|
Talk about freedom of speech right?
That's only gov't censorship.
This is still a private enterprise and they need to protect their business.
I wish we had the freedom to talk about anything - and on another fan/personal site we could. It just wouldn't be in their best interest to allow these things to be discussed and in effect foster an environment where this is promoted by remaining silent. These are their boards and their business and livelihood. Not being able to talk about it here (even as just a discussion) is a small price to pay to keep this entire place working an not under siege by lawyers and the law.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Censorship is censorship. It doesn't matter who's doing the censoring.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've been offered copies of Paizo PDFs with the watermarks removed on multiple occasions. I didn't accept. Not because I'm incorruptible or righteous, but because Paizo PDFs are legally available for a fair price, and I want to support the people that make them so they'll keep making them. On the other hand, refusing to offer legal PDFs hurts only customers, as those willing to pirate are not stymied. I had simply hoped that the powers that be at WotC would have figured this out by now. Heck, I had hoped that they'd have figured it out years ago.
In any event, even if all discussion of piracy related matters is forbidden, care should be taken before accusing people of advocating piracy (which no no one in this thread has done).
In short, I don't take well to being accused of things I haven't done. :-/
Despite their retraction of PDF sales some years ago, I'm also quite confident that WotC will continue their current stance of selling PDF material on dndclassics to include the new edition. When PDFs of the core books do become available I expect prices to be relatively high - most 3E, 4E and 5E transition material there now is a good bit higher in price than classic 1E/2E/Basic material.Where are people getting the idea that Wizards has a "no PDF" policy?
4e PDFs are all for sale.
3e PDFs are all for sale.
2e PDFs.
1e PDFs.
BECMI/OD&D PDFsAnd, though not many have been released yet,
5e PDFs.Seems like they've been pretty supportive of PDF sales.
I still can't access my OD&D files. >:(
Censorship is censorship. It doesn't matter who's doing the censoring.
True, but I think the point is that Paizo isn't violating anyone's rights in this case. It's their website.
In any event, I've said my piece -- some of which might even survive moderation. :)
I've moved the Piracy discussion, as well as the Censorship discussion, elsewhere.
Fwiw, I was totally ignorant about piracy and how one might do it but learnt about one avenue for such from a paizo.com post explicitly arguing against the practise.
So although the poster wasn't advocating piracy, by arguing against it so thoroughly they were at least helping enable it. That might be another argument in favour of low tolerance.
Fwiw, I was totally ignorant about piracy and how one might do it but learnt about one avenue for such from a paizo.com post explicitly arguing against the practise.
So although the poster wasn't advocating piracy, by arguing against it so thoroughly they were at least helping enable it. That might be another argument in favour of low tolerance.
If you want to discuss it more, please see the links I posted previously.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not really interested in joining a new site.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Back to the earlier discussion on the role of perceptions in viewing 5E versus past editions, let's not forget the huge role played by customer goodwill. There were a number of questionable decisions by WotC that accompanied the release of 4E. The release of the basic rules of 5E for free has garnered a lot of goodwill, which is not a small thing for WotC in my opinion.
Back to the earlier discussion on the role of perceptions in viewing 5E versus past editions, let's not forget the huge role played by customer goodwill. There were a number of questionable decisions by WotC that accompanied the release of 4E. The release of the basic rules of 5E for free has garnered a lot of goodwill, which is not a small thing for WotC in my opinion.
Agreed. And the fact that they intend to update it with more content later as books are released is awesome! And they already have an adventure and some monsters for free as well. They certainly have my attention!
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
DDN looks like a streamlined, intuitive, easy to learn system that, if properly supported (and it looks like the first two mega modules involving Tiamat would qualify), would be a lot of fun to play.
A few problems DDN has when compared to Pathfinder are:
1. PF has everything on PDF, which lends itself to easily printed art, maps and text excerpts I can bind, mark up and so on w/o damaging the original books; DDN does not.
2. Paizo's flip maps are simply awesome. I can't even imagine Wizards having the snap to produce something like The Emerald Spire with full maps of all sections.
3. Golarian >> Forgotten Realms. Not even close. Though the Realms are still cool, they are also pretty tired by now; Wizards needed a better game world. In short, Golarian is basically all of the old D&D game worlds and much more, all Pathfinderized.
