Anniversary Editions for older APs


Pathfinder Adventure Path General Discussion

51 to 100 of 111 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Thanks for chiming in Liz, I wasn't implying that Wayfinder is easy and simple to put together, it looks like a lot of hard work and love!

I was hoping that something similiar to Wayfinder, where the bulk of the material is fan supplied as opposed to being written by Paizo staff. And focused exclusively on a single AP instead of many, may be more doable than a seventh AP book, or reprinting, or a bundled edition.

It would not need to be as big as Wayfinder, which seems to keep growing in size by the way, and could be available only in PDF, again like Wayfinder was at first.

They could also be done as anniversary specials twice a year, or just "Best of..." whenever it gets done, similarly to the old Best of Dragon issues.

As far as subscriptions go, my Dragon & Dungeon magazine subscriptions were rolled into my charter subscription, which means I have ALL the APs! Like Dragon & Dungeon before them, they are more than just adventures, there is a lot of game tucked into all those pages.

LOL, I type slow on my phone. :P


Touche!

Now try Stolen Lands or maybe The Wormwood Mutiny. :-)

Edit: Not too slow, since you Ninja'd my smurfy slow phone.

Community Manager

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Melkiador wrote:
I just can't understand why anyone who isn't currently DMing an AP would want to subscribe to the AP line though. Maybe it's just a difference in personality, but I don't feel like my leanings are unusual. Personally, I have witnessed DMs subscribe to an AP when they start DMing and then cancel the subscription when it gets too far ahead of the campaign.

Pathfinder Adventure Path subscribers also get the Pathfinder Advantage, which is a site-wide 15% discount on many products.


I think part of my problem with the model is that it's a bit self defeating. As long as subscriptions are low, then most customers only own one copy. But as subscriptions increase, there are more and more people with multiple copies of the same content. And there is nothing to keep those people from turning around and reselling their duplicates.

It'd be interesting to see the numbers of how well a product sells in its future compared to how many customers received it through subscription.


Melkiador wrote:


I just can't understand why anyone who isn't currently DMing an AP would want to subscribe to the AP line though. Maybe it's just a difference in personality, but I don't feel like my leanings are unusual. Personally, I have witnessed DMs subscribe to an AP when they start DMing and then cancel the subscription when it gets too far ahead of the campaign.

I've been a subscriber since, well, I'ma charter subscriber to the AP line. And do you know how many we've actually run? Two full paths, though I am currently running two more, different ones online.

But do you know how many I've enjoyed reading? All of them so far. All of them have given me ideas that I believe have helped my GMing.

That said, I have subscribed to other parts of the Pathfinder lines including Companions, but in the interests of my budget, I stepped that back and now just buy them singly from my FLGS or online based on specific content I want. In the case of the APs, though, I still want those because the content changes so much from AP to AP that they are still interesting.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Melkiador wrote:
I wonder if they make so much more money from subscriptions than from traditional book sales and individual purchases. Also, can't you just cancel and resubscribe at will, to miss part of a subscription you aren't interested in? Consider if the average table falls apart before getting past the 3rd book of a campaign, Paizo is losing out on selling the rest of that content. But if Paizo can sell an anniversary edition they can sell all of that content at once. In the anniversary model Paizo gets their money whether someone's table gets to that part of the books or not.

The important part of the subscription model is the guaranteed monthly revenue to keep the lights on. An opt out model is far better business than an opt in model. You get subscribed, and then it is more effort to unsubscribe when something doesn't suit your fancy. So inertia keeps some people staying on through the rest of the AP. I myself only unsubbed from the AP line when I had 36 volumes collecting dust on my shelves. Now I do PDF purchases. As for 'selling all that content at once' it doesn't matter how many of those they sell when it releases if the last six months they weren't making enough to run operations. Steady sales are far better for business health than big windfalls.


Melkiador wrote:
I just can't understand why anyone who isn't currently DMing an AP would want to subscribe to the AP line though. Maybe it's just a difference in personality, but I don't feel like my leanings are unusual.

I've never GM'd an AP, though I'm likely to run Giantslayer when / if it becomes available for PFS credit. I've subscribed since Skull & Shackles, excepting when I dropped my subs around Iron Gods (but that was due to a variety of factors, very little of which was the sci-fi aspect, and more to do with things like budget, time, and PFS decisions making me step back from PF for a bit).

