| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's a simple weapon that does d3 slashing damage. Also, you take a -2 to CMD against disarm attempts.
What, you thought the butter was only on the blade?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Have those stats been posted yet?Has anyone created stats for the Buttery Knife yet?Yes.
She could tell you but....oh, you know the rest....
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Midnight waffles?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
i have my grandma's recipe for Swedish Pancakes:)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Figured I'd ask here since the devs are looking at this one.
I've asked this before, but no one ever answered it. The one thing I have on my mind is, with GenCon coming earlier, and the ACG being what it is because of rushing, is anything going to be looked at so that Occult Adventures doesn't suffer similar issues? I like Paizo, but I don't want to buy a hardcover that will have the same (or more) editing errors that the ACG had. The ACG may have been a singular drop in quality, but it is one that has the chance of repeating itself again next year. And I've been waiting for psionics to come out, so I am a lot more invested in Occult Adventures than the ACG.
So what can we expect from Occult Adventures and avoiding the same editing issues that plague the ACG? Is GenCon coming early being looked at as a potential issue?
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mark's post on negative conditioning has implications well beyond the FAQ.
For example, when I see a particular community member who posts negative comments on every single AP, it is much harder to recognize any valid criticsms they may have. So my eyes tend to slide past their posts.
And that is for me as a casual observer - imagine what it must be like for somebody who is directly involved in the creation of the product.
Valid criticism is important, and the folks at Paizo are very good at taking it and responding when appropriate. However, when it becomes apparent that a poster will never be pleased, there's not much point in changing things to please them.
Well I think, there are legitimate ways to see this situation:
-Some people just need a place to vent, their frustrations with the adventure paths as written. The causes for those problems will likely stay the same, frankly I doubt that even a small fraction of players plays adventure paths exactly with as written or following the assumptions: 15 pts. point buy, 4 players, suggested wealth per level.... and the more you group diverges from these assumptions....
I could go on but you get the idea.
-They have legitimate complaints, no AP is perfect and mistakes do happen. Personally I have a couple of problems with Kingmaker, the kingdom building system, was as written in the AP, pretty broken (magic items...) and the subplot that gets resolved with the 6th adventure, is not very well foreshadowed. But those are the risks of trying something new. I have not played Skulls and Shackles, but it looked pretty solid to me.
Not without sacrificing the quality we're hoping to give for our current projects. Which would be self-defeating and cause more problems than it would (in theory) solve.Is there any chance of paizo taking a good look at MA and finding a way to make it more compatible with the Adventure Path? Not asking for anything extensive, just something reasonably short for us to point out to GMs asking if the AP is playable. Call it a mod if you will.
I know that Paizo is incredibly busy, but this could seriously reduce the level of complaints.
I think Pathfinder Unchained might solve some of the problems/offer alternatives for perceived problems, that are multiplied by a number of mythic abilities.
Alternatively I am quite willing to purchase Mythic Rechained.Not saying it's the case in this particular instance, but: because what vocal posters say they want/say they're buying/say about how they're playing and what data shows the majority of customers actually do/what they buy/how they play are often radically different.Because the Customer is NOT Always Right.How can that not be true??There is absolutely no one better to judge the acceptable level of quality than the consumer.
I dont know if that's true.
The consumer as a whole is a broad term. The bigger the consumer base, the more base the product must be to appeal to the broadest group of people. Appealing to consumers on a broad level tends to make things dumbed down and uninteresting.
The Consumer is ultimately a big o' ball of bi-polarity. Too many people want one thing. I think its best if the product is simmply based on the image of what the devs think it should be, and that the community hopefully agrees enough to keep the company afloat.
Voting with my wallet, seems like a nice idea, but it is rather hard to do. I still like Mythic Adventures, I like they way they decided to to it (mythic tiers as a separate system to levels), and as a fan of the old ELH stuff, this is still better.
I bought MA twice, as well as mythic origins (completely different power level aside from one thing, but a nice product) as well as the adventure path. My problem is, that I also buy quite a lot of other things, I am still quite lukewarm about the recent adventure path, but I don't expect too run it.. ever. It is just somethinge nice to read, and steal ideas from.
Are reviews an answer ?
