Pathfinder Bloat - are you concerned?


Product Discussion

101 to 150 of 761 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I'm not concerned. If a book looks like something I'm interested in, I'll buy it. Otherwise, I won't. Pathfinder is like a buffet; you can have a little of this and a little of that, some of everything, definitely none of that, or go meat and potatoes only. You're not required to eat everything, all at once.

-Skeld

Grand Lodge

16 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Bloat is a term invented by people who feel that a game system should only consist of the parts that they themselves use.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Wiggz wrote:
Duncan7291 wrote:

I'm concerned about the introduction of new classes so soon after the release of the ACG. I'm concerned that Pathfinder is become bloated and creating such a load of information that new players or GM's may feel the learning curve is too high to become vested in this system.

What are yall's thoughts? (Note: I'm not complaining just to complain, this is a real concern of mine and I would appreciate some honest discourse on the subject.)

What got me into PF were the AP's... what has me reconsidering is the bloat.

Unfortunately I get castigated for even asking about purchasing more AP materials (such as hardcover treatment of the out of print and out dated AP's) while lately the bloat has begun to increase at an exponential rate. It's tough for me and others to hear there is no manpower for updating 3.5 modules while watching Mythic Adventures, the ACG, Occult Adventures, Unchained, etc, etc, etc all coming out back-to-back-to-back with barely a breath taken. Moreover, as these books come out faster and faster their quality suffers, from adequate play testing being done to simple things like typographical errors.

I'm honestly not sure what's driven Paizo to inundate their patrons with inferior quality materials packed to the brim with largely unasked for options. I'd rather that manpower be used to ensure things like the pawns actually include the appropriate characters (no Elyrium?) or the book covers themselves are in error. PFS was a great idea but as the special rules exceptions and addendums start to look more and more like a phone book and potential GMs are stretched thinner and thinner to keep up with all the 'options' they may be faced with, it's going to die of self-immolation.

Are they coming out faster and faster? I thought there was an established rate of 3 hardbacks a year (one of which is a bestiary/codex type book of monsters or NPCs for GMs). I don't think the upcoming unchained, occult, etc. is changing that.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Wiggz wrote:


What got me into PF were the AP's... what has me reconsidering is the bloat.

Unfortunately I get castigated for even asking about purchasing more AP materials (such as hardcover treatment of the out of print and out dated AP's) while lately the bloat has begun to increase at an exponential rate. It's tough for me and others to hear there is no manpower for updating 3.5 modules while watching Mythic Adventures, the ACG, Occult Adventures, Unchained, etc, etc, etc all coming out back-to-back-to-back with barely a breath taken. Moreover, as these books come out faster and faster their quality suffers, from adequate play testing being done to simple things like typographical errors.

There is some misleading things in this paragraph. First, while manpower might be a concern, the #1 reason why Paizo doesn't want to do further hardcover AP compilations is that it messes with their business model, which is what the company is based on. By updating or compiling former Adventure paths, they first of all create an impression that would lead people to think that this might be a regular thing, which may stop people from subscribing. Secondly, its essentially releasing 2 APs at once; that means whatever new AP is being produced stands to be less profitable as people buy the old AP and don't bother with what has been released.

This has been stated over and over again, and at any rate new rule books wouldn't interfere with new hardcover compilations, since both are largely done by different groups within Paizo.


MMCJawa wrote:
Wiggz wrote:


What got me into PF were the AP's... what has me reconsidering is the bloat.

Unfortunately I get castigated for even asking about purchasing more AP materials (such as hardcover treatment of the out of print and out dated AP's) while lately the bloat has begun to increase at an exponential rate. It's tough for me and others to hear there is no manpower for updating 3.5 modules while watching Mythic Adventures, the ACG, Occult Adventures, Unchained, etc, etc, etc all coming out back-to-back-to-back with barely a breath taken. Moreover, as these books come out faster and faster their quality suffers, from adequate play testing being done to simple things like typographical errors.

There is some misleading things in this paragraph. First, while manpower might be a concern, the #1 reason why Paizo doesn't want to do further hardcover AP compilations is that it messes with their business model, which is what the company is based on. By updating or compiling former Adventure paths, they first of all create an impression that would lead people to think that this might be a regular thing, which may stop people from subscribing. Secondly, its essentially releasing 2 APs at once; that means whatever new AP is being produced stands to be less profitable as people buy the old AP and don't bother with what has been released.

