Guys, this is a fantasy elf game. You don't need to be this angry about it.


Secrets of Magic Playtest General Discussion

1 to 50 of 67 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

12 people marked this as a favorite.

The amount of anger, frustration, and vitriol I've seen of this forum is insane. THIS IS A GAME TO HAVE FUN IN AND TELL COOL STORY'S! Hell, this is a beta of a option of a part of a game to have fun it and tell cool story's. Paizo won't shot you if you don't play a class. And it doesn't matter how angry you get about their decisions, They'll do what's profitable. If the majority want something, Paizo will pander to the majority. If most people think like you, all you need is to take the survey to get what you want, and if most people want something different, no amount of yelling will help you're cause. Come on guys, there's enough in the real world be be angry about, don't let this elf game dictate your happiness.

Liberty's Edge

9 people marked this as a favorite.

No - You're wrong, on at least one point.

Grunt:
This is a Dwarf game.


can't it be both?

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I should think not, we don't forget.

In all seriousness though, you're right and I'll admit that I too tend to get overly invested in debates and argumentation around here but honestly, I think for many of us nerds getting emotionally invested in a game is nigh unavoidable despite its consequences.


12 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Oof, I totally feel this thread.

Had to step away from the playtest forum for a bit because of this. The amount of vitriol was just too much.


14 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't really see a lot of people being angry about the class itself (a couple people are, but they're wrong). Most of the frustration I've seen and experienced myself stems from trying to evaluate and find the problems in the playtest, you know, as you do, pointing out those flaws, brainstorming solutions with people and having a couple of very loud, very insistent people yell that the class is fine the way it is. I'm not mad that it's in an incomplete state or needs work, it's a playtest. That's what they're for. I'm just getting frustrated that this forum which very much is for pointing out problems is becoming a shouting match against people who don't like it when we do that.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Capn Cupcake wrote:
I don't really see a lot of people being angry about the class itself (a couple people are, but they're wrong). Most of the frustration I've seen and experienced myself stems from trying to evaluate and find the problems in the playtest, you know, as you do, pointing out those flaws, brainstorming solutions with people and having a couple of very loud, very insistent people yell that the class is fine the way it is. I'm not mad that it's in an incomplete state or needs work, it's a playtest. That's what they're for. I'm just getting frustrated that this forum which very much is for pointing out problems is becoming a shouting match against people who don't like it when we do that.

Maybe it's because I mostly stay in the summoner side, but I've mostly found this with people that think the ideas of the class are bad and need to be reconstructed from the ground up to be more like the unchained summoner. I don't think anyone believes these classes don't need some desperate changes in implementation, just that the basic ideas like only having spell slots of your X highest level works fine.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
MaxAstro wrote:

Oof, I totally feel this thread.

Had to step away from the playtest forum for a bit because of this. The amount of vitriol was just too much.

Honestly, I've had to step away from a part of the forum (or the forum as a whole) to destress multiple times since I joined. Particularly when people just shout the same points at each other over and over for a couple pages, neither side making headway on the other.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Salamileg wrote:
MaxAstro wrote:

Oof, I totally feel this thread.

Had to step away from the playtest forum for a bit because of this. The amount of vitriol was just too much.

Honestly, I've had to step away from a part of the forum (or the forum as a whole) to destress multiple times since I joined. Particularly when people just shout the same points at each other over and over for a couple pages, neither side making headway on the other.

The only reason I don't feel the same is because this is quality popcorn worthy drama. It can't be health for anyone not viewing with that mindset, and probably

isn't healthy for me.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

"Guys, this is a fantasy elf game. You don't need to be this angry about it."

Have you looked outside lately? Plague, riot's, wild fires, ect... It's the apocalypse so people are looking for something fun to do as stress relief and here comes a playtest that might upset that. I'm actually surprised it's been as civil as it's been.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:

"Guys, this is a fantasy elf game. You don't need to be this angry about it."