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I can't honestly recommend buying the physical copy, not until a second printing with all the Erratas.I agree 100%
Ironically, every person who takes that stance actually delays the publication of the second printing... and if enough people were to do that, there would *be* no second printing.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ironically, every person who takes that stance actually delays the publication of the second printing... and if enough people were to do that, there would *be* no second printing.Personally I can't honestly recommend buying the physical copy, not until a second printing with all the Erratas.I agree 100%
Unfortunately, I don't have the money to buy a product with a great deal of editing errors. I don't want to spend $39.99 on a product with gross issues just so I can get the errata sooner. I don't have a lot of money and as much as I like Paizo and want to support them, I can't spend money on a product so I can get the errata faster. The frugal part of me won't allow that.
Seems like a catch-22 alas :(
Also, any chance you can comment on my question about the GenCon rush and Occult Adventures? I've been looking for a dev comment in regards to it, positive or negative. I just want to know if anything is being looked at to prevent OA from having similar editing issues due to GenCon coming earlier. I love psionics and I love Paizo, but after ACG, I am really worried about OA having the same issues.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ironically, every person who takes that stance actually delays the publication of the second printing... and if enough people were to do that, there would *be* no second printing.Personally I can't honestly recommend buying the physical copy, not until a second printing with all the Erratas.I agree 100%
I'm prepared to accept the possibility that there are some books I just won't own because the first run doesn't sell out. It isn't a dig, it is just a fact. I brought home my shiny new copy of UM and decided that night I wouldn't buy another first run hardcover from Paizo. I buy PDF's because they are cheap, so even if they never get updated a didn't waste too much on them, and if the book gets updated then so does the PDF.
That means my bookshelf has less product on it than it might otherwise, and I'm ok with that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I want Pannekoeken!
I want aebelskivers.
|
|
Ironically, every person who takes that stance actually delays the publication of the second printing... and if enough people were to do that, there would *be* no second printing.Personally I can't honestly recommend buying the physical copy, not until a second printing with all the Erratas.I agree 100%
I supported the recent legendary gamess mythic kickstarter, and the plan seems to be to send out the pdfs to us, then gather the feedback to fix every typo and only then send it to the printer.
I appreciate, that this might cause some trouble with retail, but would this be an option you would be willing to experiment with?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I now want stats for a buttery knife now. And are they different from a butter knife, or only an alternate name for the same weapon?
I want a recipe for buttery kinfe.
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I love Paizo, but have to admit I am frustrated with spending $150+ on MA and WotR and then hearing about all of the problems and issues on the forums here. I am a somewhat new PF DM and the thought of trying to "fix" things on my own is daunting. Most companies that put out a "flawed" (I know some would argue this is an overstatement) product usually try to "make things right." It sounds like Paizo does have enough "irons in the fire" to prevent that from happening in this particular case...which is too bad. Seeing the lower quality of the ACG was also a disappointment. I believe in Paizo and am rooting for them, but I do have to agree with the OP that they seem to have too much on their plate and not enough staff.
I'm an old GM and there are two pieces of advice I'd give you as a somewhat new PF GM:
1) I don't believe most of the "_____ is broken!" posts/arguments I read on the forum until I actually encounter the problem at the table myself. Groups are different sizes, with different levels of player experience, with different playstyles, and people are just different from one group to the next. The thing that I might think is an insurmountable problem, you might never see at the table.2) If I were a somewhat new PF GM, i would attempt Mythic until I had at least another AP under my belt.
Beyond that, happy gaming.
-Skeld
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I want Pannekoeken!I want aebelskivers.
NGAAAAAAAAUGH! I WANTS! I haven't had aebelskivers in YEARS.
|
Creative Director
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Figured I'd ask here since the devs are looking at this one.
I've asked this before, but no one ever answered it. The one thing I have on my mind is, with GenCon coming earlier, and the ACG being what it is because of rushing, is anything going to be looked at so that Occult Adventures doesn't suffer similar issues? I like Paizo, but I don't want to buy a hardcover that will have the same (or more) editing errors that the ACG had. The ACG may have been a singular drop in quality, but it is one that has the chance of repeating itself again next year. And I've been waiting for psionics to come out, so I am a lot more invested in Occult Adventures than the ACG.
So what can we expect from Occult Adventures and avoiding the same editing issues that plague the ACG? Is GenCon coming early being looked at as a potential issue?