Different strokes, different folks.

-TimD


Liz Courts wrote:
Wayfinder is not made by Paizo staff, but that does not mean it doesn't require a lot of time and effort to put together (generally crammed in between work and home life and copious amounts of caffeine).

and blood in the form of altar offerings and papercuts!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

BTW Legendary Games supply extra stuff specially made for APs, strongly reccomended to check'em out!

Paizo Employee Creative Director

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Melkiador wrote:

I think part of my problem with the model is that it's a bit self defeating. As long as subscriptions are low, then most customers only own one copy. But as subscriptions increase, there are more and more people with multiple copies of the same content. And there is nothing to keep those people from turning around and reselling their duplicates.

It'd be interesting to see the numbers of how well a product sells in its future compared to how many customers received it through subscription.

We've been using this model for all our lines for a decade or so. And it's pretty much been the OPPOSITE of self defeating as far as we can see. I understand that subscriptions aren't for everyone, but they DO seem to be for ALMOST everyone...


TimD wrote:
I've never GM'd an AP, though I'm likely to run Giantslayer when / if it becomes available for PFS credit.

I am not sure whether Giantslayer makes a good PFS AP. It's a great AP overall, but it has dull sections and partially questionable loot. Not being allowed to fix that sounds horrible to me. I'd rather GM Runelords for PFS - if any AP.

Back to topic: I'd like more anniversary editions, too. The Runelords version was a great read, it's easy to believe a lot of refinement was done.

So let's hope Pathfinder gets more fans outside the USA. For them subscriptions are less interesting (higher shipping costs, likely less money available), but they will spend money on other Paizo products, hence subscriptions will lose importance (relatively). Which might result in more options for everyone, including additional anniversary editions.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SheepishEidolon wrote:
TimD wrote:
I've never GM'd an AP, though I'm likely to run Giantslayer when / if it becomes available for PFS credit.
I am not sure whether Giantslayer makes a good PFS AP. It's a great AP overall, but it has dull sections and partially questionable loot. Not being allowed to fix that sounds horrible to me. I'd rather GM Runelords for PFS - if any AP.

APs in PFS typically have "campaign mode" (read as: home game you get PFS credit for), which is what I would use in this instance and mostly because one of my players I've been gaming with for over 20 years is very interested in playing it and I told him I'd run it when time frees up a bit and it is sanctioned.

On-topic, I'd be on the list of folks who might be interested in an Anniversary Edition of the 3.5 stuff, but well-understand the reasons (especially from a project management / people resources point of view) it is unlikely to happen.

-TimD


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Melkiador wrote:

I think part of my problem with the model is that it's a bit self defeating. As long as subscriptions are low, then most customers only own one copy. But as subscriptions increase, there are more and more people with multiple copies of the same content. And there is nothing to keep those people from turning around and reselling their duplicates.

It'd be interesting to see the numbers of how well a product sells in its future compared to how many customers received it through subscription.

Multiple copies of the same content? You only get one print copy. While the digital is nice, I think most gamers still like having print copies around.

Yes, if someone only wants a single AP, they will likely only subscribe for half a year. But I suspect a lot of people collect more APs than they will ever run. I know I have all but 1.2, despite running only one so far. But whenever I do run another one, I have plenty to choose from on the shelf. Without having to hunt for out of print copies if my friends decide they want one of the more popular paths. Which, to be honest, seem like the most likely APs they'd choose.

Edit: Oh, I am playing in another one. Which I loaned to the GM so he could run them. Which is why I keep half of them unread on the off chance I'll get to play.

RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Melkiador wrote:


I wonder if they make so much more money from subscriptions than from traditional book sales and individual purchases. Also, can't you just cancel and resubscribe at will, to miss part of a subscription you aren't interested in? Consider if the average table falls apart before getting past the 3rd book of a campaign, Paizo is losing out on selling the rest of that content. But if Paizo can sell an anniversary edition they can sell all of that content at once. In the anniversary model Paizo gets their money whether someone's table gets to that part of the books or not.

That assumes that people are running the APs as they come out, not after all 6 are available. For instance I'd never run an AP before I got all 6 books.

