Pathfinder Is Still Bad

Slade · Post by **Slade** » Fri May 25, 2012 9:49 pm

Really?
Did not know that detail.

Juton · Post by **Juton** » Fri May 25, 2012 10:21 pm

Slade wrote:I assumed that Pathfinder had a beta tester group (people who actually playtested it) outside of its "open playtest" advertisement scam.
You know, to make sure the game actually worked... instead just felt right....

Apparently according to Lisa (one of the designers) they never did any real playtesting at all.
http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz5sfi?Im-not ... rms-and#23

I appreciate a good bash against Paizo, but not ones that are total BS. According to Lisa they never did a closed Beta or any test that required NDAs. You can make a lot of accurate, relevant attacks about how poorly they ran their open beta test, but they did run an open beta test.

malak · Post by **malak** » Sat May 26, 2012 3:25 pm

Slade wrote:Apparently according to Lisa (one of the designers) they never did any real playtesting at all.

And this is a surprise to you? Why?

They knew that 3.5 sells already, and making sure that everyone thinks they are improving the ruleset was much more important that actually improving the ruleset.

And looking at where they stand now, I think it was the right decision. They managed to position themselves as the good guys next to evil WotC in the eyes of many - no mean feat when considering that the product they sell is actually WotC's, by and large.

deaddmwalking · Post by **deaddmwalking** » Sun May 27, 2012 3:57 am

I participated in the Paizo play-test. It did absolutely drive me away from them. They didn't care about things that were blatantly broken and could be proved with simple math. They made a bunch of changes that seemed unnecessary and refused some important changes to 'maintain backward compatibility'.

There were problems with the Playtest. But they did make changes based on feedback, and they did make some interesting tweaks. Not enough for me to support it, but it seems like they're doing pretty well.

Paizo was the good guy in that situation. WotC pulled their license to publish Dragon and Dungeon magazine, and they were good products. More importantly, they were holding themselves to a high standard - particularly editorially.

Paizo continues to make excellent products (that I don't buy) - that is to say, they continue to be of good quality with very few errors. WotC has never been able to say that.

I remember picking up Serpent Kingdoms and opening to two random pages and having stupid fucking typos rape my eyeballs - things that should have been impossible for any editor to miss. They don't do enough quality control - never have - and if D&D Next is any indication, never will.

Lago PARANOIA · Post by **Lago PARANOIA** » Sun May 27, 2012 4:15 am

deaddmwalking wrote:WotC pulled their license to publish Dragon and Dungeon magazine, and they were good products. More importantly, they were holding themselves to a high standard - particularly editorially.

I disagree with that. I had a paid prescription to Internet Dragon and Dungeon and I liked that product a lot better than the haphazard and unprofessional-looking dead tree edition. I mean, fuck, most 4E tables let people use post-Paizo Dragon and Dungeon material at their table more-or-less uncritically. That NEVER happened for 3E D&D and for good reason; I trust Relics and Rituals, Mongoose, and Kingdoms of Kalamar material a lot more than Dragon and Dungeon dreck.

As far as published adventure paths and modules go, eh. 4E D&D has published some really good ones (Hammerfell, Scales of War) and some incredibly shitty ones (Keep on the Shadowfell, Kingdom of Ghouls, that Dark Sun Bruce Cordell module). I only have City of Worms and it's okay. Nothing that would make me think that WotC was stupid for letting go of Paizo.

deaddmwalking · Post by **deaddmwalking** » Sun May 27, 2012 4:33 am

We're going to have to agree to disagree.

I'm not familiar with the internet version of these products, but I subscribed for a long time.

After Dungeon ditched Polyhedron as a 'shared sister magazine' and they focused on a low, medium and high level adventure in each issue, it was a solid product. Not every adventure was useful to every group, but having a large number of adventures available to a DM to help 'take the group off the rails' isn't a bad thing, and at $8-9 an issue, it was a hell of a good bargain compared to most gaming products (assuming it even cost that much).

