Help Paizo Celebrate Kingmaker's 10th Anniversary!

eddv wrote:

By the point that theyre back to playing 2nd banana to WotC, who really cares about Paizo is my point.

You actually came to the Paizo boards just to say "who really cares about Paizo"?!?

Damn, the Internet is weird.

If They go back to being a 3pp for WotC was the full context there.

But sure.

I started out caring about them when they were a 3PP for WotC. Why would now be any different?

I think this could be a smart way to recruit players away from D&D 5e to PF2. In a fairly short period of time, PF2 will surpass D&D 5E in terms of player options. Providing D&D 5E stats will hook D&D 5E players, who will then consider changing over to PF2 when they realize that it provides a richer variety of options than D&D 5E ever will.

I started out caring about them when they were a 3PP for WotC. Why would now be any different?

If 1e fans are sacrificed on the altar of 2e fans(who do not yet exist), it may change how I feel about the company.

Joana wrote:

CorvusMask wrote:

Anyhoo, if this version gets updates from CRPG version, I hope it doesn't get plot points adaptions from CRPG version.

Mostly because CRPG version changes things radically, and not always for better. I mean, most of it is cutting content, like centaurs, bog striders, Fort Drelev and then changing everything to connect to Nyrissa in more obvious way while making the big bads feel less independent.

{my bold}

This was most likely 100% in response to customer feedback. One of the (few) major complaints on the boards about Kingmaker was that the BBEG "came out of nowhere" in the last book and wasn't foreshadowed enough in the earlier volumes.

Yeah, but it also makes them all feel like pawns, and two of them are even more sympathetic than the original version. And they changed lot of details in general for different reasons, like because they can't have war mechanics, there isn't really straight up "war" war in War of the Kings.

I always imagined Irovetti as somewhat more sympathetic. In the original draft he wasn't evil; he was just a through-and-through opportunist. He wanted the same thing the PCs wanted: to dominate the "Stolen Lands" area. He was no doubt far less altruistic than most PC parties, but he wasn't going around kicking puppies and burning kittens for sport. He (correctly) sees the PCs as upstart rivals and a threat to his power, so as they start breaking out of their shell and taking down Drelev in adventure #4, he made a power play to cut the head off the snake and preserve his dominance.

In running Kingmaker in my home game, as soon as Drelev fell to the PCs, Pitax immediately started claiming the now-unclaimed border hexes and moving into Drelev territory. They weren't just going to sit idly by and let the PCs grab up that land. Fortune favors the bold! The PCs pretty quickly ended up with a new contested border with Pitax, and while they were wary of Pitax's expansion they couldn't really complain about his land grab either. After all, the Freedoms of the River Kingdoms are pretty clear that "you have what you can hold." In that context, the invite to the Rushlight Festival was a pretty natural and in-character olive branch. And then, of course, things went very VERY sideways... :)

Joana wrote:

CorvusMask wrote:

Anyhoo, if this version gets updates from CRPG version, I hope it doesn't get plot points adaptions from CRPG version.

Mostly because CRPG version changes things radically, and not always for better. I mean, most of it is cutting content, like centaurs, bog striders, Fort Drelev and then changing everything to connect to Nyrissa in more obvious way while making the big bads feel less independent.

{my bold}

This was most likely 100% in response to customer feedback. One of the (few) major complaints on the boards about Kingmaker was that the BBEG "came out of nowhere" in the last book and wasn't foreshadowed enough in the earlier volumes.

Yeah, but it also makes them all feel like pawns, and two of them are even more sympathetic than the original version. And they changed lot of details in general for different reasons, like because they can't have war mechanics, there isn't really straight up "war" war in War of the Kings.

For the CRPG to make changes is only natural. Not just because it's on a computer rather than on tabletop, but because otherwise it would be just a boring copycat of the books. I would expect the anniversary edition to make changes too, for the same reason.