Yes. We are absolutely doing things to try to let us do a better job on Occult Adventures.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Might I suggest rolled up Pfannkuchen filled with jam or Nutela?
Just give me a spoon. That Nutella will get taken care of.
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
I really believe that, had Paizo NOT considered themselves a "small" gaming company starting the day their game took the #1 position, then 5th Edition would not have a snowball's chance in hell of dethroning them. But, because they held on so hard to that "small" gaming company identity, they likely will be dethroned.I'd be interested to know what you think Paizo should be doing to act like a "big" company.
They seem to have a lot of licensing deals out there and have been building their brand significantly since 2007. They made Forbes' list as one of the fastest growing companies not too long ago.
I'm not sure whether you're arguing this case as a fan or from a hypothetical business standpoint, which is one reason I'm curious. Maybe from a business standpoint, they could do something like become a publicly traded business. But from a fan's perspective, I think a cap on growth helps the quality quite a bit - a lot of my dissatisfaction with the direction of D&D, for example, seems to stem from decisions made at a Hasbro corporate level.
As to whether D&D will retake first place in sales rankings, I don't think it necessarily has anything to do with Paizo's mistakes but rather than fact that Dungeons & Dragons is a huge brand by RPG standards and that many people will buy in out of sheer curiosity if nothing else. I'm also not entirely sure that D&D will crush Pathfinder's place in the market the way some people assume. Not only is there a lot of overlap between the two fan bases, but Paizo releases a lot more product and has a good amount of momentum right now. I think it might be just as likely that while D&D tops sales charts for a while, Paizo remains right there with them - at least by the increasingly inaccurate ICV2 rankings.
But at least that hypothetical situation of mine would make for fun little fan wars about which game has the bigger audience? (Although really, why do fans care that much which company is selling more - unless they own stock in said company?)
To be clear about a few things:
D&D will likely re-take the #1 position for RPGs. Likely. <--Important word, right there: it does not mean "absolutely." And if they do, it won't be because they "crush" PFRPG's sales. They'll just beat them.
I think Paizo could have maintained their 1st place position by growing because they should. Not because they had to, not because growing "at all costs" is what business is all about. They just should have grown. Added more staff. Taken a look at their processes to see where they were always falling behind and shore those processes up. Tell their vendors what their expectations are and make them hold to it.
I'm sure they did those things. But if the attitude they project is "Well, you know, we're a small game company, so hey! Thanks for any support," then they're going to get shuffled to the side every now and then in favor of a more insistent client. Edit: And even though they did some of these things, they only did what was absolutely necessary rather than looking toward the future and thinking, "What more do we need to really hit this stuff out of the park?" /Edit<--Forgot to tie up my opening line...
I don't think that Paizo should be a publicly traded company. I don't think they should be a BIG company, either. I certainly don't want them to look for some giant corporation to buy them out (though I'll bet they take the offer if one comes along - I'd imagine that when someone offers you the chance to be a bazillionaire you can't come up with a lot of reasons to say, "Nah."). And I don't want them to lose sight of what made them as good a company as they are.
I think they should be the World's Leading Game Company. They can be that, accomplish all these things I'm mentioning, and still retain their identity as Paizo (that company that is so good at listening to its customers and keeping in touch with its fan base).
D&D will likely re-take the #1 position for RPGs. Likely. <--Important word, right there: it does not mean "absolutely." And if they do, it won't be because they "crush" PFRPG's sales. They'll just beat them.
I think 5th Edition may overtake Pathfinder initially, but I'm not sure about in the long run. D&D has the name-recognition, so people who have never played D&D before will immediately run to 5th Ed. However, the general response I've heard from people who've played, and from reading through the PHB myself, is that the system is fine for first-time players; it's simple and introduces new players to common RPG tropes.
However, the rest of the general response has been, effectively: after a few sessions, however, players will want to customize their characters, add more complexity to their characters and their games, etc.
That's where Pathfinder comes in.
