| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've certainly had my opinion refined and nuanced, if not entirely changed or reversed. There have been good arguments and nuances ideals and ideas forwarded that are both interesting and enlightening in various small ways.Over two hundred posts. Anyone change their opinion based on any of the arguments you've read? Anyone?
Don't worry, I'll ask again around the 500 mark.
Same here.
Intuitive thinking is not a substitute for analysis...but it can usually provide an excellent guide to quickly determining the spaces where analysis is necessary.Okay... So if your argument hinges upon how something feels to you rather than a more objective metric, you are saying that your feelings are more important than the feelings of another party.
Since we know this is objectively untrue, the argument is meaningless.
That's a totally reasonable starting point. After your intuition gets tweaked, you then analyse the problem area to determine whether that feeling has any real foundation. I haven't seen anyone post the steps that must necessarily follow to have a valid argument.
Right now, the argument amounts to "I don't like it". Obviously that need not be said.
What really concerns me is that SLAs were allowed to satisfy prereqs in the first place. The cat is out of the bag now and getting it back in is not as simple as changing a FAQ. The problem here is communicating this information to players. Having someone show up at a table who has read both the Guide to Organized Play and the Additional Resources and saying "there is no single source of information on the rules--there was a FAQ change. Didn't you get the email from Paizo?" makes you feel like a jerk. Changing FAQs is (as a general rule) a bad idea. Consistency in the rules is important. VOs and GMs get the "pleasure" of explaining this information to players face-to-face. Not nice. If something looks like a rotten way to get around the rules and smells like a rotten way to get around the rules then the odds are that it should not be legalized.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly. I'd be happy if they actually gave us the reason it was change.My guess is it was something a previous dev member pushed to do and now he is gone no one is defending SLA counting as pre reqs.
No. All three of us thought it was an interesting idea.
Well, that takes it back to being a mystery. Thanks for weighing in.
If I had to guess, I'd say something in one of the new book (occult or unchained) prompted it. that would at least explain hearing nothing about why.
Honestly. I'd be happy if they actually gave us the reason it was changed.
Somebody threw too many piggies into the time vortex.
From what I can recall, one of the reasons SLAs were allowed to qualify for item creation feats was a number of monsters that have such feats, but lack any "real" spell casting.
Here is my short list after some searching for "Wondrous Item"
Cthulhu (Wondrous Item)
Kostchtchie (Wondrous Item, Arms and Armor, Construct)
Baphomet (Wondrous Item, Arms and Armor, Construct)
Nocticula (Wondrous Item, Arms and Armor, Construct)
Pazazu (Wondrous Item, Arms and Armor, Construct, Rod)
Formian Queen (Wondrous Item)Someone better tell the Demon Lords their builds aren't legal anymore.
Lucky for them they're monsters and can cheat. :P
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No. All three of us thought it was an interesting idea.Honestly. I'd be happy if they actually gave us the reason it was change.My guess is it was something a previous dev member pushed to do and now he is gone no one is defending SLA counting as pre reqs.So don't leave us in suspense. Why did the dev team reverse direction on this FAQ?
I had an old PC that was a Wizard/Diabolist and I used the Imp Companion's SLAs to qualify it for item crafting feats. It seemed like a very reasonable use of my imp companion! Too bad it's an illegal build now.
SKR is no longer a Paizo Dev. He was not involved with whatever decision was made for this un-FAQ.
...I think.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
SKR is no longer a Paizo Dev. He was not involved with whatever decision was made for this un-FAQ.
...I think.
Correct. I wasn't there for last week's decision, I have no unrevealed information about it, and I won't speculate about it.
But I like cake.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But I like cake.
Filthy munchkin, there is only Pie!
Quit furthering the Cake-Pie Disparity.
SKR is no longer a Paizo Dev. He was not involved with whatever decision was made for this un-FAQ.
...I think.Correct. I wasn't there for last week's decision, I have no unrevealed information about it, and I won't speculate about it.
But I like cake.
LOL cake...
I figured you wouldn't have any insight into the latest FAQ but thanks for the info on the old FAQ. :)
I hereby pledge to buy every book Paizo ever publishes, even if it's a thousand blank pages bound up with a cover that says "Pathfinder Official Scrap Paper"...
if the devs pop up with a reply, "Oh, you want a reason, do you? Just to piss you off, that's why! There, it's exactly what you thought. Now you got 'all you wanted', did ya?"
I'm pretty sure you cannot guarantee that your business would be enough to make up the lost business of the people they'd alienate with that move.
You...you didn't actually...think...
You didn't think it would ever be something they'd even consider, did you? Even COMCAST doesn't have the balls to pull that kind of customer service.
I'm pretty sure you cannot guarantee that your business would be enough to make up the lost business of the people they'd alienate with that move.You...you didn't actually...think...
You didn't think it would ever be something they'd even consider, did you? Even COMCAST doesn't have the balls to pull that kind of customer service.
LOL It's not like they have competition. South Park had it spot on...
EDIT: I mean COMCAST of course.
I'm just saying why it's something they'd never consider.
You wouldn't believe that by reading the other thread on this subject. The way they'd have you believe, Paizo takes dumps on puppies, preferably their customers' brand new, freshly bathed puppies, just because it might make one customer sad.
Honestly, I didn't make that post there because I think they might take me seriously.
...I'm not so sure based upon your replies, I haven't already been so misjudged.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Customers Brand puppies are the best.
|
if the devs pop up with a reply, "Oh, you want a reason, do you? Just to piss you off, that's why! There, it's exactly what you thought. Now you got 'all you wanted', did ya?"
Honestly, that would be hilarious enough just from watching the after effects that I wouldn't hold it against them :)
(Which has me really start to wonder if I am trending toward CN IRL...)
You wouldn't believe that by reading the other thread on this subject. The way they'd have you believe, Paizo takes dumps on puppies, preferably their customers' brand new, freshly bathed puppies, just because it might make one customer sad.
To be fair, staff of the company that produce a pen and paper RPG are almost like the primordial stuff from which GMs are born. Given that most GMs seem to be some flavor of E, wouldn't it make sense that their origin is the same also? :) Although I've always thought of them as more NE, and taking a dump on a puppy seems more of a CE sort of move...
Are we getting into Paizo bashing?
I don't support that, and it helps no one.
Let's stop that.
For Paizo Bashing-
Well, a lot of people are very annoyed.
I feel for those people who wrote guides and things that are now useless.
The way the change just arrived w/o reason certainly does not help.
So its a good thing if Paizo get to know that a lot of people don't like it, or the way it was done.
Against Paizo Bashing-
Well, some of it is rather intemperate.
And in peoples private games, those of us disaffected can just seek a GM who agrees and ignore the ruling.
And on you, blackbloodtroll. You are a troll. And you are on the internet, therefore you are an internet troll. So you of all creatures should be in favour of abuse over the internet. :P