I'd like to throw in my unsolicited support for a 1E hardcover edition. Yes, I know that I can get pdfs for Kingmaker but I don't enjoy running my games while using a pdf. I like having the physical book and the physical copies for Kingmaker are out of print and difficult to get (i.e. expensive).

The argument telling people to move on to 2E really reminds me off the D&D transition from 3.5 to 4E. Paizo was able to step in and fill a gap because there was a sizable demand to continue supporting 3.5. It seems to me like the same type of thing is going to happen with Pathfinder 1E if Paizo chooses to not end support for 1E (which after June, I think they are)

Neat!

Adapting Kingmaker to the new edition is a good idea. I've personally wanted to play it for some time but some of the earlier PF1 APs don't do all that well with some of the player option they did not anticipate because they postdate the AP. I mean, we ran roughshod over council of thieves, which hurt the feel.

So putting it in 2e where the sheer number of options is lower (just because you launch with 2-3 books, and not 50) is a good thing I think.

TriOmegaZero wrote:

I started out caring about them when they were a 3PP for WotC. Why would now be any different?

If 1e fans are sacrificed on the altar of 2e fans(who do not yet exist), it may change how I feel about the company.

The way I hear it, that happened the moment 2E and the end of 1E content was announced.

Hype!

Nobody is entitled to make products for you. Using words like sacrifice is just hilarious. There is a reason for PF2E and asking the devs to cater to you over 2E is asking them to sacrifice their futures and finances. It is a selfish and myopic view of the industry.

Especially when with all the PF1 content we have, back porting should be relatively easy. You know the appropriate DCs and you have the monster stat blocks already (for free no less!)

I mean, if you want a dead tree version of Kingmaker you might be in trouble but the PDFs are already using the PF1 ruleset. So you can play Kingmaker for PF1 right now. I can't imagine backporting i going to be much harder than running the anniversary edition of RotRL with the 3.5 rules.

You can absolutely ask for a 1E version. I have myself asked for that.

Paizo is entirely within their rights to say no. What you do with that answer reflects on you, not Paizo, not anyone else.

Ah, sure, just when the partner and I finally finished accumulating all the original volumes, too. =P

I too am curious as to how much it's going to differ from the original version. Since I already have it all and like playing PF1 just fine, I'm not sure if I personally will pick it up if it's just a direct port. (There will be plenty of PF2 APs for me to play in the future, after all.) If it's not that different, I'd totally back an option that allowed you to only select some of the bonus content (like the companion stuff). I'd go for a 1E version if it was significantly updated, too.

And if there was an option for a PF1 bestiary (for the NPCs and things you can't just look up the equivalent of) similar to what they're offering for 5E, that'd be nifty for those who'd like to run it with updates in PF1, in the absence of a full version.

My group loves Kingmaker; it was the first campaign we played as a group, and we're actually playing through it again now. Several of them are playing the computer game too. I have no doubt that this would be something that most of them would pounce on...

But none of them are even slightly interested in Pathfinder 2E. I'm not either, but I wanted to at least put one or two of the playtest adventures through their paces; the suggestion was dead on arrival.

As such, this is going to be a hard pass for all of us, unless there's an option for a PF 1E version as part of the crowdfunding rewards.

I'd just like to add a voice of support for incorporating Dudemeister's changes. They improve the adventure substantially.

My Kingmaker experience lasted seven years. I started as a player in 2010, and the GM did not have the benefit of much added community material, because precious of it had been invented at that point. We made it to the end of Book 3 before the campaign fizzled (the GM developed a severe case of Real Life).

About a year after that, one of the other alumni of that group decided to start a fresh Kingmaker with a new group, and I joined in. By that time, Dudemeister had invented the Monster Kingdom and a couple other modifications, which the new GM integrated, and they made the play experience much better (even though I was going through stuff I'd already done for the first half of the second playthrough).

