Pathfinder 1E Paizo Bites- A Rant

[Henry]

From the sound of it, it's starting to sound like the editors need by-lines on each adventure, rather than the whole magazine.

I am glad to see so many industry professionals sharing their opinions - it really makes the picture come full circle.

 

[woodelf]

True. Although there is sometimes a sliding scale; one company is definately rated by author more than anything else, although one of those authors has his own scale (adventures poor, rules/accessories high). Overall, though, you are right; while no company has my 100% assurance, there are a few that I'll call 95-Percenters, being 95% sure that I'll like the product so long as the subject matter appeals to me. (And it kinda makes me laugh that WotC isn't amongst them...)

Actually, it makes me sad. WotC *should* be the flagship of the RPG industry, in terms of not only sales, but quality, IMHO. Both to set an example, and because they should have the biggest bucks to hire the bestest staff. The fact that they're not is a bit troubling to me. Personally, WotC not only doesn't hit the 95% mark, but i'm not sure it hits the 50% mark. I haven't bought anything by them since The Primal Order (oh, wait, i guess technically they released Loch Leglean Tribunal). Oh, and there *is* one company that hits the 100%+ mark for me: Atlas Games. They've even sold me on games that i would've thought i *wouldn't* like, based on subject matter alone (Furry Pirates and Rune, frex).

 

[tburdett]

Speaking as an artist, not as a writer, I could care less if someone takes a crap on my art after they buy it or blows it up with dynamite really.

Ok, but what if they did that and then presented it in an art magazine and attributed it to you without making note of the fact that the crap was added after the fact. Would you feel the same way?

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

Ok, but what if they did that and then presented it in an art magazine and attributed it to you without making note of the fact that the crap was added after the fact. Would you feel the same way?

Probably a better comparison would be 'editing' a picture. Adding clothes, deleting people, etc. Its done in animated shows a lot these days...

 

[Melfast]

Dragon is "100% Official" and therefore has to meet WOTC/Core standards

A couple of points -- everything is Dragon is "100% Official." Therefore, Paizo has the right and the responsibility to edit material to meet this broad standard.

2d -- I've had good luck working with Dragon/Paizo over the last couple of years while I lived overseas and now that I'm back in the states. They were quick to replace magazines that did not arrive (sending them 1st class postage). When I started my subscription to Dungeon a little late to get the Dark Sun special issue (which was the whole reason I did it), I emailed them and had a copy of the missed issue within a week.

3d -- I think most of the Dark Sun rewrite was fine. It conforms with 3.5 and is playable even if you don't have 6 years worth of Dark Sun material acumulated. Afficiandos don't like it, but athos.org will give a grittier spin to the campaign if you want it.

4th -- HOWEVER, I think Dave Noonan has a legitimate gripe if they re-wrote a lot of his stuff without telling him since his name is on the article. Paizo's responsibility falls somewhere between warning him and giving him a chance to make changes based on their requirements. If production schedule did not allow for give and take with the author, the production schedule was too short.

My two cents or so anyway.

 

[LondonReign]

Ditto

I would LOVE to see a writer come on this discussion board and publicly point out all the boners, gaffes, nonsensical sentences, and other mistakes that his editors have fixed. Until a writer does that, I don't have much patience for people who have to deflect any criticisms of their work on to an editor's head.

Not only did James Jacobs (Dungeon associate editor, I believe) completely convert my adventure "Racing the Snake" (Dungeon 105) from 3e to 3.5e, he actually added a lot of flavor text to it to make it Ket-appropriate for Greyhawk. In other words, he made it better. He fixed it.
He also polished the finale to make it a real finale. My early draft had the adventurers arriving in port, and that was all. Yep. No big fight. Just an arrival at port. You see, I figured the main villain would have been dispatched by then. In all, it was a dumb way to do it, but I couldn't figure out what should happen. The published version was much better. In other words, he made it better. He fixed it.


