Arelas's page

176 posts. 1 review. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 176 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

It seems email and sidecart are having issues.

To simplify please cancel the following subscriptions
Starfinder Adventure Path
Pathfinder Adventure
Pathfinder Lost Omens

Thank you.

Marco Massoudi wrote:

Getting the pawns over 5 months later kinda defeats the whole short AP idea and it looks like something in planning went wrong.

This does seem a disappointing problem with the new format.

Thank you.

I'm good with how the order is now.

Since I have not received a response to my email I will post here.

Please cancel my Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Modules, and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game subscriptions.

Thank you.

Are there prints?

My group found the original Rise of Runelords a great intro to paizo's world. It was a great transfer from dungeon magazine. It is kind of the classic AP.

davidvs wrote:

I just received my copy of the Rise of the Runelords Anniversary Edition. Needless to say, I am delighted.

But it does prompt me to ask:

Which other Adventure Paths are 3.5 instead of Pathfinder?

Has Paizo staff announced any intention to update those to Pathfinder?

Has Paizo staff announced any intention to publish more hardcover "summary editions", whether anniversary or just because?

I would much rather own hardcover compilations than paperbacks, but for reasons of durability and because I do not care much about the non-adventure "extras" in the Adventure Paths.

The 3.5 AP's are

Rise of Runelords (now pathfinder in AE)
Curse of the Crimson Throne
Second Darkness
Legacy of Fire

Previously Paizo said The Rise of Runelords Anniversary Book was unique. It was a celebration of the company/world more than a new line. They didn't want people to wait for summary editions and not buy paths. Second Darkness and Legacy of Fire also seemed to be less popular and sold less. So maybe we will see Curse redone, but I think it is unlikely.

Despite owning them I haven't run Crimson or Legacy yet, and would happily buy an updated pathfinder version.

Zaister wrote:
The Kyngdoms wrote:
I also agree with what someone else said. I think the majority of us who prepaid would rather get the product than a refund and that it does speaks volumes for what we think of Nic's ability. In spite of everything.
That much is true for me, at least.

Same here.

Thanks. :)

Skeld wrote:
KaeYoss wrote:
Mine's not even pending yet...

Mine's been pending since Tuesday (I think, maybe Wednesday). At least I'm not the only one in the boat. I hope it gets shipped today so I can get PDFs.


Mines been pending since the 7th.

Aaron Bitman wrote:
pres man wrote:
You know what the saddest thing about those are? That none of those monsters are now Open Content. They can't even put them in their own Bestiary.

That's hardly a shock, is it? When Gary Gygax left TSR, was he allowed to publish material for his own Greyhawk setting? When Eric Mona, et al, were hired to write gaming materials, that writing was still owned by the company that hired them. It was no secret. If you want to own your published works, you start your own company.

I agree on the gaming system not being a shock. That doesn't make it less sad, just understandable.

Gygax didn't do more Greyhawk gaming products. However, he was allowed to finish his novel series of Gord the Rogue using Greyhawk. I think only two of the books are official Greyhawk, but the rest still uses the world and all its parts and major npcs (4 more books I think).

Didn't they say the pdf wasn't finished on Friday? Some more hyper links were being put in.

Of course on Monday if it's all done they should put the pdf up. They did mention possibly taking the forums down do to the downloads.

Wildfire142 wrote:

Just wanted to say the bestiary icon are interesting and I'm sure once I've got them memorized I'll be able to tell at a glance about the creature.

Good idea looking forward to see how it works out.

Im just hoping there arent too many. That and the new warmachine symbols aren't too close. :)

The next 4 classes will probably relate to an AP or region being done in the next year or so. So Council of Thieves seems too soon. That leaves King Maker or Jade Regent. Jade Regent seems the most likely to have new style classes.

James Jacobs wrote:
GeraintElberion wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
GeraintElberion wrote:

I think I have spotted the first Easter Egg in Council Of Thieves.