Later, I circled back and played out the remainder of the original Kingmaker campaign as the GM, for one of the other original players, finishing it as a part of a solo campaign -- though honestly, by that time it was so heavily modified as to only vaguely resemble the original campaign. I cherry-picked bits of Book 5, notably the Rushlight Festival; and ran a good bit of Book 6, but the plotting was drastically different.

Lately, I've been listening to Sugar Fuelled Gamers' Kingmaker, an actual play podcast by a GM running the AP for a solo PC played his wife. He integrated a lot of Dudemeister's additions, as well as some of his own; it's far and away the best run Kingmaker I've seen.

Anyway! Please consider integrating Dudemeister's modifications. They make the entire thing much better.

I was waiting for this for the past few years, but since it won't be proper Pathfinder, I'll just stick with the CRPG.

My advice would be to add everything you can from the game, as they have really expanded the story, while somehow streamlining it!

Dudemeister plugged his work. If there's a hardcover, I would love, love to see it incorporate the material that Kingmaker GMs have posted on the forum over the years. We all put a lot of love into our campaigns, and we loved seeing other people take our creations and make something even bigger.

When we updated RotR and CotCT, since there were no video games to take innovations and expansions from, we plumbed the boards to see what ideas the community had tried out and incorporated or adapted the best of them as space and time allowed. We are already looking through the Kingmaker boards for similar popular threads.

I'm excited and think this will ultimately pay off in the long run, possibly converting g some 1e players since they'll have the ability to compare the systems

You can absolutely ask for a 1E version. I have myself asked for that.

Paizo is entirely within their rights to say no. What you do with that answer reflects on you, not Paizo, not anyone else.

It all depends on how they go about sharing that information. A large chunk of the pathfinder base came about because of how wotc said 4e was great compared to earlier editions. How companies treat the people that come to them for their product matters, especially in breaking what could be seen as bad news.

I have yet to see any Paizo employee say anything disparaging of 1E.

TriOmegaZero wrote:

I started out caring about them when they were a 3PP for WotC. Why would now be any different?

If 1e fans are sacrificed on the altar of 2e fans(who do not yet exist), it may change how I feel about the company.

The only sacrifice that happened is all the PF1 customers who sacrificed buying PF1 on the altars of switching to 5E or having so much PF material that they didn't need to buy more.

Yeah, I know. You bought everything, you would continue to buy everything, you're a True Fan. But turns out that there weren't enough of you True Fans to keep the ball rolling when 5E and crunch/lore saturation made people move their money elsewhere.

I have yet to see any Paizo employee say anything disparaging of 1E.

Nor will you. We love the game and spent 10 years making it the best it can be, but it is time for us to move on. We are glad that folks still enjoy playing it, we really are, but we are very excited to show you what the new game can do.

Thanks Jason, I didn't feel I needed to say it. :)

Definitely excited for a hardcover/updated Kingmaker, definitely one of my favorite APs. Finishing up my current campaign on Sunday; while there's things I wish I had GM'd differently on the whole it was very successful and the players had a lot of fun. My players made a beeline for Vordakai and I didn't want to pull punches even though they were majorly under-leveled. Ended up giving them a temporary mythic tier, which ended up working well.

The kingdom building bit quickly fell by the wayside in my group after about middle of book 3. It never quite felt as fun for them as exploring, even when I tried to inject more interesting aspects into the monthly events. Typically just shifted to a more narrative "what are your characters hopes/plans for the kingdom. I'd love to see a lower mechanical, but still narrative alternative rule set/suggestions incorporated into the updated version.

I would love, love, love a fancy collectors edition 'map' -- picturing a wyrmwood/other woodworking company type of thing. Probably larger than 1" hex scale -- but recessed/fog of war engraving just showing the major landmarks/names of regions, then magnetized tiles with full etched artwork to stick as tiles are explored.

I'll apologize up front for not reading this entire thread. Too much bitterness. But if it hasn't already been said...

Regarding all of the suggestions on additional content for the hardcover, such as...