In Dungeon 110 -- you know, the one everybody's so angry about -- the non-Dark Sun adventure, "Buzz in the Bridge" was mine. I detected some changes and cuts, but nothing bad. The best I could figure is that they trimmed it for space to keep MORE Dark Sun text.
It was the editors' idea, by the way, to make the big bridge map at "miniatures scale." I figure that will help the playability of the adventure immensely. What a great idea.

To sum up: Thank you, Dungeon editors, for your excellence.

John Simcoe

Ditto John. James also made many, many improvements to my "The Iron Satyr" adventure in issue #108. Did I agree with every single one of the changes he made? No, but I would say 90%-95% of them were changes for the better. He added a lot of flavor to the first half of the plot. I think you have to rely on the pros like James to make the modifications necessary to shape up the story for publications. I have nothing but good thiings to say about my experience with Paizo and James.

Scott Stearns

 

[Alzrius]

Ditto John. James also made many, many improvements to my "The Iron Satyr" adventure in issue #108. Did I agree with every single one of the changes he made? No, but I would say 90%-95% of them were changes for the better. He added a lot of flavor to the first half of the plot. I think you have to rely on the pros like James to make the modifications necessary to shape up the story for publications. I have nothing but good thiings to say about my experience with Paizo and James.

Scott, as long as you're here, I wanted to ask some stuff. It was Maglubiyet that wanted that goristro turned back to normal right? Why was a NE god so concerned about a CE creature? Likewise, why focus on one thats petrified on the Prime? Why can't he just snatch one out of the Abyss?

 

[Bendris Noulg]

A couple of points -- everything is Dragon is "100% Official." Therefore, Paizo has the right and the responsibility to edit material to meet this broad standard.

3d -- I think most of the Dark Sun rewrite was fine. It conforms with 3.5 and is playable even if you don't have 6 years worth of Dark Sun material acumulated. Afficiandos don't like it, but athos.org will give a grittier spin to the campaign if you want it.

I think the nature of many of the complaints are based on the fact that "100% Official" and "conforms to 3.5" don't necessarily have go hand-in-hand. In other words, the changes aren't so much about conforming to 3.5 as they were of conforming with a narrow view of what must be included in order to remain D&D.

So, I agree that they had the "right" to do it, but I don't agree that they had a "responsibility" to do so.

4th -- HOWEVER, I think Dave Noonan has a legitimate gripe if they re-wrote a lot of his stuff without telling him since his name is on the article. Paizo's responsibility falls somewhere between warning him and giving him a chance to make changes based on their requirements. If production schedule did not allow for give and take with the author, the production schedule was too short.

And where as the first issue is likely the nature of most complaints, point #4 is definately the nature of mine. Normally, I like Dave's material (not a big fan, specifically, but his name on an article or product doesn't red-light the product as undesirable as other authors do) and was initially disappointed with what appeared to be his take on Dark Sun.

Granted, I stopped buying Dragon and Dungeon/Polyhedron some time ago (shortly before the BoVD articles), and so I've only purchased two issues of each since (being the BoVD issues and the new Dark Sun ones). I'm afraid, however, that the recent purchases aren't exactly altering my desire (or, more accurately, lack of desire) regarding these publications (both due to the edits made to Dave Noonan's article as well as other features that I simply didn't care for).

 

[JacktheRabbit]

And that's thier right, because they are after all the editors. An editor's vision does trump a writer's.

You just proved in one sentance that you have no clue what so ever what you are talking about.

 

[herald]

You just proved in one sentance that you have no clue what so ever what you are talking about.

Hey I rate a personal attack. Thanks Doc! Even better, you don't even offer any reason to back up your point. But even better yet. You don't even offer any personal history to back up your point.

So all we get is an "Ad Hominem" attack. great.

Now I've asked people I know who have writen newspaper articals and Magazine articals for years. One of which has writen material since the early sixties, and I have taken a spin a time or two at it and I can tell you that an editors approval always trumps a writers unless you have some serious clout and even then, you would have has to pay some serious dues just to get to that point.

Looking through all of the posts it would seem that most writers that have been published in Piazo magazines are satisfied with the modifications made to thier work.

Sorry Doc, in this case, I'm rubber and your glue.