Update on Development Clarifications

[Shay Snow]

Hello!

It's been brought to my attention that there's some disapproval over the development team not coming into this specific forum to provide clarifications where needed. As I can only speak for myself, I'd like to state that there unfortunately aren't enough hours in the workday that allow for the completion of my Organized Play tasks and for me to peruse this forum and provide answers.

I am aware that developers did this in the past, however since unionization we here at Paizo have pushed for better work/life balances and encouraging employees to be able to log off and step away.

We have enabled GMs to make calls at their tables where things are unclear, and we trust in y'all's abilities to speak with each other and come up with decisions for future tables while also giving advice to other GMs who may run into issues.

(As an aside: We are aware of the Foundry updates/PDF updates issue, we're working on it, but there's currently no answer to provide.)

Thanks for all that y'all do as GMs!

[eddv]

Shay,

I think the specific frustration isnt so much the lack of update to this specific space - its the lack of update provided to any public facing space at all.

The topic suggesting it be this space is because that has traditionally been seen as the quick and dirty way to do this since otherwise you would need to fully update the pdfs and we all know what a pain in the rear that can be.

It isnt that we are incapable of improvisation; it is that there is official guidance available that simply isnt being communicated to anyone but the foundry team, which is a whole bunch of extra steps. I dont like finding out weeks later that a brutal fight was caused by my not being aware of a foundry pdf update.

Trust me when I say, I have to fill in gaps for myself all the time when an npc doesnt quite have enough on the bone to be roleplayable or when enemy tactics dont last two pc turns in terms of viability or whatever else. That isnt what we are concerned about.

What we are concerned about is that we know you are already doing to work to make official (and sometimes fairly subtle) mechanical clarifications. And thank you for doing that by the way. But we dont understand what is preventing someone from taking the time to properly communicate those when they happen.

It doesnt have to be here. It can be anywhere we all have access to and it can be through a designated intermediary, just some sort of regular process that can make it so we are aware that you have done the hard work of revisiting and clarifying the scenarios so that we can implement them is all anyone really wants.

[daisypoo]

I hear what you are saying, and I love and respect the work that you do, but to talk about the 'Foundry Issue', the answer is quite simple. All that is needed is one of the following:
- Make a new thread for scenarios that get clarification and post the list of clarifications provided to Foundry team.
- Add the clarification to a shared spreadsheet so you don't have to make a new thread each month.
-Allow the digital product lead, or someone from the foundry team, to post as campaign leadership in this specific purpose of being able to do this work for you.

Then everyone is on the same page. Over the past decade some developers have had more time to sort through these forums and answer questions, some developers have had less time. But if you already have the feedback, just post it, or have someone else post it for you. That's all.

[The.Vortex]

There is now a subforum where the changes for the Foundry VTT modules are posted:

https://paizo.com/community/forums/digitalProducts/foundryVirtualTabletop/u pdatesAndPatchNotes

From the sticky post in that forum:

Any and all changes have been suggested and/or vetted by the team responsible for development of that content. In the event of any discrepancy between a Foundry module and a print or PDF version of the same content, the Foundry module should be treated as the latest and most up-to-date resource unless explicitly stated otherwise.