Have you looked outside lately? Plague, riot's, wild fires, ect... It's the apocalypse so people are looking for something fun to do as stress relief and here comes a playtest that might upset that. I'm actually surprised it's been as civil as it's been.

How does this make the game less fun? If you don't like the play test, say that on the survey and move on. It's not like this will make the other classes worse or less fun.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

And anyway, Paizo definitely prefer that we get het up and passionate than greet the classes with disinterest and indifference.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pronate11 wrote:
How does this make the game less fun?

If you're playtesting and you aren't having fun... It's pretty self evident it's not fun.

Pronate11 wrote:
If you don't like the play test, say that on the survey and move on.

When you have barely left you house since March and can only have limited contact with people in-person, you have a LOT of time on your hands. That and if you've been waiting for these classes, you have a vested interest.

And if I did as you suggested, I'd have just written 'they are meh and I didn't test them' which tells them what? Better to test them out and find out what really works and doesn't, even if it's just what doesn't work FOR ME.

Pronate11 wrote:
It's not like this will make the other classes worse or less fun.

Not really as they will become part of the game and you'll have to interact with those classes. Add to that that this might be your favorite class so thinking its butchered may very well make you have less fun.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I also stepped away from the playtest for similar reasons, but mostly I just wanted to wait for the dust (or smoke in my state's case) to settle a bit, and people to get more actual play in.

My group is on hiatus due to life stuff, so I won't really get a chance to try out/ DM for either of these classes in the playtest run, but I'll be watching for more actual play reports while I do a few single player test runs of the classes.

That said, we all really do need more time to ingest the classes I think. The magus does feel like it's not quite where it needs to be. The summoner does feel like it's okay, but could use some finishing work. For both of these, I think a lot of their problems can be addressed by more focus abilities and tweaks to the way some of their mechanics work.

But without really getting into the guts of the class during a live play, I can't say that with any real certainty.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pronate11 wrote:

can't it be both?

Those are the kinds of things an elf would say. Don't trust it.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I have it on good authority to "never trust an elf"


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
beowulf99 wrote:

I also stepped away from the playtest for similar reasons, but mostly I just wanted to wait for the dust (or smoke in my state's case) to settle a bit, and people to get more actual play in.

My group is on hiatus due to life stuff, so I won't really get a chance to try out/ DM for either of these classes in the playtest run, but I'll be watching for more actual play reports while I do a few single player test runs of the classes.

That said, we all really do need more time to ingest the classes I think. The magus does feel like it's not quite where it needs to be. The summoner does feel like it's okay, but could use some finishing work. For both of these, I think a lot of their problems can be addressed by more focus abilities and tweaks to the way some of their mechanics work.

But without really getting into the guts of the class during a live play, I can't say that with any real certainty.

Oh yeah, this, so much. I feel like a lot of people are prejudging the classes without seeing them in play... and honestly part of the reason I stepped back is also that I realized it's not really fair of me to say anything against that until I have also seen them in play. :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
lemeres wrote:
Pronate11 wrote:

can't it be both?

Those are the kinds of things an elf would say. Don't trust it.

Or a dirty kender...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

im glad for it personally. gives me hope they will be substantially better than they are now


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

There's been a lot of vigorous back and forth, but I've seen waaaay worse.

I think there has been A LOT of constructive discussion involving math and thoughtful arguments.

I've been enjoying reading every single post in the playtest forums. (Every. Single. One.)


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Both need various changes for me to be happy with them, the summoner less than the magus (I actually really like the core concepts of the summoner)

Magus is suffering in my eyes, especially at later levels. But I haven't had a chance to run for one beyond the early levels so far (such a short playtest)

Both are conceptually linked to the main fantasy concepts of the class and I think a bit of polish would go a long way. My favourite of the last playtest (and from the final APG) was the swashbuckler, I would like to see more of them doing stuff like this and losing the baggage of the 1e classes more.


19 people marked this as a favorite.

I feel like the speed at which people go from 0 to "literally unplayable"/abusive is a large part of why the developers assiduously avoid the boards thee days.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Here's my two cents:

Magus - My biggest complaint is that they didn't just call it spellstrike.

