deinol's page

I love the old Basic Box fighter. "You don't need any special powers. Having the best Strength, HP, weapons, and armor are all you need." Of course eventually they add some weapon powers, like set spear vs charge.

Actually, that would be kind of cool. What if a fighter got powers like in 4E, but they were determined by which weapon he was holding? Like the Weapon Mastery trees from BECMI.

I've never been disappointed by an Open Design Gazetteer. This thing is full of good stuff.

It's also a pleasant surprise to open a PDF and have an Additional Design credit. I'm happy to see that some Alleys of Zobeck material made it in.

It looks like the Gear Domain will be detailed in the forthcoming Midgard Campaign Setting book, but it is listed on the back cover. It probably got cut for space.

-Jesse Butler

This spell causes instant growth of a humanoid creature, doubling its height and multiplying its weight by 8. This increase changes the creature's size category to the next larger one. The target gains a +2 size bonus to Strength, a –2 size penalty to Dexterity (to a minimum of 1), and a –1 penalty on attack rolls and AC due to its increased size.

Those are the benefits from the spell. As a 1st level spell, it's not as good as an actual giant/etc. So the benefits are capped. If you want higher bonuses, you need to use the other polymorph spells (Beast Shape, etc.)

Not that the non-humanoid eidolon can be a legal target.

I think the GSL has been modified to allow this now. Certainly there are some 3PP that are releasing products for both 4E and Pathfinder...Open Design and EN Publishing come to mind, and I'm sure there are others.

It should be noted that Open Design doesn't use the GSL. They just publish new material based on the fact that rules can't be copyrighted. So they don't actual mention D&D in their product, just a big "4" logo is all it takes for everyone to know what they are talking about.

The revised GSL is a little better for publishers, but not good enough for most of the larger companies.

Ahh thanks for the correction. I knew it was too good to be true.

The Realms book will be mostly edition neutral, with a few references to whichever system Ed happened to be using in his campaign at that time. Which is likely to be 1E/2E.

I've been playing in a 4E Dark Sun game, it's great. My Mul Gladiator/Arena Fighter/Mul Battle Slave hits surprisingly hard for a defender. We use the inherent bonus system, which makes the game very balanced even though I don't have a single magic item at level 12.

Themes are one of the best things they added to 4E. I think you'll really enjoy the books. I think they are probably the best supplements produced for 4E.

Nor does a wizard forget a spell upon casting it. This is his life, spell magic and study, thus we will assume that the wizard studies and practices secretly in his private moments. To forget a spell could mean his death and is a fairly ludicrous idea. This is his occupation, his livelihood, he is no longer an apprentice, but a fledgling mage working to establish himself in his chosen profession. To suggest that he would forget a spell is like saying a soldier might forget how to use his sword.

From The Palladium Fantasy Role-Playing Game, 1983.

For almost as long as there has been D&D, there have been people who thought the Vancian spellcasting system was kinda stupid. Some of them even wrote new games to try and fix it. Not that I am recommending Palladium's system as a truly better alternative, it's insanely broken.

I'm a long time D&D player, and a big fan. But Vancian casting's "limitations" are mostly irrelevant at higher levels when you can supplement it with scrolls, staves, and wands. I understand it'll be a part of the game because of tradition, but let's not pretend it's there for any other reason.

Luckily, it sounds like 5E will be modular and flexible enough to suit all of our preferences when it comes to casting.

It's an alien we illustrated in Pathfinder #14 but never statted up or even named.

Yet.

From the Moonscar module discussion thread, art used for mockup cover.

(Of course, it could be statted up in said module.)

Scott Betts wrote:

Terquem wrote:

Another thing I'd like to see adopted from 4e into Vancian systems for D&DNext, is that if I went to the trouble of memorizing/preparing a spell and it is a one shot wonder type spell that allows a save, then if that spell doesn't do something spectacular because the target made its save, it better still do something mildly amusing so i don't cry in my bowl of pretzel M&Ms.

Stuff like this makes me long for the flexibility of a spell point system. Oh, it had its flaws, but it provides such elegant ways of handling problems like this.

How does a spell point system handle this? The spell is cast, it either has it's effect or it doesn't (or has lesser effect). What does a spell point system change about that?

It lets you try the same spell again next turn instead of feeling like you wasted your one chance at casting X.

deinol wrote:

This is counter to my experiences playing RPGs for the last two decades.

