Shiver Me Timbers! A New Pathfinder Adventure Carrrrrrd Game Experience!

Some kind of way to integrate Infamy/Disrepute would be spectacularly awesome.

Whats the point of being pirates if you can't have (and abuse) a reputation?

Im just curious is the heroes from the RotR set will be usable in this AP? I realize three of them overlap, which I assume means that at least the archetypes the heroes have to choose from will be different than the ones in RotR, but even more differences AND the ability to use the ones from RotR will help this one sell, I think.

Also, I think a new Base set for every AP will likely be a mistake in the long run, opposed to a generic base set and each AP having maybe like a 'deluxe expansion' for Ch1 that has a larger assortment of cards, and then the other 5 chapters being the regular packs.

I realize you dont always want a ton of overlap in the generic cards of the game, but what you end up doing is making is so you HAVE to buy the base to play anything else, and that alone will drive some people away. Just my 2cp though.

Edit: Basically, the idea boils down to the fact that since you are making each AP self contained and there is no NEED to buy more than what is contained in the one AP to play the one AP, you will lose customers who might buy additional stuff. Think of it like Dominion. You Can play with just one Core (or the other 2 to 3 that can be played straight from the box), but with most of them, you have to buy at least a Core to use it. While that compares just fine to Base Set plus Chapter packs, it doesnt translate well for people you want to go from one AP to another.

Im just curious is the heroes from the RotR set will be usable in this AP? I realize three of them overlap, which I assume means that at least the archetypes the heroes have to choose from will be different than the ones in RotR, but even more differences AND the ability to use the ones from RotR will help this one sell, I think.

Also, I think a new Base set for every AP will likely be a mistake in the long run, opposed to a generic base set and each AP having maybe like a 'deluxe expansion' for Ch1 that has a larger assortment of cards, and then the other 5 chapters being the regular packs.

I realize you dont always want a ton of overlap in the generic cards of the game, but what you end up doing is making is so you HAVE to buy the base to play anything else, and that alone will drive some people away. Just my 2cp though.

It has been verified by Mike that the characters from both adventure paths will be compatible with either.

Im just curious is the heroes from the RotR set will be usable in this AP? I realize three of them overlap, which I assume means that at least the archetypes the heroes have to choose from will be different than the ones in RotR, but even more differences AND the ability to use the ones from RotR will help this one sell, I think.

Also, I think a new Base set for every AP will likely be a mistake in the long run, opposed to a generic base set and each AP having maybe like a 'deluxe expansion' for Ch1 that has a larger assortment of cards, and then the other 5 chapters being the regular packs.

I realize you dont always want a ton of overlap in the generic cards of the game, but what you end up doing is making is so you HAVE to buy the base to play anything else, and that alone will drive some people away. Just my 2cp though.

Edit: Basically, the idea boils down to the fact that since you are making each AP self contained and there is no NEED to buy more than what is contained in the one AP to play the one AP, you will lose customers who might buy additional stuff. Think of it like Dominion. You Can play with just one Core (or the other 2 to 3 that can be played straight from the box), but with most of them, you have to buy at least a Core to use it. While that compares just fine to Base Set plus Chapter packs, it doesnt translate well for people you want to go from one AP to another.

The problem with a generic base set is that you'll be missing tons of theme, which will overall detract from the game. Say they release a generic base set, with a generic character add-on, for $60 + 20. That's $80 up front (or $60 if you don't buy the character add-on; you certainly don't need to). Then you'd be paying for 6 adventure packs/AP at $20/ pack for 120/AP, or possibly $240/year if you get both. Suppose that the first pack is a "deluxe expansion" as you call it; I would expect this would cost around $40 (obviously pure speculation). So this would be $140/AP. Personally, I would rather pay $180 for a much more thematic game that has been assembled from top to bottom than $120-140 for an AP that has had to have been playtested in the context of the base set, and will thus be limited by it. A new base set will provide new opportunities for the developers to fix any issues and to come up with more unique mechanics, rather than building off the same set of cards every time. If you don't agree with the release of a new base set, you don't have to buy it. If you really can't afford two APs a year, maybe get one and have a friend get another. The bottom line is that we have all been asking for more content and that for many of us, releases every 2 months are way too slow. Paizo simply listened to us and are providing the opportunity to purchase more content (not requiring it).