Unless the subsequent books of 5th Edition radically change things up, it'll be like living back in 1979. By that, I mean 5th Edition will be OD&D, and Pathfinder will be AD&D. And we all know which version "won out" for all-around sales in that "edition war" (although OD&D DID last longer than 1st Edition, but still).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A better example would be "Brothel" being changed to "Dance Hall" in Ultimate Campaign. I doubt that had issues with the Compatibility License.Yet Paizo IS prudish enough that Frog God Games had to edit the art in one of their books.Frog God Games included nudity in their books, which violated the terms of the Pathfinder Compatibility License (specifically the adult content clause). That's why they were asked to remove it. (And yes, nudity would probably be considered "adult" in the US, which is where we are based. It has nothing to do with how "prudish" Paizo is.)
Yeah, I don't know the reason for the decision behind that, other than nodding towards Forgotten Realms's use of that term and "festhall."
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Might I suggest rolled up Pfannkuchen filled with jam or Nutela?Just give me a spoon. That Nutella will get taken care of.
Can't we have to conserve resources this years nut harvest might be pretty bad (about 70% of the nuts in Nutella come from Turkey and their harvest is projected to be terrible this year.
He have to make it last.... also you can put Nutella and Bananas on top ^^ Maybe even some (white) chocolate shavings^^
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Might I suggest rolled up Pfannkuchen filled with jam or Nutela?Just give me a spoon. That Nutella will get taken care of.Can't we have to conserve resources this years nut harvest might be pretty bad (about 70% of the nuts in Nutella come from Turkey and their harvest is projected to be terrible this year.
He have to make it last.... also you can put Nutella and Bananas on top ^^ Maybe even some (white) chocolate shavings^^
What madness is this!? Are you telling me I can't have my weekly Nutella bath!? LIVE IS NO LONGER WORTH LIVING!!!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ironically, every person who takes that stance actually delays the publication of the second printing... and if enough people were to do that, there would *be* no second printing.Yeah, it has been a quandary I've had to deal with ever since canceling my subs.
I have to agree with a few posts up that buying a copy so another better edited copy is just not feasible for me, or even buying another game from my favorite company when they switch systems. When Necromancer Games made Rapan Athuk Reloaded for 3.5, I dropped 75$ for the box set as appriciation for their work, but when Frog God(previously NG) did a Pathfinder version of RA? I..just couldn't justify getting another box even though I like their work. $20 a month for a module is fine, even though I might never experiance it but the bigger the lump sum, the more hesitant I am.
|
CEO
|
| 26 people marked this as a favorite. |
They just should have grown. Added more staff. Taken a look at their processes to see where they were always falling behind and shore those processes up. Tell their vendors what their expectations are and make them hold to it.
Interestingly enough, we have done exactly what you have said we didn't do. We have more editors now than we ever have. We have more folks on the design team than ever. More developers than ever. Our editorial department has grown significantly in the past two years. So has our art department.
As for editing, our books get more editing passes than they did in the past and the exact same people are taking those passes, along with a bunch of new eyes. This past year, we even had two editing interns to lend two extra sets of eyes.
If the answer to the question posed in this thread is to hire more people, then we have done that. And continue to do so. We have another editing position open now. I expect we will hire another developer or two in the near term as well. Paizo isn't afraid of growing. We have grown quite a bit in the exact time frame you are saying we were staying small in.
I am not exactly sure why our products aren't stacking up the expectations of some of our customers as this thread shows, but the answer isn't because we haven't hired more people. Matter of fact, it may be because we DID hire more people. Possibly. One thing I know from years in business is that as a company grows and hires more people, they all get a little less efficient.
As folks have said earlier in this thread, nobody hates errors in a published product more than the folks here at Paizo. Nobody. We strive to perfect our craft every day. And we will continue to do so.
-Lisa
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What was that loud clang?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes. We are absolutely doing things to try to let us do a better job on Occult Adventures.Figured I'd ask here since the devs are looking at this one.
I've asked this before, but no one ever answered it. The one thing I have on my mind is, with GenCon coming earlier, and the ACG being what it is because of rushing, is anything going to be looked at so that Occult Adventures doesn't suffer similar issues? I like Paizo, but I don't want to buy a hardcover that will have the same (or more) editing errors that the ACG had. The ACG may have been a singular drop in quality, but it is one that has the chance of repeating itself again next year. And I've been waiting for psionics to come out, so I am a lot more invested in Occult Adventures than the ACG.
So what can we expect from Occult Adventures and avoiding the same editing issues that plague the ACG? Is GenCon coming early being looked at as a potential issue?
