Divine Grace as a Feat is fine. It goes leaps and bounds towards allowing "paladins of any Alignments" through the Cleric and other divine classes. The main issue where it is broken is the Oracle, who is both focused in Cha and also a very SAD class, and already has methods built in to use Cha for a lot of other things.
If you simply change it to exclude Oracles, (or maybe cap it at +2 or +3), it really isn't normally an issue, but allows for a new shiny and to help build the paladin of any alignment concept a lot of people request.
Making Divine Grace (previously a class ability) a feat, pushes Pathfinder dangerously towards a Classless system.
What's next Sneak Attack and Wildshape becoming feats?
There are 36 classes in Pathfinder. 2 of those classes reflect moral (or immoral) extremes...the Paladin and Anti-Paladin (and Divine Grace rewards them for their zealotry). If a player doesn't want to play such an extreme character they have 34 other character classes to choose from.
Making Divine Grace a feat, is a pertinent signifier that the unbalanced emphasis on combat Charops has gotten way out of hand.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sneak Attack can already be taken as a limited Feat as well as various Racial abilities. Honestly, and I personally could care less about Paladins of any Alignments, I think trying to open up more options to more classes within a certain theme, is just what Pathfinder needs. Personally, I would have rather had Feat and Archtype options to turn any caster into, for example an Alchemist rather than having it be it's one single class that prevents everyone else from taking those abilities. Basically the same for almost every new class Paizo made, I'd rather them be options that built on the existing material than something you need to take to the exclusion of others. So not sure if "more of a classless system" would even be a bad thing. But, we should probably get back on topic.
Sneak Attack can already be taken as a limited Feat as well as various Racial abilities. Honestly, and I personally could care less about Paladins of any Alignments, I think trying to open up more options to more classes within a certain theme, is just what Pathfinder needs. Personally, I would have rather had Feat and Archtype options to turn any caster into, for example an Alchemist rather than having it be it's one single class that prevents everyone else from taking those abilities. Basically the same for almost every new class Paizo made, I'd rather them be options that built on the existing material than something you need to take to the exclusion of others. So not sure if "more of a classless system" would even be a bad thing. But, we should probably get back on topic.
For the most part I agree.
The point I was trying to get at is either codify it well (Fighter only feats) or have it less codified (difference in Trapfinding from D&D 3.5 to Pathfinder).
And such changes need to be across the board, rather than these strange anomalies that are randomly popping up in new hardcover releases.
actually i hope to see a lot of clarification on the Bolt Ace, as three or four threads on it pointed out, it retains firearms and has a starting firearm but no expanded crossbow options. also, was there touch attack mechanic meant to apply to a single attack or all attacks in a full attack? can they use deadly aim when targeting touch AC? love the concept but pulled out too much hair trying to make one.
@Torbyne, Deadmanwalking was compiling a semi-official list of things (I know, the thread is too long to read all at once) and had already covered the other things, hence I didn't mention them.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Primal Companion Hunter needs some clarification as for what the Animal Companion counts as.
Does a quadrupedle animal (say a wolf) count as a quadruped eidolon as far as qualifying for evolutions?
Does an animal companion get "free evolutions" based on what they have naturally (and thus satisfy requirements for other evolutions)? I.e. does the aforementioned wolf count as having a free Bite evolution as well as four leg evolutions?
I assume yes, but official clarification is always nice.
Have there been any more ACG FAQs since that one on Oct 10?
Nothing yet. Paizo staff mentioned they will be releasing an official errata for the ACG sooner rather than later. They did not say when, but the hints seemed to indicate they are currently working on the errata. That is likely why they have not released any FAQs. I believe they are waiting to answer all the issues with the ACG in the errata.
I would say it'll come out in the next six months, considering Technology Guide came out the same month and a second printing is already in circulation for it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I dislike how this takes so long to get fixes for. Yeah, I know they do a good job and it's faster than some other companies. I still don't like having to wait for months, HOPING that the questions I have will be fixed.