The problem with a generic base set is that you'll be missing tons of theme, which will overall detract from the game. Say they release a generic base set, with a generic character add-on, for $60 + 20. That's $80 up front (or $60 if you don't buy the character add-on; you certainly don't need to). Then you'd be paying for 6 adventure packs/AP at $20/ pack for 120/AP, or possibly $240/year if you get both. Suppose that the first pack is a "deluxe expansion" as you call it; I would expect this would cost around $40 (obviously pure speculation). So this would be $140/AP. Personally, I would...

I understand all of that, but the people voicing their 'moar content naow pleze!' opinions on the boards are a small minority of players. You have no idea what the other huge percentage of players think.

The point is that if they used my idea (or anything else that is cheaper than 'buy two $60 Base sets per year') and used something that is a bit cheaper, then they would stand a better chance of achieving the end goal of 'All players buy all the stuff', opposed to the idea you are saying of 'if its too much, your friend could buy the next one.'

Making the game cost less to buy per AP wont deter players from buying everything. Making it more expensive will. How many will be detered is a different question though, and thats hard to gauge.

I've seen the "two APs a year" thing presented as a fait accomplis. That's a reasonable supposition, but not necessarily the case.

There may well be a fourth AP in the second half of 2015. Or, they may just be moving the schedule up to strike while the fire's hot and a (potential) fourth AP may not immediately follow on the heels of the third.

Paizo's product output is staggering. I mean, the Skull and Shackles announcement was the SECOND of the day (ACG).

And I'd think resources will be tied up a bit more with Pathfinder Online moving towards early enrollment.

Personally, I don't mind if they accelerated the schedule. They'll probably have an AP I don't want (Jade Regent) along the way, so no loss.

There was a great interview with Mike Selinker a month or so ago (at Quarter to Three: here) where he admitted that the biggest mistake they made with the card game was underestimating how quickly players would blow through the content. I never doubted that they would switch to a monthly release for the second AP (even though bimonthly is better for me personally).

There was a great interview with Mike Selinker a month or so ago (at Quarter to Three: here) where he admitted that the biggest mistake they made with the card game was underestimating how quickly players would blow through the content.

Yup. The demand was a factor, but our team figuring out how to design an adventure path more quickly was an even bigger factor.

A basic summary of the sequence of events:
I bring Paizo the game.
They ask for monthly releases.
I say no, we can't develop it that fast.
We release bimonthly.
We figure out how to develop it faster.
I say yes, we can develop it that fast.
We do monthly releases.

So, y'know, more things. We hope you like all of them.

pH unbalanced wrote:

There was a great interview with Mike Selinker a month or so ago (at Quarter to Three: here) where he admitted that the biggest mistake they made with the card game was underestimating how quickly players would blow through the content.

Yup. The demand was a factor, but our team figuring out how to design an adventure path more quickly was an even bigger factor.

A basic summary of the sequence of events:
I bring Paizo the game.
They ask for monthly releases.
I say no, we can't develop it that fast.
We release bimonthly.
We figure out how to develop it faster.
I say yes, we can develop it that fast.
We do monthly releases.

So, y'know, more things. We hope you like all of them.

I certainly do like more things. Thanks, Mike!

This is great news, but can you investigate using higher quality printing for the next run? I have had to sleeve my cards because they are quite flimsy, easily damaged, and hard to shuffle. They compare poorly to even a basic drugstore set of playing cards. By contrast, the cards used by Fantasy Flight for games like Descent have a nice durable linen finish that requires no sleeves and makes shuffling easy. Given that you all are charging $20 a pop for a deck of 100 cards, this does not seem an unreasonable request.

Thank you. What I great second base set!

PACG:RotRL was a huge factor in my family & I attending our first GenCon this year. Now, I see I have another reason to go again in 2014!

As for all the other talk here. I really can see how the faster production schedule will work and that many people are hoping for it. Though, in my family, we just have more spread out gaming sessions and the bimonthly is actually perfect. Almost to the point that I am worried about the 3rd release being a bit early for us. Just have to wait and see...and hope for some extra time for gaming next summer!

