Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Vic Wertz

Vic Wertz's page

Chief Technical Officer. 19,080 posts. 2 reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 1,275 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

4 people marked this as a favorite.
nondeskript wrote:
I have only seen Paizo publicy state that the errata packs are sold at cost. I don't know what the final card counts were, but I do know that shortly before launch Vic posted prices and card counts that worked out to around $0.11/card. I know that the economies of scale are different between printing a card and printing 185 cards, but nearly 5x the cost? I would imagine that Paizo is making a profit here and that is perfectly fine.

The primary difference in pricing between the errata decks and Card Creator cards is this: the errata decks use a system that DriveThru already had in place, while the Card Creator cards use a system that DriveThru had to create for this project; the additional cost for Card Creator cards will hopefully eventually cover the cost of developing that system.

I won't say we're not making *any* money here; but I will say that I made it clear to DriveThru that Paizo's goal for the Card Creator is about encouraging the community, not about driving profit. That said, DriveThru hopes to make future use of this new system with other games that may be published by companies that *are* looking primarily for profit, and if we priced our cards exactly at cost, that would set a unprofitable price precedent that would make it hard for those publishers to follow suit. I essentially told Steve to come up with a number that he thought was workable, round it up, and basically just pass us the rounding. I *hope* that DriveThru recoups the time and effort they put into the system, and begins making a profit, and I hope that Paizo will eventually recoup the time and effort spent by the card team and the art department on it, but I don't frankly care that much about the last part—I just want it to help keep the game interesting for players.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I will tell you this—if you're looking for information that we don't currently give you access to right now, odds are good that the reason we're not giving you that information involves either customer privacy or corporate strategy.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

8 people marked this as a favorite.

I suspect Paul is from DESPINOS TIRE SERVICE MANSFIELD.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Apparently that's coming later this week.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

We will likely create errata packages for Class Decks and for S&S in a couple of months, after we've had time to get player feedback on S&S 6.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

3 people marked this as a favorite.

A topic just like this comes up every year when we do our RPG Superstar contest, in which contestants are required to transfer copyrights of their entries to us. (Epic Meepo, as an RPG Superstar veteran, I think you'll find that the answers here are pretty similar to the answers there.)

We're not taking ownership because we want to make money off of your work. We're taking ownership for our own legal protection. Imagine that somebody out there creates a a card for the Card Creator, and it just happens to be very similar to a card that Mike has designed for an upcoming release. By requiring Card Creator users to assign us the rights, we don't have to worry about people trying to sue us for "stealing" their ideas.

Speaking of stealing, I'm now going to paraphrase one of Sean K Reynolds' responses from a RPG Superstar thread from 2010:

Our designers aren't going to sift through Card Creator entries looking for cards to fill a hole in an upcoming set. They're perfectly capable of designing their own cards, and can likely do so faster than it would take to find a card in the Card Creator, develop it, and note the author's name for the credits.

That said, I know that Steve had some ideas about a community design contest in the future, so I won't say that we'll *never* do anything with the cards there—but I will say that *if* we do, we will make a good faith effort to contact, credit, and compensate the designer. We have done the same for a very small number of RPG Superstar entries that we republished. (And odds are good that if we do such a contest, it will involve looking at entries crafted specifically for the contest, not just picking stuff out of the library.)

On the topic of creators getting paid for copies of their cards being sold, that was something we talked about when we originally started discussing this with DriveThru, but they determined that implementing it wasn't feasible at this time. I cannot say whether or not it will change in the future. Either way, I can tell you that nobody is going to get rich off of the content in the Card Creator. If you're troubled about it, though, the answer is simple: don't make your cards public.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's okay to use anything in the Community Use Package (see http://paizo.com/paizo/about/communityuse) in the Card Creator, and to make your cards using that content public.

It is not okay to use card text or Paizo-owned images that are not part of the Community Use Package in the Card Creator.

