I now own a copy of PATHFINDER.
Never got much of a chance to look at it while at the store because it usually sold out within 24 hours of delivery. (I wasn't kidding about that shit)
SO, I took advantage of one of those 40% off coupons that BORDERS books e-mails to its Members Club folks (like me!!) At 40% off - I thought hell; yeah I'll get a copy of PATHFINDER.
So far, I'm liking it better than my D&D 4/e books. The lsyout and artwork are pretty damn nice.
......more details as I go through it all.
Oh, and that spine is so thick that I'm worried about the binding falling apart.
- Ed C.
The book is PRETTY. That's it though.
Too little, too late.
I bought it so I'd have a hard copy SRD to supplement Iron Heroes 2 when it's eventually released. It's a nice looking book.
....Looking through it/ scanning through it and such.....:
The GETTING STARTED section
On page 11 - Creature? Huh, Sort of interesting that "creature" is a a catch-all term that includes PCs, NPCs, and monsters.
On Page 13 - Wow! (minor sarcasm) An Example of Play! Let's see how this one reads.
Magic Missile? That spell is infamous. Ooh! Ooh! An illustration of the example of play on the top of the next page. Not quite how I imagined the attacking skeletons.
Okay Now I decide to look at just the artwork and then go back to straight reading of it.
On pages 18-19 there is a two page illustration introducing Races. Its alright - I just prefer a tad more realism in RPG artwork.
Page 20 - Yow. Its the swimsuit issue of a magazine done Fantasy races style.
The Elf example looks like a grumpy surfer dude.
The Gnome girl has purple punk hair. (Or is that normal for them?) Ah! The text says that hair color isd normal for Gnomes.....
more soon.....
- Ed C.
Quote from: Koltar;391124The Gnome girl has purple punk hair. (Or is that normal for them?) Ah! The text says that hair color isd normal for Gnomes.....
Punk rock gnomes. :)
If I want to use Warlocks, Duskblades, Psychic Warriors, or Crusaders using Pathfinder, I either have to do some rules juggling or handwave the inconsistencies. With 3.5E I don't.
3.5E wins.
Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391140If I want to use Warlocks, Duskblades, Psychic Warriors, or Crusaders using Pathfinder, I either have to do some rules juggling or handwave the inconsistencies.
Wouldn't be surprised if Paizo eventually creates similar classes for Pathfinder, even if it takes them several years to do so. Though by then, the question is who would actually still be interested in it.
Quote from: ggroy;391141Wouldn't be surprised if Paizo eventually creates similar classes for Pathfinder, even if it takes them several years to do so. Though by then, the question is who would actually still be interested in it.
I don't know, the two main sources of appeal for Pathfinder are:
1. Stick it to WotC
2. Keep 3.5E in print!
(as I don't really care about either of those, I am understandably unimpressed with Pathfinder)
I think #1 will certainly diminish as time passes, but #2 might linger for a while.
Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391144I don't know, the two main sources of appeal for Pathfinder are:
1. Stick it to WotC
2. Keep 3.5E in print!
(as I don't really care about either of those, I am understandably unimpressed with Pathfinder)
I think #1 will certainly diminish as time passes, but #2 might linger for a while.
The peak for #1 probably would have been during Gencon 2009 and for several months afterward. Almost a year later, there doesn't seem to be much of that crowd today. The hardcore #1 crowd probably hangs out at Paizo's forums these days.
#2 is something that resembles the road to stagnation. It may very well be the case that we will never see a 2E Pathfinder.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Paizo becoming the 2010's version of "Palladium", where they end up thriving on stagnation for more than a decade with a stable hardcore crowd who buys everything they publish every month.
In other words: a slow death.
I don't see it as stagnation at all. To me, the game is the same thing as first edition. You still do the same stuff. Your hit points still double at second level. Your fighter still gets a 5% bonus to hit every level.
I think Pathfinder will endure for a long time because the exact same shit has endured for decades.
What's the alternative to "stagnation"? Putting out a new ruleset every couple of years because (A) you didn't get it right the previous time, or (B) you just want to reboot to sell more units? I'll take "stagnation", thanks.
Absolutely, Chess, Basketball, and Golf seem to have endured under the same rules for a long time. For that matter, the stupid video game Star Craft still sells copies and is played by a lot of people despite being an old video game.
Change isn't necessary. I don't need new rules to write new adventures or play it differently. Changing within the old system is part of the fun for me.
As long as Paizo is able to sell enough copies of their Pathfinder AP books (and other supplement books) to their regular customers every month, they'll probably be able to get away with "thriving" on stagnation.
It's when the number of people buying the AP books significantly declines, is when they'll have to rethink their business model. For example, one indicator to look for is if one day they decided to start publishing their AP books in black and white greyscales and on lower quality paper.