Just to be clear how I feel about the low quality of the components for this game so far, let's look as a comparison at Space Hulk Death Angel. It includes 128 extremely durable linen finish cards (seriously, if you touch one of these cards, you have confidence it will last for a long time), plus tokens, rulebook, high quality box, etc., for MSRP of $25. Why can't Paizo produce 110 cards of similar quality for the $20 they are asking for each expansion deck? Why do these feel like they were made at a local Kinkos? I don't get that.

I am very worried about the new box. The Brazilian law effectivelly tax the size of the box, so bigger boxes have higher taxes. And the worst is that they re-tax everything if we pay the "size tax" so as it would came with all the gen con products launch, i would pay too much. I prefer if i could buy the bigger box separete from the subscription (the separete shipping actually cost lower then the retaxing of products sent together with bigger boxes).

Draco, it's always been possible to cancel and resubscribe from the character add-on pack onwards (you'll have to talk to customer service), and I don't think they'll change that for S&S.

A basic summary of the sequence of events:

I bring Paizo the game.
They ask for monthly releases.
I say no, we can't develop it that fast.
We release bimonthly.
We figure out how to develop it faster.
I say yes, we can develop it that fast.
We do monthly releases.

I'd amend that slightly.

I bring Paizo the game.

Paizo says "We have no idea how fast people will play. But most of our products have monthly releases. Can we try monthly releases?"
I say no, we can't develop it that fast.
We release bimonthly.
We figure out how to develop it faster.
Customers say waiting two months is painful.
Paizo asks if we can go monthly.
I say yes, we can develop it that fast.
We do monthly releases.

I was wondering if there are any numbers out on how many RotR base sets are being purchased compared to character expansion decks. It would be nice if the base set was simply a 6 player game with some 600 starting cards.

...

$20 for a character expansion that should really be incuded in the base game just seems expensive for no real extra game content.

Adding 110 cards to the Base Set wouldn't make them free. What it *would* do is raise the Base Set price to at least $75, and that higher price would mean lower sales.

Also, the four characters you get in the Add-On Deck are pretty darn significant extra game content just by themselves. Story cards add to playability, but characters add significantly to both playability and *replayability*.

I dunno, I just kind of feel like it's now just turned into a big cash grab...

When people are asking for more, offering them more isn't what I call a "cash grab"—it's what I call "doing things right."

In regards to afforementioned Iconic action scene art is it just mainly using the Iconics in the main set or will it include the iconics from the expansion set?

...It includes 128 extremely durable linen finish cards (seriously, if you touch one of these cards, you have confidence it will last for a long time)...

I've been in the business of printing card games since Magic: The Gathering debuted in 1993. Twice I've been persuaded to use linen finish cards, and twice I've regretted it.* The texture in the cards creates ridges that grab oils from your skin, which then attract dirt. Try this: get a linen-finish deck and a non-linen deck using the same paper stock. (I realize that first step may be a challenge if you don't have a card printed you can get samples from...) Play blackjack or some game in which you handle the cards and work your way through the entire deck, then repeat 500 times. At the end of the process, I promise the linen deck will be in far worse shape than the standard finish deck.

There's a reason that "linen finish" is also known as "casino finish": casinos can use it because they don't need longevity—they replace their decks constantly.

*The two products were one of the early printings of The Great Dalmuti from Wizards of the Coast, and the first printing of Kill Doctor Lucky from Paizo. In both cases, after a weekend of demoing at Gen Con, the cards were good for nothing but the discard pile.

In regards to afforementioned Iconic action scene art is it just mainly using the Iconics in the main set or will it include the iconics from the expansion set?

You should see 9 of the 11 iconics in a lot of the new art. Unfortunately, the warpriest and the swashbuckler won't get to appear quite as much, because a lot of the new art for the card game has to be commissioned before the reference designs for those two iconics is completed.

Thinking ahead on how to combine the sets ...

Will the cards from the new base set and AP have the same backing as the RotRL set? I hope the answer is yes so that the cards could be combined to make custom adventures without "marking" cards in decks.

I fear that because not all of the characters one the current back will be in the new set that a new card back might be produced. If this is the case, I guess the problem can be mitigated by using card sleeves.

Another couple of questions. Will the cards use the same B,C,P,1,2,3,4,5 & 6 designators. If so, will the cards also have a set designator?

Thinking ahead on how to combine the sets ...

Will the cards from the new base set and AP have the same backing as the RotRL set? I hope the answer is yes so that the cards could be combined to make custom adventures without "marking" cards in decks.

