Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Adventurer's Guide (PFRPG)

Are any of these organizations that hard to reskin though? Honest question.

Al-Zabriti - desert horselords.

Aldori - haughty sword duelists.

Pathfinder Society - British Museum

Aspis Consortium - what the British Museum actually is.

Bellflower Network - underground railroad with farm motifs.

Council of Thieves - paranormal thieves guild.

Cyphermages - mages that study rune magic.

Eagle Knights - Avian themed freedom fighters with specialized groups.

Grey Maidens - woman tortured into madness to serve a tyrant.

Hellknights - armored mercenaries who follow laws to a fanatical degree.

House of Perfection - Hogwarts for Monks.

Lantern Bearers - Non-Drow that fight Drow.

Magaambya - really old magic school not based in fantasy Europe.

Mammoth Lords - Barbarians that ride mammoths.

Red Mantis* - assassin fashionistas.

Rivethun - trans and non-binary inclusive animists.

Silver Ravens - Liberal Arts Major freedom fighters.

Storm Kindlers - storm druids.

With the exception of the Red Mantis I can see most of these easily being dropped into another setting. The Eagle Knights you could just as easily rename Lion Knights or Knights of the Hound if you want a different animal theme. For the Mammoth Lords just look at Skyrim. Gray Maidens could be put anywhere that has an Evil and depraved tyrant ruling. There's only 2 pages of flavor for each organization, so none of them (again save for the Mantis) are strangled by the flavor.

Are any of these organizations that hard to reskin though? Honest question.

If you just want to import the general concept, it's quite straight-forward indeed. But if you import details, they are connected to other Golarion specific content:

Al-Zabrit is located in Qadira.
Al-Zabriti are Keleshites.
They worship Sarenrae - one of the NPCs is actually one of her high priests.
Another NPC is a janni - not a Golarion-specific race, but maybe jannis don't exist in the given homebrew world.
The prestige class and the archetypes are also tied to those elements, at least in their background story.

So while it's possible, it's several steps of work. Most steps might be small, but it adds up. And a few steps might be not trivial: For example let's assume the homebrew has no equivalent to Sarenrae - now the GM has to figure out which god is closest or whether to carefully cut all ties to the deity.

Rysky wrote:

Are any of these organizations that hard to reskin though? Honest question.

If you just want to import the general concept, it's quite straight-forward indeed. But if you import details, they are connected to other Golarion specific content:

Al-Zabrit is located in Qadira.
Al-Zabriti are Keleshites.
They worship Sarenrae - one of the NPCs is actually one of her high priests.
Another NPC is a janni - not a Golarion-specific race, but maybe jannis don't exist in the given homebrew world.
The prestige class and the archetypes are also tied to those elements, at least in their background story.

So while it's possible, it's several steps of work. Most steps might be small, but it adds up. And a few steps might be not trivial: For example let's assume the homebrew has no equivalent to Sarenrae - now the GM has to figure out which god is closest or whether to carefully cut all ties to the deity.

Um, not really.

Horselords are located in the desert.
Horselords have the ethnicity of people who live in the desert.
They worship the sun, or a Goddess of the sun, or a Goddess of healing, or a Goddess of redemption, or just a goddess of Good.
The Janni one? Replace with another Outsider. Unless you don't have Outsiders in your setting, in which case that's some major changes from the core assumption of Pathfinder right there.
The Asavir is genie themed, not Golarion themed, the Qadiran Horselord has absolutely nothing in it aside from the name that ties it to Qadira, and the Sunrider has no connections whatsoever.

So unless there's no deserts in your campaign setting you can drop the Horselords in no problem.

WTF- why did you have to give Hell's Rebels campaign spoilers? I crafted individual character background motivations that tie characters to story with mysteries around NPC's and story lines. I'm starting my campaign this weekend, and now several of the background story mysterious got destroyed with spoilers from this book.

Why? This pisses me off to no end, now I have to re-do these or just hope that specific players do not see the spoiler and hope no one else brings it up at the table.

Up to this section of the book I was really liking what I saw and suddenly spoilers for my campaign.