And if the anniversary collection costs the same as 3 issues of the AP (which is what it was for RotR) then the revenue is the same.


captain yesterday wrote:
Juda, That's really insulting, you didn't even mention GMs that just don't have the time to add black dragons, operas, and gunslinging bardic sorcerers blasting across the Alkali Salt Flats on rollerskates with a jet powered back pack strapped to her back..

sorry not intended that way!

im reffering to those who play the ap and want less "railroad" adventure.
all of us have lifes to live, agree, and that makes aps easy to run as gm but if someone complain about the railroad, then, he should make some fixes to it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Melkiador wrote:
I just can't understand why anyone who isn't currently DMing an AP would want to subscribe to the AP line though. Maybe it's just a difference in personality, but I don't feel like my leanings are unusual. Personally, I have witnessed DMs subscribe to an AP when they start DMing and then cancel the subscription when it gets too far ahead of the campaign.

Well, I am a GM, so I'll leave the first part of your statement alone. As for the second part, I like to have options when choosing my next campaign. After I finish RotRL AE in some months (still at the end of module three at the moment), I and my group will have to choose between Shattered Star, Reign of Winter, Giantslayer and Hell's Rebels. That's a good run of diverse AP's with different styles to choose from.

That being said, I'll unsuscribe for the next AP, because I don't support evil campaigns on moral grounds. I'll pick my suscription up again afterwards, though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:
Melkiador wrote:
I just can't understand why anyone who isn't currently DMing an AP would want to subscribe to the AP line though. Maybe it's just a difference in personality, but I don't feel like my leanings are unusual. Personally, I have witnessed DMs subscribe to an AP when they start DMing and then cancel the subscription when it gets too far ahead of the campaign.

Well, I am a GM, so I'll leave the first part of your statement alone. As for the second part, I like to have options when choosing my next campaign. After I finish RotRL AE in some months (still at the end of module three at the moment), I and my group will have to choose between Shattered Star, Reign of Winter, Giantslayer and Hell's Rebels. That's a good run of diverse AP's with different styles to choose from.

That being said, I'll unsuscribe for the next AP, because I don't support evil campaigns on moral grounds. I'll pick my suscription up again afterwards, though.

I don't understand the last statement. We play this game for fun, to have a good time and get away from the real world problems for a while. Our characters murder, rob, steal, and some even torture in support of some fictional good idea or kingdom or sociecty. When that changes to be in support of some fictional evil idea or kingdom or society then people start having a 'moral' issue with it.


Back to the original question? Paizo has repeatedly stated they do not intend to do Anniversary Editions. If they do a second one, it will be to fix an existing AP that has significant problems - currently there are two APs that are quite problematic and need repairs - Second Darkness and Wrath of the Righteous. The latter will probably never be looked at again seeing Paizo realized after it was out that Mythic has some issues at higher level play and probably should have released WotR a year after Mythic Adventures' release so that user comments could have let them adjust the AP to compensate for problems.

If you did see an AE, it would not be a regular thing. It would be for milestones in Paizo's business lifespan. Indeed, we may very well see a 2nd Edition of Pathfinder before we see another AE... and Paizo has stated they don't intend on creating a 2nd Ed. anytime soon. (Heck, if anything, Unchained is Paizo's version of Unearthed Arcana. And I will admit it would be curious to see how Paizo approached a 2nd edition - they might start with a large Player's Manual that includes the core classes and the majority of the secondary classes, and then a GameMaster's Guide, much like TSR did with the old AD&D system.)

tl;dr - don't hold your breath for another AE. And you will never see AEs of every existing AP.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

^Well, then, here's rooting for Paizo to achieve more business milestones . . . .


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Mulgar wrote:
I don't understand the last statement. We play this game for fun, to have a good time and get away from the real world problems for a while. Our characters murder, rob, steal, and some even torture in support of some fictional good idea or kingdom or sociecty. When that changes to be in support of some fictional evil idea or kingdom or society then people start having a 'moral' issue with it.

Yeah, well. The characters in my campaigns are not allowed to be evil. I'd also say that they don't murder, rob and steal and especially don't torture (unless they want the wrath of the GM to come over them and the players know that), but I'm pretty sure that I'll get semantic games from you and others if I would state that as a truth.

If you are fine with having evil characters do terrible things in your campaigns in the name of "fun and a good time", then that is your choice on how to have fun. But in my campaigns I can't abide this behaviour on moral grounds and people are still having fun and respect my choices as a GM (even if a few players whine about it come time to choose the next campaign).