No doubt it takes time to get things corrected. Rather than rush out fixes with possible errors, I don't mind waiting to get what we need. The forums are here to help with other questions in the meantime. We live in a pushbutton society but sometimes patience is still a virtue.
yeah, but I'd like updates and feedback on how it's going. Something like "we estimate this will take 5 months to complete." "We're still on track, only 2 more months" or "we're making sure this errata address all these items." Just something on it. As it is we have a post saying that they've started on it and then silence. Nothing more. I don't mind waiting, but knowing how long to wait is nice.
yeah, but I'd like updates and feedback on how it's going. Something like "we estimate this will take 5 months to complete." "We're still on track, only 2 more months" or "we're making sure this errata address all these items." Just something on it. As it is we have a post saying that they've started on it and then silence. Nothing more. I don't mind waiting, but knowing how long to wait is nice.
One of the worst things you can do to not upset customers is give out timelines like that.
Say you make a post about how it is estimated to 'only' be 5 more months until the errata is done, but, when it really comes down to it, it's 7 or 8 months due to unforseen delays. Like, say, contributors not turning in products on time, editing taking longer than normal, illness or injury (especially Con season) etc, etc. Now you have a case of the customers being upset as they feel they were lied to when the 5 months come and it's not done.
Not only that, you have an issue of the people who haven't bought the product, withholding purchasing it until the newly updated one comes out. This is one of the primary reasons Paizo tells no one about pending errata because they only issue errata when their books are sold-out and need to print off more. If everyone is holding off to buy more until the errata, then the errata will never come because they never sell out.
Reminder that this company intentionally witheld the information that errata was even in the works at all for no reason whatsoever while the lead developer took a 2 month unannounced vacation from the forums following Gencon.
Reminder that this company intentionally witheld the information that errata was even in the works at all for no reason whatsoever while the lead developer took a 2 month unannounced vacation from the forums following Gencon.
Dude, forum are not mandatory to job performance, or even in general and everyone deserves to have their vacations be 'free and clear' so to speak (sure if there is an absolute emergency, but in general leave the guy alone).
Also while it's nice they do product announcements and other such announcements all such are strictly voluntary.
This isn't a FOIA sort of thing you know.
Pretty unprofessional though.
I know that if my company released an absolutely broken product and refused to comment for 2 months nobody would ever touch us again.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pretty unprofessional though.
I know that if my company released an absolutely broken product and refused to comment for 2 months nobody would ever touch us again.
Tell me when Microsoft goes out of business please.
EDIT: It's not absolutely broken as it is still being used and with fine results. It does have some pretty glaring issues. These two things are not the same though.
|
|
yeah, but I'd like updates and feedback on how it's going. Something like "we estimate this will take 5 months to complete." "We're still on track, only 2 more months" or "we're making sure this errata address all these items." Just something on it. As it is we have a post saying that they've started on it and then silence. Nothing more. I don't mind waiting, but knowing how long to wait is nice.One of the worst things you can do to not upset customers is give out timelines like that.
Say you make a post about how it is estimated to 'only' be 5 more months until the errata is done, but, when it really comes down to it, it's 7 or 8 months due to unforseen delays. Like, say, contributors not turning in products on time, editing taking longer than normal, illness or injury (especially Con season) etc, etc. Now you have a case of the customers being upset as they feel they were lied to when the 5 months come and it's not done.
Not only that, you have an issue of the people who haven't bought the product, withholding purchasing it until the newly updated one comes out. This is one of the primary reasons Paizo tells no one about pending errata because they only issue errata when their books are sold-out and need to print off more. If everyone is holding off to buy more until the errata, then the errata will never come because they never sell out.
None of this is correct. Customers are much more satisfied to have a general time frame, and more importantly periodic updates than silence. But, in this case, we have already been told that its being worked on, and that because the issues where pretty frequent, we would he seeing errata prior to a 2nd printing, with the implication that, a few months back, "Here's a few, and we will be rolling out more shortly".
Since then, as far as I know, its been silent, leading people more to believe its been forgotten or slipped to the bottom of the proverbial pile. May not be true, but that doesn't matter. Its the perception one can easily get.