This has been stated over and over again, and at any rate new rule books wouldn't interfere with new hardcover compilations, since both are largely done by different groups within Paizo.

You are correct that this discussion has indeed been done at length, and the presumption that updating out-of-print AP's that were released under the 3.5 ruleset would somehow negatively impact the sales of new AP's to current subscribers has pretty much been proven to be false... which is usually where the secondary argument of limited manpower begins to crop up. I figured I'd skip past all that, especially since this thread is the wrong place to rehash those same discussions.

Yes, while I'm certain the people working on the new rule books and the people who would work on the compilations are theoretically different groups, its Paizo who allocates its manpower and if a break was temporarily taken from the breakneck rules bloat in order to offer paying customers something they've been clamoring for almost nonstop, I'm sure those newly available personnel could be utilized fairly easily.


I mentioned earlier in this thread that it wasn't a concern for me and technically it still isnt but the other day I was rolling up a character for a second edition throwback game we're doing this weekend, I had my character sheet, dice and players handbook at that was all I needed, took me less than an hour to get my character ready to go. I started thinking that if it wasn't for herolab I'd have a huge stack of books in front of me and it would probably take me a couple of days to sort through everything to get my character the way I wanted. I like having multiple options but I have to have a character creation tool to help me consolidate everything so I can definitely see where the other side is coming from.

Silver Crusade

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Wiggz wrote:


What got me intthe presumption that updating out-of-print AP's that were released under the 3.5 ruleset would somehow negatively impact the sales of new AP's to current subscribers has pretty much been proven to be false...

Proven? How? By scientific data? Empirical research? Court rulings? You have any analysis from the fields of economy at hand? Numbers? Predictions based on said numbers? Or, for the lack of the above, experience working in the gaming industry which would give some remote credibility to guesswork? Knowledge on potential ROI? Factoring said ROI into annual budget? Long-term financial strategy?

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd be very curious about this as well, considering that the people who's job this is have been pretty adamant about why they don't do it and their reasons, and frankly I'd be more likely to trust their take on why they do or don't do something over someone griping about not having what they want.


Not concerned at all. Any GM worth their salt should be able to manage anything Paizo comes up with.

I love that they offer crunch statistics for EVERYTHING! That way if you want to expand beyond the basics, it is there for you. If you want to keep it simple, you can just stick with the Core book.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Triphoppenskip wrote:
I mentioned earlier in this thread that it wasn't a concern for me and technically it still isnt but the other day I was rolling up a character for a second edition throwback game we're doing this weekend, I had my character sheet, dice and players handbook at that was all I needed, took me less than an hour to get my character ready to go. I started thinking that if it wasn't for herolab I'd have a huge stack of books in front of me and it would probably take me a couple of days to sort through everything to get my character the way I wanted. I like having multiple options but I have to have a character creation tool to help me consolidate everything so I can definitely see where the other side is coming from.

Heh - imagine GM's in PFS who not only have to have a working knowledge of all of this, but then also have to have a working knowledge of all the exceptions and restrictions specific to PFS as well...

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

It's kind of my job. :)


Not concerned at all. If you don't like that there's "too many classes", ban them from your games. Go Core-only, or only Core and APG, or only allow a few classes from say, the ACG, or any combination you like of the awesome options and variety that exists for the game.


Not at all concerned, all you need to play is the Core Rule Book and Bestiary 1, any thing else is added at your convenience. It is not all that difficult for new players to understand.

More choices adds to the flavor of certain games I want to run. I can choose to include them or not include them. Not only do I like the hard covers that are put out I also get a lot of base classes from 3rd Party Publishers as well.

I don't believe in too many classes when my players are having fun I have succeeded as a Game Master. So when my players want to have a Druid, Alchemist, Brawler, Gunslinger and a Time Warden then that is what they play. I have no problems adapting any adventure path or home spun adventure to their unique choices.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wiggz wrote:


You are correct that this discussion has indeed been done at length, and the presumption that updating out-of-print AP's that were released under the 3.5 ruleset would somehow negatively impact the sales of new AP's to current subscribers has pretty much been proven to be false...