Hence, I'll skip the "Evil AP". Voting with my wallet is the best way to prevent a second one in the future.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:
Hence, I'll skip the "Evil AP". Voting with my wallet is the best way to prevent a second one in the future.

Which goes to show there's really no pleasing everyone.

I started my subscriptions with just an AP, Skull & Shackles, because "yar, pirates!" and the fact that it was looking like it would be a nice grey adventure. I was considering ending all of my subs when I saw the write up for the "evil iconic" and went, man, I can't stop now that Paizo is finally starting to support the other half of the alignment spectrum as the Flying Spaghetti Monster and Gygax intended.

-TimD


Frankly I'm looking forward to this one just because of the potential of running Hell's Rebels and Hell's Vengeance side-by-side or something and ending it with the two parties clashing against one another.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

TimD wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Hence, I'll skip the "Evil AP". Voting with my wallet is the best way to prevent a second one in the future.

Which goes to show there's really no pleasing everyone.

I started my subscriptions with just an AP, Skull & Shackles, because "yar, pirates!" and the fact that it was looking like it would be a nice grey adventure. I was considering ending all of my subs when I saw the write up for the "evil iconic" and went, man, I can't stop now that Paizo is finally starting to support the other half of the alignment spectrum as the Flying Spaghetti Monster and Gygax intended.

-TimD

Not sure how 3 alignments out of 9 constitutes "half"... but I get your point. I've wanted us to do an evil AP for quite a while, in fact, but it's one of those (like Jade Regent or Iron Gods) that is very polarizing, so it had to wait its turn.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

I think he meant that you were finally supporting the other 6 non-Good alignments.

And if you consider Neutral belonging to both the non-Good and non-Evil groups, that makes each group 6 and 6.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

TriOmegaZero wrote:

I think he meant that you were finally supporting the other 6 non-Good alignments.

And if you consider Neutral belonging to both the non-Good and non-Evil groups, that makes each group 6 and 6.

Oh. Well... we've pretty much supported the neutral alignments the whole time, as far as I see things. Hell's Vengeance is pretty inappropriate for a lawful neutral, neutral, or chaotic neutral character in any event.

Shadow Lodge

But it's certainly appropriate for non-Good characters. :)

Paizo Employee Creative Director

TOZ wrote:
But it's certainly appropriate for non-Good characters. :)

As long as they're evil in their non-goodness! :P


Tammy's evil.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If I were a betting man, I'd put money on a 2017 release of the Curse of the Crimson Throne Anniversary Edition hardback.


James Jacobs wrote:
TimD wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Hence, I'll skip the "Evil AP". Voting with my wallet is the best way to prevent a second one in the future.

Which goes to show there's really no pleasing everyone.

I started my subscriptions with just an AP, Skull & Shackles, because "yar, pirates!" and the fact that it was looking like it would be a nice grey adventure. I was considering ending all of my subs when I saw the write up for the "evil iconic" and went, man, I can't stop now that Paizo is finally starting to support the other half of the alignment spectrum as the Flying Spaghetti Monster and Gygax intended.

-TimD

Not sure how 3 alignments out of 9 constitutes "half"... but I get your point. I've wanted us to do an evil AP for quite a while, in fact, but it's one of those (like Jade Regent or Iron Gods) that is very polarizing, so it had to wait its turn.

Toz makes my point even better than I would, so I won't even "Tri" to outdo his explanation :)

I'm hoping this Evil AP goes over well enough you'd consider another in the future (because I'd REALLY like to see a Red Mantis centered AP as they are one of the things I find most intriguing about what you guys have going on in Golarion cannon).

-TimD


TimD wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
TimD wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Hence, I'll skip the "Evil AP". Voting with my wallet is the best way to prevent a second one in the future.

Which goes to show there's really no pleasing everyone.

I started my subscriptions with just an AP, Skull & Shackles, because "yar, pirates!" and the fact that it was looking like it would be a nice grey adventure. I was considering ending all of my subs when I saw the write up for the "evil iconic" and went, man, I can't stop now that Paizo is finally starting to support the other half of the alignment spectrum as the Flying Spaghetti Monster and Gygax intended.

-TimD

Not sure how 3 alignments out of 9 constitutes "half"... but I get your point. I've wanted us to do an evil AP for quite a while, in fact, but it's one of those (like Jade Regent or Iron Gods) that is very polarizing, so it had to wait its turn.