I'm sure there are people waiting on the updated book, but postponing actually creating that info doesn't help anyone, just makes everyone else that does not subscribe more likely to hold off for all other products down the line, expecting the same thing.
yeah, but I'd like updates and feedback on how it's going. Something like "we estimate this will take 5 months to complete." "We're still on track, only 2 more months" or "we're making sure this errata address all these items." Just something on it. As it is we have a post saying that they've started on it and then silence. Nothing more. I don't mind waiting, but knowing how long to wait is nice.One of the worst things you can do to not upset customers is give out timelines like that.
Say you make a post about how it is estimated to 'only' be 5 more months until the errata is done, but, when it really comes down to it, it's 7 or 8 months due to unforseen delays. Like, say, contributors not turning in products on time, editing taking longer than normal, illness or injury (especially Con season) etc, etc. Now you have a case of the customers being upset as they feel they were lied to when the 5 months come and it's not done.
Not only that, you have an issue of the people who haven't bought the product, withholding purchasing it until the newly updated one comes out. This is one of the primary reasons Paizo tells no one about pending errata because they only issue errata when their books are sold-out and need to print off more. If everyone is holding off to buy more until the errata, then the errata will never come because they never sell out.
Then you don't have to use actual timelines. The could still tell us what they are touching. If things are going smoothly. If there are any unexpected setbacks. If it's still a ways off or if it's nearing release. There's a lot they can tell us without giving us anything that we could get upset about.
On a side note, the fact that the weekly FAQs have stopped for a while is also upsetting. Like if they made a statement why they stopped like "Due to load of wanting to get X out sooner all people are on this for Y time." But just going silent on that too makes me think that they've stopped trying to meet that goal. And honestly, I still see Mark and other Paizo people posting on these forums, so it wouldn't take much of their time to do a quick update or something.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On a side note, the fact that the weekly FAQs have stopped for a while is also upsetting. Like if they made a statement why they stopped like "Due to load of wanting to get X out sooner all people are on this for Y time." But just going silent on that too makes me think that they've stopped trying to meet...
Uh...I am pretty sure the weekly FAQs stopped because of Christmas and New Years, and then the requisite catch up involved from those holidays.
Mark's been incredibly open about the FAQ process, and just the other day answered some questions about it on his "Ask Mark" thread.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
yeah, but I'd like updates and feedback on how it's going. Something like "we estimate this will take 5 months to complete." "We're still on track, only 2 more months" or "we're making sure this errata address all these items." Just something on it. As it is we have a post saying that they've started on it and then silence. Nothing more. I don't mind waiting, but knowing how long to wait is nice.One of the worst things you can do to not upset customers is give out timelines like that.
Say you make a post about how it is estimated to 'only' be 5 more months until the errata is done, but, when it really comes down to it, it's 7 or 8 months due to unforseen delays. Like, say, contributors not turning in products on time, editing taking longer than normal, illness or injury (especially Con season) etc, etc. Now you have a case of the customers being upset as they feel they were lied to when the 5 months come and it's not done.
Not only that, you have an issue of the people who haven't bought the product, withholding purchasing it until the newly updated one comes out. This is one of the primary reasons Paizo tells no one about pending errata because they only issue errata when their books are sold-out and need to print off more. If everyone is holding off to buy more until the errata, then the errata will never come because they never sell out.
None of this is correct. Customers are much more satisfied to have a general time frame, and more importantly periodic updates than silence. But, in this case, we have already been told that its being worked on, and that because the issues where pretty frequent, we would he seeing errata prior to a 2nd printing, with the implication that, a few months back, "Here's a few, and we will be rolling out more shortly".
Since then, as far as I know, its been silent, leading people more to believe its been forgotten or slipped to the bottom of the proverbial pile. May not be true, but that doesn't matter. Its the...
I had the errata I found (including checking all the ones mentioned in this thread) ready to go within a few days of my post here about making an errata document. But we want to be airtight on errata for this one, so we put a bunch of other fresh eyes on it, and, with the holidays over, they've started to get back to us. I'm expecting movement on this very soon to the next step (which isn't the end, but is getting much closer).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On a side note, the fact that the weekly FAQs have stopped for a while is also upsetting. Like if they made a statement why they stopped like "Due to load of wanting to get X out sooner all people are on this for Y time." But just going silent on that too makes me think that they've stopped trying to meet...Uh...I am pretty sure the weekly FAQs stopped because of Christmas and New Years, and then the requisite catch up involved from those holidays.