Thanks for letting me know. I appreciate the time you guys take talking with us. :)
Lisa, have you personally looked at the Advanced Class Guide? If you haven't I suggest looking at it and the potential errata thread that found it has more mistakes per page than any other Paizo release.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Other than the ACG error what are examples of quality slipping?
Yeah Mythic rules won't make it to my table, but not all of them are terrible. I just don't have time to fix the really bad ones, nor do I want to play mother may I as a GM with the book.
Actually Mythic Adventures and Wrath of the Righteous is the perfect example of why I would consider the quality of Paizo's books to be lower than it was before the release of MA/WotR. The ACG has some bad things I've noticed, like the dex-to-damage issue and Divine Protection (although I haven't really read carefully through, waiting for that until I get a hardcopy), but otherwise it seems like a fine book.
But Mythic Adventures and Wrath of the Righteous showed once again that Paizo shoves out new rules and sub-systems without really testing them or, if they make a playtest, really listening to the feedback from fans.
Those new rules don't work at all, at least in the context of CR appropiate mythic opponents providing any type of challenge to a mythic party. Paizo really screwed up in their calculations of what kind of power mythic player characters have at their disposal, as is evident from what those monsters are supposed to dish out and take as damage.
That was a lack of playtesting, but I agree that the rules do need to be fixed which is why I made my statement about not using them.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Perhaps back then Paizo were the plucky underdog duking it out against a big corporation, now they're the tall poppy. In other words, maybe it's the expectations that have changed rather than the rate of error.I think the expectations have changed, but not because of the "David versus Goliath" perception of Paizo, but because Paizo's audience has changed significantly.
In 2007 (when the AP launched), Paizo's audience was basically "people that liked what they did in Dragon and Dungeon magazines, wanted periodic adventures, and/or wanted a new campaign setting."
In 2008 (when the RPG was announced), the audience grew and added "people that wanted to stick with 3.5e."
Since then, Paizo has added tons of new players (necessitating products geared towards new players) and so-on. The audience today (if the messageboards are any indication) is far more demanding than in 2007.
Interesting stuff about language.Something like this (using a consistant set of well-defined words and phrases as game terms) is a great idea, but probably requires rewriting the entire ruleset. If they wanted to this, it's basically a new edition.
-Skeld
Another thing I noticed when PF first came out was that the rules were written with the assumption that you had played 3.5, so not a lot of explaining was done, compared to 3.5 which had a lot more detail. Their glossary in the 3.5 handbook has more codified words. Now you have people who never played 3.5, and it is hard to explain why things work a certain way at times. Some want to say PF is its own game, and in many ways that is true, but many of rules are written as if you already understand ___. If they are their own game they needed to write the rules as if the reader never knew 3.5 existed. Yes I am aware that there will be no PF 1.5, at least I hope not anyway, but many of the problems come from how the rules have been written. Sneak attack as an example never calls for an attack roll so the question of can "any attack" work has come up more than once.
To sum it up, I think part of the problem is that old problems not being fixed are starting to add up, but as of now I don't think overall quality is down despite mythic rules and the ACG.
What madness is this!? Are you telling me I can't have my weekly Nutella bath!? LIVE IS NO LONGER WORTH LIVING!!!Might I suggest rolled up Pfannkuchen filled with jam or Nutela?Just give me a spoon. That Nutella will get taken care of.Can't we have to conserve resources this years nut harvest might be pretty bad (about 70% of the nuts in Nutella come from Turkey and their harvest is projected to be terrible this year.
He have to make it last.... also you can put Nutella and Bananas on top ^^ Maybe even some (white) chocolate shavings^^
Ha ha ha Nutella is for the soft Vegemite is for the hardcore... It puts hair on your chest and it's made from beer.
That and I can get peanut butter Tim Tams now.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ironically, every person who takes that stance actually delays the publication of the second printing... and if enough people were to do that, there would *be* no second printing.Personally I can't honestly recommend buying the physical copy, not until a second printing with all the Erratas.I agree 100%
I love Paizo. I love how everyone at the company (at all levels) cares so passionately and is engaged with the customers.
I completely understand the sentiment here: "We know there are errors but until we sell out of the first print run it simply isn't economically viable for us to print a corrected version. Much as we would love to ship the perfect second printing tomorrow, we can't afford to do that with the first printing still in stock if we wish to remain a solvent company and continue putting out products."