I'll see if I can get Steve to create a FAQ page for the Card Creator that explains these things.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Regarding variety of scenarios: With Rise of the Runelords, we weren't sure how often we could depart from the basic "find, defeat, and corner the villain" scenario recipe. In retrospect, we could have changed it up it a lot more than we did. We do it a lot more in S&S and in Wrath, so if that's your primary issue, please check out some of the reviews posted online--I see pretty much universal agreement that we improved the diversity of gameplay with S&S.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Samy wrote:

While I think that most things outside the CRB would be extraneous and unnecessary, I think Oracle would deserve mention as, essentially, the divine version of Sorcerer. I'm not saying it should get as extensive treatment as the other classes, but I think it would have been a smart play to have an overall look at classes, and point out that for both divine and arcane, there is both a preparing and spontaneous option out there.

There are differing opinions as to which is easier to play -- preparing or spontaneous -- but for that contingent which finds spontaneous casters easier for them to manage, it would be nice to at least have a heads-up that divine has an option for that too, just like arcane does.

While this book goes into detail only on Core Rulebook material, we do *briefly* discuss other books providing additional options.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Folks, the solution is in testing. Assuming it tests ok, that is the last step prior to release. There is literally nothing you can say that will make it go faster at this point.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
zeroth_hour wrote:
My experience has been that while I haven't maxed out on deck upgrades yet, I have somewhat maxed out on deck upgrades 1 below my adventure level (I could use more blessings). I don't think I'm the typical experience however, but it may be the experience of a party who's used to these types of games.

My gut says that's right about where we want you to be.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

In most cases, showing them the FAQ should work. If it doesn't, ask to speak with somebody else.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have approved the card back—I shuffled a number of the latest proof from DriveThru together with an assortment of Skull & Shackles cards, and asked a couple of people to sort them into separate DriveThru and Carta Mundi piles, and nobody did it correctly.

I am now proofing the errata decks.

At this point, I will be very surprised if we don't have them up for order by the end of the month.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tim Felts wrote:
Scribbling Rambler wrote:
My only complaint so far is the improper spelling of armour, as is the case with many Paizo products.
and what colour is that armour?!

Bluue and Puurple.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

10 people marked this as a favorite.
Atarlost wrote:

I'd say there's been something of a bait and switch.

First we were told that Paizo's business model was content-centric and they weren't going to be forced to put out rules splats like WotC.

Then the APG and UM came out in quick succession and we were told they were front loading the rules stuff so it would be out, but it was okay and they had learned from WotC's mistakes and were going to stop when they ran out of rules they wanted to have for use in their modules and APs.

Then more and more rules content of less and less value kept coming and it's pretty obvious that they haven't learned from WotC's mistakes and we're going to keep getting poorly designed rules padding to fill two books a year and character building is going from a fun intellectual exercise to a source of stress most people don't have the time or attention to deal with.

At this point, under the paradigm we were originally promised, we shouldn't be seeing new general player options except when something mythic rules are needed to support an AP like WotR.

Here is (I believe) the earliest public mention of our release strategy for the RPG line, posted January 8, 2009, more than 8 months before the release of the Core Rulebook:

Erik Mona wrote:
The current plan is to release between 2-3 hardcover rulebooks per year, including additional Pathfinder Bestiaries.

Here's the actual hardcover rulebook release schedule. (Each "year" starts at Gen Con.)

2009–10: Core Rulebook, Bestiary, GameMastery Guide
2010–11: Advanced Player's Guide, Bestiary 2, Ultimate Magic
2011–12: Ultimate Combat, Bestiary 3, Advanced Race Guide
2012–13: Ultimate Equipment, NPC Codex, Ultimate Campaign
2013–14: Mythic Adventures, Bestiary 4
2014–15: Advanced Class Guide, Monster Codex, Pathfinder Unchained
2015–16: Occult Adventures (et seq.)

I'm not counting the Strategy Guide because it contains no new rules, but you could argue it belongs in the empty slot after Bestiary 4, which is when it was originally scheduled to come out, or in between Monster Codex and Pathfinder Unchained, which is when it's actually coming out.

So, yeah, total bait-and-switch, if "bait-and-switch" means we told you what we were going to do long before we did it, and then continued doing exactly what we said for 6+ years.

Also, I believe your comment about "front-loading the rules stuff" is probably a misremembering of something we said about front-loading the classes into the APG, UM, and UC. (Which is why we didn't do any more for 3 years.)