I am really exited for PF2 and can't wait to play it. Kingmaker annoucement is great, since this is one of the most popular AP ever done. This being said, I believe it's a marketing mistake to announce a 5e book before PF2 even being released. Not that it's a bad idea per say, but it overshadows PF2. Converting Kingmaker to PF2 was one of the reason to buy PF2 products. Now, I don't have too if I have the 5e books. I hope they won't have new DnD 5e announcement for awhile and spoilers from PF2 will increase, to focus back on PF2.

I was really hoping we'd get Second Darkness and Legacy of Fire converted to 1st Edition Pathfinder. As for signing up for this crowdfunding measure, I find it slightly confusing that Paizo Publishing is resorting to having it's customers spend their own money in order to fund production on a product Paizo itself is supposed to be working on. Is Paizo having revenue issues?

I just finished both running 1E Kingmaker and playing in a 1E Kingmaker game. I thought I was done with this AP forever. Then they announce a 2E version...….Dammit! Just when I thought I was out....THEY PULL ME BACK IN!!!

Now I know with certainty that I will run this again. It'll be fun to see the changes both in scripted events as well as the upgrade to the improved 2E system. I'm curious how the campaign will progress and unfold with a new mix of PC's.

...

Well, my interest in this is pretty minimal, but it's not because of the edition thing.

It's 'cause while the CRPG from Owlcat fixed a lot of the things I didn't care for in the AP, it's also thoroughly scratched my itch. Kingmaker didn't really ring my bell the first time I ran it.

Hope everyone who does love it gives this a whirl, though!

I was really hoping we'd get Second Darkness and Legacy of Fire converted to 1st Edition Pathfinder. As for signing up for this crowdfunding measure, I find it slightly confusing that Paizo Publishing is resorting to having it's customers spend their own money in order to fund production on a product Paizo itself is supposed to be working on. Is Paizo having revenue issues?

They’re unsure of demand , especially regarding how much in the way of “extra goodies” they should produce.

If they did it themselves, they’d just have a hardcover (and maybe a deluxe edition). This way they can include more out there or expensive things, knowing they’re only on the hook for it if there’s sufficient demand to justify the expense.

FWIW, I think this approach is probably the only way a PF1 version has any chance of seeing the light of day. I could imagine there’s a downside to “muddying the waters” and continuing to produce PF1 books, but if that isn’t insurmountable, a crowdfunding Campaign is a good way to ascertain the market for something.

What people say they’ll spend money on often doesn’t line up with what people will spend money on.

I was really hoping we'd get Second Darkness and Legacy of Fire converted to 1st Edition Pathfinder. As for signing up for this crowdfunding measure, I find it slightly confusing that Paizo Publishing is resorting to having it's customers spend their own money in order to fund production on a product Paizo itself is supposed to be working on. Is Paizo having revenue issues?

Or is Paizo trying out a different approach? Nowadays, I think it is an ultra smart move with niche publishing to involve potential buyers early on.

Also, the comment,

I find it slightly confusing that Paizo Publishing is resorting to having it's customers spend their own money in order to fund production on a product Paizo itself is supposed to be working on. Is Paizo having revenue issues?

Has me confused. When you buy a book, you spend money on the production - that is part of the cost.

I look forward to this!

I would imagine, if the response is really good, that we would see a 1e compilation of the new stuff. I wouldn't mind to have both the 2e and 1e.

I look forward to this!

I would imagine, if the response is really good, that we would see a 1e compilation of the new stuff. I wouldn't mind to have both the 2e and 1e.

I’d love a PF1 version, but it’d be complicated (something like a tier or addon, conditional on getting sufficient backers).

This is exciting.

I was a PF1 game master, but the game got too much for me to run. So I reluctantly swapped my table to 5e. (Not all my players will thrilled. But oh well. I’m the one running and buying the books.)
But I was always sad I never got a chance to run Kingmaker, having bought the dead tree version of tat AP.
A 5e bestiary that lets me run the book with minimal conversion is a must-buy. I look forward to adding that to my book shelf.