But this does come off a bit as "Buy the error-filled book if you want a chance to buy a corrected book later."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I work a job where I have to keep a lot of people happy too. I'll tell you a secret - if there's one task I can do that will make people happy and make me feel better about my day, and another that will inevitably lead to someone "screaming" at me and making me hate the human race, I will choose the first one as often as humanly possible.Everything else in the quoted post was also good, but I wanted to pull this out in particular. Ssalarn is right that pretty much any FAQ that clarifies an ambiguity is going to make the side who doesn't have the clarification go their way upset. And there is always that side, so it will always make someone upset. So to continue to help me get you more FAQs, faster FAQs, and more consistently timed FAQs, if that is your #1 priority, I entreat you all—if you want to see more FAQs, then one day, when a FAQ doesn't turn out the way you wished it would, please take a moment to remember this post and then don't post about it angrily. I understand that you will still be angry, you have every right to be angry, and I'm in no way telling you that you don't have that right. In fact, go rant to a friend about it.
The reason to not post about it here is purely a psychological one based on conditioning (yes, I am teaching you how to condition us for your advantage, so read on!). Basically, if you give negative feedback when there are no FAQs and then negative feedback when there are FAQs too, since your discontented posts are your psychological ammunition, you're diluting your message in both instances. In essence, pick your top priority and choose that one to give negative feedback. If your top priority is preventing FAQs because they might turn out the other way and you prefer the ambiguity, then complain about the FAQs when they come out and don't complain about the lack of FAQs. If your top priority is to get more FAQs and clear up grey areas, as I hope it is, like mine, then post negatively only when we don't give you FAQs and you feel we should, and...
Good stuff. Another thing for the PDT team to do is to "not just answer the question asked". Sometimes answering one FAQ will make it seem like it conflicts with another rule. Even if it takes longer to get the FAQ out, mention how related rules are or are not affected.
1. I am not saying scan every book, but just try to think of anything that might be related. If nothing comes to mind post the FAQ, and if we(the posters) think of a possible conflict we can ask for another FAQ, but saying something like "however ____ is not affected because ____" would solve some problems before they start.
2. I had another point, but somehow I forgot it. Oh well, I will post it later if I remember.
3. You or someone might want to remind people to post in a conservative manner while disagreeing with official decisions. Sometimes people can be verbally abusive without realizing it.
4. To all of the posters: If you make a mistake just own up to it, and if you are misunderstood just say what you meant. Replying with hyperbole does not help. YOU may know what you mean, but that does not mean the other reader does. Getting mad and being more combative instead of saying "I meant ___", does not help a discussion.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mark's post on negative conditioning has implications well beyond the FAQ.
For example, when I see a particular community member who posts negative comments on every single AP, it is much harder to recognize any valid criticsms they may have. So my eyes tend to slide past their posts.
And that is for me as a casual observer - imagine what it must be like for somebody who is directly involved in the creation of the product.
Valid criticism is important, and the folks at Paizo are very good at taking it and responding when appropriate. However, when it becomes apparent that a poster will never be pleased, there's not much point in changing things to please them.
Basically this
Their are certain posters whose posts I completely eyeroll at if not ignore. They also tend to be posters who often constantly complain about getting ignored by developers. Doesn't take a genius to figure out why.
ACG's editing seems problematic in part because there are other people beyond those posters complaining, not just the usual people who will never be satisfied with Paizo for some reason or another.
Ha ha ha Nutella is for the soft Vegemite is for the hardcore... It puts hair on your chest and it's made from beer.
That and I can get peanut butter Tim Tams now.
The problem with Vegemite is that those who don't understand it slather it on like peanut butter. Vegemite should be used sparingly on toast with melted butter.
Sorry, but peanut butter is bleugh. 8P It's only useful for making satay sauce.
Basically, if you give negative feedback when there are no FAQs and then negative feedback when there are FAQs too, since your discontented posts are your psychological ammunition, you're diluting your message in both instances. In essence, pick your top priority and choose that one to give negative feedback.I want more FAQ! Please? Pretty please?
And, I think I have been as positive as possible about this.