First, I find Call of Cthulhu one of the easiest games to introduce new people to. Many of my friends who don't like RPGs in general will sit down for a Call of Cthulhu one-shot.

In my experience you have friends who play RPGs. One of them decides they want to run a game. Then some subset of friends who are interested in the game and can fit it into their schedule play. It doesn't matter what the system is. Sure, I guess if you really want to play a specific game but want to convince someone else to GM that game, it's a hard sell. But when a GM wants to run a game, it's never been difficult to find players for it. A GM with a game in mind will teach the others and we'll get down to playing.

I guess if you do most of your gaming with strangers at conventions or game stores it might be a problem. But I've always had a group of gamer friends. And friends want to play games with their friends. When I moved to California and knew nobody, I found the local university gaming club and made friends. Now I have too many games I'd like to try and never enough time.

But this is kind of like saying "Everyone at my church knows about Jesus" and forgetting that not everyone is in your church.

Gamers want to game. Gamers will leave systems if they don't get enough support because they want to game more than the system allows them. They will try new systems and games for fun, even if it means investing 60 bucks in an Core book they may only play onces, and they will all sit around a table for a few hours passing a book back and forth to each make a character they may only play a few times.

But that is preaching to the choir, and that market is limited and will die off, literally and figuratively, without new blood.

It's like crack. If the first hit is free, and it's good, you'll make money in the long run when they need to spend more to get a fix.

I did say it was just my experience, making it anecdotal. But I am talking about a fairly wide variety of gaming groups. My elementary school gaming group had different people than my middle school or high school or college or post-college groups. In every gaming group I've hung out with, the GM runs the game they like, and the players play because an enthusiastic GM is worth their weight in gold.

I understand that market forces effect us in subconscious ways. And I'd love to hear about how other gamer groups operate. But in my experience winning over the GMs is key. They decide the game that gets played.

deinol wrote:

I left way back in 1st edition. You have to admit, the rules were a bit of a mess. I came back at the launch of 3rd when D&D finally caught up with the innovations that others had been using in the RPG industry in the 80s/90s. I still play plenty of other games though. My theory is the people who get most upset about edition changes are ones who haven't really explored the variety of other options out there. There are lots of games to suit every taste, I can't be too upset if one comes out that doesn't suit mine.

The problem with other variations is that you have to find a table full of people who know the rules and want to play with you.

This isn't hard with something based off OGL, but it can be challenging when you get to something more obscure. Even finding 4 players and a GM for Call of Cthulhu can be a challenge if you aren't plugged in with relatively hardcore gamers.

This is counter to my experiences playing RPGs for the last two decades.

First, I find Call of Cthulhu one of the easiest games to introduce new people to. Many of my friends who don't like RPGs in general will sit down for a Call of Cthulhu one-shot.

In my experience you have friends who play RPGs. One of them decides they want to run a game. Then some subset of friends who are interested in the game and can fit it into their schedule play. It doesn't matter what the system is. Sure, I guess if you really want to play a specific game but want to convince someone else to GM that game, it's a hard sell. But when a GM wants to run a game, it's never been difficult to find players for it. A GM with a game in mind will teach the others and we'll get down to playing.

I guess if you do most of your gaming with strangers at conventions or game stores it might be a problem. But I've always had a group of gamer friends. And friends want to play games with their friends. When I moved to California and knew nobody, I found the local university gaming club and made friends. Now I have too many games I'd like to try and never enough time.

deinol wrote:

I would love to see a source for "initially farmed out the development of Warhammer 40,000 Roleplay to Green Ronin". There is a thanks to Chris Pramas and Green Ronin for their work on WHFRP 2nd Edition, which Dark Heresy was greatly based, but the three writers/designers credited in the original Dark Heresy book don't seem to be from any Green Ronin works. The link you provided shows that Chris wanted to acquire the license after Black Industries was dissolved, but I see no indication that they worked on the project before that.

"In 2004, Games Workshop announced that the WFRP line would once again be published. Black Industries, a newly-created division of GW's Black Library publishing arm, would oversee the publishing and distribution of a new second edition of Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, designed by Green Ronin Publishing."

They wrote the 2nd edition, Black Industries published it.

Right, Green Ronin was a key player in WHFRP 2E. I even mentioned it above. I was looking for any evidence that they worked on Dark Heresy, which, besides an unsourced wikipedia comment, looked to be an entirely Black Industries project. Certainly they based much of their work on existing Warhammer material, but that's not the same thing at all.

