There's nothing preventing people from coming on this thread and voicing their desire to NOT have "High level content".
Respect for James Jacobs, perhaps:
Feedback from people who have played Epic level games before about what worked and what didn't is super valuable to us as a result. Arguments about whether or not we should do epic level type rules in the first place... not so much.
|
How does that make any senseThe thread is called "Do you want high level content?" Clearly it's going to attract more yeses than noes.Myself included, there are 76(give or take 5 or so) posts that are in favor of post 20th play.
However, there are a whopping 18(again give or take 5 or so) posts against post 20th play.
And we have 1 person(perhaps a few more) that are a "Maybe"
People who want high level content will be more motivated to click on the thread to begin with.
There's nothing preventing people from coming on this thread and voicing their desire to NOT have "High level content". Why do you feel it's "clearly going to attract more yes than no posts?"
Because I know something about polling.
For example, there is currently a thread titled "Paizo needs to release a mount / animal companion book." I just took a sample of that poll, reading all of the responses. 100% of respondents want an animal companion book.
Then look at the poll thread I posted today. Out of ten responses so far, only 3 call for animal companion book. Why the difference? Why 100% vs 30%? Because a poll asking what Paizo should release catches a broader swath of players than a poll asking if you want an animal companion book. People who don't care about animal companions are less inclined to click on the first thread, let alone post to it.
Furthermore, as I pointed out repeatedly, some of the pro-high level people posting to this thread have been making disingenuous and dishonest personal attacks on anyone who doesn't want a high level book, which creates further disincentive to post a "no." If posting a "no" means you will be attacked, then people who want to say no but do not want to be attacked will not post. In fact, it's the tendency of this kind of behavior that disincentives no voters from clicking on the thread in the first place.
That's why I was challenging the people who were maligning those who vote no to play fair.
Since this thread is about numbers I guess I should post rather than just lurk. I do not want a post 20 book immediately, rather I'd prefer a book on high level(12+) play with ideas and rules for tightening up those levels of play.
|
|
Furthermore, as I pointed out repeatedly, some of the pro-high level people posting to this thread have been making disingenuous and dishonest personal attacks on anyone who doesn't want a high level book, which creates further disincentive to post a "no." If posting a "no" means you will be attacked, then people who want to say no but do not want to be attacked will not post. In fact, it's the tendency of this kind of behavior that disincentives no voters from clicking on the thread in the first place.
Really. Seriously. Your going to play the vitctim card. Who was making "disingenuous and dishonest personal attacks" in this thread. No one imo. Could i have been more diplomtic in some of my posts yes. If anyone her was being outright abusive and rude imo it was yourself. We were having a pretty civil discussion you came into this thread aind it went downhill. Imo you were and seem stii dead set on getting this thread closed. Are you trying to provoke a reaction from pro-high level supporters. It sure look like it to me because instead of letting it go you want to keep being distruptive no matter who tells you to stop. No one is saying do not post no to epic content. At the same time those who do not want epic content should expect others like myself who want epci content to disagree with that position.
Because he doesn't like high level content, and wants to make us think that people who like high level content are a minority who doesn't deserve to get it. Very simple.
Agreed and seconded. Not only that supporters of it are also going out of their way to provoke him apparently. I swear posters will do anything to try and prove a point.
|
OK kids, settle down again. You have to admit that Gailbraithe makes a fair point...most people who don't want post-20th level stuff aren't going to specifically go into this thread just to post "I don't want it" unless they have fairly strong feelings about it. It's human nature. So while I don't support his claim about attacks, it is a bit true that claiming numbers from this thread means most people support post-20th play is a bit disingenuous. Perhaps this was on purpose, perhaps not. I prefer to believe not.
A minor point. The people who don't WANT high level content have no real obligation to post a complaint AGAINST it, because the content is all stuff that would be purchased in future publications and the simply act of NOT buying that content would be proof enough. Since no one is holding a gun to their head and saying "If we publish this, you WILL buy it, so you'd better make sure we don't!"
That said, I don't get the people who claim there's no challenge to a game above level 15 or so. For one thing there's easily a dozen monsters that are CR 20+ especially if you've gotten the supplemental materials. Not to mention there are a LOT of rules about advancing monsters to make them more challenging so if you can't figure out how to challenge high level parties you're just not trying.