Quote from: The_Shadow;391168What's the alternative to "stagnation"? Putting out a new ruleset every couple of years because (A) you didn't get it right the previous time, or (B) you just want to reboot to sell more units?
Business as usual for the big gorilla rpg publisher.
Quote from: The_Shadow;391168What's the alternative to "stagnation"? Putting out a new ruleset every couple of years because (A) you didn't get it right the previous time, or (B) you just want to reboot to sell more units?
The number of "suckers" willing to buy a new edition, could one day decline to the point where it does not bring in enough revenue. For the big fish, that day could take many decades if not a century.
The 50th anniversary of D&D will be in 2024. Maybe Blizzard or a future holodeck supplier company will own it by then.
Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391140If I want to use Warlocks, Duskblades, Psychic Warriors, or Crusaders using Pathfinder, I either have to do some rules juggling or handwave the inconsistencies.
With the exception of one of those, those came in the great class glut of 3.5 and I never allowed in my game anyways. Now I generally won't have to worry about my players asking me to play them.
Advantage: Pathfinder.
I just...idk. 3.5 worked for a while, but a lot of the fun I had was in spite of some of the weird kinks in play. Is Pathfinder really that much of an improvement in play?
I mean, 4e is working alright for our group now, but I do prefer the more broad focus of the 3.x d20 system vs Fight Fighting Fighty (not that that's necessarily a bad thing, but I'm not big on the default adventure design for 4e or Savage Worlds since they're very Bang! Bang! Bang! Pulpy/comic action heroes stuff). It's just that dealing with the back-end stuff in 3.x was always a chore and didn't seem to add all that much to play. I don't mind crunch, but I want results when I have to deal with it.
I am at work right now ......so this will be brief.
My first response: Oh my frakking Kahless!.
(Didn't know an argument would start by accident)
Next response: I bought the book, at a discount, So far I think its pretty alright.
More posted comments about the PATHFINDER core book when I get home tonight.
- Ed C.
Quote from: Koltar;391202(Didn't know an argument would start by accident)
- Ed C.
And you've been using the Internet for how long?
Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391144I don't know, the two main sources of appeal for Pathfinder are:
1. Stick it to WotC
2. Keep 3.5E in print!
(as I don't really care about either of those, I am understandably unimpressed with Pathfinder)
I think #1 will certainly diminish as time passes, but #2 might linger for a while.
Well thats you.
I on the other hand noticed all the good will that PAIZO in general generates by their attitude and customer relations. Also the damn book used to sell out within 24 hours of arriving at the store.
Oh yeah - I buy PAIZO maps and 'generic' Gamemastery products all the time in the hopes of using them with
GURPS or some other roleplaying game. The art direction and general quality of PAIZO products have pretty much left me impressed over the past 5 or 6 years.
So, I thought I'd give
PATHFINDER a look and even a purchase - its very likely worth it considering PAIZO's track record with me.
- Ed C.
Quote from: DeadUematsu;391029The book is PRETTY. That's it though.
Exactly my opinion. I'd love to have that as a quote on the blurb of my copy.
Quote from: Koltar;391394Well thats you.
I on the other hand noticed all the good will that PAIZO in general generates by their attitude and customer relations. Also the damn book used to sell out within 24 hours of arriving at the store.
Oh yeah - I buy PAIZO maps and 'generic' Gamemastery products all the time in the hopes of using them with GURPS or some other roleplaying game. The art direction and general quality of PAIZO products have pretty much left me impressed over the past 5 or 6 years.
So, I thought I'd give PATHFINDER a look and even a purchase - its very likely worth it considering PAIZO's track record with me.
- Ed C.
Color me strange, but I find that the quality of a game book is of the utmost importance, while now nice the people who publish it are has almost no impact on my game at the table.
Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391405while now nice the people who publish it are has almost no impact on my game at the table.
It's all a con perpetrated by the employees and owners of Paizo. :rolleyes:
Pathfinder and the Beastiary are beautiful books. I read both cover-to-cover when I got them and really liked them a lot, but will probably never get a chance to use them aside from the PbP we've got going here. But I still got my money's worth from the enjoyment of reading them and the ideas that I got from them.
Quote from: Koltar;391394I on the other hand noticed all the good will that PAIZO in general generates by their attitude and customer relations.
Why do you care about goodwill, attitude, and customer relations, for an RPG?
Is OD&D a worse game because it has no company behind it to offer goodwill, attitude, or customer relations at all, for example?
I can see goodwill, attitude, and customer relations being important to you in general as someone who works at a game store. But, for deciding which game to play? Shouldn't that be based on the content of the game, not the good feelings you get from the game producer?