I’m surprised it took this long to do 5e material.
Kobold Press is far smaller than Paizo, and was doing cross system products for years. And Green Ronin is able to support their own game lines and 5e 3rd Party books.
Paizo has the staff that they can do a few 5e books (with freelancers) and still manage Pathfinder and Starfinder.

I’m surprised it took this long to do 5e material.
Kobold Press is far smaller than Paizo, and was doing cross system products for years. And Green Ronin is able to support their own game lines and 5e 3rd Party books.
Paizo has the staff that they can do a few 5e books (with freelancers) and still manage Pathfinder and Starfinder.

Neither KP nor GR are the same size as Paizo, and what works for a publishing company of one size typically does not work for a publishing company of a different size. It's much easier to support multiple systems when your company essentially produces one product at a time with a limited in-house staff. It is very, very different to be a mid-sized publisher like Paizo who produces significantly more products on much more aggressive timetables, and who has a much heavier burden of distributor deadlines to meet and full-time staff to pay.

There is much less overlap between running a small publishing company with fewer than a dozen full-time staff members, running a mid-sized publishing company with 70+ employees, or running a corporate organization that is a subholding of an international conglomerate, than someone not familiar with the industry might think.

From the twitch stream just concluded, it sounds like PF1 isn't an option but the full details are going up on Tuesday.

James gave a good answer, it seemed to me (Jason Bulmahn in the chat said similar). They like PF1 and are proud of it, but there's only so many directions they can split their focus/energy. They're moving on to PF2 and like that and are proud of that too.

I'd really like to see a PF1 compilation alongside everything else that they're doing, but it sounds like it's just not feasible for them.

They asked for feedback, they got feedback (make it 1E compatible). If they still don't want to do it, there's really nothing left to say on the matter. It's disappointing.

Yeah, Erik mona was in the chat. He said they’d heard the feedback (I think that’s what he was referring to anyhow). Hopefully there’ll be a way to include PF1 in some way but I guess there always has to be an ending.

pennywit wrote:

Dudemeister plugged his work. If there's a hardcover, I would love, love to see it incorporate the material that Kingmaker GMs have posted on the forum over the years. We all put a lot of love into our campaigns, and we loved seeing other people take our creations and make something even bigger.

When we updated RotR and CotCT, since there were no video games to take innovations and expansions from, we plumbed the boards to see what ideas the community had tried out and incorporated or adapted the best of them as space and time allowed. We are already looking through the Kingmaker boards for similar popular threads.

My DMs are open ;-)

Mark Moreland wrote:

pennywit wrote:

Dudemeister plugged his work. If there's a hardcover, I would love, love to see it incorporate the material that Kingmaker GMs have posted on the forum over the years. We all put a lot of love into our campaigns, and we loved seeing other people take our creations and make something even bigger.

When we updated RotR and CotCT, since there were no video games to take innovations and expansions from, we plumbed the boards to see what ideas the community had tried out and incorporated or adapted the best of them as space and time allowed. We are already looking through the Kingmaker boards for similar popular threads.

My DMs are open ;-)

That came out flirtier than I expected...

But seriously would love to contribute some words to this book.

Maybe a voice of a minority here, but I would gladly pay for a well-designed, professional 5e conversion guide, even in just pdf form, for each upcoming AP and setting guide. I prefer playing 5e for its rules simplicity, but love the complexity of the Pathfinder setting and stories.

Maybe a voice of a minority here, but I would gladly pay for a well-designed, professional 5e conversion guide, even in just pdf form, for each upcoming AP and setting guide. I prefer playing 5e for its rules simplicity, but love the complexity of the Pathfinder setting and stories.

I don't think you're alone, there are a lot of Paizo fans that prefer 5e, me being in of them, and I'd be on board. It would have to be a third party, I guess, as Paizo wouldn't have the time (and expertise?) to do the conversion but they could publish it. Maybe this will happen later on down the 2e track, when Paizo have that more sorted. This bestiary is a teaser towards that!