WTF- why did you have to give Hell's Rebels campaign spoilers? I crafted individual character background motivations that tie characters to story with mysteries around NPC's and story lines. I'm starting my campaign this weekend, and now several of the background story mysterious got destroyed with spoilers from this book.

Why? This pisses me off to no end, now I have to re-do these or just hope that specific players do not see the spoiler and hope no one else brings it up at the table.

Up to this section of the book I was really liking what I saw and suddenly spoilers for my campaign.

How so?

Up to this section of the book I was really liking what I saw and suddenly spoilers for my campaign.

So don't use them.

roysier wrote:

WTF- why did you have to give Hell's Rebels campaign spoilers? I crafted individual character background motivations that tie characters to story with mysteries around NPC's and story lines. I'm starting my campaign this weekend, and now several of the background story mysterious got destroyed with spoilers from this book.

Why? This pisses me off to no end, now I have to re-do these or just hope that specific players do not see the spoiler and hope no one else brings it up at the table.

Up to this section of the book I was really liking what I saw and suddenly spoilers for my campaign.

How so?

Certain people are alive that are presumed dead at the start of the campaign. Certain people have affiliations that are unknown at the start of the campaign. In both cases I used these as mysterious to investigate and if solved give that player bonus xp.

Since I already handed out these mysteries to resolve and have been working on which ones to include I'm pissed off the Paizo would print something that resolves these for the players. I'm going to have to go back and redo 2 of them now. I'm pretty sure the players avoid spoilers elsewhere but don't expect them to pop up in printed material,

I will really have to think about running another Paizo AP, if they are going to print spoilers in later material.

Rysky wrote:

roysier wrote:

WTF- why did you have to give Hell's Rebels campaign spoilers? I crafted individual character background motivations that tie characters to story with mysteries around NPC's and story lines. I'm starting my campaign this weekend, and now several of the background story mysterious got destroyed with spoilers from this book.

Why? This pisses me off to no end, now I have to re-do these or just hope that specific players do not see the spoiler and hope no one else brings it up at the table.

Up to this section of the book I was really liking what I saw and suddenly spoilers for my campaign.

How so?

Certain people are alive that are presumed dead at the start of the campaign. Certain people have affiliations that are unknown at the start of the campaign. In both cases I used these as mysterious to investigate and if solved give that player bonus xp.

Since I already handed out these mysteries to resolve and have been working on which ones to include I'm pissed off the Paizo would print something that resolves these for the players. I'm going to have to go back and redo 2 of them now. I'm pretty sure the players avoid spoilers elsewhere but don't expect them to pop up in printed material,

I will really have to think about running another Paizo AP, if they are going to print spoilers in later material.

Um, if you're running instead of playing then don't let your players use this book then.

As for the NPCs, one is presumed to still be alive and active, so the opposite of presumed dead. And if you meant Shensen, yeah, no. There was no way she was gonna be dead. In the slightest. She's one of if not the Creative Director's most favourite character, there was absolutely no way they were gonna drop a bridge on her.

But yeah, you're the GM so Paizo hasn't "resolved" anything if you don't want them to and what they did do aligns with the AP so I'm not seeing the issue. Your players are still gonna play, they still have to do everything.

roysier wrote:

Up to this section of the book I was really liking what I saw and suddenly spoilers for my campaign.

So don't use them.

Nice to say, but now i have to redo stuff 2 days before the start of the campaign. It's a a personal pet peeve of mine to waste time, I wasted time creating these for Paizo to turn around and print spoilers.

TriOmegaZero wrote:

roysier wrote:

Up to this section of the book I was really liking what I saw and suddenly spoilers for my campaign.

So don't use them.

Nice to say, but now i have to redo stuff 2 days before the start of the campaign. It's a a personal pet peeve of mine to waste time, I wasted time creating these for Paizo to turn around and print spoilers.

I don't understand, are you a player or the GM????

If you're the GM you already know the plot and "spoilers" so I don't see what this changes?

It's not incredibly difficult. Ask your players not to read that section.

If they're interested in playing fair, they'll play along. And if they weren't, well, they could have bought the AP or looked for spoilers on the Internet, whether or not this book existed.

roysier wrote:

TriOmegaZero wrote:

roysier wrote:

Up to this section of the book I was really liking what I saw and suddenly spoilers for my campaign.