Mist,
So you're saying the game that WotC produces or even WW currently are better because they lack better customer input?
Btw Koltar I hope you're enjoying the book.
Al,
*waves* And secondly there IS a Pathfinder version of Warlock out there. Just not needed when you compare the rest of the stuff. (Plus I like Otherworld stuff for extra base classes. Armiger is the new win.)
Quote from: jeff37923;391223And you've been using the Internet for how long?
And as arguments go, especially on this site, this was awful civil.
This is true Tommy. I've seen WAY worse arguments over way more trivial tidbits than what edition is the best.
Quote from: Nightfall;391514Mist,
So you're saying the game that WotC produces or even WW currently are better because they lack better customer input?
No, that's not at all what he's saying. Additionally, I find it difficult to understand how anybody could have interpreted it that way.
Quote from: VictorC;391850No, that's not at all what he's saying. Additionally, I find it difficult to understand how anybody could have interpreted it that way.
Indeed, customer input and customer relations are two entirely different and unrelated things.
Quote from: Mistwell;391454Why do you care about goodwill, attitude, and customer relations, for an RPG?
Is OD&D a worse game because it has no company behind it to offer goodwill, attitude, or customer relations at all, for example?
I can see goodwill, attitude, and customer relations being important to you in general as someone who works at a game store. But, for deciding which game to play? Shouldn't that be based on the content of the game, not the good feelings you get from the game producer?
Well it's either one of two things: either there's no such thing as an RPG or Gaming community, and it's all about just picking up a can of soda in a store, in which case, who gives a fuck about people making games, the sorts of games they create, and how they're trying to sell them, right?
OR
There is such a thing as a gaming community, a network of individuals from the people who socialize around a gaming table to an international community at large, in which case the people making games, the sorts of games they create, and the public relations they entertain to sell and develop these games do matter to the community at large.
Now, I, personally, believe in the second possibility. There is a gaming community, there are people with ethics, morals, ideas creating certain games, and selling them in some ways or others, and all these things matter to me. I am buying products of our imaginations, role playing games, which I love. Not soda at the local 7-11. I will give my money to people I want to reward. I'm not forcing anybody to make my personal choice, but I do vote with my dollars for products and individuals I want to support, while not giving a dime to those I do not want to support. It's the ethical thing to do, to me, myself, and I concur.
Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391851Indeed, customer input and customer relations are two entirely different and unrelated things.
When it comes to the bottom line, customer input and customer relations are the same thing.
Sure... you can scare or otherwise bully your customer into buying your product(s), however that will only last until something better comes along.
On the other hand, if you have a happy customer, something better can come along, and your customer will totally ignore it in favor of your older products because the customer feels his/her input is both valued and appreciated whereas with the new products there is no perceived value because of the lack of a relationship.
Unfortunately, many companies have implemented predatory practices on account of simple greed. They won't last. Historically they haven't. Periodically the markets shakes such busineses loose and they collapse under the weight of their lack of ethics. We are all overdue for a major shakeout.
Can't say I'll feel sorry for the companies that don't understand.
P.S. I picked up the Pathfinder GameMastery Guide over the weekend. It totally rocks!
Quote from: GameDaddy;391876On the other hand, if you have a happy customer, something better can come along, and your customer will totally ignore it in favor of your older products because the customer feels his/her input is both valued and appreciated whereas with the new products there is no perceived value because of the lack of a relationship.
This is the problem, people in this case aren't judging the products on what they should be judged on. How good it is and is instead judging it on how warm and fuzzy the company selling it makes them feel.
Lets say, I'm playing Fatal, because the company that puts it out just makes me feel all warm and cozy. Oh, they listen to what I have to say and they treat me nice. So I should keep playing it rather than... well anything?
Customer service/relations is more of an icing on the cake, or a cherry on the sundae if you prefer.
I will never base a decision of whether or not to play a game on the PR, I'll base it on the merits of the game.
Quote from: GameDaddy;391876P.S. I picked up the Pathfinder GameMastery Guide over the weekend. It totally rocks!
Did the same at Drexoll Games not two days ago! Just had the time to read a few pages so far. Except a rather annoying amount of "the DM tells magnificent stories and weaves storylines" bullshit ( ;) ), it looks pretty good, indeed. :)
A loyal, long-term customer is worth their weight in gold. They are the ambassadors of your product. They will spread it's virtues to others *for free*. But if you sour that relationship, they will become your arch-enemy. Look at the latest WotC edition wars.
How many times have we seen that in the history of gaming companies? I think it occurs far more often than in industries that deal in less creative and personal products then role-playing games. The closest thing I can think of is fans of authors that write fiction. They will move heaven and earth for you... but don't piss them off...