Which, regardless, is still a successful licensed product whose only connection to the OGL is rather tangential at best, (via the transitive property of Chris Pramas.)

* This makes sense to me, anyhow - as it happens our group was an outlier in that we left D&D when 2nd edition came out (for those niche options I mentioned) and didnt come back to it until after 4E had launched, so I dont have any actual experience or knowledge of what that launch was actually like

I left way back in 1st edition. You have to admit, the rules were a bit of a mess. I came back at the launch of 3rd when D&D finally caught up with the innovations that others had been using in the RPG industry in the 80s/90s. I still play plenty of other games though. My theory is the people who get most upset about edition changes are ones who haven't really explored the variety of other options out there. There are lots of games to suit every taste, I can't be too upset if one comes out that doesn't suit mine.

deinol wrote:

ciretose wrote:

If by booming you mean "Selling in a distant 3rd place" sure. And it should also be noted that they were written originally by a 3PP (Green Ronin) that Games Workshop outsources to, and then bought by a card company after they were successful.

Thanks for helping me make my point about how the OGL helps develop R&D.

Green Ronin never worked on Dark Heresy. Dark Heresy was released by Black Industries, a subsidiary of Games Workshop, before they licensed out board games and RPGs to Fantasy Flight Games.

Not according to Wikipedia.

"Black Industries, the role-playing game imprint of BL Publishing, which is itself a part of Games Workshop, initially farmed out the development of Warhammer 40,000 Roleplay to Green Ronin, the same company that created the 2nd edition of Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay (WHFRP2), before bringing development back in house. Fantasy Flight Games took over development of future products since acquiring the license for the game in 2008."

Also From Green Ronin.

Like most things in the industry, it was farmed out for freelancers. And that is a large part of my point, and why those that use the OGL are successful.

I would love to see a source for "initially farmed out the development of Warhammer 40,000 Roleplay to Green Ronin". There is a thanks to Chris Pramas and Green Ronin for their work on WHFRP 2nd Edition, which Dark Heresy was greatly based, but the three writers/designers credited in the original Dark Heresy book don't seem to be from any Green Ronin works. The link you provided shows that Chris wanted to acquire the license after Black Industries was dissolved, but I see no indication that they worked on the project before that.

I do agree that the OGL allows for more freelancers to become experts at a product, but industry veterans working on licensed products isn't exactly the best example of it. Chris Pramas worked for Wizards and was known in the industry long before he started Green Ronin.

Ciretose's point is still valid. Although "When 4E came out, many people bought it because Dungeons and Dragons was really the only game that fit that niche." is hyperbole - it was nonetheless true that D&D was extremely dominant in the market and had a huge brand-name awareness advantage.

It's not true that people had no choice but to pick up 4E if they wanted to play in that niche, it is nonetheless true that people were far more inclined to do so on release than they would have been with some other random fantasy RPG. WoTC have a much reduced advantage in that regard now.

I don't think their advantage is very reduced at all. The announcement of a new version of D&D received an article in the New York Times. That may not seem like much, but it's way more news coverage than Pathfinder 2nd edition would receive. And the fact that so many people refer to their Pathfinder game as "D&D" means they are still winning the brand awareness game.

Pathfinder is a great brand that is growing strong, but let's not forget that the majority of casual gamers and the general public will only remember the name Dungeons and Dragons. I was recently in a small town in Washington and found a small local game store. It carried Magic, a few other CCGs, board games, and D&D. I asked about Pathfinder and they'd never heard of it. This was just a few months ago. I was in Florida last week and one store I found had Pathfinder and a lot of other games on the shelf. But the Magic + Board Games + D&D store had only one RPG in stock.

Nihimon wrote:

I've been trying to figure out the Sellen river for a while now. I understand you're already committed to that map, but it would be nice if you could force the artists to actually create geologically reasonable features.

I'm assuming it flows from north to south. I don't know if there's a topographical map of the Inner Sea region but by default I always assume rivers flow to the ocean.

And remember that the poster map is only a very rough guide to what is in an area. When they get down to creating the actual region for the game they will have plenty of room to embellish details. The only rivers on the poster map are going to be major ones, like the Mississippi and its major tributaries.