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Neurophage wrote:
That's the thing: People AREN'T paying them to print cards. Most money in MtG comes from buying individual cards directly from a shop to build a deck. You work at a store, so I don't need to mention that a store isn't going to order more product unless they're selling out of the product they have. The last time I looked up, I found out that Wizards is losing money on every set they print.

You have been *incredibly* misinformed by someone. M:TG has consistently ranked among the best-selling games in the industry nearly every year of Magic's 22-year history, and was number one for many of those years. And I guarantee you that there's a tremendous profit involved—Hasbro has regularly called out M:TG as one of the brands that generates the most revenue for them.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

15 people marked this as a favorite.

The Strategy Guide is IN THE WAREHOUSE, and will make the March release!

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

FYI, our recommendation is that you only add class decks for characters that you're actually playing.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Garrett Guillotte wrote:
[stuff about minus signs]

One of the reasons Paizo doesn't use "proper" minus signs is that not all fonts implement them (especially the weird small-house artsy fonts some of our art department folks can't get enough of).

(There's a workaround of using one specific font for characters like that wherever it appears, but that can bite you very badly when somebody changes a style on a bit of text somewhere and, elsewhere, your minus sign quietly turns into a space or a box...)

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

13 people marked this as a favorite.
Wiggz wrote:
Providing the product I committed to buying isn't going to make me stop buying it... but continuously changing the product I committed to buying after the fact just might.

I've very confused by the notion of "continuously changing the product I committed to buying after the fact." You seem to be implying some sort of bait-and-switch here that I am very confident we are not doing. We tell you what's coming well in advance of taking money for it.

Or are you trying to say that our new products are somehow changing things you already own? 'Cause If somebody's breaking into your house and putting things into your older products that make you use newer products with them, it's not us. Don't want to use Mythic? Don't use Mythic. But Mythic didn't change your Core Rulebook.

Wiggz wrote:
Combined with the steadfast refusal to even acknowledge the repeated requests to update old AP's it seems like every time a whole new set of classes or a whole new version of previous classes gets introduced, it creeps my previous purchases that much closer to obsolescence, reducing its collective value.

Mythic didn't change your Rise of the Runelords either—at least, no more than you choose to let it. (But you know what would *really* make your previous AP purchases obsolete? Having us update them.)

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Charles Scholz wrote:
Vic Wertz wrote:
There was a prequel of sorts, Rogue Planet, set in between Episodes I and II.
Rogue Planet was a prequal, but it came out after the YV storyline had started. It sorta explains how the Yuuzhan Vong learned about the Jedi galaxy.

Yep—if it hadn't come out later, it wouldn't be a prequel, it'd just be, uh... er... "in the right order"?

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Fake Healer wrote:
Vic Wertz wrote:
... because he's a fictional character?

Boooo!!!! Party foul! You suck, Wertz, way to break the mood!

lol

I'll take your criticism seriously when you become an actual healer. Until then, you clearly have a vested interest in supporting fictional characters.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
LMPjr007 wrote:
So with the date announcement I want to know: What questions would you like to ask SKR, myself or both of us? Nothing will be off limits so you can ask anything you want about game design, Pathfinder hell better still the rumors you have heard about us. Feel free to ask those tough questions ND tough answers you want to hear.

Sean: What does the "K" stand for?

Louis: What does the "Jr" stand for?
Sean and Louis: Any chance of arranging a trade so you end up "Sean Reynolds Jr." and "Louis K Porter"?

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

... because he's a fictional character?

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I sense a great disturbance in the Force.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

6 people marked this as a favorite.

In the coming weeks, we'll be kicking off playtests for new class decks, and other projects in the pipeline (Org play season 1, the set after Wrath, etc.), and we could use some more playtesters.

We need people who own at least one complete Adventure Path, because our playtests will often require you to test individual new components in scenarios built using mostly existing cards (for example, we might have a new character who needs to be run through a bunch of different scenarios, or we might have a new scenario that needs to be built with a bunch of existing monsters). We also need people who can usually commit to playing a whole bunch on fairly short notice—for example, we might say that we need you to play a character through several scenarios within a few days. And, of course, we need people who have a pretty decent understanding of the game. For example, we might say we need you to test a scenario from Adventure Deck 5 using level-appropriate characters, so you need to have a pretty good idea how to achieve that. You should care about things like the difference between searching and examining, and know which one of those requires you to shuffle the deck afterwards.