So don't use them.

Nice to say, but now i have to redo stuff 2 days before the start of the campaign. It's a a personal pet peeve of mine to waste time, I wasted time creating these for Paizo to turn around and print spoilers.

I don't understand, are you a player or the GM????

If you're the GM you already know the plot and "spoilers" so I don't see what this changes?

The problem is that the players are going to read the book (but not for the purpose of using it in this campaign), and get unintentionally spoiled on something that the GM was using as a big mystery.

I think your best bet here, as a GM, is to just say "don't read these chapters of the book you may have already bought." Which isn't fair on the players, since now they spent money on something they can't fully read through.

It's not incredibly difficult. Ask your players not to read that section.

If they're interested in playing fair, they'll play along. And if they weren't, well, they could have bought the AP or looked for spoilers on the Internet, whether or not this book existed.

Yeah the only way they'll avoid spoilers if they choose to, even if they don't have this book. If they do and don't want to be spoilered then they'll avoid the Silver Ravens section since they know it's attached to that AP.

It's not incredibly difficult. Ask your players not to read that section.

That's my advice. Be up front and let them know your issue with the content. If they use HeroLab, they'll never even see it.

Rysky wrote:

roysier wrote:

TriOmegaZero wrote:

roysier wrote:

Up to this section of the book I was really liking what I saw and suddenly spoilers for my campaign.

So don't use them.

Nice to say, but now i have to redo stuff 2 days before the start of the campaign. It's a a personal pet peeve of mine to waste time, I wasted time creating these for Paizo to turn around and print spoilers.

I don't understand, are you a player or the GM????

If you're the GM you already know the plot and "spoilers" so I don't see what this changes?

The problem is that the players are going to read the book (but not for the purpose of using it in this campaign), and get unintentionally spoiled on something that the GM was using as a big mystery.

I think your best bet here, as a GM, is to just say "don't read these chapters of the book you may have already bought." Which isn't fair on the players, since now they spent money on something they can't fully read through.

That's only a temporary restriction on a single chapter of the book. If they didn't already realize the Silver Raven's chapter would have spoilers, pointing it out is the best course of action. Once you are past the spoilers, free them up to read it.

Really, that arrangement could be motivating for a certain kind of player to engage with the storylines.

roysier wrote:

TriOmegaZero wrote:

roysier wrote:

Up to this section of the book I was really liking what I saw and suddenly spoilers for my campaign.

So don't use them.

Nice to say, but now i have to redo stuff 2 days before the start of the campaign. It's a a personal pet peeve of mine to waste time, I wasted time creating these for Paizo to turn around and print spoilers.

I don't understand, are you a player or the GM????

If you're the GM you already know the plot and "spoilers" so I don't see what this changes?

Explained in a previous post once the player gave me their character concepts and background I wrote additional knowledge any mysteries tied to bonus XP for them. My intent was to get them focused on certain elements of the story, get them interested in certain NPC's, and give them some personal character motivation that is different then the party as a whole. Each player got a multiple page handout.

I'm going to go back and have to re-do parts of them, I want the mystery to remain a mystery without the possibility of spoilers.

So, my question is why did Paizo have to print spoilers? This is one customer that is pissed off. For me the timing could not have been worse. But I guess pissing off one customer may not be a concern of theirs. I was pretty loyal to Paizo up until this point but I'm thinking this loyalty may be miss-placed if they don't care about what their customer think.

I'm certainly going to take into considerations when I start thinking about running my next campaign and look at other game systens or AP's not printed by Paizo in the future to insure I don't put so much energy into something to have it go wayward due to Paizo staff not thinking spoilers are a issue.

I'm going to go back and have to re-do parts of them, I want the mystery to remain a mystery without the possibility of spoilers.

I get that it is your preference to have no chance of spoilers, but I don't see how this book is any worse than the myriad of sites with the information already freely available. Communicating the problem with your players will have the same effect with none of the extra work.

I say this as a current player in a Hell's Rebels game, just starting book two.