Selling role-playing games is not like selling a hammer. The relationship between the creator and the buyer is far more intimate.
Though I can recommend some really good LED flashlights and knives... :)
Quote from: Tetsubo;391912A loyal, long-term customer is worth their weight in gold. They are the ambassadors of your product. They will spread it's virtues to others *for free*. But if you sour that relationship, they will become your arch-enemy. Look at the latest WotC edition wars.
It sure sounds good and there a lot of people who for various reasons dislike 4e. I will additionally submit that many of the ways WotC handles things aren't the best and sometimes down right bad.
However, they're the biggest and they sell the most, Paizo (who supposedly has good customer service) can't even dream to come close.
So while customer service/relations does factor in, it in no way should be considered a make or break factor.
The
only time I contacted any company's customer service was several years ago, it was Fantasy Flight Games. They treated me like shit. But you know what, Midnight is (or was) ballin. I continue to play it despite being written off by dicks.
I would be a complete and total idiot to stop playing a game that I enjoy because some schmo needs to work on his attitude.
I would also be a complete and total idiot to play a game that I didn't enjoy simply because someone was nice to me and/or listened to something I had to say about said unfun game.
So by all means pretend that we're not buying products for their usefulness to us. You may, continue to buy product because a faceless name was polite to you.
Quote from: VictorC;391918It sure sounds good and there a lot of people who for various reasons dislike 4e. I will additionally submit that many of the ways WotC handles things aren't the best and sometimes down right bad.
However, they're the biggest and they sell the most, Paizo (who supposedly has good customer service) can't even dream to come close.
So while customer service/relations does factor in, it in no way should be considered a make or break factor.
The only time I contacted any company's customer service was several years ago, it was Fantasy Flight Games. They treated me like shit. But you know what, Midnight is (or was) ballin. I continue to play it despite being written off by dicks.
I would be a complete and total idiot to stop playing a game that I enjoy because some schmo needs to work on his attitude.
I would also be a complete and total idiot to play a game that I didn't enjoy simply because someone was nice to me and/or listened to something I had to say about said unfun game.
So by all means pretend that we're not buying products for their usefulness to us. You may, continue to buy product because a faceless name was polite to you.
I have never encountered a company that produced a bad product but where really pleasant to deal with. You seem to have had a different experience. But I have encountered, countless times, a company that treated their customers like crap even though they made a nice widget. I tend to not endorse their widget after that experience. How I am treated does in fact effect my opinion of a company and their product.
Quote from: VictorC;391918However, [WotC are] the biggest and they sell the most, Paizo (...) can't even dream to come close.
That's a myth. A myth that probably translates a reality right now, but a myth nonetheless.
Quote from: Benoist;391922That's a myth. A myth that probably translates a reality right now, but a myth nonetheless.
Myths can last a long time.
Quote from: ggroy;391924Myths can last a long time.
Absolutely. I agree. The notion that somehow nobody ever can ever dream of selling like WotC does is a myth nonetheless.
Companies rise and fall. Markets change. We've had a leader of the hobby in TSR, which then was bought by WotC. It can happen again. And believe it or not, but just because D&D is D&D doesn't mean this particular game is bound to remain the leader of the hobby forever and ever. Amen. Period. Slash. End of story. Just because it didn't happen yet doesn't mean it can't, ever.
Quote from: Benoist;391926Absolutely. I agree. The notion that somehow nobody ever can ever dream of selling like WotC does is a myth nonetheless.
Companies rise and fall. Markets change. We've had a leader of the hobby in TSR, which then was bought by WotC. It can happen again. And believe it or not, but just because D&D is D&D doesn't mean this particular game is bound to remain the leader of the hobby forever and ever. Amen. Period. Slash. End of story. Just because it didn't happen yet doesn't mean it can't, ever.
If it was going to happen because of 4E, it would have done so already in a manner we could see.
Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391927If it was going to happen because of 4E, it would have done so already in a manner we could see.
What would be an obvious sign of this happening?
(ie. Besides Hasbro/WotC selling off the D&D intellectual property or taking D&D off the market).
Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391927If it was going to happen because of 4E, it would have done so already in a manner we could see.
It's not about 4E. Not everything has to be brought back to 4E. Get a clue.
Quote from: thecasualoblivion;3911441. Stick it to WotC
2. Keep 3.5E in print!
You forgot:
3. I like what Paizo's doing with the game, and want to see/play more of it!
Quote from: Benoist;391935You forgot:
3. I like what Paizo's doing with the game, and want to see/play more of it!
As do I. WotC has such a huge market share because their property was the first on the market. In an alternative universe it would be Mazes & Minotaurs.
;)
Quote from: Tetsubo;391919But I have encountered, countless times, a company that treated their customers like crap even though they made a nice widget. I tend to not endorse their widget after that experience. How I am treated does in fact effect my opinion of a company and their product.