You're going to have to be creative to test things—we'll be providing you with bits of text, and you'll need to convert them into a form you can use for testing. (Many playtesters print out bits of text and sleeve them with other cards. Which means you'll need a lot of sleeves and a lot of other cards.)

It's also important that you understand that playtesting is different from playing the game for fun. You will doubtless have a lot of fun, but the primary reason you are playtesting is to help us find places where it's *not* fun. Sometimes, that means throughly getting to know the unfun parts, and deliberately choosing to have less fun than you would if you were not playtesting. You'll have to deal with scenarios that are frustrating. You'll have to deal with scenarios that you can't win. Your characters will die, and you need to not care. You can't approach it like you do playing through an AP—your goal is not to win, it's to make the game better. If all you want is to say "I finished the next AP three months before it came out," we don't want you in the playtest. We're looking for people who want to say "I made that AP more fun for everyone."

It's also important that you approach it as playtesting, not looktesting. As Mike likes to say, "Don't tell me what you think will happen. Tell me what happened." Your initial reactions are important, but nowhere near as important as your play experiences. If you think something is broken, we'll probably expect you to back that up with an actual game situation that demonstrates it.

We need playtest groups of all sizes (from 1 to 6 players). If you like, your entire group can participate on the playtest forums, or you can act as a conduit for your group.

If you've read through all this and you're still interested, please drop a note to swallowtail@paizo.com. We'll need the email address connected to your paizo.com account, as well as the email addresses of anybody in your group who would like to participate in the playtest forums. (And don't worry if it takes a week or two to get a response.)

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

4 people marked this as a favorite.

That's my understanding, and I also have no desire to be the guy trying to legally defend that course of action.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Jester David wrote:
4e launched with a lot of planned 3PP support while Pathfinder launched with none and had to build support over time.

I can't give you an exact number of companies that had announced they were supporting 4E prior to its release, but looking at our product database, I found only Goodman Games, Mongoose, Expeditious Retreat, Dragonfire Laser Crafts, and Green Ronin as having 4E/GSL product listings in our system prior to September 2009. (I think Kobold Quarterly was also in from the start, but since it's not strictly a 4E product, it isn't in my search results.) I'm sure there were others onboard (particularly companies that only release PDFs through DriveThru), but I'd be pretty surprised if the answer was more than about a dozen professional companies signed on to the GSL at release time.

On the other hand, in the months prior to our release, we prepared a preview edition of the Core Rulebook for established companies that had announced support for Pathfinder (and were willing to cover the $75 per copy that it cost to produce each preview copy), and that went out to 27 companies.

Jester David wrote:
Five and a half years into its planned seven year lifespan...

Pathfinder has *never* had a planned lifespan. Erik, Jason, and James may have occasionally offered their own personal opinions on what a reasonable lifespan might be (and those opinions often didn't agree all that much) but I promise you that internally, our plan has always been to rely on our audience to tell us if and when they want a new edition.

Jester David wrote:
However, there's also the OGL to consider. Pathfinder owes its existence to the OGL, which allows Paizo to use all the D&Disms in its world. I'm uncertain how far you can change the game and still claim to use the license.

You can use the OGL without using a single word or concept out of Wizards' SRD.

Jester David wrote:
Paizo cannot easily drop the OGL, not without having to rename a ton of monsters and options. But doing so would allow them to make a video games adaptations and the like. They could be their own game for a change.

All correct.

Jester David wrote:
Does the Adventure Card game use the licence?

It does not use the OGL.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

9 people marked this as a favorite.

I think we've just about ironed out the issues that have been preventing us from releasing the RotR errata decks as print-on-demand sets through our friends at DriveThruCards, and I expect these to be available in a couple of weeks.

Since we updated a bunch of cards in between the two printings, there will be different options depending on which printing you have.