** spoiler omitted **

This is indeed an easter egg. It's also a relatively even MORE subtle bit of foreshadowing to an AP that is still well over a year away from starting.
Jade Regent?

So could this also be a hint to the style of the four new classes?

Congrats, nice to see your risk paid off. My group is eagerly awaiting their copies.

Thanks for the help. I was thinking of getting a reader for around the house and easier on the eyes.

I could see it being a problem at the table, but wasn't planning on it for that use. Old fashioned book or labtop would work better.

Thanks again.

I know this is an old topic, but I was wondering has anyone tried the Kindle DX with paizo pdfs?

I'll add support to the "no map folios in chronicles" camp.

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Which of these ideas are interesting to you? What other suggestions do you have for the line that you think would be cool to play?

I like the idea of the one off adventure with pregens highly related to the story of the module. I find the s.o.s of my group like these type (and will play in them). Halloween we did the small Razor Coast module by Sinister adventures which did this via possesion.

I also like the idea of modules connected to an adventure path. When we cant get the actual game in, it be fun to do these side stories. Especially when the AP session ends in a spot where you need everyone for the next session.

My group rarely gets to high levels except at the end of a path which is usually the end of that campaign storyline. Not that I'm against them but I wouldn't want too many.

Of course super modules are small APs so all for them.

Over the last few years:

Barbarian : 2
Bard : 2 (one started as a monk)
Cleric : 3
Druid : 0
Fighter : 4
Monk: 2 (one became a bard)
Paladin : 2
Ranger : 3
Rogue : 3
Sorcerer : 1
Wizard : 3

Other classes
Scout : 1
Gun Mage(IK): 1
Artificer: 1
Totem Warrior : 1

Prestige Class
Loremaster : 1
Knight of the Pale(Ptolus) : 1
Great Captain : 1
Assassin: 1
The Agent (IK): 1

Rodney Thompson wrote:
I also think that judging an adventure path by its first adventure may be a bit harsh. Life's Bazaar was just a big dungeon crawl. Now, Life's Bazaar did set up the whole city of Cauldron, and of course the Whispering Cairn set up Diamond Lake; for Rescue at Rivenroar, Brindol was already set up by Red Hand of Doom. I also don't think RaR gets enough credit for what it does do in unique ways: it has a series of linked encounters that are part of a village raid, and it has a puzzle surrounding the captives...where the captives themselves are the clues. I'd call that fairly atypical.

I know people at WOTC have Red Hand of Doom to access I don't. The first module for an AP should set up the AP. I found RaR very lacking. Saying that an older module, from another edition, set up the town is for lack of a better word annoying. Then again the last few Digital Insider Updates have put me in the same mood. Honestly you could skip the first module and it would change little.

As for the series of linked encounters, it was okay but I guess my group compared it heavily to Burnt Offerings. Nothing really excited us to continue Scales. It felt as a series of encounters with little personality. Of course as a DM the more I put into it, the more I wonder if it will derail the story later (of course a real outline for the DMs might help with that).

Rodney Thompson wrote:
Beyond that, I think that Siege at Bordrin's Watch and the Shadow Rift of Umbraforge both are as chock-full of interesting locales, background, etc. as you can get. Overlook is a great, detailed, useful city. I'm super jealous of Rob Schwalb's city design, as it makes Mithrendain look so ho-hum next to it. Scott Gray brings the Shadowfell to life. I think both adventures are extremely detailed and leave a lot of hooks for the DM...

These two are far better modules. In fact they (and some of Vaughns comments) are why I decided to run this campaign. In a way Siege fits better as the first module of this AP. However, I still feel very in the dark about the direction of the AP. Was anything in the first module important? Will we see bigger connections between the modules? Can we have an overview of important characters or such?

crosswiredmind wrote:

The idea that he had some elaborate corporate-sponsored plan to deceive the D&D community requires a very large stretch of imagination and give far too much credit to WotC to be able to pull of such an elaborate and coordinated campaign of deception and obfuscation.

