Pathfinder 1E Paizo Site is Down, Do They Have the Licence?

[Moonshade]

*shudders*

I just delved into the Paizo forums. I'd heard rumors, but...yeesh. Wizards' biggest mistake in the buildup to 4e was axing the print versions of Dungeons and Dragons, and creating such a strong rallying point for the most vocal and irrational members of the community.

I had to make this to cleanse myself after reading it

While Paizo seems to have an anti-4E reputation, its 4E boards do contain active pro-4E posters who have managed to defend their pre-like of the new edition without sinking to personal insults of the level and frequency common on other boards, and without receiving such venom from the anti-4E people. Irrationality is most definitely not limited to Paizo's message boards - until the explosion of the past few days, I considered it perhaps the most reasonable of the big D&D forums (defining "reasonable" here as the ability to debate the released 4E information without threads being turned bashing sessions aimed at posters who express different opinions). For an unmoderated forum, it did pretty well. And as many forums show, even moderation is not a guarantee of rational discussion. When it comes to 4E, "vocal" and "irrational" are not the exclusive property of the Paizo boards.

 

[Torillan]

I don't think that its Paizo being "anti-4E", its that they haven't made a decision to adopt it yet, based on the amount of info they were getting from WOTC. To be honest, when they initially launched the 4E part of their message boards, it was very civil. I think what happended was a few pro-4E felt that they had been wronged somehow and the resultant replies were what soured the threads.

My perspective, that's all. I'm not looking for a flame war. For myself, I've decided not to invest in 4E. Not that I hate it; point of fact, I do like elements that have been implemented. But some I'm either not sure of or don't like. I have discovered the joys of Savage Worlds and will be going with those rules.

I think it would be great if 4E does well, and can convert back some of the "haters". It just hasn't turned out to be something I'm interested in anymore.

My 2 cents. Take it for what its worth.

 

[Orcus]

Paizo isnt anti-4E. Heck, if you want proof just note this for the record: they are publishing books with me that are going to be 4E products.

I dont know how you can be anti-4E and publish books that support 4E. They arent anti-4E.

Now, has the uncertainty on 4E made them undecided on what they do with their product lines? Yes. That isnt the same as being anti-4E.

Believe me, all of us third party publishers would have much preferred to have had the GSL and the rules months ago when they were promised to us in November. That would have made all of this alot easier. But we arent anti 4E. I, for one, am pro-4E.

Clark

 

[JVisgaitis]

Man, people are tough.

On one hand you have Clark from Necromancer who is very excited about producing products for 4e and has been contributing on a thread for 4e monster design from a designer's perspective. Result? Clark is a poster boy for 4e who is blindly loyal to it like he's trying for a money grab or something.

On the other hand, we have Erik from Paizo who isn't sure what direction they are going to take 4e. He said it will be a successful edition and all of that, but he just isn't sure if it's the game for him or his customers. Result? Paizo is anti-4e.

Is it at all possible for a company to like or dislike 4e because of the actual merits of the system? Does there always have to be some sort of "agenda" for someone's opinions on the game?

This isn't politics people, it's D&D. Get a grip and take people's opinions for what they are without blowing everything out of proportion.

Rant over.

 

[MarkAHart]

Is it at all possible for a company to like or dislike 4e because of the actual merits of the system? Does there always have to be some sort of "agenda" for someone's opinions on the game?

Where's the fun, conflict, drama, and flame potential in THAT stance?

 

[DM_Jeff]

Is it at all possible for a company to like or dislike 4e because of the actual merits of the system?

Maybe. But not if the rules or the GSL straight-jackets said company's creative direction. And that, as I hear, is Paizo's biggest concern.

-DM Jeff

 

[Vayden]

No one's saying Paizo as a company is Anti-4E (or at least I haven't heard anyone say that). What I will say is that their message-boards are the most anti-4E of anything I've seen outside of WotC's FR boards.

 

[helium3]

When you stare into the intertubes, the trucks stare back.

Heh heh. I *heart* Ted Stevens.

 

[Wisdom Penalty]

No one's saying Paizo as a company is Anti-4E (or at least I haven't heard anyone say that). What I will say is that their message-boards are the most anti-4E of anything I've seen outside of WotC's FR boards.

Yep. Who gives a gnome's turd what half the folks on Paizo's board think? That's not the issue.

The issue, gentle readers, is that juvenile vitriol and ad hominem arguments have made those messageboards a quagmire of useless, negative banter.*

Could this be a result of the fact such behavior was tolerated, at least prior to the implementation of moderated forums (thank you Ms. Lisa Stevens)? I'm suggesting it is.

And that's a twofold damned shame. Shameful that moderation is required because people can't make a cohesive argument without acting like a 4-year old who had his 3E books stolen, and shameful that Paizo's boards - which had been growing into a fairly popular place on the web for like-minded nerds - are now on life support.

W.P.**


* I've always wanted to use vitriol, ad hominem, and quagmire in the same sentence. I can now level-up.

** I'm not trying to be holier than thou. I've been suspended in my day for being, according to Piratecat, a jerk. I really can't argue with him. Again, though - that shows the benefit of clear-minded and neutral moderators. Here's hoping their implementation at Paizo works wonders of a positive kind.

 

[Xath]

Yep. Who gives a gnome's turd what half the folks on Paizo's board think? That's not the issue.

The issue, gentle readers, is that juvenile vitriol and ad hominem arguments have made those messageboards a quagmire of useless, negative banter.*

Could this be a result of the fact such behavior was tolerated, at least prior to the implementation of moderated forums (thank you Ms. Lisa Stevens)? I'm suggesting it is.

And that's a twofold damned shame. Shameful that moderation is required because people can't make a cohesive argument without acting like a 4-year old who had his 3E books stolen, and shameful that Paizo's boards - which had been growing into a fairly popular place on the web for like-minded nerds - are now on life support.

W.P.**


* I've always wanted to use vitriol, ad hominem, and quagmire in the same sentence. I can now level-up.

** I'm not trying to be holier than thou. I've been suspended in my day for being, according to Piratecat, a jerk. I really can't argue with him. Again, though - that shows the benefit of clear-minded and neutral moderators. Here's hoping their implementation at Paizo works wonders of a positive kind.

Let's not start a mud-slinging fight between Paizo and ENWorld posters please.