4. Paizo has excellent customer service whenever a problem comes up (which is very rare). Relate to it, Wizards. The D&D branded franchise has seriously jerked me around many times throughout the years: AD&D 2nd, the short hop from 3.0 to 3.5, the whole 4E debacle, the recalled earlier edition PDFs after I paid for them online, a generally snobby & inattentive attitude, and so on. Screw that. In contrast, Paizo has been awesome since inception.
5. Paizo has a bazillion products, virtually all of them bad ass (and again, with maps, PDFs and customer service support). In view of points 1-4 above, tell me again why I want to trust Wizards to handle my gaming needs?
The bottom line: I don't think Wizards can lure me back at this point. Given the way Paizo has handled PF they deserve my business.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel Golarion is pretty much Forgotten Realms lite. It's pretty much the "...and the kitchen sink." setting that Forgotten Realms is but without the thousands of years of lore and history FR has or cool things like Zhentarim, Undead nations, or Shades.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel Golarion is pretty much Forgotten Realms lite. It's pretty much the "...and the kitchen sink." setting that Forgotten Realms is but without the thousands of years of lore and history FR has or cool things like Zhentarim, Undead nations, or Shades.
And that's exactly why I like it.
Also? Lack of major NPC's that people (meaning players) treat like celebrities.
Also lack of really rabid fans who feel the need to keep to the FR timeline based on the fiction lines and other material as opposed to the game that they're playing right then and there.
I still have my original grey box FR (without the box though. but I still have the hex grid overlays! and the maps!) and I was a fan of the original Elminster articles in Dragon Magazine. But once it got out in the wild and scooped up by obsessive fans? Not a setting that I'd ever run again.
I will say that the 3rd Edition FR Campaign Setting book is really well done though.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not a fan of Golarion or the newer Realms material -once you had to keep pace with the novels to stay current with the ever changing realms (I hate fantasy novels) that's when I checked out. The original grey box gave me a land of mystery, fog and unclaimed tracks of open land. FR started loosing me with some of their novel/module tie ins - but even through some of 2nd it was my go to campaign world. If I ran it again it would be grey box only (those hex overlays were brilliant, btw - had them for Ravenloft also).
Back on the kitchen sing: the other Golarion "sin" is really the boring lands with little originality or creativity - the this is human culture "X" given fantasy treatment is a bit overdone. Africa Land, Eastern Europe Land, North America Land - all overdone and somewhat formulaic.
I do praise them for places like Razmiran (just a glossed over Church of Scientology really - but still good) and Numeria (a tribute to aspects of fantasy meets tech from old D&D modules and campaign world). But unique lands and places like this are not the norm for this campaign world. The real interesting lands that mimic earth history - such a Vudra, are more or less undeveloped or only glossed over.
The lack of high level NPCs running around for the players to follow is another good feature and learned lesson from FR. I think they should still list some high level movers and shakers, but they should not be used as dramatic plot devices to further the campaign world along while the players watch the soap opera from the sidelines (such as the World Turns, Days Our Lives or Game of Thrones).
Golarion showed some initial promise of being a new Greyhawk or FR but the limited art direction and internal logic lost me and the whole thing looks like a jumbled mess.
DDN looks like a streamlined, intuitive, easy to learn system that, if properly supported (and it looks like the first two mega modules involving Tiamat would qualify), would be a lot of fun to play.
A few problems DDN has when compared to Pathfinder are:
1. PF has everything on PDF, which lends itself to easily printed art, maps and text excerpts I can bind, mark up and so on w/o damaging the original books; DDN does not.
2. Paizo's flip maps are simply awesome. I can't even imagine Wizards having the snap to produce something like The Emerald Spire with full maps of all sections.
3. Golarian >> Forgotten Realms. Not even close. Though the Realms are still cool, they are also pretty tired by now; Wizards needed a better game world. In short, Golarian is basically all of the old D&D game worlds and much more, all Pathfinderized.
