Playtesting & Pathfinder's Crimes Against It

[Maxus]

If there's one thing I can't forgive Pathfinder for, it's fucking up what people think a playtest is.

The Argument against Buhlman-style Play-and-test-if-you-remember.

That's a 4e game they're playing. They're having a blast. It's a blast to read. The Paladin she plays is a half-elf who has Vicious Mockery and uses it.

So if you asked them about how 4e plays, they're probably tell you 'Great!' despite the game being mechanically bland.

Realizing that was, I think, the most underhanded thing within the Pathfinder support farm forum playtest.

They didn't want a mechanical breakdown and analysis, they wanted to know you were having a blast with your buddies! "Great job, dudes, thanks for the info, game on!"

So, on the one hand, proof that hanging out with a good crowd is fun. On the other, proof that giving an objective analysis is impossible to do in-game where your experience will be colored by how the game went and other factors.

[hogarth]

They didn't want a mechanical breakdown and analysis, they wanted to know you were having a blast with your buddies!

[citation needed]

[Akula]

Many of us were actually here when pathfinder was in it's playtest, I think Frank provides more information in the Pathfinder: the Lowdown thread. But basically, some people like Frank provided numbers and analysis of the failings of the pathfinder ruleset and were rejected in favor of anecdotal reports of individual games and how awesometastic they were. Even if the things that made the group have fun, like the roleplay or homebrewed NPCs and artifacts, were not related to the rules.

[hogarth]

Many of us were actually here when pathfinder was in it's playtest, I think Frank provides more information in the Pathfinder: the Lowdown thread. But basically, some people like Frank provided numbers and analysis of the failings of the pathfinder ruleset and were rejected in favor of anecdotal reports of individual games and how awesometastic they were.

I certainly agree that they didn't like the format of Frank's critique. But I think it was mostly the format that they were opposed to, not the fact that it was a critique. If he had couched it as actually playing through some module and had used the most diplomatic language possible, I'm sure they would have liked it just fine.

Now you can certainly criticise them for rejecting valuable data out of hand just because they didn't like the format. But that's not what Maxus is claiming; he's saying that they didn't want to have any analysis at all. Since that's his claim, the burden of proof is on him to back it up.

[Roy]

Many of us were actually here when pathfinder was in it's playtest, I think Frank provides more information in the Pathfinder: the Lowdown thread. But basically, some people like Frank provided numbers and analysis of the failings of the pathfinder ruleset and were rejected in favor of anecdotal reports of individual games and how awesometastic they were.

I certainly agree that they didn't like the format of Frank's critique. But I think it was mostly the format that they were opposed to, not the fact that it was a critique. If he had couched it as actually playing through some module and had used the most diplomatic language possible, I'm sure they would have liked it just fine.

Now you can certainly criticise them for rejecting valuable data out of hand just because they didn't like the format. But that's not what Maxus is claiming; he's saying that they didn't want to have any analysis at all. Since that's his claim, the burden of proof is on him to back it up.

Nope. Remember that Squirrel guy? Yeah, he actually played through some modules (and tore them apart trivially, because they're meant for level 15s but don't take into consideration level 5 abilities among other flaws) and they still whined.

Anyways, I had my try at convincing the Paizils to stop failing. They refused to cooperate, so now I'm just on damage control.

[Akula]

I think we both know that Maxus isn't going to be able to spelunk threads from two years ago on the pathfinder forums. And I'm not sure what your point was. Not only did they reject the data that was handed to them, they banned the people providing it. We know they had the data, we know they dismissed it, we know they encouraged the "and how did your game last night go" playtest mentality until their boards were hostile to destructive testing. We know all these things, and you aren't disputing them, but you do unfairly dispute the thing that we cannot prove but can reasonably infer. Nothing Maxus said is indefensible, but the point you singled out for criticism is the allegation of the intent of their actions. But the actions they took, and the consequences, are things we know. It doesn't matter why they did it, but they did prefer to have subjective bullshit to firm analysis. It is not unreasonable of Maxus to say that they wanted a yes-man mentality when they encouraged and fostered that mentality.

[Username17]

I certainly agree that they didn't like the format of Frank's critique.

That's quite an understatement. They banned me from their forums and told everyone to be really clear that they were completely uninterested in mathematics, controlled studies, or even repeated testing of the same encounters. They only wanted "real playing" - which of course is completely unscientific and doesn't actually tell you anything.

-Username17

[hogarth]

We know they had the data, we know they dismissed it, we know they encouraged the "and how did your game last night go" playtest mentality until their boards were hostile to destructive testing. We know all these things, and you aren't disputing them, but you do unfairly dispute the thing that we cannot prove but can reasonably infer.

I called your mom on the phone last night and I said: "Hey, you fucking [EDITED] slut bitch! Let's talk about Charles Dickens and then you can suck my cock" and she hung up on me. Why does your mom hate Charles Dickens?

[ubernoob]

We know they had the data, we know they dismissed it, we know they encouraged the "and how did your game last night go" playtest mentality until their boards were hostile to destructive testing. We know all these things, and you aren't disputing them, but you do unfairly dispute the thing that we cannot prove but can reasonably infer.

I called your mom on the phone last night and I said: "Hey, you fucking [EDITED] slut bitch! Let's talk about Charles Dickens and then you can suck my cock" and she hung up on me. Why does your mom hate Charles Dickens?

