|
| 25 people marked this as a favorite. |
The level of negativity on the boards since the new guide was released has me quite concerned.
I have seen posts where every little word is nitpicked to try and break the meaning of its common sense intent. I have seen posts complaining about the PP cost of general retraining, ignoring the fact that in 5 seasons it has never been allowed before. There are posts complaining about the new inventory sheet, which was added to help both players and GMs keep track of their stuff in a more organized way.
About a year ago when some new material came out and a certain archetype wasn't allowed, people became very passionate and negative about it until Mike finally just gave in and allowed it. He revealed at that time that he was planning on it being a chronicle sheet boon(and a VERY cool one, I might add).
People, the new rules haven't even had a chance to be USED! If you keep up with the nitpicking, negativity and asking for more more more, I can almost guarantee that this is the last set of 'new rules' that will ever be attempted.
I sorely miss the way the boards used to be back in Seasons 0-1. Back then people were a lot more positive and polite, digging through the rules together and being helpful. Now it seems every other post is written by an 'Internet Tough Guy' who has his opinion on the rules and won't brook any criticism (positive or negative) about it.
And what's almost worse is that I see this negativity growing from the Old Guard as well as the people who have joined the boards in the past few years.
Here is how the past few days should have gone:
Mike and John: Hey players, here is a new updated guide with completely new features we are going to be testing to see how they work in Organized Play.
Players: These look interesting. I don't necessarily agree with everything personally but let's give it a shot and see how it works out. I'm sure if some of them become more of a hindrance or overpowering you will look at them again, right?
Mike and John: Of course, we are always striving to make this the strongest Organized Play Campaign that we can.
Respect how busy the Paizo PFS worker bees are right now, a week out from GenCon. They are trying to create the same quality scenarios in a very short amount of time AND trying to get them out in time for GMs to be well prepared to run them. Criticizing the Guide right now takes their time away from this, and I know that if a rule is seriously broken, it will NOT ruin the Campaign between now and when GenCon is over.
When you post on a thread, pretend as if the person you are responding to is right there next to you, face-to-face with a squirt gun pointed at your face. That may engender more polite responses from everyone.
Finally, before you reply to break down what I said sentence by sentence to prove me wrong and how much smarter you are than I, know that you are part of the precipitate, not the solution.
|
|
Matthew, from the tone of your previous posts that I have witnessed, I think you would have fit in just fine with the way things used to be. I too, am not a fan of rebuilding but you know what? I'm going to see what happens this season with it. If it becomes disruptive to gaming at my tables, you can bet I am going to get polite and passionate about re-banning it with the powers that be.
And thejeff, do you think that the much needed clarification was so important that it couldn't have waited until after GenCon?
|
|
Wow, pot calling kettle black...
I never said it was a bad thing, I was posting about the negativity on the boards and about respecting what the Paizo PFS guys have been doing and how it appears people are reacting. By doing the exact thing I asked people not to do, you continue to prove my point. Continue to respond all you like but unless it is polite, I probably won't respond back.
|
|
I'm really not trying to argue, that was not the intent of my thread at all, Finlander, but I do feel that I have a right to publicly defend myself when I'm called out publicly. Like I said previously, I'm leaving it at that post and not going further because I don't want it to get obscene....but then the Paizo filters would prevent that anyway.
But thanks for the post and for doing what you can to mediate. It is appreciated :)
|
|
I do not expect you to reply Mr Morgan, but I know you are a both good people. I troll this board ALOT, and i know it hard not to defend yourself. I do it, but sometimes coming back with a straight logical answer that has no intention to be definisve is a better approach.
It makes them look like a jerk if you apologize and explain.
Again if you look you can find things where I rage posted worse than these. So by no means am I perfect.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hah, Mr Morgan is my father, I'm just plain old Lord of the Universe Todd
Universe Man, Universe Man... My money's on Particle Man.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
While I agree there has been a fair amount or grar in the posts re: 5.0, there was a call for feedback. Could folks have been more constructive in the way they turned a phrase? Of course. Unfortunately, the relative anonymity allowed via forum posts leads to this type of situation (anyone who has worked in both phone based and in person customer service can tell you all about the difference in the way folks act in person vs. detached contact).
The best solution is to lead by example. I freely admit I have taken the bait in some threads, as has pretty much everyone who has ever posted. But restraint whenever possible is the best way to overcome a wave of negativity. "Kill them with kindness" is not a cliche for no reason.
|
I really don't think it's as much of an issue as you're making it out to be. Paizo wants feedback, and people are just passing on constructive criticism.
The exchange over how things should have gone that you've presented seems incredibly idealistic. The fact that they're getting emotional about it is actually a good thing - they're invested.
There could have been an uproar, but what's there now isn't one and I can see a lot of good advice Paizo can take on board, and I'm pretty confident that's how they see it.
The level of feedback they're getting - even the nitpicks (there's not really that many, c'mon) - is encouraging.
|
|
Now THAT is a post I can respond to! Thanks for the polite tone. I definitely don't advocate blindly drinking the Kool Aid, but I do want to remind people that there are four scenarios that would normally be posted at the end of Aug/Sept respectively and get them all in the middle of August PLUS a Special PLUS Bonekeep Part 2. That is what John is currently doing. Mike is organizing HQ and putting together the entire show of 2000+ tables of PFS.
Do you ever get on a roll with your work to have it interrupted every now and again for something else that is minor compared to what you are currently doing? I have and it is what I feel people have been doing as of late.
