|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Yes. I have coordinated with John Compton to make sure that Flip-Mats and Map Packs being used in this year's scenarios will be available at the booth.
So, as I understand it, this makes it difficult to tell readers where to find material that's referenced if you don't want to go ahead and reprint it in the book. Is that the intention?
I don't know if that was the intention, but that's how it's worked out in practice if you didn't want to waste word count on copy/pasting mechanics.
Is it best practice to reprint things that you reference just so it's easy for the reader?
I have followed the practice of "reprinting all mechanics" when I have done my freelancing in the past (which has led me to avoid some mechanical choices to avoid eating too much of my word count). "Best" or not is relative, but I know as a GM, I like having them reprinted and handy.
Or just leave the reader to figure out where a referenced item is from, either by searching online or going line-by-line through the OGL at the end of the book?
Most readers don't go through the OGL, so it's not an ideal solution for that particular reason. If you're creating a PDF, you *can* hyperlink to the relevant product (or to a rules reference website).
We don't carry stock of non-Paizo products (for the most part), so we have to order from our distributor, wait for it to come in, then ship it out to you. In addition, this is the busiest time of the year for us, and we try our best to indicate estimated shipping times in product descriptions to give you the necessary information that you need when placing your order.
1) Someone has an archetype gain proficiency with two weapons that are both found in books not mentioned in Exhibit B. Can we reference those items, as in use their name and mention where to find them? Or would we need to cut that?
Depends on what the name of the weapon is, but you couldn't reference the product it's from in your text. (You could reprint the relevant rules, though.)
2) I did want to expand and do something with regents, a whole set of alternative rules in the Player Companion: Alchemy Manual. Is that something that we could legally do? If so, what would we need to make sure we did?
Yes, you just can't reference that reagents come from the Alchemy Manual in your product text—but you would have to reference it in your Section 15 statement.
3) I would like to mention or even reprint a feat is in The Dungeoneer's Handbook, the Torchbearer feat. If not reprint than I would at least like to add to the number of torchbearer archetypes available to use. Can I do that?
Yes, you could reprint it, as long as it does not contain Product Identity. Again, update Section 15!
4) I am working on a line of PDFs that present magic shops. Some of the ideas are adapted from the Magical Market's line, (patronage and barter, for example,) but have been altered, expanded, or rewritten. I am not copying anything directly or making any direct references, but it is similar in some respects to the Player Companion book. Do I need to worry?
Section 15 again is your friend.
*arrives in a cloud of brimstone, vanilla, nutmeg, and cinnamon-scented smoke*
And time for some examples!
And as an addendum, I Am Not A Lawyer. I just happen to see a lot of third-party products cross my inbox and by necessity have to look at the Pathfinder Compatibility License frequently. :D
Barachiel Shina wrote:
Because it's really really expensive to print hardcover (as opposed to softcover). Most books are assembled in multiples of 16. Our Free RPG Day modules are 16 pages, Companions 32, Campaign Setting 64, Adventure Paths (and new Modules) 96 pages. In order to make hardcovers more cost effective, a book would need to meet a minimum number of pages (my personal guess is 128 pages).
Each player gets "at least 12 cards," so you should have enough to go around for a standard four player group. However, this limits the variety of options at your disposal (as some mechanics allow for more draws), so each player with their own deck is ideal—but not required.
I really want to like this book, but I've been reading the blog previews and I wonder if a lot of the classes were written with a different play style in mind than my own. Or maybe that's how the previews are written/geared toward. I didn't get that feeling from APG, UM or UC or their previews. But something in these previews makes it feel different to me and that is making it harder for me to really like or get into this book right now.
Previews only show a small portion of the book—if you're hesitant, wait until you have a chance to see the book in its entirety through your FLGS and then make a decision. :D
Purple Duck Games wrote:
I think Bastards & Bloodlines was from the early 3.0 era which did not exclude certain monsters from the SRD (which is how Green Ronin published their illithid book).
Andreas Rönnqvist wrote:
You might want to clarify this for certain, and double check which Open Game Content statement that you're looking at gives you permission to base your work on their IP.