Owners of first printings will have the following options:
• Updates for the Base Set Box, Adventure Deck 1, and the Character Add-On Deck (66 cards): $6.99
• Updates for Adventure Decks 2-6 (83 cards) $8.99
• Updates for Blessings of the Gods (36 cards) $3.99
• Updates for the full set (185 cards) $19.95
(I broke Blessings of the Gods out as a separate option because the change is pretty minor, and those of you who want to skip replacing those 36 cards will be able to save a few bucks.)

Owners of second printings will have just one option:
• Updates for the full set (79 cards) $7.99

As many of you know, we changed printers between our first two printings, and there's a small difference in both size and color of the cards between printings.

DriveThru has worked up two different card back color profiles with the goal of matching the original color profile of the set that the cards are designed to work with. That is, the first four products listed above will have a cardback that's color-matched as best as possible to the first printing, while the last product will have a cardback that's color-matched as best as possible to the second printing.

For the size issue, cards from our 1st printing are about half a millimeter longer than the cards from our second printing. DriveThru's cards more closely match our second printing cards. I think most people won't have a problem here; if you think you might, I'd suggest you wait for feedback from others before you buy anything.

Also, we are taking no revenue from these decks. The cost you see covers DriveThru's costs plus a small margin for them.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I added one entry today. It includes the previous standalone resolution for the Spiny Shield, so I removed that entry.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Kthulhu wrote:
There's more than enough adventures out for Pathfinder 1st edition to last you, your kids, and your grandkids the rest of their lives.

Only if you insist on working and sleeping and such between your game sessions...

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
GreyWolfLord wrote:

WOW...D&D outsold Warhammer 40K?

Of course, that's another arena where it appears sales may be distorted in regards to how well they are actually selling...

Over the last decade or so, Workshop has tried very hard to push most of their business into their own stores. Even if Gary's relative rankings of D&D and 40K *were* typical of traditional hobby stores, it wouldn't tell you anything about the rest of either business. A *lot* of D&D 5 is selling through Amazon, so ICv2 doesn't know about it, and a *lot* of 40K is selling through GW stores, so ICv2 doesn't know about it.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Sara Marie wrote:
Reckless wrote:
I'd take a salaried position as official Paizo bartender in lieu of any board title.
We keep putting in a requisition for a coffee/alcohol cart and it keeps getting denied :(

Oh, no, we have one... it's just that it starts at the other end of the building, and always empties out before it gets to you.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

5 people marked this as a favorite.

We'll have some more coming in in a few months.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BlackDiamond wrote:
... I can sell 80 Pathfinder core rulebooks a year, every year, since about 2010.

Gary! Good to see you in here.

Question for you. The buzz we have from distribution, and from other retailers, is that D&D is doing great. For some, a little better than Pathfinder; for some, a little worse. But they pretty much all say—and our own sales figures say—that Wizards' success is not coming at the cost of Pathfinder—that their Pathfinder sales are in the same ballpark as before, if not up a little. What are you seeing in that respect?

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Danbala wrote:
Here's a thought: would it be technically possible under the OGL to create a version of Pathfinder that was essentially, but unofficially, compatible with 5e? I wonder what that would do for sales?

We have no interest in shenanigans like that. And if anybody but us did it, they couldn't call it Pathfinder.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Depends how you count.

There are 400 B cards in the Base Set.
There are 110 cards in each of the 6 adventure decks, and 110 in the Character Add-On Deck.
There are 8 printed cards in the AD4 Make-Good Pack, though 1 of them just explains what the pack is.
There are 4 cards in the Ranzak promo pack, though 1 of them is a rules/explanation card.
There are 11 other promo cards, though if you had a subscription from October through February, you'll have 5 copies of Blessing of Zogmugot, not just 1.

So if you have everything, including 5 copies of Zogmugot, and you count the 2 explanation cards, you should have 1197 cards.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ryric wrote:

Some stuff off the top of my head:

1. Packs with land as your "rare" card
2. Packs with mis-sorted cards so possibly all commons, possibly all rares
3. Cards getting held up in customs - sometimes a store would get sets over a month after "release."
4. Grossly underestimating demand - the Legends set sold out in a 50-mile radius of my house in under an hour, sometimes before the store in question actually opened.(I.e. more people in line than they had product)
5. All sorts of weird rumors and misinformation - "We'll print the Unlimited set forever, that's why it's called unlimited." "We'll never reprint Legends." In the pre-internet era it was hard to sort out what was fact and what was rumor, but it was easy to get the impression that WotC was lying to us about the game.