Summoner - synthesist is weak...I want my purple iron man suit back.

And if you think these arguements are bad, wait for the gunslinger playtest.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I feel like the speed at which people go from 0 to "literally unplayable"/abusive is a large part of why the developers assiduously avoid the boards thee days.

It wouldn't be as bad if there wasn't people that, in response to those people, go from 0 to "it's literally the best thing every and should never change!!! [and you're a bad person for think anything else]". When you have those diametrically opposed camps posting, it's like watching political ads... There are some people here that will jump in an the slightest bit of critical... :P


4 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I feel like the speed at which people go from 0 to "literally unplayable"/abusive is a large part of why the developers assiduously avoid the boards thee days.
It wouldn't be as bad if there wasn't people that, in response to those people, go from 0 to "it's literally the best thing every and should never change!!! [and you're a bad person for think anything else]". When you have those diametrically opposed camps posting, it's like watching political ads... There are some people here that will jump in an the slightest bit of critical... :P

I haven't seen anyone say they wanted no change.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Salamileg wrote:
graystone wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I feel like the speed at which people go from 0 to "literally unplayable"/abusive is a large part of why the developers assiduously avoid the boards thee days.
It wouldn't be as bad if there wasn't people that, in response to those people, go from 0 to "it's literally the best thing every and should never change!!! [and you're a bad person for think anything else]". When you have those diametrically opposed camps posting, it's like watching political ads... There are some people here that will jump in an the slightest bit of critical... :P
I haven't seen anyone say they wanted no change.

I never specified I was talking about a class as a whole: it applies to the parts debated in a specific thread. Some people LOVE 4 slot casting and don't want it to change for instance. Those people might take suck an extreme stance there and then advocate for change elsewhere.

now there are some fairly rabid pro-paizo people around ARE pretty much like that for everything paizo but I haven't seen them posting for this.


13 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

You know, as someone who has been accused of being a "rabid pro-Paizo person"... that never made much sense to me.

Like, my tastes happen to line up very closely with what Paizo tends to publish. I tend to enjoy their content. I tend to want them to keep producing that same kind of content.

Somehow that equates to to me being some kind of blind zealot, as if I don't know what I like until Paizo tells me to like it.

As I said, never made much sense to me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I imagine true "rabid supporters" don't need to post anything, since it's not like Paizo can't do any wrong.

That being said, even "rabid supporters" are just as bad as the "vitriolic naysayers," even if they are much less vocal about it. The Superman Paradox is just as bad as any Stormwind Fallacy or Rules Lawyer shenanigans. Remember kids, not even Superman could be Superman all the time.


I would like to say that personally I am not angry. I might get irritated at having to repeat my points only for it to get ignored, but I rarely get angry.

I do get very heated because I want the best class possible. My number one goal is always to make classes and abilities the best they can possibly be. But some people see that as wanting broken things even when I have never stated that I want that.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pronate11 wrote:
Guys, this is a fantasy elf game. You don't need to be this angry about it.

Try explaining that to the Orcs Rights League.

Liberty's Edge

7 people marked this as a favorite.

I am somewhat happy that the vitriol is mostly people talking past each other and not people taking shots at the devs, which did happen in past playtests and got Paizo to not playtest the Shifter, with the results we saw.

Also I try not to pick a side and make posts that would be aimed at countering someone, but rather post my own feelings and ideas. It helps not feeling under fire from other posters and not unwittingly adding fuel to the fire while trying to defend my position.

That said, I think this playtest threads can be mined for a guide on how to efficiently turn a thread into a war zone.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Sapmak_ wrote:

Here's my two cents:

Magus - My biggest complaint is that they didn't just call it spellstrike.

Summoner - synthesist is weak...I want my purple iron man suit back.

And if you think these arguements are bad, wait for the gunslinger playtest.

I am dreading the gunslinger playtest.