Dragon78 wrote:

5)What was Zon-Kuthon a god of, before he visited the dark tapestry and become Zon-Kuthon? What was his domains?

5) We haven't revealed that—that's a campaign secret not quite on par with "How did Aroden die?"

Is that information no longer correct? Or did you forget that it was written up? Before I looked up that info my wild, almost certainly inaccurate, guess was going to be that Zon-Kuthon was actually Aroden.

Figures. They're cancelling Static. Which when I went to subscribe it wasnt on the list, so you know they planned it to fail at the start.

I'm not certain what you mean by this. It wasn't on your local comic stores list when you went to subscribe? Or it wasn't on the official 52 checklist promo that was getting handed out at launch? I thought all of the titles were on the promo list I saw, but I wasn't really paying attention to Static.

As it is, the bottom selling 6 books are getting axed. That's not a big surprise actually. I'm actually surprised that more titles aren't getting cut. It looks like they plan to keep 52 series in print at all times though, that's interesting. I wonder if it will start being like British Soccer leagues, where twice a year the lowest ranked comics will be replaced with new titles.

If by booming you mean "Selling in a distant 3rd place" sure. And it should also be noted that they were written originally by a 3PP (Green Ronin) that Games Workshop outsources to, and then bought by a card company after they were successful.

Thanks for helping me make my point about how the OGL helps develop R&D.

Green Ronin never worked on Dark Heresy. Dark Heresy was released by Black Industries, a subsidiary of Games Workshop, before they licensed out board games and RPGs to Fantasy Flight Games.

We also have no idea what sort of volume the 40K RPG sells, but it's been consistently in the top 5 since its release. I would love to be making that much money on RPGs.

I do agree that the OGL helped foster talent and grow the freelancer pool during the 3.X era, but the 40k RPGs aren't a good example for that. You are likely thinking of Chris Pramas's work on 2nd edition Warhammer Fantasy RPG.

When 4E came out, many people bought it because Dungeons and Dragons was really the only game that fit that niche. That isn't true anymore, and so they aren't going to be able to take the "My way or the highway" approach unless they want to lose even more market share.

I'm sorry, but this can't be true. There have been plenty of viable options to D&D for almost as long as D&D existed. Not to mention the many 3.5 derivatives that were already on the market when 4E was released. Nobody was forced to buy 4E because of some sort of imaginary monopoly.

I think that the idea of theme packs geared to modules or specific types of monsters is a good one. The issue I have is with its implemntation. I would wish the sculpts to be high quality and specifically made for the set, not simple repaints. You guys did a good job on the initial iconic set; and subsequent sets should match or exceed that standard, even if the price was increased. The Pathfinder brand should stand for the highest quality product in all areas, not for the production of average or below average schlock ( that's how the formerly leading roleplaying game fell ).

I don't understand how a good quality sculpt becomes below average schlock when you reprint it. I can understand not wanting the set because you already have the figures, but increased quantity doesn't magically decrease quality.

I could show up before the end of the fight if that helps. The dice are trying to kill your party off.

Yup, go ahead and show up. I blame Anton's inability to roll higher than 5.

Is there any 5th edition thread left in this forum that hasn't been entirely about personal mud throwing for the last week?

Since there isn't very much real information about 5E yet, we know a lot more about Scott than we do about the new game.

Hopefully we'll get some more substantial reports after the convention this weekend.

Elton wrote:

Pathfinder just cleaned up 3.5 and passed it off, and it feels like D&D to us. So we bought that. :)

Of course, there are some people for whom 3.X never felt like D&D.

Back in the 80's and 90's, not being D&D was a plus. I quickly abandoned AD&D to play Warhammer FRP, Talislanta, and Palladium because those were "better"* systems. When D&D 3.0 came out, it felt like it had finally evolved to be almost caught up with modern contemporaries. So from the perspective of someone who has always played a variety of RPGs, "D&Dness" doesn't matter. Is the game fun? Let's play.

*I will admit that I was young. Each system had strengths and weaknesses, but D&D didn't even have a skill system, so it felt incomplete to me.

Quote:

Interesting Betts. You're already dropping the system you've praised litteraly daily on these boards every since it arrived, for 5ED. If 4Ed was that great of a system, as you've suggested so often, why not stick with it? Then you wouldn't have to re-buy all those books you've already shelled out your hard earned dollars for in the 4Ed system?

