In Legacy of Fire 3 it mentions in the adventure that ** spoiler omitted **
Maybe it's just me being naughty (;P) but I presume that "fee" means an additional payment here. So it would cost the market price (at the owner's discretion) AND that fee.
I mean, if you recreate a cruel slave society where profit is the most important thing... Make profit count...!
Well, maybe I understood that too easily, but he said -Enworld.org MBs- that he won't give his PI to WotC so they'd be able to do whatever they'd want with it.
SO I understood Necro won't be converting their Advanced line.
BUT I also understood they'll be creating 4e content similar to those product lines with new ones.
SO I think it's probable that some kind of Advanced manuals for 4e hit the FLGSs in the next months.
I'm not sure if they'll be under the GSL or not.
Personally, I think working outside the GSL frame is a risky but nice option, and fairly legitimate. Back to 2E days, isn't it?
---
About 3X/4E war:
I don't have any problem with 4e or 4e gamers, and I even like lots of things about the _new_ game, but I dislike WotC's corporative manners since some time to the present day.
I don't think it's a gaming discussion, I think it's a legal discussion that affects the gamer community.
From my POV, the OGL made the RPGs more popular -evidence: they have sold an incredible amount of basic handbooks-, and now that Karzoug rules over WotC -sorry, I couldn't avoid it! ;)- they'll be able to regain market percentage but splitting and agitating negatively the gamer community and the industry.
Necromancer, the loudest cheerleader of them all for WotC has been eerily silent for weeks now.
Clark from Necromancer told everybody they won't be going GSL with their current trade marks (Advanced, Tome of Horrors, etc.), and they're still studying if they bring some new monster books.
But hey, GSL has also brought some great news: it'll be a Pathfinder Tome of Horrors!
I must say, every publishing business around the globe should look at the Paizo guys as a great example of how things must be done.
28 minutes between the "In the next week or so, we're expecting to ship the next volume" and the official shipment (which grants access to the downloads).
We've had a couple of meetings about our subscription fulfillment process today, partly in response to this problem, and are going to be making some changes going forward so that our best customers (subscribers to multiple products) get their orders shipped even faster.
Heh. You knew we'll love you for that, didn't you? ;)
Personally, I quite like the modularity of 3e (a lot) and see it as one of the great strengths. Without having seen the rules for 4e (a huge caveat) what is described sounds like it might be great for a month or two, but if the character classes do wind up being a bit generic would that excitement fade? I'm not sure if that is true, or if the 4e rules are really like that.
I mostly agree with what you say here.
Modularity is 3.X' strength and the reason I'll keep playing mostly 3.X.
From my POV, 4e excitement WILL fade after some games, so I'll solely play it from time to time and not for long-running campaigns, BUT I feel that I must defend 4e from comments about its "tactical combat focus"; I really don't think that 4e is more tactical combat focused than 3.X is.
The 4e focus is in everybody being cool _in the same way with different outfits_ while the 3.X / PF focus is in everybody being cool in different ways.
I think that the 3.X paradigm is better for my games and in general for not-only short-term fun, but I understand people that likes the immediate fun-for-today-hunger-for-tomorrow.
I'll probably play both, but not at the same level.
- 3.X / PF RPG for Pathfinder's or long-running campaigns.
- 4e for short campaigns or one-shot adventures with people that doesn't enjoy long-running campaigns at all.
I'll probably play 3.X / PF more often (like five times more often) than 4e, and the expenses budget will be proportional -raising Paizo's joy, 'suppose. ;)
Aritz
EDIT
This comment is about DMing. As a player, I'll exclusively play 3.X / PF because that's the other DMs' preference for D&D games.
obviously the ones who ponied up the $5k will get the license since they have paid for it already
Well, this isn't so obvious, specially since NOBODY has paid the $5K fee, as the very Erik Mona told us days or weeks ago.
The problem is: nobody, even those who where interested in paying that fee, has received the GSL or any license affecting the 4e.
And the books are already being printed!
Half a year ago I started a campaign with option "Max HP + Constitution Score"
BUT
Currently we're playing with a Vitality/Wounds system, which means that the option above isn't necessary anymore.
Vitality/Wound points let 1st level characters adventure without the traditional death risk (since they at least double hit points), but they have to be enough cautious in order to keep the low-level game dangerous.
I don't recommend using this system as presented in the Unearthed Arcana, but I really think it's the best system for cinematic adventures in 3.x (You know: best from 4e in 3e!)