Anyway I've said my peace. It would be nice for Paizo to not print spoilers. For some of us customers this matters. Otherwise I like the book, I don't mind the reprints since one of my games where I play the GM restricts players to hardcover rules only. So, softcover prestige classes were out of play until the reprinted ones now.

shaventalz wrote:

Rysky wrote:

roysier wrote:

TriOmegaZero wrote:

roysier wrote:

Up to this section of the book I was really liking what I saw and suddenly spoilers for my campaign.

So don't use them.

Nice to say, but now i have to redo stuff 2 days before the start of the campaign. It's a a personal pet peeve of mine to waste time, I wasted time creating these for Paizo to turn around and print spoilers.

I don't understand, are you a player or the GM????

If you're the GM you already know the plot and "spoilers" so I don't see what this changes?

The problem is that the players are going to read the book (but not for the purpose of using it in this campaign), and get unintentionally spoiled on something that the GM was using as a big mystery.

I think your best bet here, as a GM, is to just say "don't read these chapters of the book you may have already bought." Which isn't fair on the players, since now they spent money on something they can't fully read through.

That's only a temporary restriction on a single chapter of the book. If they didn't already realize the Silver Raven's chapter would have spoilers, pointing it out is the best course of action. Once you are past the spoilers, free them up to read it.

Really, that arrangement could be motivating for a certain kind of player to engage with the storylines.

It's not just one chapter it's actually 2. I could not invoke that restriction due to most of my players are playing in multiple campaigns with other GM's

We print "spoilers" in many of our products, and when we do we try to let customers know so they can plan ahead for their games as appropriate. It obviously doesn't work every time, with some spoilers slipping through the cracks. Sorry it didn't work out for you, roysier, but in the case of this book, we made the decision to do what we did because I wanted the Silver Ravens to have a greater presence in the game overall, and because I felt that having a recognizable rebel group in the book was important for the setting and the book overall.

But at the same time, consider that sometimes spoilers can HEIGHTEN excitement for a game. Or movie or book or whatever. If a player becomes more interested in playing a game because they've had something spoiled, in my opinion that's more valuable in the long term because the player is eager to participate in the story. I'd rather have a player who's eager for the story than one who's disinterested.

It sounds like that isn't working for your game, but don't discount the power of spoilers acting as enticement and lures for players rather than assuming that they'll always ruin things.

It's not just one chapter it's actually 2. I could not invoke that restriction due to most of my players are playing in multiple campaigns with other GM's

As the GM, you can and should communicate with your players about things that you think may ruin or spoil your game. Tell them "Hey, there's two chapters in this book that reveal secrets I don't want revealed for my game, so please don't read chapters X and Y."

If they're good players, they'll respect you and avoid those chapters. If they're not, they won't... but that's not a problem that this book caused. If they're playing in a campaign whose events could well directly spoil your campaign, that's more a problem of perhaps picking the wrong players at the wrong time for the game, I guess?

Thanks for the response and background about the reasoning why to include it. The backstory for Jackdaw is particularly unnerving since I would think the party would be surprised to find her when they do. I would think that could impact every Hells Rebel game not only specific to mine,

In the end I'm going to have to re-write a part of one players background and probably change the Jackdaw story in the book. I really liked it where it was at.

Remember, it's your game, not ours. If you want Jackdaw to be dead in your game, that's fine. In fact, if you play Hell's Rebels, chances are great that your players will end up being the ones in charge, and not the NPCs listed in the book.

And you should ABSOLUTELY tell the players that. Remind them that it's their actions in the campaign that will determine the future of your game and the setting.

Umm, yeah, I'm not sure why you don't just tell your players to not read adventurer's guide <_< Nothing wrong with that

Umm, yeah, I'm not sure why you don't just tell your players to not read adventurer's guide <_< Nothing wrong with that

Or even "don't read these eight pages". It's not like it's scattered throughout the sections.

I get that it is your preference to have no chance of spoilers, but I don't see how this book is any worse than the myriad of sites with the information already freely available. Communicating the problem with your players will have the same effect with none of the extra work.

I say this as a current player in a Hell's Rebels game, just starting book two.

I'm about to start book 2 as a player as well, so I understand roysier's problem here. I think the problem here is that organisation is a bit too fresh for this book in my humble opinion; most groups are playing HR or HV right now. I'm sure release schedules are a pain to manage for Paizo though, so I'm glad that damage has been averted by way of warning in my case.