First, I'll be switching because I tend to prefer supported systems to unsupported systems. I'll also be switching because the game will probably be even better than 4e. Just because I like it doesn't mean I don't think it can be improved.

As for re-buying books, they're cheap. I didn't spend more than a couple hundred dollars on books over the course of coming up on four years. And really, why would I complain about the opportunity to own more books? Books are awesome.

For $200 dollars, I can (and probably have) taken my wife to the movies ~10 times for ~20 hours worth of entertainment. Or I can spend $200 on RPG books that will keep myself and a party of 4 entertained for over a hundred hours of enjoyment per year. Our hobby is cheap guys. That said, I probably shouldn't tally up how much I spend a year on RPGs.

I agree with Scott — books are awesome.

I picked up a few at my local game store. Got a Troll, a Werewolf, and a Watch Guard. Love them. Wish I could afford a case.

I just hope that none of the new feats will require a caster level, otherwise only a few classes will actually be able to get all of them.

Do they need to be able to get all of them? Some feats will be good for casters. Others will be good for fighter types. In theory, they could write 50 new kitsune feats and no character could reasonably get all of them.

Feats are options. Not all options are available to all characters.

Edit: It should be noted, my order is stuck in the snowpocalypse, so I haven't seen this particular PDF yet.

You can probably find these on ebay for cheaper (although it's hard to find them in mint condition.) So if you really want, do that and give the difference to the charity. Or buy Swords and Wizardry and do the same.

On the other hand, if this sells well, it might let Wizards know there is a market for premium editions of classic products.

Just got my PoD in the mail.

Little worried about the quality.

With heavy use this will fall apart quick, it is not stitch binding. Held to the book with only clue, same with the paper.

Did you get color, or just B&W?

Chris Mortika wrote:

Secondly, if you live in Austrailia and you're interested in a set, I'll see what I can do to pick one up for you. We'll either figure out postage, or else I'll grab Wes when he comes up north to visit during Origins this year, and we'll give him an extra suitcase to carry back with him.

Hi Chris - this would be greatly appreciated. Apparently there is some chance of an Australian distributor down here being able to get some (Mil Sims for those Australians who are interested) as they've had some way of sourcing similar such offers in the past, apparently.

Nonetheless, if nothing eventuates, I for one would like to take you up on this when the time comes. Cheers.

I assume that the "North American Distribution" just means they sell it to distributors. Whether or not those distributors have ways of selling things overseas depends on the distributor. I'm sure enough of them have ways that it will make it to far corners of the world market.

Personal gripe: We should have begun colonization of the moon by now. For space reasons, as well as for use as a staging area. The fact that the U.S. space program has languished while American Idol has done well almost convinces me that there's no intelligent life right HERE.

To be fair, American Idol has a tiny budget compared to the space program and isn't publicly funded. On the other hand, we could have probably started a moonbase with the cost of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

Isn't this the game company that is famous for waiting to release a game until they are satisfied with it?

Also, those changes don't sound all that hard. Some work, certainly. But not that hard.

Anyway, I've played the beta. I already know the game is going to be awesome.

I can believe that the bulk of the playtest data wasn't used. Truth is, it doesn't matter.

First, that stage of playtesting was late in the process. So the basic structure was already set. They weren't looking for feedback that told them to restructure the whole system. They are looking for tweaks. Is this power doing a little too much damage? Is this monster too hard for its level? Is there a typo? That sort of stuff.

Here's a secret: Paizo only uses a fraction of the playtest information it gets. Public playtests generate a lot of data. In the end, the designer still has to make tough design decisions. Some of those decisions will be counter to the majority opinion of the playtesters (see Ninja, Gunslinger, etc.) That's just the way the development process goes.

This time around, they are going to gather a lot more playtest data earlier in the process. That seems like a good step to me.

Until I hear a change in brand strategy, who cares what they are working on?

An open public playtest isn't a change in brand strategy?

If you don't care what they are working on, why are you spending so much time in this forum? That certainly looks like a sign of not caring.

I do admit, I am curious what their 3PP license scheme will be. I'm certain it will be more open than the revised GSL. I doubtful it will be as open as the OGL. Still, I think they've adjusted their strategy to head in a positive direction for the brand.

I would definitely buy some collected modules. B series, X series, Tournament series, etc.