4. Paizo has excellent customer service whenever a problem comes up (which is very rare). Relate to it, Wizards. The D&D branded franchise has seriously jerked me around many times throughout the years: AD&D 2nd, the short hop from 3.0 to 3.5, the whole 4E debacle, the recalled earlier edition PDFs after I paid for them online, a generally snobby & inattentive attitude, and so on. Screw that. In contrast, Paizo has been awesome since inception.
5. Paizo has a bazillion products, virtually all of them bad ass (and again, with maps, PDFs and customer service support). In view of points 1-4 above, tell me again why I want to trust Wizards to handle my gaming needs?
The bottom line: I don't think Wizards can lure me back at this point. Given the way Paizo has handled PF they deserve my business.
Opinions are awesome(except for the part about losing the PDF's you paid for, that does bite). Personally? I'm not a fan of Golarion at all. I'd take any other setting had I had the chance.
They are loads golarion npcs of import. Just play some APs and you'll see how much you get in the way of their fun. Far too many mission critical ones and not enough player driven
Not saying FR will be any better AITETT
DDN looks like a streamlined, intuitive, easy to learn system that, if properly supported (and it looks like the first two mega modules involving Tiamat would qualify), would be a lot of fun to play.
A few problems DDN has when compared to Pathfinder are:
1. PF has everything on PDF, which lends itself to easily printed art, maps and text excerpts I can bind, mark up and so on w/o damaging the original books; DDN does not.
Completely agree, except to say we don't actually know the DDN PDF situation yet. But there appears to be a pretty good chance they're going to get this wrong.
2. Paizo's flip maps are simply awesome. I can't even imagine Wizards having the snap to produce something like The Emerald Spire with full maps of all sections.
Agree Flip-Mats are awesome. Hope WotC does something similar (and/or brings back Dungeon Tiles).
3. Golarian >> Forgotten Realms. Not even close. Though the Realms are still cool, they are also pretty tired by now; Wizards needed a better game world. In short, Golarian is basically all of the old D&D game worlds and much more, all Pathfinderized.
Personally I don't care...my best campaigns were home brews.
4. Paizo has excellent customer service whenever a problem comes up (which is very rare). Relate to it, Wizards. The D&D branded franchise has seriously jerked me around many times throughout the years: AD&D 2nd, the short hop from 3.0 to 3.5, the whole 4E debacle, the recalled earlier edition PDFs after I paid for them online, a generally snobby & inattentive attitude, and so on. Screw that. In contrast, Paizo has been awesome since inception.
Agree that Paizo is better, but as they grow I'm seeing some of the same problems that Wizards has start to creep in. Agree that WotC yanking the PDFs was completely unacceptable (and counter-productive).
5. Paizo has a bazillion products, virtually all of them bad ass (and again, with maps, PDFs and customer service support).
Actually a downside to me when it comes to mechanics for mechanic's sake.
In view of points 1-4 above, tell me again why I want to trust Wizards to handle my gaming needs?
The bottom line: I don't think Wizards can lure me back at this point. Given the way Paizo has handled PF they deserve my business.
Pathfinder is too rules-heavy for me to be 100% satisfied with it. That said, right now it's the best overall option out there.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
But it seems that 5e fans don't take house ruling any more lightly than other editions. :)
The hard cap on stats is very important because Bounded Accuracy means enemy AC's, attack bonuses, saves, etc never get stupidly high like in previous editions of D&D. Everything in the game, from the balance of light armor vs heavy armor to monsters to skill DCs rests on the assumption that PCs won't have a super-high score in any single key stat (like Dex or their casting stat). They then give you several opportunities for large stat increases as you level up (gaining as many as 14 stat points for a Fighter by lvl 20), secure in the knowledge that even with +14 stat points, they'll either need to be spread around to less important stats once your key stat is quickly maxed out, or you'll exchange them for feats. If you remove the cap and you can hit 30+ in your key stat, it completely throws everything off balance, and then there will be complaints about how light armor is way better than heavy armor and how ACs are too low on monsters, etc.
|
|
The hard cap on stats is very important because Bounded Accuracy means enemy AC's, attack bonuses, saves, etc never get stupidly high like in previous editions of D&D. Everything in the game, from the balance of light armor vs heavy armor to monsters to skill DCs rests on the assumption that PCs won't have a super-high score in any single key stat (like Dex or their casting stat). They then give you several opportunities for large stat increases as you level up (gaining as many as 14 stat points for a Fighter by lvl 20), secure in the knowledge that even with +14 stat points, they'll either need to be spread around to less important stats once your key stat is quickly maxed out, or you'll exchange them for feats. If you remove the cap and you can hit 30+ in your key stat, it completely throws everything off balance, and then there will be complaints about how light armor is way better than heavy armor and how ACs are too low on monsters, etc.
