|Mikaze Star Voter 2014|
Just because some staff members post to the boards more than others, don't feel like any one voice speaks toward the tastes of everyone building content for Golarion.
This gives me a lot of hope for some subjects. :)
|F. Wesley Schneider Editor-in-Chief|
So, if the Dragon Empires really takes off, and in the next few years Paizo decides to provide more support for it, they could theoretically do a "Pirates of the Dragon Empires", or any of the other topics covered by the companions.
This was pretty much the only thing I could imagine right off the top of my head that would mix it up. So yeah, I can see that argument.
|Joseph Wilson Star Voter 2013|
F. Wesley Schneider wrote:BPorter wrote:+1 for Pirates of the Inner Sea vs. PF Companion:Pirates.
You don't get off that easy? ;P
Lol. No problem.
1. The former evokes more Golarion flavor. The latter sounds like a generic RPG supplement.
2. The former allows for a tighter focus (the Inner Sea) rather than attempting to cover the topic more broadly. This also has the benefit of leaving the door open to cover the topic as it pertains to other areas of Golarion at a later date if warranted/desired.
This sums up my thoughts pretty nicely. Pirates of the Inner Sea is just so much more flavorful and evocative.
If I just saw an RPG book called "Pirates," I'd probably pass it by. Pirates of the Inner Sea has much more of a draw to it, offering actual context to the concept.
While I understand the reasoning for moving away from the unfamiliar word of "Golarion" for naming conventions, I think names such as Inner Sea and Dragon Empires make for a nice compromise of familiarity and flavor.
|Joseph Wilson Star Voter 2013|
F. Wesley Schneider wrote:Honestly? This type of approach would probably push me over the edge and finally add on the Companion subscription (the one thing keeping me from being a Superscriber!).Gorbacz wrote:I'm itching to see the DE Primer for players because it's coming out simultaneously with DE Gazetteer. So for the first time we will have a player book and GM book for one area. Excellent idea! Now if execution will be good, I think this should be the format to keep. I really can't wait for these two books for oh so many reasons.
Great point, and this is something we've never been able to pull off before. Do folks dig this idea? Having a GM book with all the nuances secret details and GM rules, and a player book on the other side with all the player stuff? I know Dragon Empires isn't out yet, but it's very similar to what we did with the Inner Sea World Guide and the Inner Sea Primer. More products like this, perhaps?
FYI: I have recently added the Companion line to my subscriptions. The current announced slate pushed me over the edge, particularly the Dragon Empires Primer and Pirates of the Inner Sea, but the Tiefling and Aasimar books definitely keep my attention. I think you guys are on the right path in terms of subject matter as long as you keep up with the nice variety of formerly untapped subjects.
I'm loving the new races line. I forsee much of money going to Paizo whenever I have it. I also like the look of doing a few noteworthy archetypes like the knight.
Overall I love how the companion line looks and feels. In addition as I run my own setting I enjoy how I can run with the concepts while my players enjoy being able to adjust their characters to fit what they want the most.
As for the naming convention you use I like it. It draws people in and makes them ask where the Inner Sea is and that might make them pick up the book if they don't play Pathfinder. If they like th book then we may have a new player for Pathfinder.