Easy case in point. Drow Nobles have NO cap on their SR. It's 11+ Class levels. So a 20th level Drow Noble Fighter would have an SR 31 and be a CR 20 encounter. Not to powerful. So let's make it a Graveknight. That brings it up to a CR 22. This Drow used Fire to become a Graveknight, so now it's a 20th level Fighter with immunity to Fire, Cold & Lightning and has SR 31. At the same time this Undead is in Full Plate (required) which by 20th level should be pretty damned heavily enchanted.. I could go on, but that's a solid high level CR without even using ANY above 20 content.
There's no rules that say you can't use combined character classes to go above 20th level now. So you could easily make that a 20th level Fighter/10th level Cleric Graveknight and suddenly you have an undead drow noble CR 32 with a SR 41 ... using nothing but one template, the corebook and bestiary 1.
I'm running a game right now where the 4 beings who are in charge of the main setting are character level 30. I don't expect the party to get that high or even challenge those people, but these are beings who've been running their setting for 500 years. Putting them at level 20 didn't make sense.
As for the people who claim you can't have "epic" level material in the Golarion setting, I give you the example of Geb, Nex, The Lich King, The Worldwound.... that's not even counting the land of Impossibilities (Vurda) where Djinn of all types are running around as servants. There is PLENTY of material in Golarion to consider high level encounters.
I think the most important thing about Epic level content is to provide a LOT of Epic level challenges. I would actually like to see an Epic level Bestiary/Game Mastery Guide come out BEFORE an Epic Level Players guide.
Think up new monster abilities, new enemy powers, new setting difficulties, new traps, new poisons, etc.
That way people who are considering DMing an Epic level game have a lot of time to design their campaign world and also can start tailoring their game at around level 15+ to hint at the more dangerous realms of existence, something to keep the players motivated through the story as it evolves naturally.
I think that was one of the big failings of 3.5 when they released their Epic level handbook. They just sort of took for granted that DMs would be able to implement their material as fast as the players would advance their characters and that's not necessarily true.
But basically I would like enough material to be presented that a DM can think of starting an Epic level game in the same vein as they would starting a regular game, one where level 20 is basically the same as level 1.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nice meta conversation. Kinda worthless though.
Hell yes, I want high-level content. I want them to "fix" 13+ with optional rules (and maybe actual rules changes for the worst offenders).
I want a single chapter on post-20th, and from there I think we will all decide collectively whether it's headed in the right direction.
Most importantly, I want Paizo to do it when and how they want to. These kinds of developments must be supported by adventure content, and that introduces many factors into the publication beyond whether or not we all want the rules.
|
|
Really. Seriously. Your going to play the vitctim card. Who was making "disingenuous and dishonest personal attacks" in this thread. No one imo.
No one? How about you. In this post.
If anyone her was being outright abusive and rude imo it was yourself. We were having a pretty civil discussion you came into this thread aind it went downhill. Imo you were and seem stii dead set on getting this thread closed.
Memorax, what you wrote right here? This claim that the discussion was civil until I joined it, and that I am trying to get the thread closed?
That's a disingenuous and dishonest personal attack.
Because he doesn't like high level content, and wants to make us think that people who like high level content are a minority who doesn't deserve to get it. Very simple.
And here is Hama also making baseless accusations.
Agreed and seconded. Not only that supporters of it are also going out of their way to provoke him apparently. I swear posters will do anything to try and prove a point.
And more personal attacks from you.
Discussing my motives, and specifically asserting that I have petty and malicious motives, avoids discussing the issue and forces me on the defensive. It places me a position of having to defend myself from your character assassination.
That's a disingenuous and dishonest personal attack.
I'll have to do is keep a detailed log for this Friday's game. It'll be interesting to see what the actual time is and what people do.
I don't remember the last one with the three elemental ooze monoliths and the two ooze krakens being too bad, and I only made a few mistakes. Plus the advanced kraken should have been smart enough to focus on the fighter and wasn't. But no big deal, it kept the combat short, meaning there was more time for non-combat gaming.
Be aware, not all of these guys are min-maxers, so don't expect an uber-optimized combat. Not that it makes any difference - if they were crazy min/maxers, the creatures would be harder but the end result would essentially be the same. I probably won't have time to report on it until Monday though, since this weekend is ConnectiCon and I'm writing/running a game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't care who started it. The bickering stops now, please.