I fear that because not all of the characters one the current back will be in the new set that a new card back might be produced. If this is the case, I guess the problem can be mitigated by using card sleeves.

Another couple of questions. Will the cards use the same B,C,P,1,2,3,4,5 & 6 designators. If so, will the cards also have a set designator?

The cards already have a set designator; see that "Rise of the Runelords" on the top left on your cards? That's a set designator - they're from the RotR AP.

Same card back. Same B, C, P, 1–6. Skull & Shackles logo where the RotR logo was.

Kevin Mack wrote:

In regards to afforementioned Iconic action scene art is it just mainly using the Iconics in the main set or will it include the iconics from the expansion set?

You should see 9 of the 11 iconics in a lot of the new art. Unfortunately, the warpriest and the swashbuckler won't get to appear quite as much, because a lot of the new art for the card game has to be commissioned before the reference designs for those two iconics is completed.

Okay final two art questions Will any of this new art appear in any other Paizo products or is it exclusive to the card game also by action is it iconics kicking butt, getting butt kicked or a mixture of the two?

Once we have art, it might end up being reused anywhere.

As for the exact state of the iconics and their butts and the kicking thereof or thereby, I can't say yet!

I'm somewhat concerned that the fact I foresaw new ACG Iconics being used in the new set may mean that my mind is starting to work like the Paizo staff... ;)

Vic asked for input on set 3, and I want to renew my suggestion of Jade Regent: great variable locations, new characters, and the possibility of some new sub-systems modeled from the AP (caravan, ally relationships, revolt/kingdom building).

My second choice is Kingmaker, though it is possible that Mummy's Mask or Wrath of the Righteous may be better choices by then.

I also really liked the idea somebody presented of stand-alone expansions based on modules or PFS. A small box based on the Falcon's Hollow series or the Razmir trilogy would be a great way to give extra content without designing an entire AP. It could even come without characters. However, some sort of "level" mechanism would be needed - perhaps all that is necessary is that the cards have the same letter/number coding as other sets.

Moar, please! :)

I also really liked the idea somebody presented of stand-alone expansions based on modules or PFS. A small box based on the Falcon's Hollow series or the Razmir trilogy would be a great way to give extra content without designing an entire AP. It could even come without characters. However, some sort of "level" mechanism would be needed - perhaps all that is necessary is that the cards have the same letter/number coding as other sets.

This is a great idea.

I also really liked the idea somebody presented of stand-alone expansions based on modules or PFS. A small box based on the Falcon's Hollow series or the Razmir trilogy would be a great way to give extra content without designing an entire AP. It could even come without characters. However, some sort of "level" mechanism would be needed - perhaps all that is necessary is that the cards have the same letter/number coding as other sets.

Moar, please! :)

That was my idea for Saving Darkmoon Vale . A stand alone adventure, instead of a whole path (which takes a whole lot more work!).

I can easily foresee stand-alone adventures being a lot more interesting once there are two or three base sets...a series of adventures that requires one to combine cards from several base sets would be quite excellent. Alternately: one that requires combining from several base sets + adventures...e.g., take the "Haste" spell cards from RotR AD2, the "xxxxxx" weapon from S&S AD2, combine with the materials from "Combo Adventure AD2", make the decks. This would allow them to really expand what goes in to each 110-card adventure deck, with more unique locations, monsters, etc.

Wyphy wrote:

I dunno, I just kind of feel like it's now just turned into a big cash grab...

When people are asking for more, offering them more isn't what I call a "cash grab"—it's what I call "doing things right."

Amen, Vic! Amen!

Good golly, Miss Molly - I cannot believe that people would complain about a monthly release schedule. Here's a thought: if you can't buy a particular pack, just wait til you can! Or, ask some of your game group to chip in. Or, throw a few of the packs on your birthday or holiday gift list.

Of course, we want more expansions and content for a phenomenal game. For goodness sake, no one is forcing you to buy them all the second they come out. It's not like these are limited edition products.

Wouldn't you rather have the option of buying more add-ons than being forced to wait for the new ones?!

And to call it a "cash grab" is absurd. Heaven forbid the Paizo team trys to make a profit or gets increased capital to invest more into the game (or other new products). A monthly release schedule for an insanely popular new game makes complete business sense.