But it seems that 5e fans don't take house ruling any more lightly than other editions. :)
This seems to be the core design consideration behind bounded accuracy. If you check the basic doc (and who knows if this will show up in other books), there are no spells that inflate stats. So number range is more tightly controlled than in any other edition (even vaunted 1st and 2nd).
I did have some trouble selling the matching proficiency number to my players last week. I think DMs will see the number control as a selling point, players who like martial classes - not so much.
Luckily for me, the guy who likes fighters understands why the change since he and I already went through our arms race and he saw the 2nd string combatants (rogues and clerics) and even unoptimized NPC fighters in his group offer little in combat when we had our numbers war and everyone else was locked out.
So far it looks like we won't be switching next time we play. One of my players is going to run 2nd ed (doesn't want to learn a new system) so this is going to have to wait some time till I run it (after several other games already in line to be run).
Personally, I think that house ruling a game before even playing it is a pretty bad idea. Play a few games, preferably at a range of levels, and see if your initial assumptions are actually problems. Get enough experience with that particular version to see what the consequences of rules changes are likely to be.
Naw, if something is bad or thematically wrong then you should hammer it out the gate. Changing how fast healing works (independent of everything else so far) doesn't break the game if you don't like the default power levels.
Changing stat modifiers or lifting caps because mechanically that's how it was in 3rd ed could lead to some serious system breakdown, because unlike healing rates per day (or SLA cantrips, or other minor things: specific spell, etc) there is a core mechanical assumption tied to it (saves, to hits, skills, etc). So raising the proficiency values or increasing stat values will take the game way out of range. You could still run it so, but unlike other tweaks active direct gameplay will feel very different with the PCs running over the encounters (PF style).
5E definitely looks to be closer to my preferences mechanically, but I have serious doubts that they'll get the other stuff (PDFs, the OGL, organized play) right. We'll see. Since I like the rules themselves, I want to believe, and the is new leadership and new direction -- but 4E didn't end well for me.
|
|
5E definitely looks to be closer to my preferences mechanically, but I have serious doubts that they'll get the other stuff (PDFs, the OGL, organized play) right. We'll see. Since I like the rules themselves, I want to believe, and the is new leadership and new direction -- but 4E didn't end well for me.
These are huge concerns - on top of all of that, Wotc has not put out a good module since they took over the TSR reigns. IMO - of course. I just can't think of anything that was slightly memorable that they have produced during the 3rd/3.5 era. Not talking Dungeon mag 3rd ed era, some of those were good - much better than Wotc offerings at the time. I just can't remember any of the modules - the hardcover "return to" being included (I have them all). Just boring adventures that started looking very set piece/minis focused near the end (those book layouts were terrible).
Luckily we have FGG taking some of this on, but I think the actual adventure content is going be (and has been) their weakest area and pretty lightly supported for this game if no other 3pp step up.
Maybe the new AP style mod will fix it?
These are huge concerns - on top of all of that, Wotc has not put out a good module since they took over the TSR reigns. IMO - of course. I just can't think of anything that was slightly memorable that they have produced during the 3rd/3.5 era. Not talking Dungeon mag 3rd ed era, some of those were good - much better than Wotc offerings at the time. I just can't remember any of the modules - the hardcover "return to" being included (I have them all). Just boring adventures that started looking very set piece/minis focused near the end (those book layouts were terrible).
Luckily we have FGG taking some of this on, but I think the actual adventure content is going be (and has been) their weakest area and pretty lightly supported for this game if no other 3pp step up.
Maybe the new AP style mod will fix it?