Mark's been incredibly open about the FAQ process, and just the other day answered some questions about it on his "Ask Mark" thread.
Yup, I mentioned several times that I had enough FAQs to give one per week for the rest of 2014 (with the double holiday FAQ being the last one). And yep, I believe I did make an update about that when asked on my thread. As to when the 2015 FAQs will start? Probably not right away. As I just mentioned, we have ACG errata to handle, for one thing. Both the errata and the FAQs will require me to get together the whole team, and the next time I have that chance, I'm going to use it for the errata first.
Yup, I mentioned several times that I had enough FAQs to give one per week for the rest of 2014 (with the double holiday FAQ being the last one). And yep, I believe I did make an update about that when asked on my thread. As to when the 2015 FAQs will start? Probably not right away. As I just mentioned, we have ACG errata to handle, for one thing. Both the errata and the FAQs will require me to get together the whole team, and the next time I have that chance, I'm going to use it for the errata first.
On a side note, the fact that the weekly FAQs have stopped for a while is also upsetting. Like if they made a statement why they stopped like "Due to load of wanting to get X out sooner all people are on this for Y time." But just going silent on that too makes me think that they've stopped trying to meet...Uh...I am pretty sure the weekly FAQs stopped because of Christmas and New Years, and then the requisite catch up involved from those holidays.
Mark's been incredibly open about the FAQ process, and just the other day answered some questions about it on his "Ask Mark" thread.
Will the errata be all on one page or document? Will the faqs related to the ACG be available in a separate document or page as well? I want to be able to find all the ACG faq answers without having other book's faq answers mixed in. Thank you Mark Seifter.
Will the errata be all on one page or document? Will the faqs related to the ACG be available in a separate document or page as well? I want to be able to find all the ACG faq answers without having other book's faq answers mixed in. Thank you Mark Seifter.Yup, I mentioned several times that I had enough FAQs to give one per week for the rest of 2014 (with the double holiday FAQ being the last one). And yep, I believe I did make an update about that when asked on my thread. As to when the 2015 FAQs will start? Probably not right away. As I just mentioned, we have ACG errata to handle, for one thing. Both the errata and the FAQs will require me to get together the whole team, and the next time I have that chance, I'm going to use it for the errata first.
On a side note, the fact that the weekly FAQs have stopped for a while is also upsetting. Like if they made a statement why they stopped like "Due to load of wanting to get X out sooner all people are on this for Y time." But just going silent on that too makes me think that they've stopped trying to meet...Uh...I am pretty sure the weekly FAQs stopped because of Christmas and New Years, and then the requisite catch up involved from those holidays.
Mark's been incredibly open about the FAQ process, and just the other day answered some questions about it on his "Ask Mark" thread.
FAQ answers all always on their own page. I think all the ACG FAQs so far are pending errata. I'm not sure of the protocol, but once they become real errata, we may clear them as FAQs.
Thanks for the quick response! That is great news.
Yup, I mentioned several times that I had enough FAQs to give one per week for the rest of 2014 (with the double holiday FAQ being the last one). And yep, I believe I did make an update about that when asked on my thread. As to when the 2015 FAQs will start? Probably not right away. As I just mentioned, we have ACG errata to handle, for one thing. Both the errata and the FAQs will require me to get together the whole team, and the next time I have that chance, I'm going to use it for the errata first.
Uh...I am pretty sure the weekly FAQs stopped because of Christmas and New Years, and then the requisite catch up involved from those holidays.Mark's been incredibly open about the FAQ process, and just the other day answered some questions about it on his "Ask Mark" thread.
So I was unaware of the "ask mark" thread. This does resolve the issue I was having with the FAQ. (part of me was saying that hoping I could be proven wrong and thus know where the resource for it was).