Ah, what's the point? I don't even use alignment in my games, and I almost always play LG in others, so I'm mostly just standing on principle. You said yourself that Paladins are the most disruptive class there is. I'm just trying to alleviate that.

I suspect that the problem really only comes from problem players. Just as a paladin who is always being stern on the party can be a problem, a rogue who keeps trying to steal from the party can be a problem. Problem players will be problems.

If you really want alternate Paladins, it is easy enough to adapt them either from the Dragon articles James mentioned or Unearthed Arcana. Or a number of other 3PP. But the core game isn't going to change aspects that have been apart of the tradition for over 2 decades.

If your having trouble in your particular group, talk it over with the GM or the player in question.

I want.

My fear is that the market will become consolidated, and you will basically have one game option. Publishers like Green Ronin and Paizo won't exist, so alternative same system products won't exist. No Mutants and Masterminds, no Ptolus, only WoTC approved material, which will stop being approved if they become a real threat to market share.

That is quite simply never going to happen. There have been other RPGs for almost as long as RPGs have existed. D&D has always been the big name, but I remember playing GURPS, Warhammer Fantasy, Palladium, Traveller, and many others besides.

#1 The OGL is irrevocable. So there will always be 3.X and its children available in some form.

#2 Print on Demand is becoming more and more effective. You can't stop gamers from writing new games, and soon most any game will be available in print or electronic form for the foreseeable future.

Does Wizards want to increase their market share? Certainly. But TSR wasn't able to stop a flood of other publishers from making RPGs. The cat is long out of the bag. Alternatives will always exist.

It is not some guy in a bar saying "I ran into Mike Mearls." It was a reporter writing an article for a publication that presumably adheres to something called "journalistic standards."

Except isn't the quote in question not from Mike Mearls, but a quote from a third person talking about him?

If there is some other quote under discussion, I may have missed it.

I also think re-releasing old editions will be antithetical to the stated goals of the new edition of the game. A lot of people might rationalize that they'd rather use the books they have and buy old supplements they can't get in print in .pdf, and never even consider buying the new game. I think a lot, like me, would do both, actually - but I don't think the "suits" will see it that way.

I don't think having early edition PDFs available hurt 3E sales one bit. I know I picked up quite a few that I was missing from my physical collection while they were still available.

I do think that they are most likely to re-release old material as part of DDi though.

Align Weapon is a very unlikely spell for a Cleric to prepare

Unless they already know they are going into a dungeon full of demons. I would memorize it more than once.

Single devil against a party of 7? The party will wipe the floor with it. I'd throw in some lower level minions to get in the way. Nothing too rough, maybe some CR 5s.

I am finding myslef incredulous that you can have a DM running ONE game that accomodates all styles of edition play. If on the other hand the GM can choose the edition style he wishes to play will that be supported?

I assume, as with every RPG ever produced, the GM will be free to add, remove, or adjust things to their taste. When a group comes together, they've got to have a consensus about what style of game they want to play. I can run a combat heavy dungeon crawl which would bore some types of players. I can run a high drama courtly game that would bore others. System doesn't matter.

They are saying they want to give the tools to allow a lot of different kinds of games. I will remain cautiously optimistic until I see they playtest information.

As it is, I've already seen a game with simple characters next to complex characters. Open up your classic Basic D&D box and compare the rules for fighters with the rules for wizards.

P.H. Dungeon wrote:

I'm not a huge fan of any current iteration of D&D either. I'm enjoying Dragon Age right now, you might be interested in checking that out.

Yora wrote:

I'd buy that game because I don't really like any versions of D&D.

However, I dislike 3.5e and Pathfinder less than all other fantasy RPGs. If someone shows me something better than that, I am all for it. And the bar isn't really set that high. Being able to play a game as complex as 2nd Edition with based on the basic d20 system and it having decent official support would probably be all I want.

I did, and it looks really great. But I don't expect any content beyond those two boxes and I wouldn't want to play in that world. And I quite enjoyed a large number of the D&D books from all editions.

Kobold Quarterly has some great articles on Age, including an article in #13 from Chris Pramas giving Age backgrounds for Freeport. Open Design's forthcoming Midgard setting book will have a Age appendix with backgrounds, spells, and specializations. There's also an Age Midgard Bestiary from Open Design (Disclaimer: I contributed three of the monster conversions.) Josh Jarman's Dragon Hack has rules for Pathfinder races and classes in Age. There's a really good Mystara Dragon Age pdf. Not to mention that the playtest for Set 3 is coming.