I completely agree that the best adventures of the 3E era were in Dungeon -- it wasn't even close. That said, I did like Red Hand of Doom.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I completely agree that the best adventures of the 3E era were in Dungeon -- it wasn't even close. That said, I did like Red Hand of Doom.These are huge concerns - on top of all of that, Wotc has not put out a good module since they took over the TSR reigns. IMO - of course. I just can't think of anything that was slightly memorable that they have produced during the 3rd/3.5 era. Not talking Dungeon mag 3rd ed era, some of those were good - much better than Wotc offerings at the time. I just can't remember any of the modules - the hardcover "return to" being included (I have them all). Just boring adventures that started looking very set piece/minis focused near the end (those book layouts were terrible).
Luckily we have FGG taking some of this on, but I think the actual adventure content is going be (and has been) their weakest area and pretty lightly supported for this game if no other 3pp step up.
Maybe the new AP style mod will fix it?
People seem to love that one - I bought the series (the hobgoblins right) - if one stands out it would be that one.
But yeah - they really need to work on their adventure cred. Maybe now with a little less focus on minis and maps (for the minis) and them trying to setting up tactical fights will give way to memorable locations, plots and interesting NPCs.
Take for instance the Emerald Spire and map pack (got the pdfs from the KS) - I don't like them. The maps are all forced into a box because of the need to produce a map pack and all the levels look similar and have to follow a limited parameter due to their flip map product line. The actual level design/content for the module as Paizo's take on a mega-dungeon is decent - not earth shattering but it could still be fun. Probably the smallest mega-dungeon out there.
I guess I don't think the limits of physical products should be transferred over to creative content. I want a maps that are limited to only what's written on paper - not "can we make this as a product" to be part of consideration taken when creating a dungeon level.
5E definitely looks to be closer to my preferences mechanically, but I have serious doubts that they'll get the other stuff (PDFs, the OGL, organized play) right. We'll see. Since I like the rules themselves, I want to believe, and the is new leadership and new direction -- but 4E didn't end well for me.
I don't really give a poot about whether or not 5th edition has pdfs or not, as I prefer an actual book in my hands. Just easier for me to read, and feels more comfortable. Sure, pdfs are less weighty, but to me that doesn't outweigh (sorry for the bad pun) the positives of having a physical book. And organized play can vanish for all I care.
But your third thing, OGL, I hope they do have. Hopefully if they do have an OGL, the quality of 3rd party products would be more in line with a few of the Pathfinder ones, and not the steaming contents of outhouse holes that was the 3pp for the run of 3rd edition.
Having an OGL or not won't make or break 5th edition for me. Seeing what all is included inside the PHB, DMG, and MM will decide that. Though in a way, I have already made up my mind about the system for the most part. I liked what I saw in the basic pdf. I just hope that it will be rather easy to homebrew some stuff of my own, like it was/is for 3rd edition and Pathfinder.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wizards mentioned in the Basic document that one of the campaign worlds they'd bring back would be Mystara. That grabbed my attention!
Personally, I think that house ruling a game before even playing it is a pretty bad idea. Play a few games, preferably at a range of levels, and see if your initial assumptions are actually problems. Get enough experience with that particular version to see what the consequences of rules changes are likely to be.The hard cap on stats is very important because Bounded Accuracy means enemy AC's, attack bonuses, saves, etc never get stupidly high like in previous editions of D&D. Everything in the game, from the balance of light armor vs heavy armor to monsters to skill DCs rests on the assumption that PCs won't have a super-high score in any single key stat (like Dex or their casting stat). They then give you several opportunities for large stat increases as you level up (gaining as many as 14 stat points for a Fighter by lvl 20), secure in the knowledge that even with +14 stat points, they'll either need to be spread around to less important stats once your key stat is quickly maxed out, or you'll exchange them for feats. If you remove the cap and you can hit 30+ in your key stat, it completely throws everything off balance, and then there will be complaints about how light armor is way better than heavy armor and how ACs are too low on monsters, etc.
But it seems that 5e fans don't take house ruling any more lightly than other editions. :)
Well I guess I'm just more adventurous when it comes to house rules. Like Auxmaulous says, if some rule is just plain offensive to my sensibilities, I'd rather house rule it right out of the gate. If problems arise as a result, I'll deal with them as they come up. I can already think of a couple of ways to remove the cap without obviously breaking anything. (Again, something might break anyway, but I could cross that bridge when I got to it.)