Go look at the cover of Entertainment Weekly. The magazine has Harry Potter on the cover of its fall movie issue. HP isn't coming out until next year. The company that publishes EW also owns WB. So when EW went to WB while it put its fall preview issue together was the guy at WB (who more than likely knew HP was going to be delayed) lying when he gave approval for the cover? Is EW lying because the movie is on the cover but not coming out until next summer?

Are you seriously claiming WB and the company that owns it and EW isn't massively larger than WOTC? :) I mean the harry potter budget alone is probably bigger than the DD budget. I also believe the Potter delay was a recent decision so wouldn't have spread out to all of WB. Kinda curious what the video game companies are doing with the delay. :)

Now I do agree that I doubt WOTC is that good at planning and hiding things. I also think this WOTC guy thing has been a tad over done at this point.

Charles Ulveling wrote:

Hey guys!

I was just looking for a little help in adapting the 2nd SoW AP into the FR. I was thinking to set it in the Dalelands, but I'm not very versed in Realmslore. I was hoping someone could givee me a more informed answer as far as location. Thanks!

I admit I've lost track of the realms a bit, plus there's the new realms version. Ive been thinking Greyhawk myself. The Red Hand of Doom Module places Elsir Vale (in the realms) imbetween the Misty Vale and the Forest of Amtar. Changing Brindol to Rethmar and the Rathgaunt hills into Giantshield moutains. Other suggestions were the southern stretches of Chessenta or the boderlands of Damara/Narfell/Implitur. Im not sure how many of those regions still exist in 4e Realms.

Without the AP outline its hard to tell how big the region of the story will be. I was hoping for a where to put it article. However, they havent even gotten the player article out yet.

baradifi wrote:

How hard has the conversion been? How time-consuming? Or do the new DM adventure creation tools in 4e streamline this?

In a nutshell how scared should time-strapped GMs be of upconverting Paizo?

I converted the first half of Sins of the Savior rather quickly. Honestly, its not that hard as long as you are willing to be a little flexible (I changed some of the summoned monsters). Converting the named characters isn't to bad using the dmg. In fact they are a good deal easier to run.

P.H. Dungeon wrote:
I glanced over the second adventure in the path just now. At first glance it looks significantly better to me than the first adventure. The first one felt like another keep on shadowfell, with a lot of more or less pointless hack and slash. This one seems to have more story, and just looks better overall. However, I haven't looked at it too closely. I'd still like to see an overview for the entire AP, and I think they are doing their readers a huge disservice by not providing one.

The second is a good deal better than the first. However, the lack of overview and character information is annoying. I think they are doing a character article soon, but it be nice before people start using the campaign. My group is going to try it as the off campaigns to our Crimson game. Where would you place Elsir Vale in Greyhawk? (some players like more background for their characters)

Scott Betts wrote:
Moff Rimmer wrote:
Azigen wrote:
They are adding 2 more tools in.


What two more tools are included with JUST the magazine price? Just curious mostly.

Both the ability generator (handy, but nothing extraordinary) and encounter generator (AWESOME) are included with the $5 deal.

I hope they modify the generator to either include stats or at least pg numbers/book info and a working print option.

Audrin_Noreys wrote:

Having run an Iron Kingdoms campaign I never thought 4th ed would be seriously considered for the core rules of the setting. Regardless of what one’s opinion of the new edition of D&D is, the basics of it are at odds with the general feel of IK. The grim low fantasy atmosphere of the Iron Kingdoms is very different with the inherently high-fantasy rules of 4th ed. On top of that add firearms and cannons and warjacks. Plus the conversion of all the setting specific classes would be a monumental task in and of itself. I really hope that this isn’t the beginning of the end of the setting. A few articles in a magazine aren’t very much for sustaining the life of a world.