And when it is time for the Kineticst playtest I imagine I will just disconnect my internet.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lanathar wrote:
Sapmak_ wrote:

Here's my two cents:

Magus - My biggest complaint is that they didn't just call it spellstrike.

Summoner - synthesist is weak...I want my purple iron man suit back.

And if you think these arguements are bad, wait for the gunslinger playtest.

I am dreading the gunslinger playtest.

And when it is time for the Kineticst playtest I imagine I will just disconnect my internet.

Honestly, I am incredibly afraid at how bad the Kineticist might look.

I liked that class so much. Just imagining it get the same treatment as Oracle or the current Magus or Summoner feels me with dread.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Temperans wrote:
Lanathar wrote:
Sapmak_ wrote:

Here's my two cents:

Magus - My biggest complaint is that they didn't just call it spellstrike.

Summoner - synthesist is weak...I want my purple iron man suit back.

And if you think these arguements are bad, wait for the gunslinger playtest.

I am dreading the gunslinger playtest.

And when it is time for the Kineticst playtest I imagine I will just disconnect my internet.

Honestly, I am incredibly afraid at how bad the Kineticist might look.

I liked that class so much. Just imagining it get the same treatment as Oracle or the current Magus or Summoner feels me with dread.

When I first saw the Oracle (in its final form, not the playtest) basically my first thought was how excited me for how the Kineticist will be handled.

And I do hope Paizo makes their own Kineticist, I'm really not a fan of the Legendary Games one.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Salamileg wrote:
When I first saw the Oracle (in its final form, not the playtest) basically my first thought was how excited me for how the Kineticist will be handled.

LOL I had more of a sense of dread on how I'm likely to not use the class of not all of it but to each their own.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I never liked PF1 Oracle because I don't like cursing my characters, so it's kind of okay that I don't really like PF2 Oracle either.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Part of the problem and source of the vitriol is inherent to the nature of a playtest, the majority of playtesters are not good at making well crafted classes or experienced at making criticisms useful. This leads to conflict with the actual designers and with other playtesters. The anonymous nature of forums makes it easier for disagreements to turn bitter, it happens every single time.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I feel like the speed at which people go from 0 to "literally unplayable"/abusive is a large part of why the developers assiduously avoid the boards thee days.
It wouldn't be as bad if there wasn't people that, in response to those people, go from 0 to "it's literally the best thing every and should never change!!! [and you're a bad person for think anything else]". When you have those diametrically opposed camps posting, it's like watching political ads... There are some people here that will jump in an the slightest bit of critical... :P

How would that make it not as bad, two people doing the same thing but with differing opinions are still doing the same thing.

Having only one opinion doing it wouldn't make it better. It would be the same.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Gleeful Grognard wrote:
graystone wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I feel like the speed at which people go from 0 to "literally unplayable"/abusive is a large part of why the developers assiduously avoid the boards thee days.
It wouldn't be as bad if there wasn't people that, in response to those people, go from 0 to "it's literally the best thing every and should never change!!! [and you're a bad person for think anything else]". When you have those diametrically opposed camps posting, it's like watching political ads... There are some people here that will jump in an the slightest bit of critical... :P

How would that make it not as bad, two people doing the same thing but with differing opinions are still doing the same thing.

Having only one opinion doing it wouldn't make it better. It would be the same.

Note I said "in response to those people". That's important.

What makes it worse is that those diametrically opposed forces clash with much more vigor because they are so extreme. If it's just one side, the other reasonable people in the thread can just walk away and not reply once they figure out it's a zealot: opposing/dueling zealots go into a death match with collateral damage where there are no winners other than fatigue.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
Salamileg wrote:
graystone wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I feel like the speed at which people go from 0 to "literally unplayable"/abusive is a large part of why the developers assiduously avoid the boards thee days.
It wouldn't be as bad if there wasn't people that, in response to those people, go from 0 to "it's literally the best thing every and should never change!!! [and you're a bad person for think anything else]". When you have those diametrically opposed camps posting, it's like watching political ads... There are some people here that will jump in an the slightest bit of critical... :P
I haven't seen anyone say they wanted no change.

