Pathfinder 1E RPG.net ripping Pathfinder apart

[ProfessorCirno]

Isn't that unfair:
If the thread in RPG.net is labeled about what you dislike about Pathfinder: then to post off topic would be praising it. Naming calling/insulting those posters on that topic is also off topic and usually considered trolling so the guy was banned for the day.

I'd kinda call that good Modding. The guy was obstructive for no reason. Possibly anger that the "Not like" topic was longer than the "like" topic there, but one can't control that.

Now I kinda don't know RPG.net's history if in the past they trolled on RPG.net the Pathfinder discussion/praising topics there, but at least on that thread they were acting like rationale beings.

At the WotC forums Arc-Tan has had many intelligent posts. So I can vouch that he can be intelligent at times.

Except the moderation is only one way. Find a +Pathfinder thread that doesn't involve someone going in and insulting it. Find one. Yes, the -Pathfinder threads are VERY well moderated. But the +Pathfinder ones? Nooooot exactly.

Do you have any links to this behavior? Is this an actual list of things you have seen or just some raving?

A quick trip to rpg.net's d20 forum showed me these threads:

[Pathfinder] New Class: The Spellblade - Revised

Why should you switch from 3.5 to Pathfinder?

[3.x/Pathfinder] Balancing Magic and ... Saves?

as well as the [Pathfinder---] What don't you like? thread that sparked the OP's complaint.

This is post that started it all

Well, let's see. Under the "Why should you switch" we get this.

RPGnet Forums - View Single Post - Why should you switch from 3.5 to Pathfinder?

A lot of people are willing to *tolerate* it, yes. A lot of people have for various social and cultural reasons been pressured into jumping on this bandwagon of how Pathfinder is the torchbearer for Real True Gaming that 4e left behind. That doesn't make those houserules that people are willing to tolerate a good, positive thing. The fact that a flaw is not enough to totally sink and destroy a project does not mean it wasn't a flaw or that it didn't affect how the project turned out.

Glad to know I"m just duped and peer pressured into buying Pathfinder. Jokes on me, it seems! This is a standard post by Arc. Anyone who buys Pathfinder should be pitied, because it's really a horrilbe game and none of us actually like it. Oh, poor us!

RPGnet Forums - View Single Post - Why should you switch from 3.5 to Pathfinder?

GGroy here states that Pathfinder was only made so Paizo could wank it's ego. Nice!

RPGnet Forums - View Single Post - Speculation on Future of Pathfinder

"They've established a loyal fanbase for themselves which they can milk pretty much at will for years to come."

Awesome!

Oh hey, the thread "What do you like about Pathfinder" is there!

RPGnet Forums - View Single Post - [Patherfinder] What *do* you like?

"Pretty much nothing." Oh man, I totally see why you took the time to post that.

And lastly...well, hell. Look at anything Chris Brady posts, which is pretty much a mix of all of the above. At all times.


Would you like me to keep going?

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

Cirno is right the modding is there but very, very one sided. Try pulling any of that in a 4e thread just try. Or in the neg thread, dumping on 3.5 of PF is fine but saying anything good will get you dogpiled with not a mod in sight

 

[Gimby]

When it comes to the moderation differences - have you reported posts that you think are threadcrapping or have you just been hoping the mods will spot them?

They've stated elsewhere that they generally only act on reports - the boards are pretty large and they don't get to all threads.

 

[Gothmog]

Pot, meet kettle. The sweet, sweet irony. This is exactly the same kind of ridiculous claims that have been leveled by 4e haters all over the internet for the last year (including conspiracy theories, dumbing-down the game, a corporate scheme, blind devotion to and being dupes for WotC, etc.), complaining about D&D 4e. It is frustrating to see people so consumed by their own petty motivations and egos that they overlook the facts of the situation and go so worked up over A GAME. Heck, I even remember people complaining like this when 3e was released- so its nothing new. Some of the backlash on the rpg.net forums is obviously done to tweak the noses of the 3e/Paizo fanboys that threw hissy fits over the last year about 4e (and both sides are being jackasses if they are doing this), but some of the comments in that thread are legitimate problems with Pathfinder and in many cases the posters are voicing arguements and discussing rules with backup from the Pathfinder book/PSRD.

I don't usually frequent the rpg.net boards, and the modding done there isn't as well done as the modding at ENWorld. There don't seem to be many warnings from mods, and bans look to be a frequent punishment for troublesome behavior. I can't comment on the personal bias of the rpg.net mods towards 4e, since I haven't read any of those threads. However, I can comment on the Paizo boards (when I went looking on tips for converting some of their adventure paths to 4e), and the dogpiling and venom that spews from many of the posters there if 4e is brought up, or Pathfinder is criticized. And the Paizo mods do next to nothing about it.

In the end, I'm happy Pathfinder is out for those folks who enjoy it. Its not for me, and I disagree with many of the design decisions and how concepts were implemented in the game, but I'm not the target audience. And if you do find yourself getting upset over some of the claims made about Pathfinder on rpg.net....well, welcome to the club. Those of us who do enjoy 4e have had to put up with equally stupid shenanigans and grow thicker skins over the last year. Just remember, it doesn't affect how you play your game, and it is still JUST A GAME.