For me personally, though, the stat cap is the least of my issues with 5e. So it's a moot point for me -- I won't be DMing or even buying 5e.
I completely agree that the best adventures of the 3E era were in Dungeon -- it wasn't even close. That said, I did like Red Hand of Doom.These are huge concerns - on top of all of that, Wotc has not put out a good module since they took over the TSR reigns. IMO - of course. I just can't think of anything that was slightly memorable that they have produced during the 3rd/3.5 era. Not talking Dungeon mag 3rd ed era, some of those were good - much better than Wotc offerings at the time. I just can't remember any of the modules - the hardcover "return to" being included (I have them all). Just boring adventures that started looking very set piece/minis focused near the end (those book layouts were terrible).
Luckily we have FGG taking some of this on, but I think the actual adventure content is going be (and has been) their weakest area and pretty lightly supported for this game if no other 3pp step up.
Maybe the new AP style mod will fix it?
People seem to love that one - I bought the series (the hobgoblins right) - if one stands out it would be that one.
But yeah - they really need to work on their adventure cred. Maybe now with a little less focus on minis and maps (for the minis) and them trying to setting up tactical fights will give way to memorable locations, plots and interesting NPCs.
** spoiler omitted **...
You guys are aware that the first big 5e adventure is going to be done by Kobold Press?
WotC is already farming out their adventure material, which makes me a little worried about FGG's books. With no OGL specifically for 5e and WotC beginning to work with 3pp, I have to wonder how they will handle an outside publisher creating D&D Material. I hope we don't see a new round of negative PR just because someone didn't ask for permission.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
- Categorizing humans into 9 ethnic groups (most likely taken from Pathfinder)...
The ethnic groups are pulled from the Forgotten Realms campaign setting (At least I recognise most of the names to be from there). It's been around a little longer than Pathfinder.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why is it when anything good D&D related comes up, people automatically assume it was taken from Pathfinder?
Did we somehow forget that Pathfinder itself was taken from D&D?
|
|
You guys are aware that the first big 5e adventure is going to be done by Kobold Press?
WotC is already farming out their adventure material, which makes me a little worried about FGG's books. With no OGL specifically for 5e and WotC beginning to work with 3pp, I have to wonder how they will handle an outside publisher creating D&D Material. I hope we don't see a new round of negative PR just because someone didn't ask for permission.
Yeah, that's why I said:
Maybe the new AP style mod will fix it?
That was in direct reference to multi-part Tyranny of Dragons module series.
IDK if they are farming this out because they know they don't have the module writing credits or if they are just too busy focusing on the game, so they sent the module out to alleviate pressure on the design team.
Yeah, that's why I said:
Maybe the new AP style mod will fix it?That was in direct reference to multi-part Tyranny of Dragons module series.
Sorry Aux, I misunderstood. I was responding to:
Luckily we have FGG taking some of this on, but I think the actual adventure content is going be (and has been) their weakest area and pretty lightly supported for this game if no other 3pp step up.
I read it as you didn't know that Kobold Press was doing their Tyranny of Dragons.
IDK if they are farming this out because they know they don't have the module writing credits or if they are just too busy focusing on the game, so they sent the module out to alleviate pressure on the design team.
I'm not quiet sure they would admit that they don't have writing chops to create a good adventure (and I don't really believe that to be true of the current WotC design team, in the first place). Mike Mearls has stated that they are going to be farming out adventures and other material to 3PP, so the core team can focus on the rulebooks.
I think that is pretty reasonable and a great step in the right direction. I'm excited to see Kobold's adventure. I'm really excited about to see what the future holds for D&D material created by other 3PP.
This is why I worry about FGG's move to start a KS prior to getting a public confirmation of an OGL. I hope they don't remove themselves for future projects because of a false start.
Mike Mearls said the following in his most recent post,
"Hard as it is for me to believe sometimes, I'm also spending a fair amount of time putting the final touches on the storyline that will begin after Tyranny of Dragons—and the storyline after that one is already entering first draft. It's hard sometimes to juggle the past, present, and future of D&D all at once."
So it looks like they have plans to be releasing regular adventure path type products.