I never specified I was talking about a class as a whole: it applies to the parts debated in a specific thread. Some people LOVE 4 slot casting and don't want it to change for instance. Those people might take suck an extreme stance there and then advocate for change elsewhere.

now there are some fairly rabid pro-paizo people around ARE pretty much like that for everything paizo but I haven't seen them posting for this.

So, the big difference here is you're talking about stuff like specific things people dont want to change, versus people saying a class is unplayable.

I love the four slot idea, and I love certain aspects of the Magus. I think spellstrike isnt great but it isnt as bad as most people act.

I've been called essentially a shill for saying that multiple times. It makes it feel like playtest discussion is pointless because no matter what I say, people just want to hate it.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Squeakmaan wrote:
Part of the problem and source of the vitriol is inherent to the nature of a playtest, the majority of playtesters are not good at making well crafted classes or experienced at making criticisms useful. This leads to conflict with the actual designers and with other playtesters. The anonymous nature of forums makes it easier for disagreements to turn bitter, it happens every single time.

A blog post with a crash course in communicating useful criticism would be nice.

I’m not sure if the insults escalated this morning, or I just noticed them more. Either way it’s been more exhausting than talking about a game I like to play should be.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
ExOichoThrow wrote:
graystone wrote:
Salamileg wrote:
graystone wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I feel like the speed at which people go from 0 to "literally unplayable"/abusive is a large part of why the developers assiduously avoid the boards thee days.
It wouldn't be as bad if there wasn't people that, in response to those people, go from 0 to "it's literally the best thing every and should never change!!! [and you're a bad person for think anything else]". When you have those diametrically opposed camps posting, it's like watching political ads... There are some people here that will jump in an the slightest bit of critical... :P
I haven't seen anyone say they wanted no change.

I never specified I was talking about a class as a whole: it applies to the parts debated in a specific thread. Some people LOVE 4 slot casting and don't want it to change for instance. Those people might take suck an extreme stance there and then advocate for change elsewhere.

now there are some fairly rabid pro-paizo people around ARE pretty much like that for everything paizo but I haven't seen them posting for this.

So, the big difference here is you're talking about stuff like specific things people dont want to change, versus people saying a class is unplayable.

I love the four slot idea, and I love certain aspects of the Magus. I think spellstrike isnt great but it isnt as bad as most people act.

I've been called essentially a shill for saying that multiple times. It makes it feel like playtest discussion is pointless because no matter what I say, people just want to hate it.

Striking Spell been mathematically proven to be the worst use of your time under any given circumstances. If you're still insisting it's not that bad I think people are in their right to be frustrated with you. The concept is sound and delivers on a fun fantasy. The execution needs a lot of work before it's in a workable state.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Capn Cupcake wrote:
Striking Spell been mathematically proven to be the worst use of your time under any given circumstances. If you're still insisting it's not that bad I think people are in their right to be frustrated with you. The concept is sound and delivers on a fun fantasy. The execution needs a lot of work before it's in a workable state.

The thing about this, though, is that an ability that is mathematically bad but conceptually sound is actually the best kind of problem to have; with the way PF2 is set up, fixing the math is really easy.

I would imagine that what the devs need the feedback on most of all is how conceptually sound things are, rather than just the math.

If the problem with Striking Spell can be boiled down to "the mechanics are fine but it needs a bit more accuracy to work", that's like a five minute fix compared to "the mechanics need to be scrapped entirely".

Certainly when I've said that I like how Striking Spell works, I'm not saying "the ability is perfect as-is", because I agree that there is a math problem. So if I describe it as "not that bad", that's basically what I mean.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MaxAstro wrote:
Capn Cupcake wrote:
Striking Spell been mathematically proven to be the worst use of your time under any given circumstances. If you're still insisting it's not that bad I think people are in their right to be frustrated with you. The concept is sound and delivers on a fun fantasy. The execution needs a lot of work before it's in a workable state.