Or maybe just ditch the favored class and multiclassing xp penalty concepts entirely...
From my POV, favored classes shouldn't exist. Even more in such a world like Pathfinder's.
I'd like an "unusual classes", though.
I'll explain myself: instead of applying penalties to every class choice but one, just apply that penalty to the really uncommon classes of that race/community.
Could you create one for the site or give me some examples?
I'm using this one in my RPG-Group's Wiki. Copy the content to the edition section of a new file named Template:Whatever. This one is for PCs, but you can easily adapt it.
You can use two additional parameters in order to change the template box title colors. Fgcolor sets the text color and is set in white by default. Bgcolor sets the background color. Use hexadecimal values.
My question to you is this: Has anything you've learned as a direct result of the D&D Experience changed your mind about 4th Edition?
I've voted "Yes, I'm going to 4th", but it isn't entirely true: the info I could read through the internet showed me that 4th-Ed isn't as bad as some guys want to paint it, but I still think it doesn't convince me enough.
I'll take some of 4th-Ed ideas for my own 3.75, but I don't think I'll convert. I'll decide it after playing a 4th-Edition adventure with core rules.
I'll keep buying your products if 4th-Edition-Paizo is easy convertible to Aritz's-3.75, or if you include a 3.5 conversion (not necessarily in the print edition).
If you don't include 3.5 support, or 4th-edition makes your adventures really hard to convert to anything else, I'll try to play in standard 4th-Ed. If I like it, I'll keep being your customer. If I don't like the 4th-Ed-Pathfinder at all, then... Well, pretty obvious.
Really not a great black-or-white post, but it's what I think about it...
Cubans have to decide by themselves what to do with their country, democratically (which is really far away from what the USA want for Cuba).
Meanwhile, I'll keep demanding my right to vote on the USA elections, since every decision made by your government affects me.
The spanish election system lacks from some democratic requirements, as does the USA election system too. So start criticizing and fixing your own "democracy" at least as much as you try to "fix" others'. Like Cuba, for example.
I agree with most voices here. It's a players problem, probably including yourself.
If they don't want to play D&D, then you should find some other game mates. And from your side, try to discuss with your players what kind of [D&D] game are you all going to play before playing it.
In my own case, I've never called again for a game those guys that acted like your players in my highschool game. We're still friends and they're nice people, but I don't want them in my D&D game, even if I play as a player instead of DMing.
Aritz
EDIT: As said before by some boardmates, IMO, evil characters without mature goals are boring and funstopping for everyone.
At least as great as the average Paizo product, which means a lot for me, and if they like it, you can serialize it with D1 or the Rise of the Runelords AP.
:D
Aritz
PS. Converting a bunch of rugby players into a D&D geeky group? That's worth LOTS of PXs! ;)
I don't think paizo would make more runelords adventure paths
I've hastily read the 2nd AP preview section in the Spires of Xin-Shalast PDF, and it contained some plot about
Spoiler:
Queen Ileosa and Runelord of Lust.
It isn't exactly a Runelord's AP, but
it demonstrates how the Paizo guys are smartly using the world they've created so the PCs can actually save the world in a different way every time and meanwhile be diving in Golarion's history without repeating the same plot structure every time...
Well, we'll see when the 4th AP comes out, but I really trust them.
If you are not satisfied with 4E, would you consider using True 20 for your next "edition?"
No.
I've read the starting basic rules and they didn't convince me.
If 4e doesn't convince me, we'll start applying my own d20 version, which takes some ideas from the OGC from 3.5 edition, some from True20, some from Star Wars Saga, some from Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed/Evolved, and some from my own recipe.
We've playtested some of those ideas in our game as house rules and everyone liked them, so we'll apply the whole ruleset if we don't like 4e.
Aritz
PS. I'll upload spanish and english versions of that ruleset to my site as a hypertext when we decide if we switch to 4e or not. If anybody interested, write me.
I tend to offer feats in exchange for skipping animals provided by the class.
Hey, I have a problem with animal/creature companions too! :D
For the moment, I've applied the same solution, but I'm trying to improve my DMing so every player can play with whatever she/he wants to. I promise I'll be able to DM that when 7th Edition comes out ;P
Last posts are really usefull, they perfectly summarized my POV!
- Too many people around a table... Playing! It's fun (You know, the more the better), but 8 players and a DM is like being in a school playground... :P
- Inattentive players.
- General unknowledge of spell descriptors.