PACG has had nowhere near the nasty growing pains that Magic did.

I can address many of those. I've numbered them for reference.

1. That was us not knowing any better. Remember, we started by printing 10 million cards, and we thought that would last a year. With only a few thousand of each rare card in existence, we thought that many people would never see some rare cards. Legends would be told: "I heard a guy over in Birmingham has a black creature that's 7/7!" But it didn't last a year—it was sold out before it was technically released. Until then, we thought you'd *need* land, not that you'd have *too much* of it, so we put a little on every sheet. (We figured out we were wrong after we sent Arabian Nights to the printer, but before it was actually printed, and we asked the printer to remove all the basic lands, but they accidentally left a Mountain in...)

2. Printer error. Sucks, but it happens. (The PACG equivalent is when somebody opens a double-deck box and gets two copies of the same wrapped deck.)

3. Welcome to the world of shipping.

4. When your growth is explosive, and you have to set print runs four months before release, this happens. The scary part is that with every set up to Fallen Empires, we asked all of our distributors for the quantities they wanted, and then we ordered a *lot* more than that, and by the time it came in, it still wasn't enough.

5. I can promise that Wizards never lied about the game while I was there, and probably not afterwards either. At the time you're talking about, Magic was evolving so quickly that many statements about the future were out-of-date before customers heard them, but that's very different from "lying." We also heard a lot of stories from retailers who told their customers we said things that we never said and never *would* have said.

But to talk about one specific example, at one point, we actually did intend to print Unlimited forever. Our plan, once we introduced it, was that it would evolve over time. We wouldn't change the packaging, but each time we reprinted it, we would drop some cards and add some cards. We even sent one of those revisions to the printer, but our customers persuaded us that we should label the revisions, so we didn't print it, and instead (eventually) replaced it with 4th Edition.

You can't know everything you need to know about your own game until your hear from your customers. We were learning a lot about making Magic at that time, just as we're learning a lot about making PACG right now.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Please note that the Season of the Shackles files have not been updated yet; that will happen soon. Chris Lambertz will post here when they're ready.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

And more on topic, you all might find this blog by Gary Ray of Black Diamond Games interesting. I can't say that what he's saying is necessarily representative of the industry, but I can say that in terms of business sense, Gary is an above-average hobby retailer.

FYI, you can see his previous years' top 10 lists here. (Note that last year, he had listed Warmachine and Hordes separately, but said that "together they would be at the number four spot;" Cards Against Humanity would have then been number 10.)

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ganryu wrote:
Any plans for a swedish translation?

To the best of my knowledge, we have not been approached by a professional Swedish publisher, but we'd certainly be open to talking to one!

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The exact wording is still being massaged, but the answer is that you don't encounter the card, you just use the examined card's checks as the check to close this location.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
bbKabag wrote:
Joshua Birk 898 wrote:
Vic, does discarding from the blessing deck work the same way?

Is there a card right now that does not indicate that you discard the blessing from the blessing deck into the Blessings discard pile?

Skull & Shackles Rulebook wrote:
Advance the Blessings Deck: At the start of your turn, flip the top card from the blessings deck faceup onto the top of the blessings discard pile. You never acquire this blessing, though some cards may refer to it during your turn.
I'd have to point out that you never get them. So maybe we have to change that?

When you discard a card from the blessings deck, it goes into the blessings discard pile unless we say otherwise.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yetisburg is a really, really fun game. I really wish it had sold well enough to justify some of the sequels we'd thought up: Dismember the Alamo, The Ghoul from Iwo Jima, and some others that I can't quite recall...

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

2 people marked this as a favorite.

As many others have pointed out, it's an uneven series, with the highlights being Stackpole, Allston, and Stover... but for me, the biggest flaw was that it was just far too long. The story would have had better effect if it had been half as many books, or maybe a quarter as many.

1 to 50 of 1,275 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.