Toz makes my point even better than I would, so I won't even "Tri" to outdo his explanation :)

I'm hoping this Evil AP goes over well enough you'd consider another in the future (because I'd REALLY like to see a Red Mantis centered AP as they are one of the things I find most intriguing about what you guys have going on in Golarion cannon).

-TimD

The Red Mantis are also on my list of things I really like about the setting.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Gambit wrote:
If I were a betting man, I'd put money on a 2017 release of the Curse of the Crimson Throne Anniversary Edition hardback.

Is there anything particularly notable about Curse besides being their second AP? Any reason they'd want to revisit it?

Using post count as a rough judge of popularity, I would say Kingmaker would be top of the list for an expanded edition.

AP Posts
Rise of the Runelords 49649
Kingmaker 33642
Curse of the Crimson Throne 15433
Carrion Crown 15150
Wrath of the Righteous 13832
Skull and Shackles 10702
Jade Regent 8050
Reign of Winter 6975
Serpent's Skull 6831
Iron Gods 6825
Council of Thieves 6316
Second Darkness 6253
Legacy of Fire 5937
Shattered Star 3860
Mummy's Mask 3025
Hell's Rebels 1906
Giantslayer 1704

Carrion Crown has much more activity than I expected. I also thought Skull and Shackles would be a bit higher, although still near the top.

For all the complaints about Wrath I've seen, it certainly gets enough love.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

One should not mistake post count for love. Hate drives many more posts than love.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:
One should not mistake post count for love. Hate drives many more posts than love.

Hey, I kind of didn't post anything in Giantslayer forum, and you know how I feel about that AP ... ;-)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

True facts. Can you filter out how many of those posts are "argh, this is hideous," "I can't make this work," or "this new subsystem the AP is using has some rough edges, how do you sandpaper those down?"

'Cause every AP gets plenty of all of those.

Kingmaker is certainly a popular AP (and has what might be my favorite and best-constructed first adventure), but Paizo has little reason to facelift it.

Runelords got the love because yes, it was the first Paizo-proprietary AP, but also because it used a different rules-set from the current Pathfinder standard. Much like Curse, Second Darkness, and Legacy of Fire.

And of the three remaining 3.5 APs, Curse is by far and away the most well-loved.

(Not to say that a few nips, tucks, and revisions couldn't work wonders for Second Darkness or Legacy of Fire, but they seem... less hallowed, somehow)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:
One should not mistake post count for love. Hate drives many more posts than love.

True, but it certainly shows interest. There are thousands of posts discussing how to fix Wrath. There aren't nearly so many discussing how to fix Second Darkness. If nobody cared, it would just be crickets.

Certainly of the 3.5 APs that could use a facelift, Curse is the most popular.

I wouldn't expect another anniversary hardcover before 2018 though. If it's not already on the schedule, it isn't happening for 2017. Besides, the games 10th anniversary will need something special.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

More importantly... wasn't the Runelords Anniversary Edition apparently a logistical nightmare to assemble, since it essentially added another product to the release schedule?

I think the premise that ANY future Anniversary editions are forthcoming shouldn't be taken for granted.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Cole Deschain wrote:

More importantly... wasn't the Runelords Anniversary Edition apparently a logistical nightmare to assemble, since it essentially added another product to the release schedule?

I think the premise that ANY future Anniversary editions are forthcoming shouldn't be taken for granted.

It wasn't the fact that it was an Anniversary Edition that made it tough—it was trying to do too many things too quickly that made it and everything else tough. There was nothing intrinsically "more difficult" about building the Anniversary Edition than anything else, and in fact, all things being equal, it was actually one of the easier "big projects" I've worked on. Perhaps even the easiest, since the vast bulk of the year's worth of work had been done already when we first published it. The number of on-staff editors and developers we have today verses what we had several years ago changes things on the ground SIGNIFICANTLY for one thing.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

One of the biggest reasons I'd say CotCT would get the attention if the opportunity came up for another compilation is because it's nearly a perfect campaign.

It's got one of the best stories Paizo has ever done.

It has some of the best, most intriguing, most fun, most engaging NPCs they've ever created.

The narrative flows much better than 90% of the APs they've written.