And I see no reason why it shouldn't affect your opinion of the company to a degree. But when discussing said product with someone who hasn't experienced the "rudeness" (real or imagined, not that I'm saying you havent encountered said rudeness) are you telling me you'd tell that individual, 'It's bad." Rather than, "It's awesome but the people working for them are dicks.
Disingenuous at best.
Additionally, I find myself more interested in something if word of mouth is the game is fun for these reasons. As opposed to someone telling me their perception of a company is positive for these reasons.
Would I prefer all the company's I purchase from to be super friendly and swell? Yes, I would. But I live in the world and I don't try to kid myself that this industry is really any different than most others. These companies aren't making these products to see us smile, they produce them to make money. That being the case I'll base my opinion of the product on, and I know this is crazy, the product.
EDIT: On an unrelated note, I did like your review of Fantasy Craft. The one about the merits of the game, I purchased as a result, thanks.
Quote from: ggroy;391928What would be an obvious sign of this happening?
(ie. Besides Hasbro/WotC selling off the D&D intellectual property or taking D&D off the market).
I can think of two obvious signs. One is WotC drastically retooling the D&D line. I don't consider the D&D essentials launch to qualify as this. D&D has an audience split between the newbie/casual players and the hardcore players, and what the groups want and need often conflicts. 4E was built to satisfy the hardcore players while trying to make the game friendly to newbies and casuals, and did a better job at satisfying the hardcore players than it did towards the newbs/casuals. I think Essentials is more the launch of a two tiered system, with Essentials aimed at new and casual players. The second sign would be the rise of a non-D&D game, like the emergence of Vampire in the 90s. Nothing like that is happening right now.
Quote from: Benoist;391933It's not about 4E. Not everything has to be brought back to 4E. Get a clue.
It isn't? Somehow I don't believe you here.
Quote from: Benoist;391935You forgot:
3. I like what Paizo's doing with the game, and want to see/play more of it!
Buying in to "indie" hype isn't really any different than buying into corporate hype. When you look at Pathfinder objectively, its 3.5E with a fresh coat of paint. Paizo is doing an excellent job of customer relations and marketing with Pathfinder, but when you remove that and look strictly at the game from a system standpoint, it isn't remarkable at all.
Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391958It isn't? Somehow I don't believe you here.
Just get a clue, alright? It's not about 4E, and you're not 4E. Give it a rest already. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Benoist;391959Just get a clue, alright? It's not about 4E, and you're not 4E. Give it a rest already. :rolleyes:
In the big picture, I think this is bullshit. Pathfinder does not exist in a bubble. Without an edition change, Pathfinder the RPG never happens. Without people angry at the discontinuation of 3E and the removal of the OGL from the current edition of D&D, Pathfinder doesn't enjoy the success it has attained. I also don't think people musing about the future fortunes of WotC exists independently of those same people being dissatisfied with what WotC is doing or has done with the game.
Somebody muses about the future decline of WotC, I respond by saying that if WotC was to decline because of events that occurred over the last two years(4E, ditching the OGL, "firing customers") we'd see stronger signs of it than what has happened.
Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391958I can think of two obvious signs. One is WotC drastically retooling the D&D line. I don't consider the D&D essentials launch to qualify as this. D&D has an audience split between the newbie/casual players and the hardcore players, and what the groups want and need often conflicts. 4E was built to satisfy the hardcore players while trying to make the game friendly to newbies and casuals, and did a better job at satisfying the hardcore players than it did towards the newbs/casuals. I think Essentials is more the launch of a two tiered system, with Essentials aimed at new and casual players.
Perhaps there was actually some substance to the D&D + AD&D split, during the TSR era. Allegedly the basic D&D box sets sold in the millions back in the 1980's.
http://www.acaeum.com/library/printrun.html
Later this year, we'll see whether this is still the case.
Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391958Buying in to "indie" hype isn't really any different than buying into corporate hype. When you look at Pathfinder objectively, its 3.5E with a fresh coat of paint. Paizo is doing an excellent job of customer relations and marketing with Pathfinder, but when you remove that and look strictly at the game from a system standpoint, it isn't remarkable at all.
If the people at Paizo were running their company like how Kevin Siembieda is running Palladium, I wouldn't be surprised if the company ends up dying a painful death.
For the big fish, they can get away more easily with brushing off criticisms and telling customers to fuck off. It's harder to get away with that, when a company is small fry.
Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391958Buying in to "indie" hype isn't really any different than buying into corporate hype. When you look at Pathfinder objectively, its 3.5E with a fresh coat of paint. Paizo is doing an excellent job of customer relations and marketing with Pathfinder, but when you remove that and look strictly at the game from a system standpoint, it isn't remarkable at all.