This is one of the problems my friends and I expected with the end of 3.5 in regards to all the OGL properties out there. They have all this source material and no core on which to attach it. Yes they could go with Pathfinder but, as cool as it is, it isn’t going to be the only 3.5 surrogate.
As kind of a side note about Iron Kingdoms, does anyone else that has played it think that War Machine’s storyline detracts from the RPG setting or vice versa? In this I mean that what would be cool for a table top minis combat game isn’t necessarily cool for a RPG setting not as a which one is better/more fun.

Amusingly enough Id say 4e is closer to warmachine style rules than 3.5. Now its not as gritty as IK but then again warmachine isn't. The 4e ritual seperation of magic fits in quite well. The lack of summoning and such as well. I mean how early can you fly in 3.5? They spent a lot of time removing/redoing spells in the IK guides, cause 3.5 had too much high magic. The weaking of magic items is great since IK items are suppose to be unique. Actually with less healing potions and the healing rules of IK, you better not get hurt. The warlord fits quite nicely. Now Tielfings, Dragonborn and Eldarin don't fit so well. Then again the 3.5 elf, gnome, dwarf, and half orc didnt. In fact they rewrote humans. Of course Warlocks fit quite well, just with diffrent pacts. I mean the gun mage is a warlock.

However, saying that, thats a lot to redo. Id prefer they keep it more like the World Guide and Five Fingers. Few rules and less system specific.

I never found the warmachine storyline a problem for the rpg. It just adds another layer and diffrence between it and other settings. It also adds in some great hooks. Its certainly less damaging in my eyes than the Realms/Dragonlance novels for those worlds.

crosswiredmind wrote:

I have spent significant time in local game shops in PA, NY, NJ, DE, MD, VA, NC, OR, CA, MA, ME, NM, FL, England, Scotland, Tokyo, Vancouver, Montreal, and even San Jose Costa Rica (though that was more of an Anime shop). I know that many shops are just card shops with a few RPG products. The context of this entire discussion is the RPG industry. I know that if D&D disappeared tomorrow the GW stores would still be there as would comic and card shops that also sell games. But there are a whole lot of shops that stock more than just a few RPGs and there are more of them than you may think. If D&D were to go pop then this whole industry would be in deep trouble.

Which I guess is the disconnect for many of us. To me that industry with FLGS has been dead for a while.

Teiran wrote:
Arelas wrote:
If it is updated it could be useful.

I do hope they keep the database up to date with the new monsters and NPC's they print. It would make the tool much, much more useful.

I noticed Irontooth, the special goblin NPC, was in there, and that was pretty cool. I would be very impressed if they put all the named NPC's from their adventures into there, so that people can use themin home brew encounters.

I hope it will also have what book these monsters are from. As 4e grows if the tool doesnt give stats but names it be good to know where they are from. Or maybe have one of the options be to click the books you want to use in design.

Lord Fyre wrote:
BigDaddyG wrote:
Like I said if an FLGS is having to survive on the sales of D&D alone...then they probably deserve to go under.
But, consider . . .
  • The current U.S. economy is in distress. This is forcing people to make serious cut-backs in discretionary spending. That number includes RPG players. :(
  • Brick & Mortor stores were having difficulties before the economy started having issues.
  • Gaming & Comic shops [and hobby stores in general] tend to be pretty low margin businesses even in the best of times.
So, now would not be a good time to ask them to try to survive the collapse of a major product line.

Well I dont think most of successful stores see DD as a major product line. Least none I go too (this could just be the region Im in). They all find it way too unreliable product for the return. Sides for all intensive purposes DD was dead for over half a year before 4e came out.

crosswiredmind wrote:
The Red Death wrote:
Lord Fyre wrote:
P&P gaming - NEEDS - D&D.

This is conventional wisdom, because D&D has always been around and created the industry itself. But conventional wisdom is proven wrong time and time again.