So I was unaware of the "ask mark" thread. This does resolve the issue I was having with the FAQ. (part of me was saying that hoping I could be proven wrong and thus know where the resource for it was).Yup, I mentioned several times that I had enough FAQs to give one per week for the rest of 2014 (with the double holiday FAQ being the last one). And yep, I believe I did make an update about that when asked on my thread. As to when the 2015 FAQs will start? Probably not right away. As I just mentioned, we have ACG errata to handle, for one thing. Both the errata and the FAQs will require me to get together the whole team, and the next time I have that chance, I'm going to use it for the errata first.
Uh...I am pretty sure the weekly FAQs stopped because of Christmas and New Years, and then the requisite catch up involved from those holidays.Mark's been incredibly open about the FAQ process, and just the other day answered some questions about it on his "Ask Mark" thread.
Makes sense to me. Probably what confused MMCJawa was just the wording. It happens to me all the time too. I'm guessing that something more like "I haven't seen any mention about the FAQs. Has anyone else?" would have gotten your question across more easily.
Yeah, Sorry. I was still a little frustrated when posting that about the my lack of info on the errata. There are things in the ACG that I want to use that my GM's aren't allowing since they don't have clear answers yet. So it was meant to be a rant too. Thanks for posting the update on what's going on for the errata.
|
|
But we want to be airtight on errata for this one, so we put a bunch of other fresh eyes on it, and, with the holidays over, they've started to get back to us. I'm expecting movement on this very soon to the next step (which isn't the end, but is getting much closer).
This is exactly what I mean, and thank you for answering. :)
It doesn't give specific dates, or honestly anything specific, but it does let people know that it's still ongoing and still coming. Looking forward to it.
But we want to be airtight on errata for this one, so we put a bunch of other fresh eyes on it, and, with the holidays over, they've started to get back to us. I'm expecting movement on this very soon to the next step (which isn't the end, but is getting much closer).This is exactly what I mean, and thank you for answering. :)
It doesn't give specific dates, or honestly anything specific, but it does let people know that it's still ongoing and still coming. Looking forward to it.
We've never taken this out of our sights, but we do have a lot of balls juggling in the air, so we're unlikely to post updates on any one in particular unless you ask. If it's something I'm working on and you're ever curious, ask me in my thread and I'll be happy to give an update.
yeah, but I'd like updates and feedback on how it's going. Something like "we estimate this will take 5 months to complete." "We're still on track, only 2 more months" or "we're making sure this errata address all these items." Just something on it. As it is we have a post saying that they've started on it and then silence. Nothing more. I don't mind waiting, but knowing how long to wait is nice.One of the worst things you can do to not upset customers is give out timelines like that.
Say you make a post about how it is estimated to 'only' be 5 more months until the errata is done, but, when it really comes down to it, it's 7 or 8 months due to unforseen delays. Like, say, contributors not turning in products on time, editing taking longer than normal, illness or injury (especially Con season) etc, etc. Now you have a case of the customers being upset as they feel they were lied to when the 5 months come and it's not done.
Not only that, you have an issue of the people who haven't bought the product, withholding purchasing it until the newly updated one comes out. This is one of the primary reasons Paizo tells no one about pending errata because they only issue errata when their books are sold-out and need to print off more. If everyone is holding off to buy more until the errata, then the errata will never come because they never sell out.
None of this is correct. Customers are much more satisfied to have a general time frame, and more importantly periodic updates than silence. But, in this case, we have already been told that its being worked on, and that because the issues where pretty frequent, we would he seeing errata prior to a 2nd printing, with the implication that, a few months back, "Here's a few, and we will be rolling out more shortly".
Since then, as far as I know, its been silent, leading people more to believe its been forgotten or slipped to the bottom of the proverbial pile. May not be true, but that doesn't matter. Its the...
Funny how a large percentage of the companies with inexact time-frames generally refuse to speak up much about what they're working on. Paizo editing, errata and FAQs is much like software, you don't provide a hard date until it's already done and ready to ship.
Look at the Kineticist post-mortem. Mark gave us a date of 'Wednesdayish' for a post-mortem for the Kineticist but it kept getting pushed back due to the meeting with the Designers all being delayed. Then Mark had to give a date of 'the day after the meeting, whenever that occurs' and then finally just released his pending changes without ever attending the meeting because of too much red tape.