(No posts have been removed. Yet.)
|
|
Gailbraithe you do realize your the one at this point who is still trying to get some sort of reaction. I and others have moved on. You seem to want to stir the pot and keep it going. How was posting " making disingenuous and dishonest personal attacks on anyone who doesn't want a high level book" going to help you in proving your point about not wanting high level content. Still its funny when you post something negative towards myself and others its all fine. Not apprently when its directed toward you. Interesting way of looking at things.
|
|
OK kids, settle down again. You have to admit that Gailbraithe makes a fair point...most people who don't want post-20th level stuff aren't going to specifically go into this thread just to post "I don't want it" unless they have fairly strong feelings about it. It's human nature. So while I don't support his claim about attacks, it is a bit true that claiming numbers from this thread means most people support post-20th play is a bit disingenuous. Perhaps this was on purpose, perhaps not. I prefer to believe not.
As Idwrath has pointed out no one really has to post in this thread against it. I dont go into every thread I disagree with to post because I can. And its not so much he is against epic material so much that he keeps provoking a fight. Even after the mods and James Jacobs told us to not do so in this thread.
I hate labels like "mythic", "epic", and "legendary." Do you want more content for levels 15-20? How about levels 21-30? If you want 20+ what would be a reasonable level cap?
Personally, I figure 30 is a good level cap. It works for fourth ed anyway and yeah, the entire point of Pathfinder is that it's not fourth ed, but that doesn't mean they don't have any good ideas.
|
|
Except some people are counting pro and con posts, and implying that if there are more pro posts, then that means there are more people who are pro in general.
Their is enough interest from what I see in this thread for an epic book. I do not see a majority yet imo it is more than a minority too. In the end no matter how many people say yes or no Paizo has the final say. There were some who did not want to see a races book yet Paizo is releasing one anyway. If they wait for a majority of the fanbase to agree on what should be in the next book nothing would ever get published. It does help that those who write the product also own the company so if their in the mood to write epic they will. Or what ever interests them to write about.
Just to put a bit of a cap on my above "fact sheet":
I have read every.single.post. on the Ask James Jacobs thread, and there has to be at least a half dozen or so times where somebody has asked "when are we getting epic rules".
I have seen at least three or so threads whose main purpose is to ask for 20+ content.
I have also seen a lot of comments along the lines of "Oh man, if Paizo were to release a book that dealt with epic levels, not only would I buy it, but so would the 3, or 4, or 5, etc players in my group". I would buy it. And so would my friend Max and very possibly my younger brother. So that's 2 maybe 3 sales for 1 post.
Now I am just curious, but what is Gailbraithe's main reason for not wanting high level content?? I ask not to stir the pot, but because I am trying to see things from both sides. So please, whoever answers, do so just by givin me the facts.
|
|
Now I am just curious, but what is Gailbraithe's main reason for not wanting high level content?? I ask not to stir the pot, but because I am trying to see things from both sides. So please, whoever answers, do so just by givin me the facts.
It's completely unnecessary, and somewhat ridiculous. 20th level characters are superhumanly powerful, and the idea that the game needs to enable characters to become even better than superhuman just strikes me as silly.
Consider this: A 20th level bard can sing a song so powerful, so moving, that it causes a person listening to it to die of heartache. But there's more to it than that. A 20th level Bard with a 15 point buy and 2 feats (Skill Focus, Prodigy) can have a Perform (Oratory) skill of +41.
That means that even if the bard rolls a 1 (hitting DC 42), his performance is still better than a performance so great that it draws the attention of extraplanar beings (DC 30). If he Takes 10, which he can always do thanks to Jack of All Trades, his routine, everyday, garden variety singing in the shower hits a DC of 51, almost twice what it takes to draw extraplanar attention. I don't really think people grasp just how amazing that is. We're talking about Wyld Stallyns sort of good. Future civilizations will achieve world peace and perfect enlightenment through the contemplation of this bard's music.
There's no musician in recorded history that comes close to being that good. Mozart's 9th Symphony, one of the greatest pieces of music ever, doesn't even hold a candle to the kind of music a 20th level bard can whistle up without even making an effort.
And we need to have bards that are 10 levels higher than that?
There isn't any argument to justify adding ten more levels that doesn't also justify adding ten more, then ten more, then ten more, on and on upwards until we're talking about bards who have farts that are so beautiful that hearing one would cause you to shove a dagger in your ear just so they could never be sullied by a less perfect sound.