The truth of the matter is, nobody knows what would happen if D&D was to crash once and for all.

Well that is not true. My FLGS would likely close if D&D crashed. My guess is that many game stores would loose a large percentage of their sales if D&D disappeared over night. I cannot see how the hobby would recover from the loss.

Im still amazed there are DD FLGS. All the ones I know gave up on DD books awhile ago (or do some special orders). Other WOTC products (minis, cards etc) are still around. So I dont see much of a change if DD was removed from the stores near me. We will still talk about diffrent game systems while playing mini/card/wargames. The convience of the internet makes the hobby easier to hold togehter than in 1e/2e days.

I imagine the living campaigns would suffer unless one company filled in the gap quick. I kind of wonder what % of sales are based on living campaigns and home campaigns.

One the encounter tool doesnt seem to have a print button. If it is updated it could be useful. I however had hoped the full version would let you print out an encounter with stats and such. However, I can see the problem with that when they gave up on the book code idea.

crosswiredmind wrote:
David Jarvis 54 wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:

Heck their own game isn't even D&D anymore...IN name only.

In your opinion. Given the continued high sales volume of the first set of 4th Edition books, that opinion appears to be in the minority.

Just curious, but, do you have any numbers to share which back your statement up?

I'm just wondering how you know the sales numbers are so high.

... because Amazon posts them and 4e was tops for a while. There is no question that sales of 4e have been very big indeed.

I don't know if the sales of the initial books will be the best way to measure success and if it feels like DD. Most groups are trying it for a bit, requiring multiple books. It is summer which at least for most groups means we aren't playing DD that much. Most groups I know bought the books, few are playing it (mine is one of the few).

Now if the sales of the main books and supplements are doing well this time next year, it will be a better indication that they got the feel right.

On druids and bards I know their are some fan made ones on enworld. The bard hasnt cause any problems in our current campaign.

N'wah wrote:

And sorry no one's posting replies over here. They probably don't cotton to us 4E types coming out of our designated sandbox. :)

Not shocking no one has posted yet. I recieved my books today in the mail. I guess people could be looking a the pdfs, but the campaign is new. I know I have to finish the second half of Sins of the Savior/Spires before I begin Second Darkness. (another player in my group is doing Crimson)

Having said that I like the ideas and I think Im going to start reading the books. :)

Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:
ProsSteve wrote:

Personally I can't wait to have a go at the 4th edition( mainly because I bought the books and don't want them to waste them) but there are a lot of things in the books that interest me.

In the group I run there are a couple of people that Power game, one in particular and it'd be interesting to see how that improves that situation as well as improving team-work for the characters. It annoys me to see one player abusing his characters abilities and not helping other PCs to have the spotlight.
I do find a great deal of the system rather un-dungeons & dragons but the final verdict will come out once the PC's reach 30th level.

They are challenging to do and make fun but if you can manage it throw a number of Skill Challenges at the party. The resident power gamer in my group basically freaked out when he realized that making his PC into some kind of a 'toon was not actually making him the best and most important player at the table.

Just made 2nd level with my cleric on Monday night and I'm picking up Skill Focus: Insight with my new feat.

The basic design of 4e does curb some powergaming and equalize the playing field.

I think the new skill system however does less than the old for getting power gamers to think their character. You autolevel in all skills. A skill focus feat in many ways replaces putting more points in that skill. Of course groups who used skills less and are encouraged by the skill challenge system will see more change from this. Note: I think the skill system is more convient, but I'd say its easier for a powergamer to ignore skills than in 3.5

Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:

Truth is, for me, this is a non issue. I actually have no interest in the games table - I mean I might look at it and be impressed/unimpressed by the technical marvel but my D&D reality is about having a cool excuse to hang out with friends, make fun of the guys and spew out an endless stream of double entendres with the girls while a heroic action adventure story unfolds around us.

Game table - no matter how cool just can't get there from here because what I want from game night is fundamentally a social experience.