Dragon was never perfect, but it was never meant to be something you slide into your game whole-sale. First off, the magazine wasn't published by Paizo the entire run of 3.0/3.5, if I remember correctly. I mean, I think most of the people were the same and Lisa and company formed Paizo to keep producing Dragon and Dungeon when WotC divested themselves of it. But basically, every issue of Dragon was like Unearthed Arcana - it gave options for play, but not every option is compatible with every other option. Also, in the 96 or so issues published during 3.0/3.5, there was a lot of 'stuff'. The more stuff you add, the more problems you get. For example, let's assume there were on average 5 spells per issue for clerics - that's somewhere in the neighborhood of 500 extra spells that they didn't have to 'learn'. Throwing them all into the game would be excessive... But using a few spells for a cleric focused on a particular theme wouldn't NECESSARILY break the game. Things like statting out a moose as a druid animal companion isn't really something that's going to break a game, for example. I was definitely willing to try more things in Dragon than anything by Mongoose, for example, but most of it didn't stick - but that has more to do with the fact that I can't bring a stack of 50+ issues to every game considering the other books I already had to bring. If I used anything, it tended to be one or two things at a time so I'd have my reference material at hand.

rasmuswagner · Post by **rasmuswagner** » Sun May 27, 2012 8:15 am

Paizo are currently committed to a clear editorial policy: Never admit mistakes. Never fix anything.

Antariuk · Post by **Antariuk** » Sun May 27, 2012 9:32 am

rasmuswagner wrote:Paizo are currently committed to a clear editorial policy: Never admit mistakes. Never fix anything.

Yeah, I'm getting that impression too.
I read a few things on their boards, which by the way still have terrible layout, and every time (not so) tricky rules questions came up, it felt like a good ol' sage advise.

Especially the thread where rasmus commented on the pregens. That one really gave me a pause, because Jacobs was backed up by some fans despite him literally saying that they don't care for shitty pregens or errors within the stats because they are made like 5 minutes before everything goes to the printer.

Although, sometimes they do fix things, albeit in a 'surprising' fashion. For example, only recently I discovered that with the 5th printing errata wizards can retry coyping spells without spending a skill point in Spellcraft first:

PRD wrote: If the check fails, the wizard cannot understand or copy the spell. He cannot attempt to learn or copy that spell again until one week has passed.

Well, at least there are some new fighter feats somewhere... I guess.

hogarth · Post by **hogarth** » Sun May 27, 2012 2:57 pm

rasmuswagner wrote:Paizo are currently committed to a clear editorial policy: Never admit mistakes. Never fix anything.

It really depends on the particular person. Some people are particularly defensive when it comes to the possibility of admitting mistakes. For instance, Sean K Reynolds is particularly Frank Trollman-esque in that regard.

Mask_De_H · Post by **Mask_De_H** » Sun May 27, 2012 6:03 pm

Are you just trying to start shit so Frank will finally hatefuck you, hogarth? Because you've been baiting him for months.

hogarth · Post by **hogarth** » Mon May 28, 2012 12:14 am

Mask_De_H wrote:Are you just trying to start shit so Frank will finally hatefuck you, hogarth? Because you've been baiting him for months.

Wait, it's only honourable to point out the flaws of people who aren't here?

Seriously, Sean K. Reynolds is willing to argue that black is white and hot snow falls up before admitting that something is wrong, but he's hardly the only one who does that.

Blicero · Post by **Blicero** » Mon May 28, 2012 9:45 am

hogarth wrote:
Mask_De_H wrote:Are you just trying to start shit so Frank will finally hatefuck you, hogarth? Because you've been baiting him for months.
Wait, it's only honourable to point out the flaws of people who aren't here?

Seriously, Sean K. Reynolds is willing to argue that black is white and hot snow falls up before admitting that something is wrong, but he's hardly the only one who does that.

I don't think I've ever seen Frank admit that he's wrong regarding a rules question for a system he did not write or help write. Even when it seems fairly likely that he is mistaken. Ditto for most realworld topics. And many hypothetical rules situations (WoF is clearly the most egregious example.)

But he's much more open to criticism for rules that he has already written out. Meaning After Sundown, Tomes, etc. In comparison, SKR seems to regularly ignore things that he has written or that people that work with him has written just to justify what he wants to say at that given moment. Like the Sage.

And I'd say that that is a fairly major distinction, at least as pertains to RPG design. (Unless you're just really looking for the hatefuck.)

...You Lost Me · Post by **...You Lost Me** » Mon May 28, 2012 10:40 am

Instead of nitpicking his statement, you could take it the way he meant it, interpreting it as "Sometimes SKR refuses to admit he's wrong (Frank does this too)"

That's it. Now let's all put down our e-peens and move on, shall we?

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Mon May 28, 2012 10:43 am

I don't think I've ever seen Frank admit that he's wrong regarding a rules question for a system he did not write or help write. Even when it seems fairly likely that he is mistaken. Ditto for most realworld topics.

