It seems rather obvious Paizo will eventually get around to doing a Companion for each Class. Unless they do entire books. I realize the core four (cleric, fighter, rogue, wizard) will probably be the first Class-based Companions. It's just good business sense.
This got me wondering what order I want to get them in. So I made a list of the Base Classes (plus Psion) and started going down them, giving each a reasons for why I placed them there. Remember: My List. My Rules.
MONK: For some reason, this one shouted "POSSIBILITIES!" Pretty amazing for just words on the screen. Fill this with numerous orders and philosophies. Add in dozens of unarmed combat styles. And viola! The potential for Zen Awesomeness.
ROGUE: Just so I can remake my only Elven PC, Joesh Ravendark. The only member of his adventuring party to escape unscathed from the Dungeon of Deformities.
BARD: 'Cause Bards get no love. Of all the 3.5 games I've been in NO ONE has ever chosen to play Bard.
CLERIC: Cause someone usually doesn't want to play Cleric. And just to slight players who refuse to play Clerics. :)
FIGHTER: It's probably the most played class in D&D.
WIZARD: I want more familiars. Or rules for making non-atypical familiars because of an idea for a necormancer I've had.
PALADIN: Decided to play a cleric turned paladin or a paladin turned cleric for the PF Society. Maybe I'll play a straight Paladin. Decisions, decisions...
SORCERER: I like what Paizo has done for this class & I'd like to see more.
BARBARIAN: THUNDARR!
DRUID: Just wanted to branch out. (ha ha it is to laugh)
PSION: I hear they're on other worlds. I like other worlds.
RANGER: Just to spite someone I know. It's petty. BUT as I like to say "It's all about the spite."
If you haven't already: Feel free to disagree.
|
I think that these will be pretty far out, they already have everything planned until next Gencon, and each of these book alienates a decent amount of the player base. Plus, it is eaier to sprinkle things for the classes in other books than it is to get good fluff for the classes that is valid the whole game world over
Director of Brand Strategy
|
Erik mentioned on the [ulr=http://chat.dmtools.org]chat room[/url] that he would love to do short (16 or 32 page) guides to each class after the PFRPG comes out in August. Something to help new players get the feel for a particular class. I believe (unless I'm confusing things) that he also said a short 1-on-1 adventure could be included as well. I think it's a cool idea, but I'd want to make sure that it contained enough new information for seasoned players that it wasn't obsolete for anyone buy newbs.
|
It seems rather obvious Paizo will eventually get around to doing a Companion for each Class. Unless they do entire books. I realize the core four (cleric, fighter, rogue, wizard) will probably be the first Class-based Companions. It's just good business sense.
. . .
If you haven't already: Feel free to disagree.
OK, I will.
When these are officially announced I will check for the end of the current adventure path, then cancel my subscriptions.
I paid for this junk from TSR, I paid for it from WotC, I will take a pass on paying for more system destroying splat books from Paizo.
I am already unhappy with the never-ending flood of crunch that keeps appearing in the current products. More would just mean they are giving up any pretense of maintaining quality and just going with quantity. If Paizo is determined to repeat the mistakes of TSR and WotC they can do it without me or my money.
Just say no to splatbooks.
|
Creative Director
|
A Companion about monks might sell well to those who want to play monks... but you're self-selecting to NOT sell to the rest of the 10/11ths of your audience. For race books, at least you're self selecting for about twice that amount... but frankly, that's STILL a reason why we haven't gone all out on doing all the races. Elves are pretty popular, and dwarves are too, but we're very afraid that no one will buy a gnome book (which galls me, since I'd be one of those few to buy the gnome book were I a customer).
We're quite unlikely to do companions about the classes as a result. Instead, we're trying to make sure that there's stuff for all 11 classes in any specific companion.
I suspect that we MIGHT do companions about organizations some time, and some organizations are self-selecting for certain types of classes. Also, if we were to do a companion on, say, The Lands of the Linnorm Kings, you could expect to see a lot of barbarian stuff in there.
we're very afraid that no one will buy a gnome book (which galls me, since I'd be one of those few to buy the gnome book were I a customer).