It's got the full gamut of experiences, and has the most thorough, most complete story I've seen in an AP ever. You start small, dealing with extremely mundane, extremely local issues, and by the end of the campaign you're dealing with something suitably epic and large-scale, and the majority of the stuff in between doesn't feel like too large of a jump or gap.

It's got something for everyone. It's got high-stakes diplomacy. It's got skeevy street crime. It's got taking down an evil cult. It's got stealth- and espionage-based scenes. It's got a mystery plot. It's got a ginormous dungeon crawl. It's got puzzles and riddles. It's got a exploration-based trek. It's got storming the castle. The only thing it really doesn't have is sandboxiness - since it's an urban adventure mostly contained in one city - and that lack is probably one of the main reasons Kingmaker is up there as one of the more popular alongside it.

Most of all though... it's the least flawed of the older campaigns other than Runelords. Legacy of Fire is a cracked gem, some people will love it despite its flaws and/or polish off the edges on their own a bit when they run it, and Second Darkness ... well, Second Darkness is still mostly ore, and even the Paizo staff have said that a refit of SD would take some working to clean up and straighten out, to fix some misconceptions and some things that didn't work out well (the jarring jump in location and theme and atmosphere from Riddleport in Books 1 and 2 to being selfless heroes the rest of the story is one, and the hostility and arrogance of the Elves being another) before they'd want to release a remake.

Crimson Throne doesn't really have those problems. What faults it has are mostly minor overall, or due to personal dislike of one or two parts of the story. Some people don't like A History of Ashes leaving the city for so long and at such a crucial point in the plot; others don't like how Skeletons of Scarwall is just a huge dungeon crawl all chapter. But I call those less flaws and more just conflicts of theme between what the AP offers and what the individual player/GM wants out of it. (I'll admit I'm personally in the first group regarding HoA, hence why I pulled it out and used it in Kingmaker instead, and replaced it with something else for when I run CT in the future.)

Speaking of Kingmaker, the main reason CT edges it out in my prediction of an "if they do, then" scenario is because KM doesn't really need the update. If KM got an update, it really would just involve polishing up the plot to make some of the connect-the-dots more apparent to players so that Sound of a Thousand Screams stops blindsiding so many people. Given that the Kingdom Building stuff got updated in Ultimate Campaign I seriously doubt it would get packaged with a KM re-release (though I could be wrong!); rather, I think it would just refer to "use the rules from this other book", or tell them to check the PRD.

CT, for all the near-perfection of its story, characters, and concepts, could not only use a little polish in its plot - no more than KM, and probably less to be quite frank - but its mechanics are immensely outdated, as it's only six months younger than Runelords and operates on an extremely similar mindset by the writers. The NPCs' classes and feat selections, monster stats, and many other ideas could use some updating in such a re-release, especially with the addition of several new base classes and ARCHTYPES in the years since. I mean come on, can't you see Blackjack as a Swashbuckler? Laori as an Inquisitor? Sabina as a Cavalier? Heck, Ileosa herself could pick up a handful of different archetype options, any of which would suit her character just fine, presuming they wanted to keep her a Bard and not change her class to something else entirely.

So yeah, if I had to pick money on a "if Paizo were to re-release another AP" bet, that's why I'd wager on CT.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Cole Deschain wrote:

More importantly... wasn't the Runelords Anniversary Edition apparently a logistical nightmare to assemble, since it essentially added another product to the release schedule?

I think the premise that ANY future Anniversary editions are forthcoming shouldn't be taken for granted.

It wasn't the fact that it was an Anniversary Edition that made it tough—it was trying to do too many things too quickly that made it and everything else tough. There was nothing intrinsically "more difficult" about building the Anniversary Edition than anything else, and in fact, all things being equal, it was actually one of the easier "big projects" I've worked on. Perhaps even the easiest, since the vast bulk of the year's worth of work had been done already when we first published it. The number of on-staff editors and developers we have today verses what we had several years ago changes things on the ground SIGNIFICANTLY for one thing.

I (gleefully) stand corrected.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm not sure that popularity really matters (because I think any compilation is going to sell well, provided there's been a significant gap since the original). The issue from Paizo's side has never really been concern as to the viability of any compilation project.