The thing about this, though, is that an ability that is mathematically bad but conceptually sound is actually the best kind of problem to have; with the way PF2 is set up, fixing the math is really easy.

I would imagine that what the devs need the feedback on most of all is how conceptually sound things are, rather than just the math.

If the problem with Striking Spell can be boiled down to "the mechanics are fine but it needs a bit more accuracy to work", that's like a five minute fix compared to "the mechanics need to be scrapped entirely".

Certainly when I've said that I like how Striking Spell works, I'm not saying "the ability is perfect as-is", because I agree that there is a math problem. So if I describe it as "not that bad", that's basically what I mean.

the other issue is there is very little benefit of it unless you are slide casting.

you get...the critical effect and the no map, wich is true but works out to be about teh same as map regardless. and doesnt matter when you use a save spell.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

It only "works out to be about the same as MAP regardless" because of the accuracy issue, though - which as I said, boils down to a math issue.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MaxAstro wrote:
It only "works out to be about the same as MAP regardless" because of the accuracy issue, though - which as I said, boils down to a math issue.

id still prefer an inversion of it, 1 action to store the spell, 2 actions to attack and deliver it. committing two actions for nothing at that time feels very bad.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Oh! Huh, that's a version I hadn't considered... Although that would lose out on "any kind of Strike can deliver the spell", which is a bit unfortunate.

I really like that you can use Flurry or Double Slice to deliver a spell, presently.

EDIT: It would also work oddly with 1-action or 3-action spells.


MaxAstro wrote:

Oh! Huh, that's a version I hadn't considered... Although that would lose out on "any kind of Strike can deliver the spell", which is a bit unfortunate.

I really like that you can use Flurry or Double Slice to deliver a spell, presently.

EDIT: It would also work oddly with 1-action or 3-action spells.

simple phrasing, lower the actions to cast the spell by 1 to a minimum of 1. i dont know of many 3 action spells youd currently store into your weapon to attack with anyways.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Magic Missile comes to mind, but I'll agree that it's a niche case.

Either way, this probably isn't the thread for this, my apologies. ^^;


2 people marked this as a favorite.
ExOichoThrow wrote:
So, the big difference here is you're talking about stuff like specific things people dont want to change, versus people saying a class is unplayable.

Usually when you dig into the reasons someone says "unplayable", they have specific reasons for it: IE, it's unplayable because of 4 slots, or spell strike or no customization of Eidolons or... There is generally specifics that are the sticking point. The reverse is true but often unspoken as people tend to assume 'this class IS playable' and is something you don't have to go out of your way to say so they go into into the specifics.

ExOichoThrow wrote:
I love the four slot idea, and I love certain aspects of the Magus. I think spellstrike isn't great but it isn't as bad as most people act.

For me, I'm not a big fan of 4 slots: you can no longer can afford to use magic for utility and/or fun things: it's all about the big 4. Secondly, it leads into a weird situation where the game assumes higher level casters keep their low level slots, like with staves.

IMO, spellstrike is mainly a detriment to use: you're getting the synthesis ability for an increased chance to delay your spell to another round and possibly never even get it off. SO not a fan if the curent set-up.

ExOichoThrow wrote:
I've been called essentially a shill for saying that multiple times. It makes it feel like playtest discussion is pointless because no matter what I say, people just want to hate it.

I'm sure I've read your comments but I personally don't recall specifics so I find it hard to comment. Could be a matter of perception [context and nuance is easy to lose in the internet], could be the person was an ass or in a bad mood or something else. People around here can get passionate about the game can get set in their ways: it happens when you've invested a lot into it and the stress of real life issues happening now doesn't help with moods and patience either.

So I wouldn't take it to heart: If someone seems to be acting like a jerk don't reply to them and debate with those that aren't. If someone is truly acting bad, flag them.

1 to 50 of 67 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Secrets of Magic Playtest / General Discussion / Guys, this is a fantasy elf game. You don't need to be this angry about it. All Messageboards