Pathfinder 1E Paizo Bites- A Rant

[psionotic]

I don't want to get involved in the finger pointing and ranting. If anyone at Paizo is reading this, I just want to give some (hopefully constructive) criticism on this issue.

Dark Sun, being near to the hearts of a few rabid fans like myself, is by its nature edgy and obscure. That's what many of us DS geeks like about it. While I appreciate the effort to publish (and perhaps popularize) it in the magazine, I was disappointed by some of the major changes made to the setting in the latest issue. Paladins, sorcerers, and arcane casting bards simply do not fit, in my opinion. The environmental effects of the heat and thirst is what makes playing it challenging (and DMing it so diabolically fun.) Of course I also know that I don't speak for everyone.

I'm sure that there are good reasons for the changes that were made, but I think that the goals of those changes could have been accomplished in another way (with a sidebar on which classes to exclude, and how to fit them back in for those who want to use them, pehaps.) Dave's Athasian Bard probably would need a whole page, I know, but I for one would loved to have seen it. I would still love to see a web enhancemnt including the other material submitted for the article, if possible.

Thanks for your time,

-psi.

 

[Belen]

Actually when it comes to content it is easier to delete than add, but that is also IMO.

Since it is THEIR magazine, yes their vision does trump all others. They paid for the article after all. The editor has creative control of what sees the light of day in that publication. I do believe that trumps all other visions.

Wrong. The author has the right to choose whether the new "vision" should carry his/her name.

An author owns their intellectual property. Should an editor make changes, then that author must be consulted and should have the right to pull the material.

This is why is should be done before Paizo pays for the work.

 

[herald]

That's complete bull.

As I said before, if that is the case, then if I wrote a novel and submitted it to Tor, then the names of the characters and the plot was "edited," then they can still print it under my name without consulting me?!

yeah....right.

But it's not a book, it's a magazine. A magazine or newspaper has a certain scope that it tries for. If your work doesn't fit that scope, it's changed or it's gone. period.

 

[Greydt]

D'Karr- You are making my point for me. The magazine is 100% DnD approved. This means that many players will just assume that is the Dark Sun they will play. This leads to miscommunication among players and GMs, and basically tells players that the rules trump the GM.

GM: "That's not Dark Sun."
Players: "According to the officials, it is. Now, you can do it your way, good luck finding players...or...."

Looks like the GM is in alot more trouble than just a few differences in Dark Sun rules if their player(s) act like that. I'm not exactly sure what your point is with the above example, but I'm assuming a "clarifying the rules with the GM" is a lot simpler outcome than having the players stage some kind of revolt.

I'm just curious - since I don't read through the forum as much as I use to - but aren't you (BelenUmeria) usually in the middle of any thread that complains about Paizo? I had to ask because I'm getting a huge sense of deja vu in this thread...

Edit: By the way, since Dungeon is suppose to be the second half of this Dark Sun thing, does anyone know if that issue will have more info?

 

[D'karr]

That's complete bull.

As I said before, if that is the case, then if I wrote a novel and submitted it to Tor, then the names of the characters and the plot was "edited," then they can still print it under my name without consulting me?!

yeah....right.

That will mostly depend on the terms of your contract with them. But that is a different situation than this one. DarkSun belongs to WotC, not Noonan. So depending on the terms of his contract Paizo could very well have done that.

Get over it, it looks like Noonan did... LOL

If you don't like the article change it to fit your vision.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

You may not think this happens, but I have seen it, although I am lucky enough to have players who, may complain about restrictions, at least allow me to fall or fly first.

You know, that is a funny way to look at things. Specially since when I'm the DM, nothing is official for the campaign unless I say it is. If it doesn't affect your game (you've already said that your players are not like that) then what is the problem? How does this affect YOUR game.

The game? Not at all. However, it does effect the attitude of some players, and this is a problem that can crop up when recruiting new players. For instance, I'm a contract AutoCAD Facilities Manager, and I end up moving every 6-12 months (I think I'm here for another year, which just feels weird...). While in Virginia, I tried to assemble a short-term group so that I wasn't just limited to the solo game between my wife and I. However, of the twelve replies I got from the notice put up in the local FLGS, each of them turned down the game because, in the words of one of them, "everything in the Core Books should be available to the players at all times without exception." He had a few colorful remarks that followed, but they've been posted here at ENWorld by others enough that I'll not bother to repeat such nonsense.