 

[Darrin Drader]

Pot, meet kettle. The sweet, sweet irony. This is exactly the same kind of ridiculous claims that have been leveled by 4e haters all over the internet for the last year (including conspiracy theories, dumbing-down the game, a corporate scheme, blind devotion to and being dupes for WotC, etc.), complaining about D&D 4e. It is frustrating to see people so consumed by their own petty motivations and egos that they overlook the facts of the situation and go so worked up over A GAME. Heck, I even remember people complaining like this when 3e was released- so its nothing new. Some of the backlash on the rpg.net forums is obviously done to tweak the noses of the 3e/Paizo fanboys that threw hissy fits over the last year about 4e (and both sides are being jackasses if they are doing this), but some of the comments in that thread are legitimate problems with Pathfinder and in many cases the posters are voicing arguements and discussing rules with backup from the Pathfinder book/PSRD.

Yep, you're right, which is why I decided to stop being a basher. If you enjoy playing 4E then more power to you. In fact, I'm willing to concede that there are some elements of the game that are, in fact, fun. It's not my cup of tea for playing D&D, but for me it's fun in the same sense D&D minis is fun. That's why there are different games for different people.

However, I can comment on the Paizo boards (when I went looking on tips for converting some of their adventure paths to 4e), and the dogpiling and venom that spews from many of the posters there if 4e is brought up, or Pathfinder is criticized. And the Paizo mods do next to nothing about it.

Also true. I think a lot of Paizo board posters see 4E as Pathfinder's enemy and feel like they have to defend it on its home turf. I don't think that's necessary.

In the end, I'm happy Pathfinder is out for those folks who enjoy it. Its not for me, and I disagree with many of the design decisions and how concepts were implemented in the game, but I'm not the target audience. And if you do find yourself getting upset over some of the claims made about Pathfinder on rpg.net....well, welcome to the club. Those of us who do enjoy 4e have had to put up with equally stupid shenanigans and grow thicker skins over the last year. Just remember, it doesn't affect how you play your game, and it is still JUST A GAME.

Yep.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I can't say anything about Paizo, as it's forum technology keeps me well away from their forums, but I'm not trying to insinuate that there's some evil shadowy cabal of 4e lovers, or that it's one sided. I know it's not.

Haters are haters, regardless of the edition. People who think 4e is some kinda of evil mind poison are no more or no less crazy then people who think Pathfinder is an illegal scam.

But, as the saying goes, eye for an eye makes us blind. You don't respond to hate with more hate, that just makes both sides feel both victimized and justified in hating the other. A cruel - and stupid - downward spiral. One that's utterly pointless, and utterly unneccesary.

 

[cangrejoide]

There's no moderation on any of the +Pathfinder threads, but defending Pathfinder in the - thread or criticizing 4e just about anywhere is grounds for being banned.

And keep in mind those guys have a nasty rep for banning and then lying about the reasons for it.

Talk about riling up a crossboard mess.

Let me guess you 2 got banned from RPG.net and are still bitter?

As for RPG.net itself, there are ample discussions both positive and negative about pathfinder, 3.5, 4E, and any other 3E variation. The [--] and [++] tags are there to segregate both negative and positive posts. If you go into a [--] thread don't expect praises about the game, and if you post positive stuff in that thread you are threadcaping according to the rules.

Pathfinder may have fixed lots of things, but there is a lot of wrong stuff with it to. It's strange that I have not seen a similar thread in this board yet, I imagine not everyone here is "in love" with Paizo's latest rendition of 3E.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Pathfinder may have fixed lots of things, but there is a lot of wrong stuff with it to. It's strange that I have not seen a similar thread in this board yet, I imagine not everyone here is "in love" with Paizo's latest rendition of 3E.

Only if you happen to believe that to be true. And that is not a given. IOW, it ain't objectively true.

And, while there might not be *one* thread of that nature here, there are in fact multiple threads discussing perceived issues with the game. Last I looked, anyway. And - as far as I'm aware - it tends to be fairly civil, which I gotta say, sets it apart, in a major way.

I think there are some great qualities to RPGnet. Especially in the Tabletop RPG 'Open' forum. But step into the D&D/d20 fantasy pit, and if you happen to either dislike 4e or like Pathfinder (or both) - and if you express such views there - you are likely to find your stay rather on the unpleasant side. I mean sure, you might not. But I wouldn't like to bet on your chances.

Just for the record though, I think naming board members from there and (in particular) outright calling them trolls, is simply uncalled for.

 

[cangrejoide]

Just for the record though, I think naming board members from there and (in particular) outright calling them trolls, is simply uncalled for.

I concurr. Not only uncalled for but totally bad form. Doing this in another forum is kinda backstabbity.

/shrug

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Talk about riling up a crossboard mess.

Let me guess you 2 got banned from RPG.net and are still bitter?

As for RPG.net itself, there are ample discussions both positive and negative about pathfinder, 3.5, 4E, and any other 3E variation. The [--] and [++] tags are there to segregate both negative and positive posts. If you go into a [--] thread don't expect praises about the game, and if you post positive stuff in that thread you are threadcaping according to the rules.

Pathfinder may have fixed lots of things, but there is a lot of wrong stuff with it to. It's strange that I have not seen a similar thread in this board yet, I imagine not everyone here is "in love" with Paizo's latest rendition of 3E.

Yep, I'm clearly bitter from being banned from RPG.net.*

Again, you're missing the issues. Personally, I think [-] and [+] threads are incredibly lame to begin with, and you'll note that they only apply to Pathfinder, but if you're going to have them, you need to moderate both. You don't let [+] threads grow infused with trolls, only to slam down on anyone who speaks positively in a [-] thread. Is there problems with Pathfinder? Sure! Are those problems "Paizo is made of evil faceless corporate douches who are scamming people out of their money?"

That depends. Are you crazy?

Yes there are legitimate issues with Pathfinder. But conversation tends to be nuked when someone jumps in and accuses Paizo of of duping people with an illegal game.

*I've never been banned from RPG.net. Good try, though!