You know how things work around here. If you make a claim people want proof or a verifying argument. We are waiting.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:
Wiggz wrote:


You are correct that this discussion has indeed been done at length, and the presumption that updating out-of-print AP's that were released under the 3.5 ruleset would somehow negatively impact the sales of new AP's to current subscribers has pretty much been proven to be false...
You know how things work around here. If you make a claim people want proof or a verifying argument. We are waiting.

This, to be honest.

I'm still of the opinion Paizo's explanation of why it would negatively impact sales holds water, and I'm yet to hear a compelling argument why they're wrong.

It all comes down to the non-subscriber customers, and the fact that when they're faced with a selection of products, they're more likely to, say, buy the AP that interests them most than to buy them all. That's why a reduced selection works better for the books - it channels those sales towards the items Paizo want shifted out of the warehouse.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Triphoppenskip wrote:
I mentioned earlier in this thread that it wasn't a concern for me and technically it still isnt but the other day I was rolling up a character for a second edition throwback game we're doing this weekend, I had my character sheet, dice and players handbook at that was all I needed, took me less than an hour to get my character ready to go. I started thinking that if it wasn't for herolab I'd have a huge stack of books in front of me and it would probably take me a couple of days to sort through everything to get my character the way I wanted. I like having multiple options but I have to have a character creation tool to help me consolidate everything so I can definitely see where the other side is coming from.

That is because you chose to use all of those books. While newer books make it easier to make certain concepts, they are not always needed. Yes, I will admit herolab makes things easier, but it is not a requirement to make it takes less than "days" to create a character even with all the books. I often plan from 1 to 20(or whatever I expect to reach) on paper, while looking at several options, and then build the character and it does not take days.

The actual building itself takes less than an hour unless it is a high level caster, and that is only because of spells, and that is on paper. If it is a martial character the actual building takes less than an hour, even at 15.
Now of course everyone's process is different, but that is not issue of bloat. That is their process in question needing to be improved upon.

PS: I see where they are coming from also, but many of them will argue about "new players" who may also be overwhelmed by the core book alone, or "power creep", which can be fixed by not allowing every book, once things get beyond what their table likes. It is like me complaining because the restaurant offers me 3 types of ketchup. Just because its there that does not mean I have to use it.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

One note: All the people talking about how you don't have to choose to use all the books are wrong for a subset of Pathfinder games: Pathfinder Society games pretty much use every hardcover in the RPG line...as well as a large number of books from the Campaign Setting and Player Companion lines as well. While players can get away with just being familiar with he actual resources they use for their PC, Game Masters need at least a passing familiarity with ALL of it.

One of the reasons I'm not a huge fan of PFS.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Kthulhu wrote:
...Game Masters need at least a passing familiarity with ALL of it.

I really don't, actually.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:
Wiggz wrote:


You are correct that this discussion has indeed been done at length, and the presumption that updating out-of-print AP's that were released under the 3.5 ruleset would somehow negatively impact the sales of new AP's to current subscribers has pretty much been proven to be false...
You know how things work around here. If you make a claim people want proof or a verifying argument. We are waiting.

Of course I know how things work around here - people dig in to their positions and proof to the contrary carved on stone tablets handed down by God himself wouldn't change their minds... when you say 'we are waiting', you don't mean 'we're waiting because we want to understand your perspective', you mean 'we are waiting for our turn to talk and tell you how wrong you are'. And that's fine - that's how chat forums go, especially with high-frequency posters.

I know many more people who bought the RotRL Anniversary Edition than I do people who subscribe to AP's - 11 and 2 respectively, going off the last headcount of my local PFS society - most of these individuals would buy another compilation in a heartbeat, but would still never consider subscribing. I myself am only a subscriber to the AP line because of the Anniversary Edition; without that gateway I'd never have trusted the product, certainly not enough to spend over $100 a pop (plus shipping and handling, natch).

As I said, this is absolutely the wrong thread to have yet another debate on the subject. I'll simply pose this one question:

How catastrophic was the plunge in AP sales and subscriptions after the Rise of the Runelords Anniversary Edition was released?