I cannot say for sure when a new version of a Guide is going to be, but Mike has stated he is going to be reviewing things right after GenCon. Maybe it will take 6 months, maybe 6 weeks or maybe 6 days after GenCon a new Guide will come out.
Now to answer your question about Prestige, I agree it isn't clear. I would adjudicate that all scenarios before Season 5 grant 2 prestige in lieu of doing faction missions. I could be wrong and they intended something different. But the impact of getting that wrong is minor vs a wrong stat block on a S5 scenario or a weird muster sheet from HQ.
Take a look back at some of the threads regarding the hinted changes in the Guide and the threads regarding those topics after it came out. Quite a few are just plain rants, which doesn't help anything.
Again, I want to reiterate, I'm not advocating "Don't criticize" I'm advocating "Wait to politely and constructively criticize until they are finished with their largest PFS convention to date." And I'm also saying, don't be a jerk on the forums, in general.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
I am excited about the change.
Me, too.
I'm excited about all of them. I'm excited to see what happens, and whether it has any impact on the viewpoints that I so often see. And lest you forget, I have been a vocal criticizer of any advocate for replay for years. But I am willing to see what happens with the star reward replay system. I have been a proponent of the more involved faction system that was in evidence during seasons 0 through 2, but I am excited to see what this new change in faction missions brings about. I was an advocate of simply leaving sub-tiers and wealth rewards alone, but I love what I've read so far.
More than anything, I'm thrilled to see that Mike, John and Mark continue to try to raise the bar despite what I think. I can't wait to see what happens during season 5. And I get the feeling there is still more to come. I'm on pins and needles with the anticipation. (-:
|
Disclaimer: I didn't read all of the recent threads, I'm too busy making $$$.
I'm excited about the changes. It looks like they listened to the feedback from fans, made adjustments and did everything right.
That doesn't mean there can't be adjustments.
I think it's better that fans are concerned and excited about changes rather than apathetic. It shows they care. But yes, no one likes whiny gamers.
In the long run, I think the fans will be really pleased with the changes in PFS.
Well, retraining is pretty exciting, until you see how much retraining actually costs.
Mike has said that they have put the cost high to be able to evaluate how it will impact the game. If there is no adverse impact, they may lower the costs.
I believe that part of the rationale for that is that it is easier to lower the cost later, than to raise it - less complaints by everyone.
|
Feedback is great, but nitpicking every single word is a waste of the Campaign Coordinator's time and takes away from precious development of pressing issues facing the campaign (like GenCon). Sorry, but Mike does not need to spell out every little detail for every little corner case we can theoretically dream up.
Folks just need to take some responsibility for playing this game and a select few need remedial classes in reading comprehension.
Feedback is great, but nitpicking every single word is a waste of the Campaign Coordinator's time and takes away from precious development of pressing issues facing the campaign (like GenCon). Sorry, but Mike does not need to spell out every little detail for every little corner case we can theoretically dream up.
Folks just need to take some responsibility for playing this game and a select few need remedial classes in reading comprehension.
I respectfully disagree.
Mike has already made several changes to the document - based on his comments and the update(s) in the FAQ.
As indicated elsewhere, Mike has stated that he is putting out the new rules before the season starts to get feedback on the rules and wording. That feedback allows his to ensure that the final product says what he means to say. And, I have to assume that since this isn't the first time that he had done this, that he built time into his pre-GenCon schedule to allow for the feedback.
Example: I have not seen in the 5.0 version anything that says that the inventory tracking sheet is mandatory. Mike has created a FAQ to state that it is mandatory. Then folks asked if it was retroactive, that you had to fill it out for all existing characters or if was only to be applied from 15aug2013 and on. Mike clarified that it was only for games going forward, that it wasn't required for pre-15aug2013 scenarios and chronicles.
As for the smaller nit-picks, they too can be important. A single misplaced or forgotten comma can cause a large change in the phrase:
Let's eat, Grandpa.
Let's eat Grandpa.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just because Mike intended to get feedback does not mean it did not get out of hand. It did quite the opposite, and very few needed clarifications came from the feedback.
If you look at the FAQ, look at the number of one word responses to the questions listed because folks decided to be nitpicky. All it does is create clutter and wastes time just because a select few of our number fail at reading comprehension.
/We do not need to cater to the lowest common denominator.
Just because Mike intended to get feedback does not mean it did not get out of hand. It did quite the opposite, and very few needed clarifications came from the feedback.
If you look at the FAQ, look at the number of one word responses to the questions listed because folks decided to be nitpicky. All it does is create clutter and wastes time just because a select few of our number fail at reading comprehension.
/We do not need to cater to the lowest common denominator.
If a lot of FAQ entries are required, even if they have one word answers, then to me that indicates that the wording of the document needs to be cleared up a bit, both for the players and the GMs. This will help ensure that the rules are applied consistently and in the same manner everywhere.
Was all of the feedback pertinent? no. Was some of it vitriol? yes. But this is the internet, you will never have only pertinent feedback.
I did follow the link and read them.
I attributed the questions more to people wanting to make sure that they understood what they were supposed to do, so that they were indeed following the rules, than to a lack of reading comprehension. Also, I do not believe that all of the new FAQs are directly related to the feedback on the new guide.
Also, not everyone's first language is English. Mine isn't even if I work in it a lot. That too many add to your perception of a lack of reading comprehension.