BTW, thank you roysier for pointing that out! as a player I will NOT read that section of the book until we're done the campaign!

Yes, thanks for reminding me that I should add a spoiler tag on one of my posts.

And I agree with your opinion that the spoilers were too soon.

Hell's Rebels came out over a year almost two years ago, how much longer ago would have been preferable?

Rysky wrote:

Are any of these organizations that hard to reskin though? Honest question.

If you just want to import the general concept, it's quite straight-forward indeed. But if you import details, they are connected to other Golarion specific content:

Al-Zabrit is located in Qadira.
Al-Zabriti are Keleshites.
They worship Sarenrae - one of the NPCs is actually one of her high priests.
Another NPC is a janni - not a Golarion-specific race, but maybe jannis don't exist in the given homebrew world.
The prestige class and the archetypes are also tied to those elements, at least in their background story.

So while it's possible, it's several steps of work. Most steps might be small, but it adds up. And a few steps might be not trivial: For example let's assume the homebrew has no equivalent to Sarenrae - now the GM has to figure out which god is closest or whether to carefully cut all ties to the deity.

I'd offload that job onto the players.

You want to be an Al-Zabrit in my game? Tell me how you fit in the world. If I don't have a Sarenrae, pitch me a deity from my campaign you think works.

That not only rewards the PCs for learning about your campaign setting, it also gives them a deeper investment since they're contributing to it collaboratively.

Hell's Rebels came out over a year almost two years ago, how much longer ago would have been preferable?

About 3 to 4 years would feel appropriate. The reality check here is that groups can't keep up with the AP release schedule.

I'm running 4 APs at once, if you can't keep up it simply means that you're not injecting enough caffeine into your eyeballs.

Rysky wrote:

Hell's Rebels came out over a year almost two years ago, how much longer ago would have been preferable?

About 3 to 4 years would feel appropriate. The reality check here is that groups can't keep up with the AP release schedule.

Not all groups no but there was plenty of people waiting for Hell's Rebels and who started it right when it came out, another reality to bring up is not every group plays every AP.

Also in three to four APs at a time here.

To avoid spoilers for Hell's Rebels Page 39 should be avoided for part 1 of the AP only.Page 171 in the Silver Raven section for parts 1 to 4.

In the Silver Raven section pages 170 & 172 - 177 are OK. These pages have no spoilers I can spot but in fact have nice stuff that would fit well in a Hell's Rebels campaign.

DM Beckett wrote:

WormysQueue wrote:

Still the James Jacobs posts I quoted above prove that the possibility of such a change was already consciously implemented from the very start. The presentation at that time served a certain metagame goal to adress certain concerns by the audience, and now, with that out of the way, Paizo is free to establish the things that they might have preferred from the very start. Which would make the "oddity that worked" just into a "necessity to work at that time".

I really don't want to argue that point, as it's been done so many times already, (and I've generally been on the other side of it). I'm mainly Devil's Advocating here. That quote however, seems very different to others he and other developers have said on the specific subject.

For what it's worth, WormeysQueue has the exact right of it. Sometimes you have to do something on day 1 in order to survive to do the ACTUAL thing you want to do on day 101.

** spoiler omitted **

I don't particularly mind this stance. Its nice to see the creativity of one of the games and worlds I love to explore evolve.

I am one of the customers that grew very tired of all players wanting to be some sort of Drizzt Clone, so was really happy that the general flavor of Golarion said, "Nope, unless the GM wants that unrepentetent and irredeemable evil in their campaign."

It also is something that with PFS I really enjoyed, because it made for a very easy reason to tell players why a boon to play a Drow would never happen, and why they couldn't flavor their characters with drow-like features from the Advanced Race Guide or any other book published by Paizo.

Now the floodgates are open for PFS, because even if John Compton, Linda Zayas-Palmer and Tonya Woldridge still keep things status quo, players now have an argument for allowing Drow flavor into the campaign. And that is not something I relish.