I ask because, by my understanding, AP sales and subscriptions are actually higher now than they were before the RotRL AE was published... not to suggest causality (except in my own case) but it certainly seems to run counter to the argument at hand.

Thanks. I'll hang up and listen.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The problem is you're asking the wrong question. The question you should be asking is:

How catastrophic will the plunge in AP sales and subscriptions be if customers know they can just wait a few years and get a compiled version?

Paizo devs have stated on multiple occasions that they have reason to believe it will be severe enough to threaten the business model that their entire company is balanced on. If you have evidence to suggest their claim is wrong, that's what we want you to provide.


Matt Thomason wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Wiggz wrote:


You are correct that this discussion has indeed been done at length, and the presumption that updating out-of-print AP's that were released under the 3.5 ruleset would somehow negatively impact the sales of new AP's to current subscribers has pretty much been proven to be false...
You know how things work around here. If you make a claim people want proof or a verifying argument. We are waiting.

This, to be honest.

I'm still of the opinion Paizo's explanation of why it would negatively impact sales holds water, and I'm yet to hear a compelling argument why they're wrong.

It all comes down to the non-subscriber customers, and the fact that when they're faced with a selection of products, they're more likely to, say, buy the AP that interests them most than to buy them all. That's why a reduced selection works better for the books - it channels those sales towards the items Paizo want shifted out of the warehouse.

I am indeed more likely to buy the APs that interest me than to buy them all. The more APs they release that interest me, the more APs I will buy from them. Updated versions of pre-PFRPG APs interest me greatly; it would save me days of conversion, updates, and rebalancing. I've held off on buying any pre-PFRPG APs for this reason. But no amount of reduced selection will make me buy things sitting around in their warehouse--if I don't want it, I don't want it.

/yeah, yeah, anecdote


Orthos wrote:

The problem is you're asking the wrong question. The question you should be asking is:

How catastrophic will the plunge in AP sales and subscriptions be if customers know they can just wait a few years and get a compiled version?

No idea. How bad is it for DVD sales? Book sales? A few years is a long time to wait.

We aren't talking about reprinting Kingmaker as a hardcover. There's a legitimate interest in not purchasing 3.5-era APs since they require long hours of modification to work with the current rule set. (Well, they don't *require* them, but the challenge level is all wrong otherwise.) The RotRL rerelease shows that there's value in updating pre-3.5-era material. Whether it's enough value to Paizo is, of course, up to Paizo, but I know where I stand on the subject--make a hardbound, updated-for-PFRPG Legacy of Fire and I'll be first in line to pick it up. But then, I don't think the subscription model is really all that.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
blahpers wrote:
Orthos wrote:

The problem is you're asking the wrong question. The question you should be asking is:

How catastrophic will the plunge in AP sales and subscriptions be if customers know they can just wait a few years and get a compiled version?

No idea. How bad is it for DVD sales? Book sales? A few years is a long time to wait.

I don't know either. But I presume Paizo does, it's their job after all. So when they say they have reasons it's not going to happen, I don't have any reason to doubt them.

Frankly I'm right there with you. I would have an absolute flip of joy for a converted, compiled Curse of the Crimson Throne. But I don't expect it to happen, and will be pleasantly surprised if it does. Heck, I'm a digital-only customer, and I'd still probably buy a hardbound CotCT converted compilation.

Quote:
But then, I don't think the subscription model is really all that.

I think this is where you're having issues. It may not be an attractive business practice to you personally - nor is it to me, being fairly strictly digital-only means there's nothing in the subscriptions for me - but it's what built Paizo up into what it is, and they've said on several occasions that without it they're extremely liable to have severe financial issues. Anything that challenges the subscription practice at this point, or any point in the near future, is not likely to occur.


A closer model to look at might be single comics versus trade paperbacks. I've not looked deeply into those numbers myself, but I do recall a number of conversations regarding them on various boards. From what I've seen they haven't slowed down churning out comics or trades -- but like I said, I don't keep up with comics as much as I did 10 or so years ago.

I agree with Orthos that converted material would be nice and a great surprise, but it isn't something I'm expecting in the near future.