And this isn't even a Dark Sun game!

So, yes, I do believe Belen's got a valid point; It's not a matter of how it effects his game, but rather presents a picture of Dark Sun that is completely false. Considering the gimme-gimme attitude frequently found amongst gamers (12 out of 12 in Williamsburg Virginia!), this makes it hard for the GM that wants to "preserve" the actual game-world environment of Dark Sun to convince players to accept those changes because they have a psuedo-official article (which is probably best described as a bastardization of the original author's work) that says otherwise.

 

[Belen]

Looks like the GM is in alot more trouble than just a few differences in Dark Sun rules if their player(s) act like that. I'm not exactly sure what your point is with the above example, but I'm assuming a "clarifying the rules with the GM" is a lot simpler outcome than having the players stage some kind of revolt.

I'm just curious - since I don't read through the forum as much as I use to - but aren't you (BelenUmeria) usually in the middle of any thread that complains about Paizo? I had to ask because I'm getting a huge sense of deja vu in this thread...

Edit: By the way, since Dungeon is suppose to be the second half of this Dark Sun thing, does anyone know if that issue will have more info?

Not all the time, but I have been on the front lines before due to a dislike of Poly.

 

[JPL]

That's complete bull.

As I said before, if that is the case, then if I wrote a novel and submitted it to Tor, then the names of the characters and the plot was "edited," then they can still print it under my name without consulting me?!

yeah....right.

If you signed a contract saying they could...then yes.

Right now, we don't know what the specific provisions of the contract in question were.

Dave Noonan does not own Dark Sun. WotC does. And WotC has put Paizo in charge of that particular sandbox.

If Dave can play in that sandbox and get paid in the process, great for everybody. But he's being paid to develop a body of intellectual property that belongs to someone else, and that someone has made Paizo the ultimate arbitrator of what stays and what goes in this one-shot article.

Anyone who doesn't like that can start their own sandbox, like Monte did, with all the risks and rewards that entails.

 

[Belen]

The game? Not at all. However, it does effect the attitude of some players, and this is a problem that can crop up when recruiting new players. For instance, I'm a contract AutoCAD Facilities Manager, and I end up moving every 6-12 months (I think I'm here for another year, which just feels weird...). While in Virginia, I tried to assemble a short-term group so that I wasn't just limited to the solo game between my wife and I. However, of the twelve replies I got from the notice put up in the local FLGS, each of them turned down the game because, in the words of one of them, "everything in the Core Books should be available to the players at all times without exception." He had a few colorful remarks that followed, but they've been posted here at ENWorld by others enough that I'll not bother to repeat such nonsense.

And this isn't even a Dark Sun game!

So, yes, I do believe Belen's got a valid point; It's not a matter of how it effects his game, but rather presents a picture of Dark Sun that is completely false. Considering the gimme-gimme attitude frequently found amongst gamers (12 out of 12 in Williamsburg Virginia!), this makes it hard for the GM that wants to "preserve" the actual game-world environment of Dark Sun to convince players to accept those changes because they have a psuedo-official article (which is probably best described as a bastardization of the original author's work) that says otherwise.

Thank you for putting it into better words than I.

 

[Charles Dunwoody]

I've had two articles published in Dragon. In the first article they left in my name and about one sentence I wrote, keeping just the idea. Part of one rule was left out completely, unfortunately. I know that article went through Wizards R&D.

My last article was closer to what I wrote, but the rules were tweaked. I didn't agree that all the changes were necessary but then I wasn't asked!

If you sell to Dragon they own the article. I'm not sure of the legal stuff, but you sell them an idea, not necessarily an article.

I know Monte Cook has had things changed (something to do with dragons) and I'm sure other authors have stuff modified all the time. I think Mike Mearls posts free stuff on his site that got cut from Dragon. I get the impression that Dragon doesn't contact authors after the sale.

For instance, my article got bumped out three issues later but I didn't know it. I sent them an e-mail and they let me know which issue it was bumped to. If I hadn't asked I wouldn't have known (and I got two contributor copies of the wrong issue, but since I didn't get any contributor copies the first time I won't complain!).

Since I got published for the first time in Dragon, I'm not complaining. I'll see how my work is treated by other companies in the future and compare the experience, but until then I'll just consider that Dragon buys ideas, not articles.

I think Dave was treated like any other contributor. I don't think Dragon singled him out in any way.