We print "spoilers" in many of our products, and when we do we try to let customers know so they can plan ahead for their games as appropriate. It obviously doesn't work every time, with some spoilers slipping through the cracks. Sorry it didn't work out for you, roysier, but in the case of this book, we made the decision to do what we did because I wanted the Silver Ravens to have a greater presence in the game overall, and because I felt that having a recognizable rebel group in the book was important for the setting and the book overall.

Thats kind of the rub (and why I diddent like using the silver ravens in this book) being a pretty much pc run group unlike all the other ones in the book there is no way this group is going to end up as recognisable for anyone who has completed hells rebels (Since 9/10 there gonna probably still be being run by the pc's or as in what happend in one of my two games

James Jacobs wrote:

DM Beckett wrote:

WormysQueue wrote:

Still the James Jacobs posts I quoted above prove that the possibility of such a change was already consciously implemented from the very start. The presentation at that time served a certain metagame goal to adress certain concerns by the audience, and now, with that out of the way, Paizo is free to establish the things that they might have preferred from the very start. Which would make the "oddity that worked" just into a "necessity to work at that time".

I really don't want to argue that point, as it's been done so many times already, (and I've generally been on the other side of it). I'm mainly Devil's Advocating here. That quote however, seems very different to others he and other developers have said on the specific subject.

For what it's worth, WormeysQueue has the exact right of it. Sometimes you have to do something on day 1 in order to survive to do the ACTUAL thing you want to do on day 101.

** spoiler omitted **

I don't particularly mind this stance. Its nice to see the creativity of one of the games and worlds I love to explore evolve.

I am one of the customers that grew very tired of all players wanting to be some sort of Drizzt Clone, so was really happy that the general flavor of Golarion said, "Nope, unless the GM wants that unrepentetent and irredeemable evil in their campaign."

It also is something that with PFS I really enjoyed, because it made for a very easy reason to tell players why a boon to play a Drow would never happen, and why they couldn't flavor their characters with drow-like features from the Advanced Race Guide or any other book published by Paizo.

Now the floodgates are open for PFS, because even if John Compton, Linda Zayas-Palmer and Tonya Woldridge still keep things status quo, players now have an argument for allowing Drow flavor into the campaign. And that is not something I relish.

As with all other character races considered for introduction into the organized play campaign, we would examine whether drow were an appropriate choice and whether they would be any better a choice than any of the other options we've planned for release in Season 9 and beyond.

As with all other character races considered for introduction into the organized play campaign, we would examine whether drow were an appropriate choice and whether they would be any better a choice than any of the other options we've planned for release in Season 9 and beyond.

I hope this is the Diplomacy DC 40 version of "You will not see drow PCs in PFS!!!!" :P

The spoilers thing is what worries me the most about this book. I like to believe that as long as I'm not reading an issue from the monthly adventure path line, all other official Paizo material will be safe from spoilers. I don't want to have to compile a list of "forbidden" RPG-line books (and options that will eventually go up on the Archives of Nethys) for my players, nor do I want to be inadvertently spoiled myself on an adventure path I would like to play in someday.

I can see why some people would not like the spoilers in the book. I'm not a fan either yet I can work around them. As for good Drow on Golarion I figured it was only a matter of time.

To me the spoilers are just weird, since it means the chapter cannot be used in the adventure paths where the material has the highest chances of being used.... @_@

Just a reminder - for those who do not play in Golarion, and for a book that is apparently on the shorter side - all that text that is easy to scrub out and replace (which I agree is eminently simple and quick) is not necessary text in Campaigns where the organisations don't exist. A book titled Adventurer's Guide would have plenty more options for adventurers in contextless situations. (i have opined that the removal of lore can leave mechanics flavorless, but looking at the Core line, we can see this is surmountable).

Now it is possible that I just happen to have a sect of militant Grey (well any color or adjectival affiliation nomenclature) Knights, and it is also possible they are organised as the Grey Maidens, and it is also possible that their lore and NPCs are coterminous with my possible group. But not likely.

So, in a book called Adventurer's Guide that is not especially for players, with organisations that may not be relevant to a homebrewed campaign, in the Core Rules line....even the most strident supporter must be able to admit even remotely that just perhaps there might be a few lessons here?