Grand Lodge

To the original question, I originally was concerned about what I perceived to be book after book of new rules. Not as a player -- as a player I thought the new options were fantastic. The Advanced Players Guide and introduction of archetypes blew my mind. To me, more options as a PC was better.

But as a new GM, I was terrified. Overwhelmed by all of the new options, concerned about looking like I didn’t know what I was doing in front of my players when I GM Society. In fact, I still have problems remembering factoids from the core rulebook (wizards’ school abilities come to mind). Kind of an odd dichotomy, I guess. So from that perspective, I was concerned.

What’s turned out is that at every PFS table I’ve GM’d to date (which admittedly isn’t a lot), the players are more than happy to answer when I say “Sorry but can you explain to me your PCs ability/power/quirk works?” That has been great for me and I've learned a lot. So far, I’ve just needed to know the basics (maybe the bare basics) of what each character class does to manage my tables. I'm pleasantly surprised that it hasn’t been as overwhelming as I thought it would be.

Shadow Lodge

Orthos wrote:

The problem is you're asking the wrong question. The question you should be asking is:

How catastrophic will the plunge in AP sales and subscriptions be if customers know they can just wait a few years and get a compiled version?

Paizo devs have stated on multiple occasions that they have reason to believe it will be severe enough to threaten the business model that their entire company is balanced on. If you have evidence to suggest their claim is wrong, that's what we want you to provide.

Of course, a question I have is how well the 3.5 AP sales are (Curse of the Crimson Throne, Second Darkness, and Legacy of Fire).

I'd never advocate compiled APs for the ones done under the PFRPG system (at least not until all six of the volumes are out of stock). But I think the 3.5 APs are a bit of a different story. I don't have the sales figures...maybe they're still selling. But if not, then a compilation wouldn't necessarily cut into the current AP subscriptions/sales.


Part of the other problem is that Second Darkness and Legacy of Fire didn't sell terribly well.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kthulhu wrote:

One note: All the people talking about how you don't have to choose to use all the books are wrong for a subset of Pathfinder games: Pathfinder Society games pretty much use every hardcover in the RPG line...as well as a large number of books from the Campaign Setting and Player Companion lines as well. While players can get away with just being familiar with he actual resources they use for their PC, Game Masters need at least a passing familiarity with ALL of it.

One of the reasons I'm not a huge fan of PFS.

Actually you're wrong. Gamemasters are only required to be familliar with core assumptions. Players are expected to bring material for anything they are using outside of Core Assumptions.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think people have a reason to be worried, especially if you take all archetypes into consideration, but mostly when you look at the quality of the new classes and why they have been released.

I don’t mind new classes, nor do I mind Paizo doing Psionics, but the ACG is problematic and so are the Ninja, Gunslinger and Summoner. The number of the Archetypes is also a kind of bloat.
The quality is declining and some of the new classes are just there to fix the old classes. The Ninja, Investigator and Slayer are there to fix the rogue and Swashbuckler is a dex fighter fix. Brawler is a monk fix, etc.

I also think lack of support for new classes or mechanics introduced is problematic, and by new classes I also mean archetypes.

Bloat is happening and you should be concerned.

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

One persons bloat is another persons options.


Zark wrote:

I think people have a reason to be worried, especially if you take all archetypes into consideration, but mostly when you look at the quality of the new classes and why they have been released.

I don’t mind new classes, nor do I mind Paizo doing Psionics, but the ACG is problematic and so are the Ninja, Gunslinger and Summoner. The number of the Archetypes is also a kind of bloat.
The quality is declining and some of the new classes are just there to fix the old classes. The Ninja, Investigator and Slayer are there to fix the rogue and Swashbuckler is a dex fighter fix. Brawler is a monk fix, etc.

I also think lack of support for new classes or mechanics introduced is problematic, and by new classes I also mean archetypes.

Bloat is happening and you should be concerned.

I should? Me, personally? {: O


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kthulhu wrote:

One note: All the people talking about how you don't have to choose to use all the books are wrong for a subset of Pathfinder games: Pathfinder Society games pretty much use every hardcover in the RPG line...as well as a large number of books from the Campaign Setting and Player Companion lines as well. While players can get away with just being familiar with he actual resources they use for their PC, Game Masters need at least a passing familiarity with ALL of it.