I myself have no interest in the official Dragon Age world. But they game is a great framework for easy hacking. My next campaign will be Kingmaker set in Midgard using the Age rules. There may not be tons of support for Dragon Age, but there's quite a bit more than just the first two boxes.

Are any of you still injured? I bet a couple more zaps from the wand and you'd be ready to go.

Actually, there is -- derived content is automatically Open Content. (And rather than argue about it, allow me to quote directly from the Wizards OGL site..)

D20 OGL FAQ wrote:

Q: What is "Open Game Content"?

A: Open Game Content is any material that is distributed using the Open Game License clearly identified by the publisher as Open Game Content. Furthermore, any material that is derived from Open Game Content automatically becomes Open Game Content as well.

Emphasis, obviously, is mine.

Interesting. That's not exactly what it says in the OGL, which is the only document that matters if it came to a court case.

“Open Game Content” means the game mechanic and includes the methods, procedures, processes and routines to the extent such content does not embody the Product Identity and is an enhancement over the prior art and any additional content clearly identified as Open Game Content by the Contributor, and means any work covered by this License, including translations and derivative works under copyright law, but specifically excludes Product Identity.

Exactly how much you can declare Product Identity is unclear. The Product Identity definition lists many examples, but doesn't limit it to just those. Paizo would certainly be in their rights to declare the entirety of the Hellknight prestige class Product Identity, but it is unclear if they could do that for more generic base classes like Alchemist.

But we don't really need to derail this thread further on the minutiae of the OGL. Paizo is very generous in declaring Open Content and we can all be thankful for that.

pres man wrote:

Tilnar wrote:

Plus, I would point out that Paizo gives away the rulebooks for free (in fact, they had to, since the product is derived from the OGL) via the PRD -- and they're doing quite well for themselves.

I don't think this is totally correct. There are certain amounts and certain things that have to be open content, but Paizo doesn't have to make all the rules open content. I don't remember the exact percent of a game product that uses the OGL that must be open content, but it is not 100%.

Actually, the division is: rules must remain open while "product identity" stuff (places, artefacts, setting-specific things, etc.) are yours to keep under copyright. Basically, the difference between the PRD and the Core Rulebook, in fact -- the PRD doesn't discuss the gods of Golarion or what domains they offer under Cleric, for instance.

Emphasis mine. That is not correct. There is nothing in the OGL that states you must make new rules Open Content. It only states that you must have a clear declaration of what is Open Content and what is Product Identity. Paizo could have chosen to declare of the material in say, Ultimate Combat or Advanced Players Guide as Product Identity. But they have chosen to keep all of their rules Open Content and only protect their world and art. (See the Product Identity declaration of your nearest Paizo product for exact details.)

I think we've stalled long enough. Let's go ahead and continue game. Whenever Fray gets back on his feet we'll work him back in.

You didn't believe 4e was a commerical failure for wotc for the longest time ... and that clearly was the case.

I'm sorry, but what? Even if the ICv2 data showed the complete market picture, which it doesn't, 4E has to be consider a commercial success. Being the #1 RPG for 3 years in a row and the #2 for 1 year is the kind of commercial "failure" that every other RPG company in existence would love to have. I thought about listing some examples, but since I can't think of a single game company that wouldn't want that it seems pointless.

A commercial failure is a product that fails to make a profit. 4E has been very profitable for Wizards of the Coast. One of the things Paizo does very well is produce a ton of books. I have nearly everything they produced that says Pathfinder on it. That takes up more book shelf space than my official 3.X D&D books. That's a ton of product in half the time. So if there were equal numbers of Pathfinder fans and 4E fans, and each bought exactly 1 book of everything produced, Pathfinder would show more sales. But that doesn't make 4E a failure; every book they produce makes a profit.

Just because they've decided that they can make more profit by launching a new game that expands their market doesn't mean their previous product was a failure. A failed line gets cancelled and shelved for a while.

Personally I'm more bothered by the fact that killing a player is less of a big deal than making him lose his stuff. Your gear is too important, because you need top notch gear that gets exponentially expensive.

I've been playing in a 4E Dark Sun game using the inherent bonus system. Magic items are completely optional. My Mul Gladiator is perfectly effective at level 11 with just an obsidian axe. I really wish it were that easy to run a low magic item Patgfinder game.