I'll likely buy the PDF for the Grey Maidens archetypes/orders (and more) and possibly the book down the line (it sits somewhere after Ultimate Intrigue and Occult Adventures but before Horror Adventures or Mythic Adventures) mostly because I do actually like to have all the rules in one place, and better on paper than screen.

@Oceanshieldwolf: either you're right or they are planning to open evil PCs for PFS... I.e. PFS RPG, PFS Core and PFS EVIL? on that note... how will the Hell's Vengeance chronicle sheets work if not for evil PCs? ;) Oh! is PFS EVIL planning to allow drow?!? :) THAT would be alright!
(long live the dill pickles)

So, in a book called Adventurer's Guide that is not especially for players, with organisations that may not be relevant to a homebrewed campaign, in the Core Rules line....even the most strident supporter must be able to admit even remotely that just perhaps there might be a few lessons here?

It's unsurprising that people who don't use/like Golarion are unhappy with a shift from generic flavor to Golarion-specific flavor and that those on the other side of the fence are likely to be pleased with the shift.

I don't really see what lesson is to be learned though. That aspect of this book (the breaking of the "minimal Golarion lore in RPG line books" rule) isn't a gradual evolution or minor experiment. It's quite a fundamental shift and there will definitely be fans for and fans against.

By "learning lessons" are you implying that there's kind of a middle way? Because to me this is one of the few issues which seems pretty binary. Perhaps more accurately, I think a book with half generic flavor and half Golarion flavor or something like that is going to appeal to even fewer people than Villain Codex or Adventurer's Guide.

By the way, I will soon have a spare copy of the book, and you're welcome to it. I'll post it to you next week.

@Oceanshieldwolf: either you're right or they are planning to open evil PCs for PFS... I.e. PFS RPG, PFS Core and PFS EVIL? on that note... how will the Hell's Vengeance chronicle sheets work if not for evil PCs? ;) Oh! is PFS EVIL planning to allow drow?!? :) THAT would be alright!

(long live the dill pickles)

Let me just nip this one in the bud.

This year we're beginning a new organized play program, and it is called Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild. That's a quite involved process as is, and adding an additional organized play program beyond that in the form of an evil campaign is not on the menu.

Valeria Tanessen wrote:

@Oceanshieldwolf: either you're right or they are planning to open evil PCs for PFS... I.e. PFS RPG, PFS Core and PFS EVIL? on that note... how will the Hell's Vengeance chronicle sheets work if not for evil PCs? ;) Oh! is PFS EVIL planning to allow drow?!? :) THAT would be alright!

(long live the dill pickles)

Let me just nip this one in the bud.

This year we're beginning a new organized play program, and it is called Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild. That's a quite involved process as is, and adding an additional organized play program beyond that in the form of an evil campaign is not on the menu.

You can't be mad at us for wanting job security for you all fine PFS folks! (demand greater than the offer is always a nice problem to have! ;) )

Having played few APs for lack of time but always ready to play more before I join the Great Beyond, I too am worried to find heavy spoilers in the chapters that deal with organizations that were mostly used in APs. My knee-jerk reflex is to avoid reading the entire chapters. Something I did not expect to do and that deprives me of quality material :-(

Maybe a chapter by chapter guide to parts to not read because of spoilers would be a good solution

And after reading this thread I am now worried about other chapters containing spoilers for future APs and that my reading them would ruin future fun

For the unGolarionizing of the content, my general impression so far is that the crunch and flavor are often heavily linked and that much of the material will take some effort to divorce it from Golarion. Note though that it could be well worth it because of the mostly high quality of what I read so far

The Al-zabriti is likely the one easiest to make Setting-neutral since it was not part of Golarion before this book. The Rivethun, also rarely mentioned before this book, might be easy to convert too. I have not read it thoroughly yet

I hope future books like this will make it easier to divorce the product from the setting because I am not sure that many people will want to invest in Magic of Golarion or somesuch if the setting is hard-coded in the product’s DNA, especially if it becomes harder to extricate than this here book

If you are not actively in a game, I doubt any of the spoilers will be meaningful to you. If you start playing an AP, don't reread those sections.

(Also, spoilers may actually increase your enjoyment of the story.)