One of the reasons I'm not a huge fan of PFS.

Then we were not wrong because we were making general cases, and Pathfinder does not revolve around PFS. If those in PFS dont like all of the books being availible then address it with PFS, and try to lessen the option instead of complaining as if a PFS problem is a Pathfinder problem.


Wiggz wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Wiggz wrote:


You are correct that this discussion has indeed been done at length, and the presumption that updating out-of-print AP's that were released under the 3.5 ruleset would somehow negatively impact the sales of new AP's to current subscribers has pretty much been proven to be false...
You know how things work around here. If you make a claim people want proof or a verifying argument. We are waiting.

Of course I know how things work around here - people dig in to their positions and proof to the contrary carved on stone tablets handed down by God himself wouldn't change their minds... when you say 'we are waiting', you don't mean 'we're waiting because we want to understand your perspective', you mean 'we are waiting for our turn to talk and tell you how wrong you are'. And that's fine - that's how chat forums go, especially with high-frequency posters.

I know many more people who bought the RotRL Anniversary Edition than I do people who subscribe to AP's - 11 and 2 respectively, going off the last headcount of my local PFS society - most of these individuals would buy another compilation in a heartbeat, but would still never consider subscribing. I myself am only a subscriber to the AP line because of the Anniversary Edition; without that gateway I'd never have trusted the product, certainly not enough to spend over $100 a pop (plus shipping and handling, natch).

As I said, this is absolutely the wrong thread to have yet another debate on the subject. I'll simply pose this one question:

How catastrophic was the plunge in AP sales and subscriptions after the Rise of the Runelords Anniversary Edition was released?

I ask because, by my understanding, AP sales and subscriptions are actually higher now than they were before the RotRL AE was published... not to suggest causality (except in my own case) but it certainly seems to run counter to the argument at hand.

Thanks. I'll hang up and listen.

Noboby said a purchase of hardback would drop AP sales. They said knowingly waiting on a compiled and updated AP would likely interfere with the sales of current AP's. If I know Curse of the Crimson Throne was being updated and I was short on cash I would not be looking at any future AP's, depending on when the new version was coming out. That is why any AP compilation will be a rare thing. For some money is the issue, but time is since they will intend to run whatever they buy.

The point of my post was mainly to see if you had any hard proof or just made an assumption so if you are done with the debate that is fine.


wraithstrike wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:

One note: All the people talking about how you don't have to choose to use all the books are wrong for a subset of Pathfinder games: Pathfinder Society games pretty much use every hardcover in the RPG line...as well as a large number of books from the Campaign Setting and Player Companion lines as well. While players can get away with just being familiar with he actual resources they use for their PC, Game Masters need at least a passing familiarity with ALL of it.

One of the reasons I'm not a huge fan of PFS.

Then we were not wrong because we were making general cases, and Pathfinder does not revolve around PFS. If those in PFS dont like all of the books being availible then address it with PFS, and try to lessen the option instead of complaining as if a PFS problem is a Pathfinder problem.

Heh - tell that to Crane Wing.


wraithstrike wrote:
Noboby said a purchase of hardback would drop AP sales.

Um... actually, LOTS of people have said that. Its the entire basis of their argument.


Options are fine, but too many options is bad. Especially when those new options invalidate old ones. Not just from an optimization stand point, but why would you ever play a rogue when you could play a ninja, slayer, or investigator and be more competent at anything the rogue can do.

It's also a problem when options are just too powerful compared to old options. Remember Sacred Geometry? Or the feat that gave (most) divine caster charisma to saves?

Shadow Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Zark wrote:
Bloat is happening and you should be concerned.

Nah.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Yeah, it´s well known that some people don´t like PFS, for whatever reasons.

PFS GM´s absolutely don´t need to know all that rules, but many like it, because it´s like a sport for them.
There´s that rule that players should own what they play for a reason.
The chance that the players actually read it then is much higher and you can show it to the GM on the fly.
I met more than enough players home games that never bothered even to read their own class and character abilities, but expected the GM to explain everything to them, repeatedly. All of them hold the game very often, no matter how cool their roleplay is.
Never happened in PFS.
There are other problems from the playerbase and GM side which are mitigated in PFS i don´t want to go into right now.