Surely one of the most significant factors from Paizo's perspective is going to be whether the original is largely out of print? Otherwise they're deliberately designating a portion of their stock as pretty much unsellable (or greatly reducing such sales, anyhow).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steve Geddes wrote:

I'm not sure that popularity really matters (because I think any compilation is going to sell well, provided there's been a significant gap since the original). The issue from Paizo's side has never really been concern as to the viability of any compilation project.

Surely one of the most significant factors from Paizo's perspective is going to be whether the original is largely out of print? Otherwise they're deliberately designating a portion of their stock as pretty much unsellable (or greatly reducing such sales, anyhow).

there is, however, a problem with that line of thinking. hardcopies for the 3.5 APs, I guess, sell worse nowadays, now that the system it is written in is outdated. A SD or CoTC 'Pathfinder Edition' might sell significantly more copies than the 3.5 would, just because less work for the GM is involved. I know I would have bought all 6 issues of SD already, had it been written in PF rules.. There is a sale potential that might not be easily determined by the sales of the original 3.5 product.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, but that's not really a problem since they're spoiled for choice (given they're not planning on compiling all of them, they can pick and choose without any significant impact on the revenue raised from the re-release).

Whichever anniversary edition they put out is going to sell. If they do one with still in-print copies they lose out on the sales of old versions. If they do one once it has largely sold out they make pretty much the same revenue (assuming they'll eventually sell out any compilation they choose to do) but don't lose the opportunity to first sell out the "backissues".

I appreciate that there are "PF or nothing" customers, but the fact the 3.5 era APs are slow sellers doesn't really matter - slow sales are better than no sales which is close to what would happen once a compilation became available.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber

That's a good point. Curse has three volumes sold out, Legacy of Fire has one, and Second Darkness is still available. So if they decide to reprint a 3.5 path, Curse is the obvious choice. Relative sales figures among the pre-PF modules is still a good indicator of popularity.

On the other hand, Kingmaker has four of six parts sold out, so it's still a likely candidate since it is one of the most popular APs of either edition.

Or they could decide to just do a completely new project for their 10th anniversary, similar to Emerald Spire.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

A 10th anniversary addition of CotCT to me just feels like it would make the most sense. It would also e a great chance to tie it into whatever else they may release that year. In the little hidden blurb in "THe Dead Heart of Xin" was that wonderful little phrase "Sorshen Lives!" My theory is as a 10 year anniversary they do another Runelord AP with everyone's favorite Mistress of Lust as the BBEG. Do the shattered star thing, starting the AP in Korvosa following the events of both CotCT and Shattered Star, re-releasing CotCT as a big hardback version as a chance to play in the city of Korvosa before the events of the new AP that shaped the city to what it NOW is.


deinol wrote:

That's a good point. Curse has three volumes sold out, Legacy of Fire has one, and Second Darkness is still available. So if they decide to reprint a 3.5 path, Curse is the obvious choice. Relative sales figures among the pre-PF modules is still a good indicator of popularity.

On the other hand, Kingmaker has four of six parts sold out, so it's still a likely candidate since it is one of the most popular APs of either edition.

Or they could decide to just do a completely new project for their 10th anniversary, similar to Emerald Spire.

I have no knowledge, of course. But I also suspect that print run sizes were increasing - so kingmaker selling out is probably an indication of far greater "absolute" popularity than CotCT selling out (of course, that also means there's more copies out there and more people who'll decide not to 'upgrade' so it's a two edged sword).


2 people marked this as a favorite.

A 'CotCT' update might include something about the Shoanti invasion if the PCs whiff it too much and they march on the city.

Silver Crusade Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I still would like to see Second Darkness get the help it needs. Crimson Throne needs so little help, and most of it would be statblocks. Speaking for myself personally, I can do statblocks easily - rewriting an AP's plot is a bigger challenge.


Kalindlara wrote:
Personally, I still would like to see Second Darkness get the help it needs. Crimson Throne needs so little help, and most of it would be statblocks. Speaking for myself personally, I can do statblocks easily - rewriting an AP's plot is a bigger challenge.

I agree. SD needs more work as it is right now. An AE would help that AP considerably more than CotCT


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

But are AEs about "helping" APs or about showcasing high points from the history of Pathfinder?

Rise of the Runelords, after all, certainly needed tweaking less than SD, or LoF, or...

It was a pretty respectable success, particularly at the time.

51 to 100 of 111 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Path / General Discussion / Anniversary Editions for older APs All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.