Pathfinder 1E Paizo Bites- A Rant

[Belen]

There's a few issues at work that we might not be privy to. The editors may have changed the content at the behest of someone at WotC. They may have thought that it would be more fun to include as many options as possible, rather than cut out classes by fiat. I don't really have an opinion either way - I played Dark Sun a few times, but I don't have an emotional attachment to it.

I do think that a better way for a writer to handle a situation like this would be to talk to the editors and see about releasing a PDF with the cut content, or create a web page at the Paizo site to offer options to people who want to cut out paladins and the like. It doesn't help anything to have fans mad at the editor rather than the writer. What does that really accomplish?

And believe me, no one's reputation is at stake here. Getting work in the RPG business is a much higher function of knowing people than producing good work.

Anyway, I can completely understand why the changes upset people. I'd be super-*******-pissed if WotC released a Greyhawk book that had Elminster setting up shop in the Valley of the Mage. The stock answer I'm supposed to give you is that it's an RPG, you can change or ignore stuff, but that's a cop out. You were looking forward to the Dark Sun material, and you're disappointed. It's like Alien III - you don't have to buy the DVD, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't have an impact on how much you like the entire Alien series.

What I would suggest is perhaps writing a very polite letter or email to Dragon that says something like "I'm a big Dark Sun fan, and I heard there was some material cut from the article, such as an Athasian bard prestige class. I'd be really interested in seeing it, since in my game I prefer to use the non-spellcasting bards from the original DS set, rather than the 3e class. Is there any chance we'll see a web enhancement?"

I think the fault runs deeper than a web enhancement can handle. It's not really about DarkSun. It's about the philosophy of sanitizing what we see and hear.

Dragon has a wider audience than most d20 publishers. It influences a large number of gamers. Their current philosophy impacts the hobby in a way that affects my game and yours.

We do not need a myopic view.

Basically, they are saying that the dictates of the world do not matter. Players should not expect any restrictions. The flavor of the world should be sublimated so that the player can have "options."

Bad precedent. If they do this to DarkSun, then we can expect the next generation to do this to our homebrews.

Restrcitions are not bad. Options are not always good.

They have gone too far. So I am going to make my stand.

 

[S'mon]

All Paizo had to do to comply with their moral (and, in theory, legal*) obligations was to email the author a copy of the changed article they intended to print. Then if he wanted, he could have disavowed it and had his name removed from the published version. That hardly seems too much to ask.

*Supposedly the moral rights of the author are adequately protected under US common law(s), which is why there was no need for statutory incorporation of 6bis rights when the USA signed up to the Berne Convention on Copyright.

Those of you who think owning a copyright gives you the right to do anything with a work are incorrect BTW, even in US law. Certainly in almost all other countries, where authors' 6bis rights are expressly recognised by statute, you can't treat an author's work derogatorily just because you've paid for the copyright; and certainly not while keeping his/her name on it.

Disclaimer: I did my PhD on the Moral Rights of the Author. Sorry.

 

[francisca]

Editors are the most under-recognized people in this business. A good editor spells the difference between an OK and a great book, but you never see anyone say anything like "Oh, Michelle Lyons edited this, I so have to buy it." The critical role an editor plays is one of those things that you don't notice until you work in the biz.

Drop some more names and I'll be glad to look for them in the credits when making a purchase.

 

[Belen]

All Paizo had to do to comply with their moral (and, in theory, legal*) obligations was to email the author a copy of the changed article they intended to print. Then if he wanted, he could have disavowed it and had his name removed from the published version. That hardly seems too much to ask.

*Supposedly the moral rights of the author are adequately protected under US common law(s), which is why there was no need for statutory incorporation of 6bis rights when the USA signed up to the Berne Convention on Copyright.

Those of you who think owning a copyright gives you the right to do anything with a work are incorrect BTW, even in US law. Certainly in almost all other countries, where authors' 6bis rights are expressly recognised by statute, you can't treat an author's work derogatorily just because you've paid for the copyright; and certainly not while keeping his/her name on it.

Disclaimer: I did my PhD on the Moral Rights of the Author. Sorry.

Thanks for the backup, Dr. S'mon.

I find it disturbing that so many people accept Paizo business practice without comment. Usually, gamers would be the first to be complaining.

Maybe it is the impression that we are lucky to publish in Dragon, or in the industry at all.

Yes, it is great to publish in a genre that we love so much, but that should not be a defacto agreement to give away your rights.

 

[francisca]

Disclaimer: I did my PhD on the Moral Rights of the Author. Sorry.

The informed opion (what an understatement) is appreciated, by me at least.

 

[S'mon]

The informed opion (what an understatement) is appreciated, by me at least.

Oh, if anyone wants a copy of it emailed to them, email me at simontmn@ntlworld.com - it's about 1.4MB. The author's moral rights are asserted.

 

[JPL]

Yup. The USA is a signatory to the Berne Convention and its article 6bis moral rights of the author. You're supposed to respect the author's paternity & integrity rights, even if you've bought the copyright. What that means at minimum is, you can't screw with somebody's work without their permission & still leave their name on it.

"(1) Independently of the author's economic rights, and even after the transfer of the said rights, the author shall have the right to claim authorship of the work and to object to any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, the said work, which would be prejudicial to his honor or reputation. "

Personally, I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that the author's honor or reputation are on the line here.