Mark has been amazing about keeping in contact with the forums about stuff, but up until Mark came along, Paizo's policy has seemingly always been total silence.
As far as I'm aware, we've never received word that errata was in the works, or which items were being worked on. Paizo has also stated on multiple occasions they won't even hint at a timeline for future errata so people don't hold off on buying the old books.
@Mark
Will the errata explain the crit part of Pummeling Style? Still wondering if a single crit makes the entire full attack a crit or if a single crit makes the attack count as a crit for on-crit affects.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Mark
Will the errata explain the crit part of Pummeling Style? Still wondering if a single crit makes the entire full attack a crit or if a single crit makes the attack count as a crit for on-crit affects.
There are, shall we say, many different things involving Pummeling Style that are currently unclear. I am hoping we will have an erratum that will make Pummeling Style crystal clear, with no need for FAQs. If not, I'm ready to FAQ it as well.
There are, shall we say, many different things involving Pummeling Style that are currently unclear. I am hoping we will have an erratum that will make Pummeling Style crystal clear, with no need for FAQs. If not, I'm ready to FAQ it as well.@Mark
Will the errata explain the crit part of Pummeling Style? Still wondering if a single crit makes the entire full attack a crit or if a single crit makes the attack count as a crit for on-crit affects.
Is it inappropriate that I suddenly pictured you caressing a microphone as you sing, "I wanna FAQ you all over, and over again?"
|
|
Funny how a large percentage of the companies with inexact time-frames generally refuse to speak up much about what they're working on. Paizo editing, errata and FAQs is much like software, you don't provide a hard date until it's already done and ready to ship.
Mark has been amazing about keeping in contact with the forums about stuff, but up until Mark came along, Paizo's policy has seemingly always been total silence.
As far as I'm aware, we've never received word that errata was in the works, or which items were being worked on. Paizo has also stated on multiple occasions they won't even hint at a timeline for future errata so people don't hold off on buying the old books.
You must be in contact with very different companies than I, as general updates and announcements are very common in most others, and the companies size isn't really a factor. In fact, most will generally post or email things like "look at March, the first quarter of 2016, or late 2015 for _______".
As for the rest,
We'll have an ACG errata sooner rather than later. The book has almost sold through its first print run, so we won't even need to do it "early."
However, in the meantime I am having the entire book re-proofed to catch as many errors as we can. I know there is an unacceptably high number of errors that involve rules elements, but the book has more typos and other sloppiness in simple running text than I'm comfortable with, and I want to make sure we fix before we reprint. Some of that stuff will reveal more errata material, I suspect. So, soon.
Being new to Pathfinder, what's the best way to approach errata with Paizo? If I buy a PDF, will a corrected version be released in the future that I can download?
Yes. If you buy a PDF and a later printing is released, all you have to do is re-download the newer printing PDF, for free.
Also, I could have sworn the Paizo Dev Team account went silent last year because of SKR leaving, since he was the biggest proponent of getting FAQs out as soon as possible.
There are, shall we say, many different things involving Pummeling Style that are currently unclear. I am hoping we will have an erratum that will make Pummeling Style crystal clear, with no need for FAQs. If not, I'm ready to FAQ it as well.@Mark
Will the errata explain the crit part of Pummeling Style? Still wondering if a single crit makes the entire full attack a crit or if a single crit makes the attack count as a crit for on-crit affects.
Once again, thanks Mark for coming in today and clarifying things in general for those of us curious about a perceived radio silence.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Funny how a large percentage of the companies with inexact time-frames generally refuse to speak up much about what they're working on. Paizo editing, errata and FAQs is much like software, you don't provide a hard date until it's already done and ready to ship.
Mark has been amazing about keeping in contact with the forums about stuff, but up until Mark came along, Paizo's policy has seemingly always been total silence.
As far as I'm aware, we've never received word that errata was in the works, or which items were being worked on. Paizo has also stated on multiple occasions they won't even hint at a timeline for future errata so people don't hold off on buying the old books.
You must be in contact with very different companies than I, as general updates and announcements are very common in most others, and the companies size isn't really a factor. In fact, most will generally post or email things like "look at March, the first quarter of 2016, or late 2015 for _______".