Hi James (and all gnome lovers out there),
Here's a little tip.
but we're very afraid that no one will buy a gnome book (which galls me, since I'd be one of those few to buy the gnome book were I a customer).
If there's one race that screams for a Companion book among the PF races it's the gnome. I would LOVE to see a book about them and would definately buy it (well, obviously... since I'm a superscriber). One of the players in my group is considering running Second Darkness, and the character I'm probably going to play there in that case is a gnome bard.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I'm not a huge gnome fan but I think that gnomes actually deserve a race book more than elves or dwarves. In fact, the least popular races are the ones that need a book most. A book that gave gnomes a Pathfinder re-imagining and made them interesting and fun to play for more people is just what's needed.
I suspect that we MIGHT do companions about organizations some time, and some organizations are self-selecting for certain types of classes. Also, if we were to do a companion on, say, The Lands of the Linnorm Kings, you could expect to see a lot of barbarian stuff in there.
I'm really happy to hear this. I think race/class books are an easy trap for publishers to fall into and I have been mostly disappointed by them, no matter what game system they are for. I think they distance themselves from the setting and become a bit too generic. By providing class info to us within the context of Pathfinder specific organizations/cities/regions, you certainly have guaranteed a look, and a likely purchase, from me.
|
|
Just say no to splatbooks.
Who said anything about splatbooks? These wouldn't have to be splatbooks. They could be made up completely of fluff, with no game rule information at all, if Paizo wanted them that way.
Though I agree that, if published as splatbooks, these products would be a disaster.
Also, "never-ending flood of crunch?" I see none. New crunch appears to be nonexistent except to support the fluff -- just the way it should be.
|
|
Who said anything about splatbooks? These wouldn't have to be splatbooks. They could be made up completely of fluff, with no game rule information at all, if Paizo wanted them that way.
Given the amount of crunch in other books, they would be splatbooks.
Also, "never-ending flood of crunch?" I see none. New crunch appears to be nonexistent except to support the fluff -- just the way it should be.
Have you done a count lately?
Alternate Class Abilities - 14 (not including alternate summoning lists)
New Skills - 1
Feats - 85
Traits - 72
Equipment - 85
Special Material - 1 (detailed, others named)
Attack Option - 1
Spells - 34 (not including G&M which I have not indexed yet)
Poisons - 6
Diseases - 4 (not including the ones in the general article)
Prestige Classes - 12
Magic Items - 109
Relics - 4
Minor Artifacts - 24 (a few are inferred to that power level based on descriptions, otherwise move them down to ordinary magic items)
Major Artifacts - 10
Monsters - 145 (including minor variants)
That is not including any minor references without additional details.
That is in just 17 months in 43 products.
With about 87 pages of text in a Adventure Path book, the monsters alone would fill up three whole books, with the rest of the material likely filling another.
Chronicles are 60 pages of text, and would be five books for the monsters and probably two for the rest.
A Companion is 30 pages of text, and would be eight for monsters and four for the rest.
It would fill the entire Campaign Setting hardcover and still spill over a bit.
Very little is reused, and it seems unlikely much will be updated for the PFRPG. That means over 200 pages of single use, throwawy material, and it shows no sign of slowing down.
To me, that is more than a lot. YMMV, but that is a key factor in my overall rating of the products. As I said before, been there, done that, have the empty wallet to prove it, am ready to hop off the bus this time.
Class companions? No, not really. So you get a book about how to play fighters in Pathfinder Chronicles games? Half of that information will also be true for barbarians. And rangers. And warriors. And paladins. And so on.
Plus, most classes can fill so many roles. What would you write about a fighter in Golarion?
Plus, I hardly think they'll run out of subject matters any time soon:
There's 6 companions a year, 2 of which are Adventure Path companions. That means 4 per year. There's still 6 races, and a dozen ethnicities, and dozens of nations.