I am 100% behind this sentiment. Occasionally, I might not be happy with some final interpretation but the fact that you make a final decision/clarification for an FAQ is a million times more important than providing feedback not to my taste. If I could have just one thing from Paizo, it would be more FAQs answered.
I also appreciate the time Paizo staff take to be active on the forums. It's another reason I'm a fanboy.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
They just should have grown. Added more staff. Taken a look at their processes to see where they were always falling behind and shore those processes up. Tell their vendors what their expectations are and make them hold to it.Interestingly enough, we have done exactly what you have said we didn't do. We have more editors now than we ever have. We have more folks on the design team than ever. More developers than ever. Our editorial department has grown significantly in the past two years. So has our art department.
As for editing, our books get more editing passes than they did in the past and the exact same people are taking those passes, along with a bunch of new eyes. This past year, we even had two editing interns to lend two extra sets of eyes.
If the answer to the question posed in this thread is to hire more people, then we have done that. And continue to do so. We have another editing position open now. I expect we will hire another developer or two in the near term as well. Paizo isn't afraid of growing. We have grown quite a bit in the exact time frame you are saying we were staying small in.
I am not exactly sure why our products aren't stacking up the expectations of some of our customers as this thread shows, but the answer isn't because we haven't hired more people. Matter of fact, it may be because we DID hire more people. Possibly. One thing I know from years in business is that as a company grows and hires more people, they all get a little less efficient.
As folks have said earlier in this thread, nobody hates errors in a published product more than the folks here at Paizo. Nobody. We strive to perfect our craft every day. And we will continue to do so.
-Lisa
Perhaps you missed the very next paragraph of my post, so I'll highlight it here:
I'm sure they did those things. But if the attitude they project is "Well, you know, we're a small game company, so hey! Thanks for any support," then they're going to get shuffled to the side every now and then in favor of a more insistent client. And even though they did some of these things, they only did what was absolutely necessary rather than looking toward the future and thinking, "What more do we need to really hit this stuff out of the park?"
I am on the front lines with your product. I sell it to people every day, and discuss it with people every day. Much like you get to see people posting here on these boards, I get to have lengthy conversations about your products. And because there is no fear of anyone pouncing on them and flinging sarcastic "clang" comments at them, I get to hear a lot more honest feedback. Because it is face to face, I don't have to hear hyperactive defenses of anti-Paizo positions, either.
People enjoy your products. The consensus is that the stories you tell are second to none. I still get new players to the game on a regular basis, and they love what they see with regards to all their options (and I carry everything I possibly can, so they have lots of options).
But I am hearing more and more about problems. All of the things mentioned earlier in this thread are brought up to me regularly, and people question why they are even possible. Things NOT mentioned in this thread are the consistently terrible binding jobs that AP volumes now have, or the all-over-the-map quality of the Pathfinder Battles line. When they look at WotC books and minis they don't find these problems nearly as often. When they look at Fantasy Flight books and minis they are noticeably lacking here, too. Why are problems found with such frequency in Paizo's products? And why do Paizo's products so often miss their publication dates, while these other companies don't?
I can't get behind the idea that the reason is because you hired too many people.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I prefer the theory that as a ruleset grows in complexity there are necessarily increased errors and fans get grumpier about those errors.
Suggesting, perhaps, that an ever-growing and increasingly-complex ruleset might not be what's needed.
Mythic Rules, the ACG, Unchained and on and on it goes... Every single quality game I've ever played - going on more than 30 years now - has always seemed follow the same path of relentless addition and reinvention until it ultimately, predictably, became to bloated to survive. I live for Pathfinder's flavor, for its AP's and modules and PFS scenarios, for its world books and its companions... there's nothing revolutionary to be done when it comes to repackaging and reorganizing a d20 ruleset, so I don't understand the need to focus on reinventing the wheel.
Personally, I prefer the theory that as a ruleset grows in complexity there are necessarily increased errors and fans get grumpier about those errors.Suggesting, perhaps, that an ever-growing and increasingly-complex ruleset might not be what's needed.
Mythic Rules, the ACG, Unchained and on and on it goes... Every single quality game I've ever played - going on more than 30 years now - has always seemed follow the same path of relentless addition and reinvention until it ultimately, predictably, became to bloated to survive. I live for Pathfinder's flavor, for its AP's and modules and PFS scenarios, for its world books and its companions... there's nothing revolutionary to be done when it comes to repackaging and reorganizing a d20 ruleset, so I don't understand the need to focus on reinventing the wheel.
