| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now I'm not the poster boy "Paizofan" - I've made it clear that I'm not a fan of much of Paizo's communication approach or marketing. But I do champion them for providing this forum, for generally being accessible, for providing exacting and excellent customer service, and for being well meaning individuals who evince a true love for the game, and for RPGs and game culture (and culture generally)!
I'm seeing a lot of hostility on the boards since the ARG/ACG Errata came out, specifically about the recent menagerie of many concepts.
Here's the thing - what has been changed in the Errata documents are what Paizo has decided to change. And there isn't really much to say beyond that. (Except of course I'm going to say a bunch more stuff.)
I have read a post that alludes to a post by a developer during the Vigilante playtest that there was some backlash against "unfortunate" issues that have been created along the way, making overpowered options. I also saw a suggestion levelled that Jason Bulmahn is not a great designer, and seeing that both Errata documents are designated as being authored by him, this looks like a shot at him as a designer because, in part, of these documents.
However, Jason was instrumental in creating the CRB, and overseeing the relates since that inception. So you've all been playing with his (and of course, other contributors) rules all along. And possibly complaining all along.
But now the Errata exists. And given the glacial approach to some FAQs, I don't think there will be errata for the latest Errata on a large scale any time soon. This is Jason's view of "changes that need to be made" writ large, and strangely without much fanfare, as the changes do seem to be sweeping. Lots of folks are incensed, confused or downright stupefied at the choices that were made. But there you have it. The rules have changed. And they will stay changed. They ain't gonna change again.
Now. If you do not play PFS, you have much, much less to worry about. Yes, table variation will cause problems between GMs that do or don't accept the Errata, but this has ever been the case.
And here is where I am going to get into trouble.
If you do play PFS, you now have NOTHING to worry about. The rules have changed. That is simply all there is to it. Your concepts have been strangled, eviscerated, smashed, burnt, pulverised, decapitated, crushed and abused. And that's just in game. Now, from outside the fourth wall, comes the Erratarrasque!!! Unstoppable, except by the power of St. Compton et al. For sure, it might be annoying, or even "suck" but you can't argue with the word of Bulmahn.
I would suggest you make your peace with the changes and move on. By all means keep arguing and complaining, but Paizo have shown to be very resilient. And then they change things. You might not like their design approach, but you are playing their game.
Personally, I see the issues. I'm not a fan of the change to the Scarred Witch Doctor, but I think I understand why it was done. In my games, I'll ignore it.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow. So saying someone falls short of "great" is hostility and disliking errata is personally insulting?
When you see someone you care about driving off a cliff you wouldn't just tell them, "Hey you may not be a great driver." You would say, "Stop you F-ing idiot!". So do not even begin to say that we have to call every paizo dev and all their work great less we be hostile. Many of us are seeing pathfinder die in our groups as better games present themselves. We can/should convey that to the people making the product we are about to drop support for.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not sure I like just where this is headed.
Telling someone to stop expressing their opinion is, in my opinion, not an acceptable action.
The people that play PFS can argue with the word of Bulmahn, and have for a while over various things.
Anyone who disagrees with the various errata can make their opinion known, and you don't really have any authority to tell them to do otherwise.
Wow. So saying someone falls short of "great" is hostility and disliking errata is personally insulting?
When you see someone you care about driving off a cliff you wouldn't just tell them, "Hey you may not be a great driver." You would say, "Stop you F-ing idiot!". So do not even begin to say that we have to call every paizo dev and all their work great less we be hostile. Many of us are seeing pathfinder die in our groups as better games present themselves. We can/should convey that to the people making the product we are about to drop support for.
No.
Hostility is hostility.
Disliking errata is disliking errata.
Insulting people is insulting.
RPGs are not cliffs.
And let me reiterate something - I'm no Paizo-fan. By all means make suggestions. And complain, and give feedback. I think critique is valuable and necessary. I do enough of my "critique" of the PDT for an army of posters.
I dunno, I think my post came from seeing that there was a lot of non-constructive posts that weren't much more than accusation and vitriol, and from realising that the Paizo staff, or at least the design team, aren't exactly effusive, and even less so when they feel they are being attacked.
There is a lot of high emotion here, which proves passion. I guess I'm just poking my snout in, where it doesn't really affect me. Which is easy to do, but it also allows me to be moderate.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
By all means keep arguing and complaining...
Actually, we could use less arguing and complaining and more discussing and providing constructive criticism.
I'm not sure I like just where this is headed.
Telling someone to stop expressing their opinion is, in my opinion, not an acceptable action.
The people that play PFS can argue with the word of Bulmahn, and have for a while over various things.
Anyone who disagrees with the various errata can make their opinion known, and you don't really have any authority to tell them to do otherwise.
I'm not sure I like that you say you don't like where this is headed. I expressly do not tell people not to express themselves.
By all means keep arguing and complaining
I'm merely pointing out the futility of many of the posts. Perhaps I should have said, "By all means keep giving feedback." My apologies.
By all means keep arguing and complaining...Actually, we could use less arguing and complaining and more discussing and providing constructive criticism.
Yup. That was put much more succinctly than I managed in many more words. And as I just posted, more the point I was trying to make.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except they're not futile.
Chris has posted several questions for the future of FAQs, errata, and developer presence.
Go take a look at the "Why all the nerfs, Paizo?" thread.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yup I just took a look, thanks bigrig107.
As Rynjin said, I have seen such posts before. I think some ideas for better communication from the PDT might come out of that thread, but I and many others have been asking for that for a while.
But nothing in that thread FROM any of the developers themselves, regardless of GenCon.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
By all means keep arguing and complaining...Actually, we could use less arguing and complaining and more discussing and providing constructive criticism.
And there has been plenty...
Now if only paizo actually listened.
It isn't being hostile to call the Vigilante playtest not a playtest when the devs say flat out they are going to ignore the biggest feedback thread in the entire section.
It isn't hostile when I can point to threads showing what the underlining problem of an option is; and the devs go on their merry way insisting the sky is orange.
As you say, the attitudes of the devs are well known: and anyone who spells them out has their post removed for "baiting."
It's been 6 years, and the devs have apparently learned nothing.