And organisations. And topics like special kinds of magic, or technology. And other planets.
we're very afraid that no one will buy a gnome book
I would definetly buy one. Well, I'm a subscriber, but if I weren't, I'd definetly pick up that one. They got little enough love from wizards (bunch of gnome-haters over there).
Plus, you guys have managed to make gnomes really cool. I'd totally love to hear about gnomes.
In fact, do gnomes before any other race.
Do halflings after that.
I would love class books. Could you group a few classes into a book? like we did for play testing? (i.e. a Barbarian, Fighter, and Ranger book)
BTW, I would buy a gnome book, too. Maybe you could group them with Halflings into one book. 16 pages is better then none.
A book on dwarves would be great. You could do another book on Half-orc and Half-elves. I could see a whole book on humans and a last one on plane-touched.
Sannos
BTW, I would buy a gnome book, too. Maybe you could group them with Halflings into one book. 16 pages is better then none.
No half-treatment for small races!
|
Have you done a count lately?
1: There has to be crunch. Folks need shiny new stuff to fill their games with. If you believe that fluff alone is enough to make a majority of D20 gamers happy, I think you are mistaken.
2: Updating for PFRPG... Most of the stuff will be compatible or in need of minor changes. So, the "throwaway" argument is moot, imho. Not to mention the "stick with 3.5" crowd...
3. Splatbooks... Notice that 90% of time, the crunch in Paizo material is linked to the fluff. It SUPPORTS the actual products. Paizo doesn't make any "bunch of random feats, a smattering of prestige classes and a few extras" products. And I hope they won't do them at all...
All these numbers would be impressive if they would be condensed in 5-10 products. But as it stands, they are spread out across 50 or so.
|
Elves are pretty popular, and dwarves are too, but we're very afraid that no one will buy a gnome book (which galls me, since I'd be one of those few to buy the gnome book were I a customer).
We demand gnomes!
Seriously, I've never played a gnome in my life, but I'd kill for a Pathfinder gnome book, the elves book was great, but Pathfinder gnomes are just so much more interesting than elves. I can think of more than a handful of people I game with who agree with me and would probably buy their own copies rather than stealing mine like they normally do!Class books on the other hand, I'd just be buying to maintain my Superscriber status, no real interest in em. I'd probably be bored by them (like the monks, but then I've never liked monks), or there are so many character options within a class that it would be difficult to write an interesting, flavourful book that's in any way helpful (fighters would be the prime suspect here).
Also, people totally play Bards. There were several at Gen Con UK PFS, we have one in my home PFS team, we had one (a gnome no less!) in my old Age of Worms game...
|
|
1: There has to be crunch. Folks need shiny new stuff to fill their games with. If you believe that fluff alone is enough to make a majority of D20 gamers happy, I think you are mistaken.
First, no they don't. People can play the game quite easily without new stuff, shiny or otherwise.
Second, given the amount of screaming by the majority of D20 gamers about how WotC destroyed 3.5 with so many splatbooks, I think you are more likely to be mistaken about what will make the majority of them happen.2: Updating for PFRPG... Most of the stuff will be compatible or in need of minor changes. So, the "throwaway" argument is moot, imho. Not to mention the "stick with 3.5" crowd...
If it needs to be house-ruled, it does not need to be purchased.
And that does not make the "throwaway" concept moot. Even without an update, how many times have any of those monsters been reused in a subsequent Paizo product? Or the feats? Instead they wind up as a series of "gotchas", sprung on players once with the effect of total surprise, then left behind for the next surprise.3. Splatbooks... Notice that 90% of time, the crunch in Paizo material is linked to the fluff. It SUPPORTS the actual products. Paizo doesn't make any "bunch of random feats, a smattering of prestige classes and a few extras" products. And I hope they won't do them at all...
Whether it supports the fluff or not is irrelevant to the amount, both of individual pieces and products it appears in.
And it is fact often just a "bunch of random feats, a smattering of prestige classes, and a few extras" appearing in the various books. So far only one prestige class has been used in an adventure, and only a few of the spells and feats. There have even been several monsters in Pathfinder Adventure paths that have not appeared in the adventures.All these numbers would be impressive if they would be condensed in 5-10 products. But as it stands, they are spread out across 50 or so.