Well, I agree with you that it's not needed - my ideal number of pages in an RPG rule set is about a hundred, I think.
Nonetheless, there's lots of people who like systems which keep expanding - I think that's who paizo are targeting with their rule expansions. I was really just rejecting the idea that the extra licensing arrangements and so forth was likely to result in an increase in complaints and trying to suggest another reason.
As i mentioned in that post, My hypothesis at least explains why the increase in complaints is with the rule books rather than other product lines. That's hard to explain if you think the ACG's problems are due to too many product lines.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can't get behind the idea that the reason is because you hired too many people.
This won't be a popular response, but perhaps if the very clear priority of keeping the LGBT flag waving wasn't quite so front and center, if the social engineering and universal representation were left to the players and GM's themselves, the focus on these many other issues presented might be greater.
We can't get answers to any of dozens of questions in the FAQ, have classes coming out after months of playtests which immediately need tons of errata and the much-heralded Mythic ruleset is broken pretty much as soon as you get into the meat of it... but hey, we all know EXACTLY how much a sex-change potion will cost!
I'm not saying the two are related, but in earlier pathfinder materials, the focus wasn't so great, the constant LGBT banner wasn't so zealously waved and many of these issues weren't near so pronounced either. Can we skip the social agenda, cut the rules bloat and just get back to what Paizo has always been best at - telling great stories through gaming?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
D&D will likely re-take the #1 position for RPGs. Likely. <--Important word, right there: it does not mean "absolutely." And if they do, it won't be because they "crush" PFRPG's sales. They'll just beat them.
I think Paizo could have maintained their 1st place position by growing because they should. Not because they had to, not because growing "at all costs" is what business is all about. They just should have grown. Added more staff. Taken a look at their processes to see where they were always falling behind and shore those processes up. Tell their vendors what their expectations are and make them hold to it.
I'm sure they did those things. But if the attitude they project is "Well, you know, we're a small game company, so hey! Thanks for any support," then they're going to get shuffled to the side every now and then in favor of a more insistent client. Edit: And even though they did some of these things, they only did what was absolutely necessary rather than looking toward the future and thinking, "What more do we need to really hit this stuff out of the park?" /Edit<--Forgot to tie up my opening line...
I don't think that Paizo should be a publicly traded company. I don't think they should be a BIG company, either. I certainly don't want them to look for some giant corporation to buy them out (though I'll bet they take the offer if one comes along - I'd imagine that when someone offers you the chance to be a bazillionaire you can't come up with a lot of reasons to say, "Nah."). And I don't want them to lose sight of what made them as good a company as they are.
I think they should be the World's Leading Game Company. They can be that, accomplish all these things I'm mentioning, and still retain their identity as Paizo (that company that is so good at listening to its customers and keeping in touch with its fan base).
Why do you think it's important for paizo to be the worlds leading game company?
I wish them all the success they want, but its irrelevant to me whether they sell more or less books than WotC. I consider them great because of who they are and how they do things, not because ICv2 declared them the winner for a few quarters in a row.
Quality control is obviously an issue (and I'm glad they've just moved erik into his new position, hopefully that bears fruit in the same way that hiring Jessica seems to have improved their deadline hitting). That's not related to "being the best" though and I don't think would be necessarily improved by growing.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
By the way, that wasn't "pouncing" on you. I'm genuinely curious. The focus on "winning" the ICv2 surveys is something I find odd.
I have no experience in publishing, but do in business. Defining your success by market share or otherwise by reference to your competitors is a poor strategy, in my view.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
Why do you think it's important for paizo to be the worlds leading game company?
I wish them all the success they want, but its irrelevant to me whether they sell more or less books than WotC. I consider them great because of who they are and how they do things, not because ICv2 declared them the winner for a few quarters in a row.
I have no idea how to reply to this, beyond saying that I can't imagine not trying to be the best at what I do. No way did Paizo set out wanting to be "okay" at making their game. If they had, it would have been exactly that.
Edit: I'm not seeing you pounce on anyone, Steve. You're being completely reasonable. Others, however, have an overwhelming need to be the cool kid in class. It gets old.