It ain't remarkable. They are however very good adventure/fluff writers. Supposed they wanted a game system to use for their adventures, they can either
1) Create own fantasy heartbreaker
2) Sign up for GSL and use the flagship RPG system
3) Use the free OGL where there are already millions of fans who are familiar with it.
Of course we know what they went for. They had an opportunity to just reprint the rules 100% unchanged actually, but it might not be profitable from a business pov, since their target market already own the books.
Quote from: areola;391966It ain't remarkable. They are however very good adventure/fluff writers. Supposed they wanted a game system to use for their adventures, they can either
1) Create own fantasy heartbreaker
2) Sign up for GSL and use the flagship RPG system
3) Use the free OGL where there are already millions of fans who are familiar with it.
Of course we know what they went for. They had an opportunity to just reprint the rules 100% unchanged actually, but it might not be profitable from a business pov, since their target market already own the books.
I'm not saying Paizo didn't do the right thing, I think they hit it right on the head. I just think the reality of Pathfinder differs significantly from the hype that has grown up around it.
Quote from: thecasualoblivion;391958I can think of two obvious signs. One is WotC drastically retooling the D&D line. I don't consider the D&D essentials launch to qualify as this. D&D has an audience split between the newbie/casual players and the hardcore players, and what the groups want and need often conflicts. 4E was built to satisfy the hardcore players while trying to make the game friendly to newbies and casuals, and did a better job at satisfying the hardcore players than it did towards the newbs/casuals. I think Essentials is more the launch of a two tiered system, with Essentials aimed at new and casual players. The second sign would be the rise of a non-D&D game, like the emergence of Vampire in the 90s. Nothing like that is happening right now.
Why not, especially since this line of products, rather than clearly designating it's position as far as newbie/casual vs. hardcore use goes, it just continues to try and appeal to both markets. These books have a bunch of things that will appeal to the hardcore audience (new feats, builds, monster layout, etc.). It's almost as if WotC needs that profit surge you can only get with the release of corebooks (which have traditionally catered to both types of consumers.) to an audience of faithful fans, oh yeah and if it happens to grab some new people that's great too...
Quote from: VictorC;391950And I see no reason why it shouldn't affect your opinion of the company to a degree. But when discussing said product with someone who hasn't experienced the "rudeness" (real or imagined, not that I'm saying you havent encountered said rudeness) are you telling me you'd tell that individual, 'It's bad." Rather than, "It's awesome but the people working for them are dicks.
Disingenuous at best.
Additionally, I find myself more interested in something if word of mouth is the game is fun for these reasons. As opposed to someone telling me their perception of a company is positive for these reasons.
Would I prefer all the company's I purchase from to be super friendly and swell? Yes, I would. But I live in the world and I don't try to kid myself that this industry is really any different than most others. These companies aren't making these products to see us smile, they produce them to make money. That being the case I'll base my opinion of the product on, and I know this is crazy, the product.
EDIT: On an unrelated note, I did like your review of Fantasy Craft. The one about the merits of the game, I purchased as a result, thanks.
One of my points is that the RPG market is inherently different from a company that makes widgets. If they make a bad widget they can just push them into the third world market or sell them off cheap to the secondary market. They don't really care what their customers think. And I speak as someone that has worked in the widget making field for the past 26 years.
Role-playing games are more akin to fiction. You *have* to romance the potential customer. The relationship between the the consumer and the creator is far more intimate. There needs to be give and take and the creator needs to listen to the market. There are limits to this of course. But since the market is so much smaller AND so much more likely to be in contact with each other (like this message board) potential bad blood is *far* more poisonous.
You are correct, I would probably tell someone that a product was good but that the company sucked. But I would not *recommend* that product.
I'm glad that you like the review.
All I know is there are products I like by companies I like. I might not enjoy playing Super RPGs, but if asked to do so, I'll probably insist on Green Ronin. Same holds true for Horror, I'll stick with Chaosium.
...again for now, just commenting on Artwork, Illustrations and what grabs my eye....
Page 25 - HALF-ORCS, Okay, even though his forearms look strange to me.
Haflings, page 26. Something about that Halfling I don't trust. Think the artist went out of the way to make his eyes & expression shifty.
HUMAN Illustration: Nice, very nice. A woman figure with muscles or athletic build but not overdone. There is a Jewel on her unbderwear - better not tell that Halfling thief on the previous page - he'll think all humans have underclothes worth stealing for jewels.
CLASSES chapter opens up with a two-page artrwork. SEONI could probably use a more practical outfit on her.