Mike and Vic: Loyal gamers here in Arizona are rejoicing at this news. You picked a perfect, new campaign setting and a killer release schedule. Congrats on the much deserved success.

Ben

That was my idea for Saving Darkmoon Vale . A stand alone adventure, instead of a whole path (which takes a whole lot more work!).

Nice, downloaded thanks! I especially like the Tower of the Last Baron conversion (which is super appropriate as I inserted that adventure into my Skull & Shackles RPG game so will definately be using that when the new base set comes out :D )

Just a quick question.. the classes that are being reprinted. Are they the same iconics or different representations of the classes? If they are the same, will there be mechanical differences or are they duplicats?

The fighter will still be Valeros, with the iconic Wayne Reynolds art... but Skull & Shackles Valeros will be mechanically different from Rise of the Runelords Valeros.

The fighter will still be Valeros, with the iconic Wayne Reynolds art... but Skull & Shackles Valeros will be mechanically different from Rise of the Runelords Valeros.

New mechanics for the repeated classes? Well this just keeps getting better and better.

Hey Vic, just got into this game, and it is fantastic. I've read most of these post and skimmed a bit, so, I know that the two base sets will be backwards compatible and all, but will it be feasible and designed into the game, that we will be able to play straight through Rise of the Runelords and S&S with the same persistent characters? As in, will the mechanic work for maybe calling S&S "Adventure 1" essentially "Adventure 7" and adding that number for monster difficulty etc? I am thinking there might advanced character cards printable online to further increase skills etc beyond what is on the cards already (increased level cap)?

Thanks in advance. This whole adventure card game sure is getting epic.

Hey Vic, just got into this game, and it is fantastic. I've read most of these post and skimmed a bit, so, I know that the two base sets will be backwards compatible and all, but will it be feasible and designed into the game, that we will be able to play straight through Rise of the Runelords and S&S with the same persistent characters? As in, will the mechanic work for maybe calling S&S "Adventure 1" essentially "Adventure 7" and adding that number for monster difficulty etc? I am thinking there might advanced character cards printable online to further increase skills etc beyond what is on the cards already (increased level cap)?

Thanks in advance. This whole adventure card game sure is getting epic.

I would not recommend doing exactly that. You will be so powerful at the end of Runelords that you will destroy adventure 1 of Skull & Shackles. But you can use characters from one game in another a long as they are at an appropriate power level.

We're saying a lot of things about the Skull & Shackles set, but you guys should be aware that it is not fully designed and a lot can change over the next few months. So just please be aware that holding us to specifics at this early juncture is not something that's going to produce a lot of fruit. We'll have in-depth coverage of what Skull & Shackles is really about in a few months. For now, there are more Runelords to fight.

Mike

This might be a dumb question but I cant figure it out...

Will you be able to play Adventure one of Skull & Shackles with the Runelords base set or will you need to buy the Skulls & Shackles base set also?

Will you be able to play Adventure one of Skull & Shackles with the Runelords base set or will you need to buy the Skulls & Shackles base set also?

To be pedantic, if you have Adventure 1 of Skull & Shackles, then you will already have the Skulls & Shackles base set :) Adventure 1 will be included in with the base set, it will not be available separately. Adventures 2 to 5 will be available separately.

But answering what might be your intent, no it shouldn't be possible to realistically play without the base set because the base set will include most of the cards required to play. For example, there will be new location cards specific to Skull & Shackles, new Henchmen, new Villains and so on. Without these you will be not be able to construct the new scenarios, if you use the RotR weapons, spells, armour, items, allies and blessings then it will be a real hodge-podge mess IMHO.

salmonofdoubt wrote:

Will you be able to play Adventure one of Skull & Shackles with the Runelords base set or will you need to buy the Skulls & Shackles base set also?

To be pedantic, if you have Adventure 1 of Skull & Shackles, then you will already have the Skulls & Shackles base set :) Adventure 1 will be included in with the base set, it will not be available separately. Adventures 2 to 5 will be available separately.

But answering what might be your intent, no it shouldn't be possible to realistically play without the base set because the base set will include most of the cards required to play. For example, there will be new location cards specific to Skull & Shackles, new Henchmen, new Villains and so on. Without these you will be not be able to construct the new scenarios, if you use the RotR weapons, spells, armour, items, allies and blessings then it will be a real hodge-podge mess IMHO.

