experts.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Let me also take a moment to discuss the difference between an "amateur" who seeks to improve the game they want to play and someone who thinks they know better than the professions.

Kirth is an "amateur" who laid out an entire set of modifications, based on specific goals, open to playtest and discussion. He takes feedback as a positive things, as he isn't doing it so people will pat him on the back and tell him how cool he is. He is doing it to get to the game he wants to play and run, personally. He not only is ok with feedback, he seeks it out.

And he is also fine if you don't like his rules. They don't have to be for you. That is why he is an "amateur".

Others on here tend to take pot shots at the Devs and the game, but don't actually lay out any details and specifics, and then freak out when anyone says they don't agree with how they read the rules.

The reason the Devs don't hang out in the threads more, IMHO, is that too many people on here want to get in an e-peen fight with them about some obscure rule so they can say "I beat a Dev!"

Back to the 3 Pointer analogy, if I played Jordan, and I got the ball first, and I tossed up a shot immediately before he could cover me, and we were only playing to "1" theoretically I could beat Jordan in Basketball.

That in no way means I am a better player.

Going back to Kirth, he has the disadvantage of not being paid but the advantage of not having an audience he needs to provide for in order to continue getting income. He can change the system whenever he feels like it and not expect a backlash from his "customer" base of people who seem to feel entitled to complete agreement with how they think things should be.

He just makes it how he thinks it should be. And then...and this is important...he tests it to see if it works and leaves his work open for others to discuss and comment on. Positively or negative.

It isn't his epeen. It's his home game.

If you are a professional developer, it is your income. It is your full time vocation, to which you devote most of your waking hours.

Many, if not most of the people on here who think they can do the job, can't. Sure like a blind squirrel they may find the occasional nut of a good idea. But mixed in are completely stupid ones that would turn off wide swaths of the customer base.

So can an "amateur" improve the game? Yes. Do I think most do? Nope.


Steve Geddes wrote:
Assuming_Control wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
Assuming_Control wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
sunbeam wrote:

Oh for god's sake. You guys act like it takes some kind of talent for rpg design.

It doesn't. It's probably for the best that they understand the rudiments of probabilityand statistics, but I believe there have been successful game designers that haven't.

MOST of the people who post on this site, or any gaming site have the chops to be successful game designers. It just takes getting the gig and getting to to it every day. Being around others doing the same thing will improve your expertise at it. Having somewhere where it is no problem to find people to be in your game, and being able to try out what you have just created with other people helps too.

Tell me something. Do you think being a game designer takes more "talent" than being an insurance adjuster? Do you think game designers have shown more command of statistics than actuaries?

RPG designers are better at designing RPGs than insurance adjusters. They are worse statisticians than actuaries are.

And who's to say the insurance adjuster isn't also a RPG designer? I'm sorry but the reality is that RPG design doesn't require significant investment of time or effort (compared to say, engineering or medicine). The Bar isn't set very high. That isn't a knock on RPGs or their designers, it is simply a reflection of the fact that games designers are not experts (because the field rarely displays the depth necessary for there to be "experts" in the sense you are using the term in), or at least very few of them are.

I wouldn't presume to tell an astrophysicist his business, He's an expert after all, and I'm not qualified in that field. However, I and many others on this forum are perfectly qualified to discuss pen & paper RPGs on equal footing with Paizo (and WotC for that matter) staff.

You can get better and become an expert in just about anything. The fact it's easy to learn
...

That's like saying chess is simpler than PF. It's not, it just has simpler rules. Generally, the simpler the rules, the greater the complexity of play in a game.

Weiqi has extremely simple rules, but is one of the deepest and most sophisticated games humanity ever devised.

151 to 200 of 806 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / 3e and Pathfinder, faulty assumptions by developers. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.