I don't want to insult anyone, but needing to have characters more powerful than the most powerful characters in fiction strikes me as...well, a sign of insecurity. It makes me think of that ridiculous D&D player who wrote into Dragon back in the 70s to inform them that they had to stop publishing Greyhawk material because Waldorf, his 325th level Wizard, had mega-nuked Oerth out of existence (also, he wanted TSR to tell him how many XP he got for killing the whole planet).
It's kind of a joke. And it's kind of sad joke.
And again, when a player needs his character to be so good that he can single-handily curbstomp the gods and nothing in the universe can challenge him, that doesn't seem so much like badwrongfun as it seems like personal insecurity bordering on the pathological.
I like D&D the way it is. I like D&D where an ancient red wyrm is one of the most terrifying things in existence, and when someone is playing at a power level that an army of ancient red wyrms is a warm up to the real fight, I just can't help but think that's ridiculous. It really starts to veer into the territory of Stephen Colbert Presents Stephen Colbert's Alpha Squad 7: A Tek Jansen Adventure, which is meant to satirize people who need these kinds of ridiculously power fantasies.
And you know, if people really want to play at that level, if they want to play at power level OVER 9000!!!!!, then play Exalted. It's actually designed for that kind of silliness.
Given my druthers, I would rather Pathfinder not wander into that territory, and certainly would prefer it not make that kind of silly, over-the-top, beyond-human-imagining levels of power canon.
Furthermore, you don't need Epic Levels to have Epic Stories. I've run campaigns that ended with the players bringing about Ragnarok and the death of all gods...when they were 10th level. Sure, they didn't just flat out curbstomp the gods with their +300 BAB, but it was still plenty epic.
So basically you have no desire to go planar hoping and have dealings with the Lords of the Nine, The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse or the Empyreal Lords. Which is fine.
But a lot of us do. We want to be able to dine with the gods, do battle with the exemplars of evil and maybe even seduce an angel(or devil)
Here's the thing, you were doing really good in your post, outlining just the facts...and then you went and started to insult us, saying that we're insecure because we want PCs that can do things that make even the gods sit up and take notice.
What the heck man?? Why go that route??
I guess I just can't understand peoples utter dislike of any addition to the game, be it a class, race, setting, etc that you seek to ruin other peoples fun.
And yes, not having official PF rules for post 20 play would ruin my fun along with the fun of my gaming group. We've had three games go into epic, and they were three of the most fun games I have ever been in.
Personally, I am not all that into the Gunslinger. Firearms are cool n all sure, but I'd prefer not to have them in my game.
BUT I will never, EVER try to tell Paizo not to create or support the Gunslinger and I am most definitely buying Ultimate Combat.
Same goes for the Lovecraft stuff. Not really my thing, at least not overly much. But James Jacobs loves it, a lot of players love it, and so I can deal. After all, I don't need to include that stuff in my games if I really don't want to.
Maybe it's because I am so open minded in real life that I don't care if there's something in my D&D world that I may not like.
You don't need mythic rules to do that.But a lot of us do. We want to be able to dine with the gods, do battle with the exemplars of evil and maybe even seduce an angel(or devil)
Really? Let's say I want my party close the Worldwound by killing Deskari. I could give them artifact, or aid them some other way, but what if I don't want to and neither do my players?? JJ has said Deskari will not be given stats until Mythic rules come out. Therefore, I need those rules.
Look, if you really, really want to get down to nitty gritty of it, you really don't need rules period. If I want my level 1 PCs to kill off the king of a country or destroy a mighty dragon, I can find the means to do so.
Not to be morbid, but once you're born, the only thing you *NEED* is do die.
I and many others WANT post 20 rules. Just like many people wanted a Gunslinger, or an AP that has Lovecraftian elements. Yet I never went on boards about them and said to not create those products.
Why must others do so?? why must you be so opposed to what other people find fun that you must actively try to prevent them from having their fun??
EDIT: Is this your poll Gail Three year poll??
|
Really? Let's say I want my party close the Worldwound by killing Deskari. I could give them artifact, or aid them some other way, but what if I don't want to and neither do my players?? JJ has said Deskari will not be given stats until Mythic rules come out. Therefore, I need those rules.