Page 31 - That SWORD is way too large and exaggerated. Its probably inspired by that FINAL FANTASY movie and other anime. (I'm not really much of a fan of Anime)
Page 35 = Now thats an interesting Halfling Bards with lots of character or backstory implied.
The cleric illustration on page 39 is evocative....well its interesting. (makes me want to use as an NPC or build a scenario around her)
Page 55 - The Fighter kind of reminds me of a young Val Kilmer...around the time he was in "Willow".
MONK, page 57. I've never liked Monks. That character look doesn't change my mind in one direction or the other.
Whoah!! Page 61 - Now thats a cool looking Paladin! Love the expression on her face. The sword shape and size are much more believable than the one in the Barbarian illustration (Page 31 comment)
Page 69 - Female Elf Rogue. Eh, nice.
Page 71. That Sorcerer reminds me of Ororo/Storm of the X-mEN. That mind of been the idea.
Page 79. The Wizard! = Hell I could make that garb and approximate that look for a convention. I'd play that Wizard as a player character.
...more later...after my shift at work today. IF I 'm relaxed enough to look at the book....
- Ed C.
Are any of you guys on here currently in a PATHFINDER campaign or mayube running one as a GM?
Whats it like compared to other RPG campaigns?
Does it feel like 3.5 D&D while playing ? - or are there many subtle differences in the mood or tone of the game sessions?
There is a chance I might be able to join in with a local group thats playing PATHFINDER.
- Ed C.
Uhm I think I've said a couple times I'm running a Pathfinder converted version of Curse of the Crimson Throne. Currently it feels a lot like 3.5 but with some subtle changes. (Like the fact the party diviner's ability to roll Inits higher than some rogues makes him go first more often than most wizards. There's less issue of a wizard at 1st level surviving most fights thanks to going to d6s instead of d4s.)
I'd recommend trying it to see what you think. If you don't like it, then you know now.
Quote from: Koltar;393461Are any of you guys on here currently in a PATHFINDER campaign or mayube running one as a GM?
Whats it like compared to other RPG campaigns?
Does it feel like 3.5 D&D while playing ? - or are there many subtle differences in the mood or tone of the game sessions?
There is a chance I might be able to join in with a local group thats playing PATHFINDER.
- Ed C.
I'm both running a Pathfinder game and playing in one. Both games use many 3.5 elements and books, including the Spell Compendium, Magic Item Compendium, the various monster books and Complete X books, 1 character in 1 game is a 3.5 class that had no Pathfinder equivalent, and the game I'm playing in is using the War of the Burning Sky (3.x) campaign, while the game I'm running is set in the Forgotten Realms. So given all that, it naturally feels a whole lot like 3.5.
However, we really like the additional class options and giving the classes new things at each level instead of front-loading them. One big difference between Pathfinder and 3.5 is that in our last 3.5 game, there were lots of multi-class and prestige class characters. In Pathfinder, many of the characters are single classed. Some have a few levels in a 2nd base class, but no one has taken a prestige class or seems to have any plans to. The base classes are just so much fun and more interesting at higher levels now that prestige classes aren't nearly as crucial
Also, the most powerful, deadly, dominating character in combat out of either game is easily a Fighter/Barbarian that is playing in my game. He is absolutely deadly, and routinely does more damage per round than the Sorcerer. That's not something you'd often hear in 3.5.
The spell changes have helped keep the casters in check, and the unlimited Cantrips + inherent powers for a Sphere, School, etc give casters something to fall back on when their spells run out.
Quote from: Koltar;393461Are any of you guys on here currently in a PATHFINDER campaign or mayube running one as a GM?
Whats it like compared to other RPG campaigns?
Does it feel like 3.5 D&D while playing ? - or are there many subtle differences in the mood or tone of the game sessions?
There is a chance I might be able to join in with a local group thats playing PATHFINDER.
- Ed C.
It just feels like 3.5 with a bunch of house rules. I like it better because no one shows up to play with any splat books.
Ran the open beta with some 3.x monsters more or less unchanged.
The game felt sort of like more of the same, with cooler stuff for bbns, fighters, and rogues (the three classes I used in the one-shot as GM).
Friends of mine, all die hard 3.x fans (not really Paizo fans until recently) all use it now. I've played in a few games so far.
Personally, I like the skill rules. Faster feat progression and stronger core races/classes are pretty nice. There's less cherry picking with the core classes, as others have mentioned. Haven't played far enough to know about PrCs. I also feel like there's more to play with at low levels, without much effect on lethality or pace, so I'd really like to try a slow xp campaign with downplayed magic gear.
Like peanut butter and jelly mixed with Eberron, for a few reasons. Faster feat progressions mean being dragonmarked doesn't take up as much of your character resources. Rebalanced races sort of fit better with Eberron's guys (you *might* drop a penalty off the warforged, but leave shifters as is thanks to faster feat progression and shifter feats... changelings might or might not need a boost, depending how you run things). That sort of thing.