 

[S'mon]

"(1) Independently of the author's economic rights, and even after the transfer of the said rights, the author shall have the right to claim authorship of the work and to object to any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, the said work, which would be prejudicial to his honor or reputation. "

Personally, I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that the author's honor or reputation are on the line here.

I thought it was the damage to his reputation as a Dark Sun guru/designer he was complaining about, though. It doesn't have to be damage to his general reputation - we have libel laws for that. It's more a subjective view; at least it's always been taken to be subjective in those countries that have statutory recognition of the MR. So if the author genuinely thinks it's harmful, that's what matters.

Edit: Also 'right to claim authorship' is generally taken to include a right _not_ to claim authorship, ie a right not to have your name on the piece if you don't want it to be - and that right is not dependent on whether the reworking is derogatory.

 

[D'karr]

I think the fault runs deeper than a web enhancement can handle. It's not really about DarkSun. It's about the philosophy of sanitizing what we see and hear.

Any publication that purports to provide 100% Official content will by necessity have to provide content that is to some extent 'sanitized'

Dragon has a wider audience than most d20 publishers. It influences a large number of gamers. Their current philosophy impacts the hobby in a way that affects my game and yours.

When you buy anything from WotC it has the potential to affect your game, the same way that buying anything from any other d20 publisher has the potential to affect your game. That is a DM's option. They can allow any content that they wish to affect their game. That doesn't mean that it necessarily affects my game or anyone elses for that matter.

We do not need a myopic view.

Then don't be a slave to convention. If your idea of Dark Sun does not include paladins, sorcerers or monks then don't use them. Stop being a slave to what WotC or any other publisher tells you. If your game would be more fun by having your halflings be 17 feet tall and have a 27 strength then do it. Do you need Paizo's permission to alter anything in that article to fit your view of Dark Sun?

Basically, they are saying that the dictates of the world do not matter. Players should not expect any restrictions. The flavor of the world should be sublimated so that the player can have "options."

Actually you are saying that. You are saying that because Paizo published a campaign world that has "options" you have to use them all. Where did your DM discretion go in that process?

Bad precedent. If they do this to DarkSun, then we can expect the next generation to do this to our homebrews.

How does this in anyway impact the price of tea in china. What Paizo, WotC or anyone else does with Dark Sun is pretty much up to them. Are they putting a gun to your head and saying, "You will play DarkSun our way or else?"

Restrictions are not bad. Options are not always good.

I wholeheartedly agree. That is why a DM has complete control of what goes into his campaign.

They have gone too far. So I am going to make my stand.

Hey, more power to you. I personally think that you are overreacting but that is your prerogative.

This is a game we are talking about after all. Isn't it? Why get so worked up about something so inconsequential. If you choose not to purchase Dragon or Dungeon or anything else, it is your decision. The same way that using the DarkSun material as published or altering it to fit your needs or vision is also your decision.

Paizo is not perfect. Name any publisher that is. However, I can honestly say that every instance of customer service I've had to deal with them has been very good. Can I use everything they publish right "out of the box"? No. But I can't do that with anything else either.

Hey, have fun.

Good luck and happy gaming.

 

[Belen]

Any publication that purports to provide 100% Official content will by necessity have to provide content that is to some extent 'sanitized'


When you buy anything from WotC it has the potential to affect your game, the same way that buying anything from any other d20 publisher has the potential to affect your game. That is a DM's option. They can allow any content that they wish to affect their game. That doesn't mean that it necessarily affects my game or anyone elses for that matter.


Then don't be a slave to convention. If your idea of Dark Sun does not include paladins, sorcerers or monks then don't use them. Stop being a slave to what WotC or any other publisher tells you. If your game would be more fun by having your halflings be 17 feet tall and have a 27 strength then do it. Do you need Paizo's permission to alter anything in that article to fit your view of Dark Sun?



Actually you are saying that. You are saying that because Paizo published a campaign world that has "options" you have to use them all. Where did your DM discretion go in that process?


How does this in anyway impact the price of tea in china. What Paizo, WotC or anyone else does with Dark Sun is pretty much up to them. Are they putting a gun to your head and saying, "You will play DarkSun our way ore else?"


I wholeheartedly agree. That is why a DM has complete control of what goes into his campaign.


Hey, more power to you. I personally think that you are overreacting but that is your prerogative.

This is a game we are talking about after all. Isn't it? Why get so worked up about something so inconsequential. If you choose not to purchase Dragon or Dungeon or anything else, it is your decision. The same way that using the DarkSun material as published or altering it to fit your needs or vision is also your decision.

Paizo is not perfect. Name any publisher that is. However, I can honestly say that every instance of customer service I've had to deal with them has been very good. Can I use everything they publish right "out of the box"? No. But I can't do that with anything else either.

Hey, have fun.

Good luck and happy gaming.

I did not know that WOTC owned Paizo. If that's the case, then I will call WOTC for those missing issues.

The issue remains. They had a good faith contract with Dave Noonan and their audience to be faithful to the material.

They failed.

Instead, the new "official" version is not the true Dark Sun. They could have printed Mr. Noonan's article as is, then tacked on optional rules for Paladins etc. That would have protected the real flavor of Dark Sun and granted options for GMs to add if they wanted.