If they were in just five products, or better yet just one, they would be more palatable. Spread out over nearly fifty, they are replicating the same problem TSR had with expansion material spread out over numerous supplements.
I think the people writing material for Paizo can write perfectly good adventures using just the core rules. I think they can also write perfectly good background without the need for new rules to express the ideas.
|
Director of Brand Strategy
|
I think the people writing material for Paizo can write perfectly good adventures using just the core rules. I think they can also write perfectly good background without the need for new rules to express the ideas.
The fact that they don't make anyone buy the past adventures to get the crunch that was released a year ago speaks volumes about their approach, though. Were they to include an Ercinee (which did not appear in the adventure) from PF5, they'd either waste tons of space reprinting the statblock and abilities, or simply refer GMs to a book they may or may not have. Instead, the additional crunch, by your own admission, has been pretty absent from the adventures themselves (with a few exceptions, but then only when something appears in the same book). They're icing on the cake. If you just want to run the adventure as written then you can ignore them, but if you want the flexibility to try and use new stuff, the door is wide open. For myself, who loves the setting, I like all the new stuff, even if it never gets used in an adventure or even one of my own games, simply because the crunch itself adds a certain degree of flavor and realism to the world.
A Companion about monks might sell well to those who want to play monks... but you're self-selecting to NOT sell to the rest of the 10/11ths of your audience. For race books, at least you're self selecting for about twice that amount... but frankly, that's STILL a reason why we haven't gone all out on doing all the races. Elves are pretty popular, and dwarves are too, but we're very afraid that no one will buy a gnome book (which galls me, since I'd be one of those few to buy the gnome book were I a customer).
We're quite unlikely to do companions about the classes as a result. Instead, we're trying to make sure that there's stuff for all 11 classes in any specific companion.
I suspect that we MIGHT do companions about organizations some time, and some organizations are self-selecting for certain types of classes. Also, if we were to do a companion on, say, The Lands of the Linnorm Kings, you could expect to see a lot of barbarian stuff in there.
James, just to put that a little into perspective.
I have owned all 10 of therevised edition tradition books for mage the ascention, i still own 9 of them(some one stole the cult of ecstasy book from me.) Each of these player organisations is destinct and cannot be combined with one another easily. Yet i own all of them so that i have more infomation on them both as a player and a storyteller. Yet, in D'n'D i can be both a fighter and a wizard at the same time. I might even be a third class all in on character.
I know that personally, i would get board only ever playing a single character class, and provided that it has some cool setting martial of secret sociaties of rogues, what golarion religious practice are like or how magic is studied, i would get them just for a good read.
|
|
I trust Paizo to make good crunch books. I know with them we're not going to get 2 dozen new base classes, and there's nothing wrong with more prestige classes as long as they are balanced.
Look at WotC's base class additions though:
Tome of Magic: 3
Magic of Incarnum: 3
Expanded Psionics Handbook: 4
Book of 9 Swords: 3
Complete Warrior/Adventurer/Arcane/Divine: 12
Heroes of Horror: 2
That's 27 off the top of my head not counting setting specific or Dragon Magazine. I'd be surprised if Paizo added 5 over the course of the next 5 years (we already know Ninja and Blackguard will be basic classes)
But seeing as Paizo is barred from using any of that wealth, they'll have to add more of their own to make up for holes (like no Shorten Haft feat) that exist in the PFRPG.
Look at WotC's base class additions though:
Tome of Magic: 3
Magic of Incarnum: 3
Expanded Psionics Handbook: 4
Book of 9 Swords: 3
Complete Warrior/Adventurer/Arcane/Divine: 12
Heroes of Horror: 2
You forgot the Factotum from Dungeonscape.