Played a mini-campaign through to about level 5 - actually we started with 3.5 characters and converted over to Pathfinder in the second session (surprise!) - which was kind of bad for me as I was playing a Scout when Christmas arrived for everyone else ;). I did like the skill consolidation , though, and the extra +3 for trained skills (I like spreading skill ranks around).
Basically not that much different -there are lots of rule changes but mostly very minor - about 25% of them seemed useful while the rest seem to pop up randomly to mess with things (for my character, revised Manyshot was a nasty surprise). The other players probably enjoyed me not rules lawyering, anyway - I try to shut up but don't always manage.
Quote from: Koltar;393461Are any of you guys on here currently in a PATHFINDER campaign or maybe running one as a GM?
Whats it like compared to other RPG campaigns?
Does it feel like 3.5 D&D while playing ? - or are there many subtle differences in the mood or tone of the game sessions?
I'm GMing Pathfinder right now. My gaming group (a large loosely affiliated group that is actually a bunch of different smaller sub-groups) didn't like 4e and was really fond of Paizo's Dragon/Dungeon work especially the Dungeon APs; one guy ran the Rise of the Runelords AP for us and we all loved it. We tried Pathfinder Beta for a campaign and liked it, and I started a game right after Pathfinder final came out; we're all enjoying it. Other guys are running other Pathfinder games too for sub-groups, usually using their Adventure Paths, though there's a new Spelljammer based one starting soon.
The feel is a combination of several things. Trying to isolate the "pure rules," they are a little more fixed, streamlined, and interesting version of 3.5. Not hugely different, and some of our games have used 3.5 splatbooks fine. Although we've kinda used it as an opportunity to take back a little more game control - the 3.5e rule sprawl along with the sense of "player entitlement" to use it all had become the 3.5e culture and the PF culture is less about that.
But it's not just the pure rules. Golarion is our favorite gaming world since Greyhawk; it's interesting and hits the right balance of not dizzying FR detail but loads of good adventure-ready hooks. Paizo's approach is welcome - not just "customer service" but things like open beta testing the original PF rules and, more recently, the Advanced Player's Guide, makes you feel more like a participant in a community than just a consumer. And Paizo makes copious and excellent adventures (the six-chapter APs, the individual modules, and the smaller organized-play tourney scenarios). "A bunch of adventures that don't suck" is what I liked the most about my other favorite D&D editions (1e, 3e with third party support).
Anyway, our campaigns run a lot like 3.5e, but with definite improvements. We had all begun to tire of 3.5e but this has made it fresh again and we basically run 50% Pathfinder games and 50% random other non-D&D games (most recently WoD, Alternity, Savage Worlds) - we have like 3-4 campaigns going on at a time across the whole gang, and so have probably 4-5 ongoing or completed Pathfinder campaigns by this point, and we're all extremely happy with it.
There are a couple things still not perfect that come with the 3.5e legacy. Making high level NPCs is time consuming (though they have a couple products with lots of NPCs to specifically address this) and high level play is complex. And it encouraged a super-gamist legacy of fretting over legalistic details, but - I don't know if it's Pathfinder or the OSR vibe out there that's making us more comfortable with going back to a bit more of the "rulings, not rules" approach.
Let's see, random other specifics... The core classes are powered up (if you use 3e/3.5e adventures unconverted you have to discount them by 2/1 ELs respectively) and made more even in terms of power distribution over level, so we see a lot fewer multiclass characters dipping for one thing or another; most folks are pleased with a pure core class and prestige classes are rarer and done for more in-game reasons.
I think that's the biggest thing for me. I like the idea of Prestige classes, but they became less "prestige" and more "classes" than they did anything else. Now in Pathfinder it's core classes that shine with specialists doing their thing for in game and some out of game reasons.
Quote from: Cranewings;391164I don't see it as stagnation at all. To me, the game is the same thing as first edition. You still do the same stuff. Your hit points still double at second level. Your fighter still gets a 5% bonus to hit every level.
I think Pathfinder will endure for a long time because the exact same shit has endured for decades.
Its not the same as 1e AD&D/OSRIC, as 1e games don't uses feats or skills and the bonuses for stats don't kick in until about 15+, also AC is rated differently, 1e also has less twinking players, due to the lack of min/maxing skills & feats (since there are none). But PF is good for those who want to keep to their old ways, the same way OSRIC has kept the spirit of 1e alive for me, Yes I am a 1e fool.
Koltar,
I highly suggest you get around to picking up a copy of Pathfinder RPG's Advanced Player's Guide. There's some really GREAT stuff in there.