Also, PFS is a big part of Pathfinder, one that normaly gives more feedback and is unreliant to obscure houserules and expectations.
If something doesn´t sit well with PFS, then it´s unbalanced things or stuff that doesn´t work at all (besides the evil player options, which get no feedback at all). Those things tend to either get banned or tempered with in homegames anyway.

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Hayato Ken wrote:
Yeah, it´s well known that some people don´t like PFS, for whatever reasons.

I like houserules and 3rd-party content too much.

Shadow Lodge

8 people marked this as a favorite.

I think bloat is a myth propagated by people with agendas.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think bloat is obfuscated as a myth by people with agendas.


Wiggz is missing the point.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I think some people carry over here their frustrations with Paizo's approach to issues such as sexuality or "sci fi in fantasy" and they're looking for every possible avenue to vent their disappointment.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
MYTHIC TOZ wrote:
Wiggz is missing the point.

Ah, the post where Rynjin's crusade began.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ElyasRavenwood wrote:

If I have my character note book with me, I show them how I have organized my characters and how I include the rules with my character.

I would love to see an example of this. Sounds like the perfect way to do a character sheet to me. Pls share?


Gorbacz wrote:
I think some people carry over here their frustrations with Paizo's approach to issues such as sexuality or "sci fi in fantasy" and they're looking for every possible avenue to vent their disappointment.

Just because someone who's posting a lot in here has posted rather bigoted things about LGBT representation in other posts? No perish the thought.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Alex Smith 908 wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
I think some people carry over here their frustrations with Paizo's approach to issues such as sexuality or "sci fi in fantasy" and they're looking for every possible avenue to vent their disappointment.
Just because someone who's posting a lot in here has posted rather bigoted things about LGBT representation in other posts? No perish the thought.

And, predictably, legitimate discussion is silenced with hyperbole, strawman arguments, misdirection and name-calling... the true agendas are suddenly offered in stark relief, and by names that would surprise no one.

I've never posted a bigoted thing in my life, though I am used to those who feel the need to label people who disagree with them so that their opinions can be dismissed (you know, all in the name of 'inclusiveness')... and when I have an opinion on a matter, be it sci-fi in fantasy, a game company's approach to sexuality or what I perceive to be creeping rules bloat, I have never had a problem expressing that opinion - in the right thread, on the right forum without confusion or misdirection.

Any chance you guys could do the same?

If I was on some kind of personal warpath against Paizo, would I really be 1) a member of the PFS, 2) a subscriber for their products, 3) spending time in other threads helping people improve the Pathfinder experience and 4) voicing both my concerns about the company and my desire to buy additional products, if only they'd produce them?

Posts like the one above represent the very worst of those on the internet and, ironically, work counter to the mindset of open-mindedness and tolerance that you claim to represent.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm sorry that we've done this "oh no teh bloat" song and dance so many times that the actors are recognizable. Put this up there with monday monkday, rollplay vs teaparty debates, and caster supremacy arguments as something that happens every single week on these forums. Nothing is accomplished, no one is convinced of anything, and the people whining on both sides are the same every single time.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Alex Smith 908 wrote:
I'm sorry that we've done this "oh no teh bloat" song and dance so many times that the actors are recognizable. Put this up there with monday monkday, rollplay vs teaparty debates, and caster supremacy arguments as something that happens every single week on these forums. Nothing is accomplished, no one is convinced of anything, and the people whining on both sides are the same every single time.

Isn't this the time for our monthly Paladin alignment thread, by the way?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Gorbacz wrote:
Alex Smith 908 wrote:
I'm sorry that we've done this "oh no teh bloat" song and dance so many times that the actors are recognizable. Put this up there with monday monkday, rollplay vs teaparty debates, and caster supremacy arguments as something that happens every single week on these forums. Nothing is accomplished, no one is convinced of anything, and the people whining on both sides are the same every single time.
Isn't this the time for our monthly Paladin alignment thread, by the way?

I am not sure about the paladin, but I wonder has anyone ever considered what alignment batman is?

101 to 150 of 761 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Paizo Products / Product Discussion / Pathfinder Bloat - are you concerned? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.