As for the rest,
We'll have an ACG errata sooner rather than later. The book has almost sold through its first print run, so we won't even need to do it "early."
However, in the meantime I am having the entire book re-proofed to catch as many errors as we can. I know there is an unacceptably high number of errors that involve rules elements, but the book has more typos and other sloppiness in simple running text than I'm comfortable with, and I want to make sure we fix before we reprint. Some of that stuff will reveal more errata material, I suspect. So, soon.
Okay, now you're getting into nuances. Most companies will not issue a statement as to when a specific thing is being patched or fixed or updated unless the patch/fix/update is already done and awaiting to be shipped i.e. patch notes.
A company will announce something like "Look for updates to the game coming on Tuesday" but won't tell you what is coming until they already have all the fixes ready and waiting to go.
That's standard policy with every computer company I can recall coming across. You get vague 'update coming' and that's it until they have specifics of what's being updated. Those specifics only include things that are already done being updated. They never tell you that about something that is still being worked on in case it runs into delays and setbacks.
Can you stop and think of any time that Apple, or iPhone (aware it's the same company, but different branch), or Microsoft, or any game developer or virus protection or software company has ever announced they are planning on fixing something unless the fix is already done? As in, say you discover a bug in an iPhone that allows you to read messages on nearby iPhones; Applie won't announce they are working on fixing the bug, they will simply fix it and release an update without telling anyone.
If you ask any company why they don't issue timelines, they will always say the same thing, "If we give a date on when something is supposed to come out, and then fail to deliver due to delays, customers become unhappy."
For Paizo, ACG is the first time I've ever seen them outright state errata was coming because it's been the book with the largest amount of grammatical and mechanical errors they've ever released. When you, as a company, release products every year that consistently set the standard by which all other table top gaming products are measured, then your big rule book release for the year falls well below that standard, it's a little on the embarrassing side.
I believe that's the only reason Erik Mona spoke up about it, including the fact that he has the editing and design team combing over the entire book to fix as much of it as they can. I suspect that the ACG errata will be the largest they've ever released in a single update.
Perhaps we can leave the arguments out of this forum and reserve them for a PM to each other?
Mark, I've been keeping a very close eye on this forum since your first post about the upcoming errata. Thank you for taking the time to give an update on the process.
@Tels
Digital Extremes, Riot Games, Whitemoon Dreams, CDProjectRed, From Software, and I could go on.
All of the above companies have, on multiple occasions, said things like "Ok, we agree that X is a problem and right now we are looking for Y to fix it. No dates yet but we want it done by Z"
Example from DE and Warframe
"Yeah, we know the system we use for RNG is starting to have problems as the pool of loot gets bigger and the individual percentages is smaller. We're working on a new loot system and we want to have it ready by one of the next two major content patches."
Next major content patch had a new loot system.
From Software is more vague
"Yeah we have balance issues and glitches in Dark Souls, make sure to submit them and we'll get around to patching them soon."
2 weeks later we got a patch and then an announcement of more patches incoming over the next few months.
In fact I've noticed that people on the forums for said company are relatively calm and accepting whenever a new bug, exploit, or problem is found out because they know that the Developer is listening and addresses their concerns as existing.
Paizo
>book is released on PDF just before Gencon
>On the first day people find some really bad errors all over the book
>Jason, can we get some clarification on XYZ game breaking issues with the feats and archetypes?
>Yeah, after Gencon we'll talk about it.
>Jason doesn't visit the forum for two months following Gencon why placing a seeming Gag order on everyone below him in the company.
>A lot of people frothing at the mouth over this.
>Lisa Stevens and Erik Mona answer a lot of questions and complaints in an obscure thread.
>Suddenly gag order lifted and Mark Seifter announces that he's already mostly completed the errata, but wasn't allowed to talk about it.
Please excuse me for being just a tiny bit peeved at this.
@Tels
Digital Extremes, Riot Games, Whitemoon Dreams, CDProjectRed, From Software, and I could go on.All of the above companies have, on multiple occasions, said things like "Ok, we agree that X is a problem and right now we are looking for Y to fix it. No dates yet but we want it done by Z"
Example from DE and Warframe
"Yeah, we know the system we use for RNG is starting to have problems as the pool of loot gets bigger and the individual percentages is smaller. We're working on a new loot system and we want to have it ready by one of the next two major content patches."