But, to be fair, 2 of those 12 Complete classes were rehashes from 3.0 Oriental Adventures classes (I don't count the Samurai - instead of taking the great OA version, they instead went with a horrible new one that was somewhat based off Dragon clan samurai - which had the least typical fighting style among all the Great Clan samurai, and managed to mess up the class to boot).
|
You forgot the Factotum from Dungeonscape.
Look at WotC's base class additions though:
Tome of Magic: 3
Magic of Incarnum: 3
Expanded Psionics Handbook: 4
Book of 9 Swords: 3
Complete Warrior/Adventurer/Arcane/Divine: 12
Heroes of Horror: 2
And the Healer and Marshall from the Complete Miniature's book.
And the 4 classes (Duskblade, Dragon Shaman, Knight, Beguiler) from Player's Handbook 2.
And the Dragonfire Adept from Dragon Magic.
And all the others I've forgotten...
3.5 went core-class-palooza at the end there.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
You forgot the Factotum from Dungeonscape.
Look at WotC's base class additions though:
Tome of Magic: 3
Magic of Incarnum: 3
Expanded Psionics Handbook: 4
Book of 9 Swords: 3
Complete Warrior/Adventurer/Arcane/Divine: 12
Heroes of Horror: 2And the Healer and Marshall from the Complete Miniature's book.
And the 4 classes (Duskblade, Dragon Shaman, Knight, Beguiler) from Player's Handbook 2.
And the Dragonfire Adept from Dragon Magic.
And all the others I've forgotten...
3.5 went core-class-palooza at the end there.
And the 3 from Complete Psionic.
To be fair, Dragon Compendium isn't really a wizards book.
Can anyone guess which class's art I like best out of that book?
Don't forget all the material on the old WotC website. If you check the archives, you'll find several prestige classes and a lot of spells and feats.
I personally would love to see some of those 3.5 classes get Paizo treatment. I liked the beguiler, scout, favored soul (stupid name), shaman, warlock, duskblade (also a stupid name), swashbuckler and marshall as well as a couple of others. I would also love to see a Crusader base class, that is an any alignment holy warrior.
I personally would love to see some of those 3.5 classes get Paizo treatment. I liked the beguiler, scout, favored soul (stupid name), shaman, warlock, duskblade (also a stupid name), swashbuckler and marshall as well as a couple of others. I would also love to see a Crusader base class, that is an any alignment holy warrior.
They cannot give them the Paizo treatment, but they could do their own classes with the name and concept for most of those.
I personally would love to see some of those 3.5 classes get Paizo treatment. I liked the beguiler, scout, favored soul (stupid name), shaman, warlock, duskblade (also a stupid name), swashbuckler and marshall as well as a couple of others. I would also love to see a Crusader base class, that is an any alignment holy warrior.They cannot give them the Paizo treatment, but they could do their own classes with the name and concept for most of those.
OK. Crusader should be OK. Favored Soul could be renamed the Mystic.
But anyway. I would like to see in the future (post 8/09) a set of additional classes.
We definately need a holy warrior not confined to LG at the least IMHO
The Marshall is a neat idea as well. I liked the Beguiler which is essentially a wizard/thief but fun to play. A base class fighter/mage is always liked as well.
The Mystic as a divine sorcerer is a cool concept and a bit different. I never understood why they gained the weapon focus feat for their deity when, by defintion, they are not bound by their patron's dogma.
The swashbuckler is the least important. But I liked its fluff and focus on speed. I think the boys at Paizo could do a great job on re-imagining the concept
OK. Crusader should be OK.
If the class is for someone who goes on a crusade, as opposed to a paladin with 4e-like powers.
Favored Soul could be renamed the Mystic.
Mystic sounds okay. I think it's not perfect, but I can't think of anything better.
We definately need a holy warrior not confined to LG at the least IMHO
Paladin variants should work. Which moves us away from the Book Of Classes to the Book Of Variant Rules.
The Marshall is a neat idea as well.
Yes. They could also combine that with a noble:
My idea of a noble PC class is a mix of a rakish fencer, influential mover and shaker, and giver of orders.