From the twitch stream just concluded, it sounds like PF1 isn't an option but the full details are going up on Tuesday.

James gave a good answer, it seemed to me (Jason Bulmahn in the chat said similar). They like PF1 and are proud of it, but there's only so many directions they can split their focus/energy. They're moving on to PF2 and like that and are proud of that too.

I'd really like to see a PF1 compilation alongside everything else that they're doing, but it sounds like it's just not feasible for them.

I totally get it but.

Just as making a 5e version is a back-door entry into that market, depending on how it's done having a PF1 version is a back-door entry to that market. Meaning while my groups are lukewarm at best regarding PF2, if this came in a PF1 & 2 package, I'd buy it. And maybe I'd see something in the PF2 portion that I'd like and be tempted.

But if there's really not enough manpower to convert the PF1 materials that already exist to PF1 rules (ie. the least possible amount of labour of any edition) in order to make extra sales, then hey, let's call this a lost sale, and lost exposure of PF2 to those of us who are reluctant or fence-sitting. Shrug.

It's clear that Paizo doesn't want to do this. Probably because they're hoping to kill off the PF1 new-stuff supply chain as quickly as possible in the expectation that it'll spur PF2 new-stuff sales. I don't envy them these decisions, but while I disagree with the way Gorbacz keeps putting it, PF1 is dead to Paizo. So be it.

I think it likely points to the size of the two markets (5E fans open to non wotc adventures and PF1 fans who wont otherwise convert to PF2) - or at least to paizo's estimate of them.

I wonder if there's also a "pull the bandaid off quickly" element. If theres a PF1 version of this there'll be requests (and expectation) of PF1 versions of other things down the track.

If they want to move on from PF1 because its not financially viable, there has to be a last book. Im guessing AP144 is it.

Aldarc wrote:

Releasing a bestiary for 5e seems like it is sending mixed messages about the future of PF2 even before it has been released.

Actually, this seems more like an instrument to get D&D 5E players interested in Pathfinder and maybe get them to convert.

Maybe but this speculative intent does not appear to be the primary way that this announcement is being read by 5e fans elsewhere. Many are hailing this as further evidence that 5E is the way forward for the FRPG tabletop genre.

Zaister wrote:

Aldarc wrote:

Releasing a bestiary for 5e seems like it is sending mixed messages about the future of PF2 even before it has been released.

Actually, this seems more like an instrument to get D&D 5E players interested in Pathfinder and maybe get them to convert.

Maybe but this speculative intent does not appear to be the primary way that this announcement is being read by 5e fans elsewhere. Many are hailing this as further evidence that 5E is the way forward for the FRPG tabletop genre.

Currently I would say there's no way to measure how the costumers have been reacting to this announcement. 2E isn't out yet, so there's no way this alone can show us how people will react after getting a look at the new game and the 5E Bestiary.

Saying this an evidence of anything is overreacting... When the product is out, however, we might see if some will be whiling to buy the 2E hardcover and the 5E bestiary just so they can play a Paizo/Pathfinder adventure.

I have been playing Pathfinder not only because of the system, but also because of the setting and the amazing stories we get. And if this setting can be further supported by costumers whiling to buy two books to play a Pathfinder Adventure, there's no other way to see it if not as a plus.

BPorter wrote:

eddv wrote:

By the point that theyre back to playing 2nd banana to WotC, who really cares about Paizo is my point.

You actually came to the Paizo boards just to say "who really cares about Paizo"?!?

Damn, the Internet is weird.

If They go back to being a 3pp for WotC was the full context there.

But sure.

Ah. My bad, then. I find it impossible to believe that Paizo has any desire or intent to go back to relying on a being a 3PP for WotC. I also don't see a scenario where PF2 and/or Starfinder are abandoned.