Oh for fuck´s sake. You could try actually checking this shit. Because I´ve been known to issue corrections for things I have said that were wrong simply because I independently discoverd that they were wrong and not because anyone here demonstrated contrary evidence.

As for hogarth´s rain of vitriol, it honestly is not worth responding to. Remember when he insisted that he was going to check his ADnD DMG to correct my bullshit about my statements of ADnD weapon drop rates? Well, either it has really taken hogarth a long ass time to get home, or the fact that what I said was one hundred percent correct because it was copied out of the damn book meant that he did not find the smoking gun on me. And then, because he is an asshole, he just kept quiet rather than fucking apologize for having essentially called me a liar.

Hogarth is pretty much entirely projection. He has some sort of bizarre mad-on for me and wants to take me down a notch or some shit, so he assumes that I am personally exactly as much of a douche as he is about all things. So any time he accuses me of, well anything at all, we can be fairly sure that this is a flaw he recognizes in himself.

There simply is no point in engaging with his insults one at a time. Even this much engagement is too much time, and I am only doing it because with two other people getting drawn into the discussion of hogarth´s personal insecurities, it seems like I need to put my damn foot down before it derails the thread even more.

-Username17

OgreBattle · Post by **OgreBattle** » Mon May 28, 2012 1:35 pm

So, which two touhous do FrankTrollman and Hogarth most resemble.

Sarandosil · Post by **Sarandosil** » Mon May 28, 2012 6:07 pm

FrankTrollman wrote:
Oh for fuck´s sake. You could try actually checking this shit. Because I´ve been known to issue corrections for things I have said that were wrong simply because I independently discoverd that they were wrong and not because anyone here demonstrated contrary evidence...

-Username17

But are you willing to issue a correction that you don't issue corrections when you independently find you were wrong if you independently find that you were wrong about issuing corrections when you independently find out you were wrong?

TOZ · Post by **TOZ** » Mon May 28, 2012 6:34 pm

Less personal wanking, more Paizo bashing please.

hogarth · Post by **hogarth** » Mon May 28, 2012 7:03 pm

TOZ wrote:Less personal wanking, more Paizo bashing please.

Sure, I'm all wanked out for the moment.

----

Gripe of the day: Two years ago, the folks at Paizo removed the Riding Dog from the Summon Nature's Ally I list (it was CR 1 and everything else on the list was CR 1/2 or less). But it took over a year to remove it from the Summon Monster I list (in the latest printing of the core rulebook), and it still isn't mentioned in the official errata document.

Hurray for stealth errata!

GâtFromKI · Post by **GâtFromKI** » Mon May 28, 2012 7:43 pm

It isn't mentioned in the online PRD. I guess html documents are very hard to correct.

hogarth · Post by **hogarth** » Mon May 28, 2012 7:46 pm

GâtFromKI wrote:It isn't mentioned in the online PRD either. I guess html documents are very hard to correct.

The problem is that the PRD is kept updated with the latest errata documents (which is perfectly sensible), so "stealth errata" like this doesn't get incorporated.

Mask_De_H · Post by **Mask_De_H** » Mon May 28, 2012 11:03 pm

OgreBattle wrote:So, which two touhous do FrankTrollman and Hogarth most resemble.

Serious answer, Mokou and Kaguya.

And that bit of stealth errata is just run of the mill laziness; the penny of failure.

hogarth · Post by **hogarth** » Wed Jun 13, 2012 11:38 am

Postscript: The Pathfinder Online demo-for-a-demo Kickstarter campaign raised $300K.

TOZ · Post by **TOZ** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 12:04 am

Was it the demo, or the adventure module for backers that raised that?

Voss · Post by **Voss** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 1:49 am

TOZ wrote:Was it the demo, or the adventure module for backers that raised that?

I believe it is the tech demo to take to backers to get them to fund the actual project.

Starmaker · Post by **Starmaker** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 7:18 am

Voss wrote:
TOZ wrote:Was it the demo, or the adventure module for backers that raised that?
I believe it is the tech demo to take to backers investors with big money to get them to fund the actual project.

FTFY.
The actual product offered at the kickstarter was a 64-page location book. The chance to play the demo was offered at the $2000 and $5000 levels, with one person going for the former and two for the latter.

The Gaming Den

Pathfinder Is Still Bad

hey this one actually terminates