- Most of my fellow players avoid learning most of the rules -Some of them, when we converted from 3e to 3.5, still asked "Should I roll high or low?". Then one of the players who actually knows the rules was accused of "knowing to much the rules" and we had our first RPG-argument. Fortunately, nobody has asked "What dice should I roll?" again since then.
The problem is that the "talkative/roleplaying" parts are really funny, because they flow at our rythm, but our combats used to suck. But we love the combat encounters, so we try to make them funnier every meeting:
We incorporated the initiative cards in first place, followed by Spell and abilities cards (But no, we are not converting our games into a CCG-Con!) and now we roll attack and damage rolls together.
As DM I use a half-minute sand clock; if the player doesn't decide what to do and starts to do it in those 30secs, her/his character just stands defensively. They panicked the first two rounds (the fastest rounds i've ever played), but we all agreed that it has been funnier since then.
After that, they've started to pay more attention, rogues have started to flank INTENTIONALLY (yeah, I know we've a problem there XD) and I think the one with the spiked chain we'll be trying to trip in a couple of game sessions :P
Aritz Cirbián
EDIT
I love D&D-3.5, but if 4e rules allow me to do the same adventures and help our games to be funnier (for the combat encounters, I mean) and my fellow players find those rules easier to learn, we'll probably converting with the first Paizo 4e AP... to the 4.5 edition XD
If your subscription came with a downloadable "conversion guide" file for your preferred system, with all of the correct stat blocks and rules for the adventure, would that convince you to keep up your subscription?
Hey, guys, if you do this, I'll be yours till the end of Time* ;)
-Aritz
*Assuming, 'course, that you keep working as well as now...
I don't think so. As I see, most parties are evil parties with "Something Good"-Aligned characters. I mean, taking profit from other, looting the goblins, or just killing them without any attempt of making them walk the Good path, this are not good deeds from my PoV.
Common gamestyle doesn't include large amounts of non-lethal damage, it include large amount of blood. At least the fantasy I know in Spain.
Beyond this, I think that the APs are playable with evil characters with appropiate motivations. If the motivation is killing for the sake of killing, it can be really boring. But if motivation is wealth, power, domination, etc, I think that this can be played with all the AP without major GM works.
Tiddlywiki is GREAT for taking your own notes, journal, in-game help, etc. If you want to share it with your players and let them edit it (as my fellow players and I do), use MediaWiki, which is the same as Wikipedia. But you'll need a PHP server with SQL database capability.
Seriously, whatever you do, go for quality rather than publishing speed.
You hit the point, Stebehil.
I think that Paizo's AP customers will buy that AP even if it's 3.5 and they were planning to go to 4e from the first day.
Seriously: you simply cannot compare Paizo's quality and WotC's quality, because you would be laughing at WotC all night; at least in adventure-publishing topics.
If I could chose between a 3.5 AP adventure that I would have to adapt to 4e, and a WotC's 4e adventure; I assure you that I prefer spending a little bit of my time in preparing the adventure and getting a lot more fun.
I'll try my best with my english; i'm a great english reader but no so good writer ;)
When 3E came, I used it almost immediately. The main reason was that unlike AD&D, 3rd edition didn't tell me how to play D&D, it just provided me the tools to do it in whatever the way I wanted to.
My feelings about 4E are that like AD&D, they're trying to tell me HOW to play, and I don't like it. If my players (since I'm usually GMing) are confronting a dragon or a bunch of goblins at 3rd level it's entirely my (and my game group) problem, not theirs.
If I'm wrong with this, I'll provably go on with 4E if it symplifies the whole thing, 'cause what I want is to get fun through the story, not through the game rules.
But going on with 4E doesn't mean to me that I'll buy the books. If I play, I'll use the SRD. That's because I don't mind spending 30-35$ every month in Paizo's adventures, because they are ragingly good, and that's what my players and I want; but I won't spend 90-100$ every 4 years just for keeping WotC at Hasbro's selling expectations.
You Paizo crew don't have to be afraid of me running away as a customer if you go on 4E, I'll assume that a little change in the rules system won't dry your brains from good ideas.
And since your AP seem made for playing twice a week, and I play once a month, I think I have enough 3E adventures for long (and I recently adquired some 2E adventures that are expecting some rule-system-updating ^_^), but I continue buying you, because you are doing a great job.
Posts
Aritz Cirbián
(Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Roleplaying Game, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, GameMastery Cards Subscriber)