(Of course, this could also be done as a variant bard, or maybe even straight bard)
|
|
My idea of a noble PC class is a mix of a rakish fencer, influential mover and shaker, and giver of orders.
(Of course, this could also be done as a variant bard, or maybe even straight bard)
My idea 'noble' class would be a bard with a few tweaks;
Uses oratory, not music, to inspire others. Gains a synergy bonus to inspire with appropriate ranks in knowledge (history) or whatever is appropriate (local to rally townsfolk, history to reference ancient battles, etc.).
Removes purely music/sound based abilities. Countersong becomes 'counterfear' for boosting morale, for instance.
Swap out a few spells, mostly sonic / music based options, to replace with appropriate battle spells, like mass bull's strength or whatever.
Allow the option to used Prepared spellcasting instead of Spontaneous spellcasting. Less spells per day with that option, but able to carry a book full of additional spells acquired through various means, allowing for greater versatility over time.
Some 'nobles' train hard with tutors, and in a magical world, would learn scraps of magical lore the same way RL noble scions were tutored in mathematics and languages (use the prepared caster option).
Other 'nobles' might be of 'the blood royal' and draw upon innate magical talents because of their superior breeding (use the spontaneous option).
I still prefer new classes to variants myself. I would love to see a new set of Paizo classes, but thats me
I like a noble idea
As for the crusader, it depends on your defintion of a crusade. If it means merely a fighter for a particular cause or a holy warrior, then yes. If you want to only include those crusaders who march off to a distant land then no...........
A Companion about monks might sell well to those who want to play monks... but you're self-selecting to NOT sell to the rest of the 10/11ths of your audience. For race books, at least you're self selecting for about twice that amount... but frankly, that's STILL a reason why we haven't gone all out on doing all the races. Elves are pretty popular, and dwarves are too, but we're very afraid that no one will buy a gnome book (which galls me, since I'd be one of those few to buy the gnome book were I a customer).
We're quite unlikely to do companions about the classes as a result. Instead, we're trying to make sure that there's stuff for all 11 classes in any specific companion.
I suspect that we MIGHT do companions about organizations some time, and some organizations are self-selecting for certain types of classes. Also, if we were to do a companion on, say, The Lands of the Linnorm Kings, you could expect to see a lot of barbarian stuff in there.
James, given the quality of the Pathfinder books I've purchased thus far. Race-themed companions are MUST BUYS for me. I've never found a gnome book that completely worked for me but given what I've seen from Pathfinder, the chances of Paizo creating the gold-standard seems very likely to me.
I've never found a gnome book that completely worked for me but given what I've seen from Pathfinder, the chances of Paizo creating the gold-standard seems very likely to me.
I also think a Gnome book is a great idea. Gnome's are essentially the least previously flavored race, and the one that Paizo has added the most to already. Plus - don't you have a corner on the Gnome-player market?
Besides, a cover with a bunch of wacky-colored spiky-haired freaks? How would that not sell? :)
[Edit: I tried posting this *several* times using "Add Post" instead of "Reply" and it would not go through.]
James, given the quality of the Pathfinder books I've purchased thus far. Race-themed companions are MUST BUYS for me. I've never found a gnome book that completely worked for me but given what I've seen from Pathfinder, the chances of Paizo creating the gold-standard seems very likely to me.
I agree. I love the Elves of Golarion book and would dig a halfling book myself.
I would also like to see a Tiefling book
New classes I would like:
The Vanguard which would essentially be the Complete Adventurer Scout
The Mystic which would be the divine version of the sorcerer but with heavy emphasis on divination spells
The Templar which would be an unaligned holy warrior, lose the spells and add some special abilities. Keep the healing.
The Shaman which would be a totem and spirit based caster
The Mageblade which would be an unarmored, gish class
The Deceiver which would be rogue/enchanter
I have absolutely no problem with Paizo doing books with extra classes and PrCs and then using them for NPCs in other books.
First, I subscribe to everything, anyway, but more importantly, this won't force you to get the book, because the stats on that other book will contain all the necessary information.