You just said you could give them an artifact or aid them some other way. Which proves your statement of 'I need those rules' is wrong. You WANT those rules. There is nothing wrong with wanting. But you don't need them. Everything I quoted from you can be done at levels 10+. So you don't need mythic rules to do all that. You merely want them.
You just said you could give them an artifact or aid them some other way. Which proves your statement of 'I need those rules' is wrong. You WANT those rules. There is nothing wrong with wanting. But you don't need them. Everything I quoted from you can be done at levels 10+. So you don't need mythic rules to do all that. You merely want them.
Really? Let's say I want my party close the Worldwound by killing Deskari. I could give them artifact, or aid them some other way, but what if I don't want to and neither do my players?? JJ has said Deskari will not be given stats until Mythic rules come out. Therefore, I need those rules.
UM...excuse me TOZ, but where in my above post did i say "I need mythic rules"?? and not the second one, but the one you quoted originally???
|
|
So basically you have no desire to go planar hoping and have dealings with the Lords of the Nine, The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse or the Empyreal Lords. Which is fine.
No, I totally do like that. I just recognize that you don't need to be 30th level to do it. You can totally do that at 20th level with the current rules for advancing past 20th.
I just think that destroying the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse should be the kind of event that caps a campaign, not a warm-up to the real adventure. When you kill the Four Horsemen on your way to the End Boss, you're verging into nonsense.
Here's the thing, you were doing really good in your post, outlining just the facts...and then you went and started to insult us, saying that we're insecure because we want PCs that can do things that make even the gods sit up and take notice.
Dude, pay attention. A 9th level Bard with Skill Focus, Prodigy and an 16 CHA can Take 10 and get a 30 on his Perform check and by RAW that's good enough to make the gods sit up and take notice. 9th level and you've got the gods taking notice of you! And there's still 11 more levels to go!
And hey, you asked why I don't like Epic level. I'm sorry if my answer offends you, but yeah, I don't like Epic because to me it smacks of being some basement dwelling loser's sad and pathetic power fantasy.
Wow Gail. I have never flagged anybody's posts on Paizo before but your last two just screamed the need for me to do so.
I came into this thread late, after much of the unpleasant back and forth, and have been civil. I have not said anything negative to anybody, other than my not understanding their seeming want to ruin the chances for other players to have fun.
You however, feel the need to be insulting in your responses. Not to me, because I know your comments don't apply to me. I am anything but insecure, in fact most people that know me claim I am the exact opposite. But I am not everybody and some may be offended by your calling them "sad, pathetic basement dwelling losers who are out to have badwrongfun(is that even a real word??)"
|
|
Wow Gail. I have never flagged anybody's posts on Paizo before but your last two just screamed the need for me to do so.
I came into this thread late, after much of the unpleasant back and forth, and have been civil. I have not said anything negative to anybody, other than my not understanding their seeming want to ruin the chances for other players to have fun.
You however, feel the need to be insulting in your responses. Not to me, because I know your comments don't apply to me. I am anything but insecure, in fact most people that know me claim I am the exact opposite. But I am not everybody and some may be offended by your calling them "sad, pathetic basement dwelling losers who are out to have badwrongfun(is that even a real word??)"
I did not insult you. I answered your question. A question you asked. I'm sorry you don't like my answer, but you do not figure into my answer. I don't know you, have no idea what you're like, and most importantly I'm not talking about you.
I'm talking about the imaginary person in my head that appears when I look inward and ask "Who the heck could this stuff possibly appeal to?"
But hey, thanks Monkey. Thanks a lot for asking a honest question, getting an honest answer, and then reporting me to the mods. You pretty much just guaranteed I'm never going to answer a question from you again.
And the word "badwrongfun" is classic gamer jargon. Google it.
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But hey, thanks Monkey. Thanks a lot for asking a honest question, getting an honest answer, and then reporting me to the mods. You pretty much just guaranteed I'm never going to answer a question from you again.
And the word "badwrongfun" is classic gamer jargon. Google it.
He's not the only one who's had to flag some of your posts today.
I've said this before—the aggressor does not get to decide when something is insulting—it's the insulted person who gets to decide that. If you don't think you're being insulting but several folks say that you are... chances are that they're right and you're wrong.
You might want to take a break for a few hours or so to catch your breath and cool down.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whelp. I think we're done here.
(This thread is locked.)