Thanks!

Thats pretty much what I figured, and it definitely makes sense... but I wanted to check just in case. :)

I would not recommend doing exactly that. You will be so powerful at the end of Runelords that you will destroy adventure 1 of Skull & Shackles. But you can use characters from one game in another a long as they are at an appropriate power level.

We're saying a lot of things about the Skull & Shackles set, but you guys should be aware that it is not fully designed and a lot can change over the next few months. So just please be aware that holding us to specifics at this early juncture is not something that's going to produce a lot of fruit. We'll have in-depth coverage of what Skull & Shackles is really about in a few months. For now, there are more Runelords to fight.

Mike

Okay thank you for the response. So, that answers my question that it is not your intent to have your characters' stats remain persistent through Runelords and S&S as of right now, and that's totally understandable.

However, I suppose it still leaves room for someone like me to make a way to allow that kind of persistence in one giant Adventure Path(s) between both games by using a variant like adding +7 to all of the checks to acquire and combat checks in S&S, while using an expanded custom character sheet with more skill feats etc. with the same persistent characters that finished Runelords without dying. That said, it might throw off the use of a lot of the new boons from the S&S set because then their benefits I would imagine would have to scale somehow to fit these powerful characters. Maybe some more blanket rules would work... Either way, new adventures await.

In the meantime you're right; there is much conquering and looting to take place until the swashbuckling begins.

Best regards,
toferyo

I love the idea of epic adventures with numbers 7+. You could also do a specific adventure expansion pack which increases the difficulty level. Like FFG did with their Lord of the Rings LCG.

Nevertheless great job with the game Mike and rest of the crew. Keep up the great work guys!

Will the Skull & Shackles base set box be the same size as the RotR base set box?

Will the Skull & Shackles base set box be the same size as the RotR base set box?

Yes.

This thread is old enough that when I saw it on the recent list, I thought it was a new thread with new details. Disappointment reared its ugly head.

Im just curious is the heroes from the RotR set will be usable in this AP? I realize three of them overlap, which I assume means that at least the archetypes the heroes have to choose from will be different than the ones in RotR, but even more differences AND the ability to use the ones from RotR will help this one sell, I think.

Also, I think a new Base set for every AP will likely be a mistake in the long run, opposed to a generic base set and each AP having maybe like a 'deluxe expansion' for Ch1 that has a larger assortment of cards, and then the other 5 chapters being the regular packs.

I realize you dont always want a ton of overlap in the generic cards of the game, but what you end up doing is making is so you HAVE to buy the base to play anything else, and that alone will drive some people away. Just my 2cp though.

Edit: Basically, the idea boils down to the fact that since you are making each AP self contained and there is no NEED to buy more than what is contained in the one AP to play the one AP, you will lose customers who might buy additional stuff. Think of it like Dominion. You Can play with just one Core (or the other 2 to 3 that can be played straight from the box), but with most of them, you have to buy at least a Core to use it. While that compares just fine to Base Set plus Chapter packs, it doesnt translate well for people you want to go from one AP to another.

I totally disagree.

The problem with the base set + expansions++ philosophy is that each expansion sells less and less. I bet you the numbers for Dominion on the newer expansions are much less than earlier expansions. What Paizo and Lone Shark Games are doing here is very smart. You refresh the pool every 6 months. You don't have to urge your customer base to stick with it month after month. You get a new product to sell the whole idea every 6 months.

The same concept exists in a game like Magic: The Gathering. They release a base set of a major theme in the fall, then a couple expansions to it, but all the cards are able to be played together. If WoTC did not use that particular format, they would have not had the longevity they have had.

There must have been some smart people around when Magic was first released. :)

There must have been some smart people around when Magic was first released. :)

I remember the shock and confusion when an upstart like WotC bought out TSR and all the D&D IP!

And panic. Don't forget the panic.

And don't forget the disastrous 4th edition and the peel off of Dragon magazine that now gives us Pathfinder Adventure not-the-card game, which is simply the best RPG (well, I believe).

This thread is old enough that when I saw it on the recent list, I thought it was a new thread with new details. Disappointment reared its ugly head.

It doesn't change the fact that we will be spending our money to buy it in June. lol. Good times.