Next major content patch had a new loot system.From Software is more vague
"Yeah we have balance issues and glitches in Dark Souls, make sure to submit them and we'll get around to patching them soon."
2 weeks later we got a patch and then an announcement of more patches incoming over the next few months.In fact I've noticed that people on the forums for said company are relatively calm and accepting whenever a new bug, exploit, or problem is found out because they know that the Developer is listening and addresses their concerns as existing.
Unfortunately, that does and doesn't work as proof for either argument, though it does strongly favor you.
The reason being is that, again, companies don't talk about pending updates until an update is already done. This is a foundational policy of most companies that issue updates. I would strongly suspect that the updates you mentioned, were already near completion or done and just waiting to roll out. Of course, there is no proof as to whether they were completed or not before they announced they were working on them.
I will say, more and more companies are making use of a community manager to say something like, "We know this is a glitch and I've forwarded it to the coding team" or something to that affect.
I do agree that an acknowledgement of an issue can go a long way towards soothing upset customers.
Also, Paizo does have a history of inadvertently giving a date to something, and failing to deliver on the date. Look at the Crane Wing or Monk Flurry of Blows fiascos. Promised to revisit the Flurry of Blows 'after Con season' only to have it pushed back 'after Super Stat' then pushed back 'after Paizo Con'. It went nearly a year before they revisited it, in the mean time a number of archetypes suddenly stopped working because of their 'clarification'.
Same thing with the Crane Wing nerf, it wasn't until Mark was hired that anything was done to improve upon the nerf.
It seems every company first starts off giving pending dates on stuff, and once customers get upset once the date comes and goes, companies switch to a policy of silence to prevent such things from occurring again.
Loot a companies like Bungie, or 2K/Gearbox or Bioware or Blizzard. They don't tend to announce they are working on something until it's already been fixed because each company has tried it in the past and, after failing to deliver, received huge flak for it. Vague generalities is the best you can possibly hope for; "Look for an update around Y" without any details of what, exactly, is being updated.
Please excuse me for being just a tiny bit peeved at this.Paizo
>book is released on PDF just before Gencon
>On the first day people find some really bad errors all over the book
>Jason, can we get some clarification on XYZ game breaking issues with the feats and archetypes?
>Yeah, after Gencon we'll talk about it.
>Jason doesn't visit the forum for two months following Gencon why placing a seeming Gag order on everyone below him in the company.
>A lot of people frothing at the mouth over this.
>Lisa Stevens and Erik Mona answer a lot of questions and complaints in an obscure thread.
>Suddenly gag order lifted and Mark Seifter announces that he's already mostly completed the errata, but wasn't allowed to talk about it.
On this, I absolutely agree. If I recall, Jason was still very active on his Facebook account and even started up Minotaur Games and a kickstarter during this time. The nasty part of me wanted to comment, "What about the ACG errata?" while he was advertising his kickstarter.
Especially since Paizo was apparently over-worked at the time with Sean's departure, but Jason still had enough time to launch products for Minotaur Games. Unless he decided he simply didn't need sleep and worked round the clock on Paizo and Minotaur products.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are, shall we say, many different things involving Pummeling Style that are currently unclear. I am hoping we will have an erratum that will make Pummeling Style crystal clear, with no need for FAQs. If not, I'm ready to FAQ it as well.@Mark
Will the errata explain the crit part of Pummeling Style? Still wondering if a single crit makes the entire full attack a crit or if a single crit makes the attack count as a crit for on-crit affects.
Please, please, please don't let it be another Crane Wing nerf. Martials need nice things. Unarmed martials even more so.
Also, keep up the good work! :)
Please, please, please don't let it be another Crane Wing nerf. Martials need nice things. Unarmed martials even more so.
We could always hope, but lately it's been between nerf and BIG nerf.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, if all Pummeling style did was act as clustered shots and the crit part made the strike count as a crit for crit proccing effects and pummeling charge let me "pounce." It would still be good enough.