Ummm, no.

[Akula]

I called your mom on the phone last night and I said: "Hey, you fucking [EDITED] slut bitch! Let's talk about Charles Dickens and then you can suck my cock" and she hung up on me. Why does your mom hate Charles Dickens?

I find your hyperbole lacking.

[MGuy]

We know they had the data, we know they dismissed it, we know they encouraged the "and how did your game last night go" playtest mentality until their boards were hostile to destructive testing. We know all these things, and you aren't disputing them, but you do unfairly dispute the thing that we cannot prove but can reasonably infer.

I called your mom on the phone last night and I said: "Hey, you fucking [EDITED] slut bitch! Let's talk about Charles Dickens and then you can suck my cock" and she hung up on me. Why does your mom hate Charles Dickens?

What?

[Calibron]

Wow, troll much?

[Maxus]

I called your mom on the phone last night and I said: "Hey, you fucking [EDITED] slut bitch! Let's talk about Charles Dickens and then you can suck my cock" and she hung up on me. Why does your mom hate Charles Dickens?

I find your hyperbole lacking.

I have isolated what it's lacking.

It's lacking hyperbole.

So it's sort of...LOLRANDOM

[Maxus]

Wow, troll much?

Who, me?

This is a vent.

I just had a discussion which boiled down to a guy saying that Buhlman is right because, look, it says playtest! Your way is not playing the game!

[Akula]

We know they had the data, we know they dismissed it, we know they encouraged the "and how did your game last night go" playtest mentality until their boards were hostile to destructive testing. We know all these things, and you aren't disputing them, but you do unfairly dispute the thing that we cannot prove but can reasonably infer.

I called your mom on the phone last night and I said: "Hey, you fucking [EDITED] slut bitch! Let's talk about Charles Dickens and then you can suck my cock" and she hung up on me. Why does your mom hate Charles Dickens?

What?

He thinks it is a demonstration that the style things are presented in is a real factor in getting people to accept them. Unfortunately, the inclusion of a preposition for oral sex makes his argument weaker. I would say it makes it irrelevant. If he had just said "Hey, I wanna discuss Dickens with you, you bitch!" and left it there, the example would have been stronger but still irrelevant because this hypothetical mother never asked for a general reasoned discussion of Dickens. And even if she did, you could make a case that that isn't what you provided, you provided a certainty of inflammatory insults with the possibility of a discussion about Dickens. Which is the opposite of what Frank and others would have provided in that situation.

tl;dr hogarth sucks at making analogies. And I am actually, sort of, offended that he thinks that these stupid arguments are a good idea. Can you put a bit more effort in whoregarth?

EDIT: This made much more sense when it was under MGuy's post. I'm going to quote that now.

And I think Calibron was referring to hogarth, Maxus.

[Roy]

How did we go from laughing at Pathfinder to talking about getting head from someone's mom?

[violence in the media]

EDIT: This made much more sense when it was under mGuy's post.

Your mom liked it when she was under my post.

[Akula]

Oh VitM, you so funny.

[Calibron]

And I think Calibron was referring to hogarth, Maxus.

Indeed.

[NineInchNall]

Yeesh. Explicit definition of Pathfinder playtesting: THIS

I even posted that in the initial Pathfinder: The Lowdown thread. In fact, the post right after mine was by one "hogarth". Hm.

[Akula]

I read that thread, thanks for digging it up again NineInchNall.

[NineInchNall]

But of course, mon ami.

[CatharzGodfoot]

How did we go from laughing at Pathfinder to talking about getting head from someone's mom?

Hogarth was making an analogy. He gives the example of talking to Akula's mom in a boorish and profane fashion about a certain unrelated subject (Dickens), and then drawing the conclusion that Akula's mom was offended by the "Dickens" rather than the 'dickings'.

This is supposed to give a mental framework for examining Mr. Trollman's presentation of Pathfinder playtest material and the subsequent reactions.

[Psychic Robot]

I disagree with this assessment of playtesting. It doesn't involve any play at all, and I am not now, nor have I ever been convinced that folks on the interwebs bearing "proof" of this or that have any idea what the hell they are talking about.

There is just so much more to actual play then crunching numbers, like for instance random variable from: situation/terrain, party/encounter composition, magic items available, flavor choices, different ability score brackets, equipment choices, feat choices, multiclassing, etc...

Just because you took a specific set of circumstances and tested raw damage output under those circumstances does not prove imbalance. All it means is that if we were not rolling dice (and living purely on set outputs for the rolls), and playing in a perfectly devoid microcosm that if two characters took those exact options that this "proof" would happen every time. But it does nothing to illustrate the classes overall balance in the thousands of other imaginable gameplay scenarios.

In that vein I often find that folks who have "proof", really don't have anything but an opinion they are trying to validate by creating a specific scenario that supports their opinion, while in most cases ignoring the rest of the variables of the game altogether.

love,

malkav

Thanks for getting me to re-read this perfect 10/10. Yes, I am being trolled for a second time just thinking about it. Now there are dicks in my eyes.

[NineInchNall]

Muwa ha ha ha! My plan worked perfectly!

The thing that makes posts like that so much more infuriating than one written by an intentional troll is the sincerity. He actually believes that crap.