Couldn't agree more. Honestly, Id rather have them keep the webonly option at the lower price. I cant imagine using the table.

Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:

Looks like we just get Dungeon and Dragon and odds and ends as they come online. Does not actually strike me as a bad price even for limited material and I'll probably pick up the 12 month package as it seems pretty clear from the way they are talking that what they really want to do is have enough available that they can charge more but are behind schedule. I might as well grab a full year so that I get the cheapest price available even if they manage to get everything but the games table done and want to raise the prices.

Wow - scoopage, I just got scooped by, like, five people.

From Gamer-zero's response the year-deal will only be for webonly features. Meaning if the gametable goes up it will not be apart of this initial subscribtion.

I hope when they have the full DDI, they keep the web only content subscribtion as an option.

Ixancoatl wrote:
Kvantum wrote:

I think it was 14.95 for 1 month, 12.95 a month for 3, or 9.95 a month for 1 year

Edit: Either way, this doesn't bode well for DDI. Either they figure subscriptions would be so low that they want to keep their numbers up so they have to drop the price, or they figure content will be so low they have to drop the price.

Or ... they might actually be trying a decent marketing strategy by offering DDI with what they said they would at a low price to cater to their audience even if theyhave to take a bit of a hit to the profit they originally wanted.

Or the content isn't the full service, so they can't charge as much. Since thats what they said, lets go with it.

These seem to only be temp prices until the full DDI service is available.

Randy Buehler wrote:

know there has been a lot of discussion of our business model and our pricing plan. We’ve been paying attention to those conversations and have decided to tweak a few things. Our current plan is to start charging for subscriptions before we have the client applications ready. That means the initial Insider subscription package will include exactly those parts that are currently in free trial mode: the magazines, the Compendium, and the bonus tools. The price tag for this subscription is as low as $4.95 per month, depending on how many months you are willing to sign up for. Specifically:

Web-Content Only Subscription Package:
12 Months = $59.40 ($4.95 per month)
3 Months = $19.95 ($6.65 per month)
1 Month = $7.95 ($7.95 per month)

We aren’t ready to discuss our medium or long-term pricing plans, but this is what the short-term looks like.

Im curious to see the encounter and ability builder. Im not really intrested in the table, so a lower price for the rest is good.

Pete Apple wrote:

As a DM, putting together encounters has never been easier. I find that preparation has been cut dramatically. I've got the same (or better) story telling possibilities. I don't feel limited by the rules, because I've always been an off-the-cuff DM anyway. I've got far less notes/books to reference at the table, and can focus more on telling the story and making things "fun". In my opinion it is much less tedious.

This goes to the other side of the screen as well. I've got a group of players with varying amounts of free time. One fellow is retired as he's on disability. He has a ton of free time and can go through books outside the game as much as he liked, looking for this or that thing to tweak his character. Another fellow has two toddlers and just had his 3rd baby. He shows up each game with his book and character sheet not having cracked it since the week before. With our 3.5 game after awhile their characters were far different in power because of the "free time available for build optimization" factor. My impression of 4E so far is that this won't have as much impact. As a DM, I *really* like that, because it will make the game more fun for *everyone* at the table. And lord knows the guy with 3 kids under 5 needs to play as often as he can! :-)

As a dm set up is far easier. Heck it wasnt too hard to convert sins of the saviour over. For off the cuff they even give suggested damage charts for level etc. The lack of magic items of intrest bugs me, however as dm they can be added back in.

The major reason my group is switching is as you say out of game. We want to have everyone equal at the table which 4e seems better at. Only a few feats are problematic without preplanning. Since we have had a rise of casual gammers in the group this is very convient. More sessions over gaming instead of leveling up is a nice change of pace.

Readerbreeder wrote:

Has anyone ever broached the blasphemous (to some, I am sure) idea of porting PF material to 4e? I'm sure it wouldn't be easy -- there was alot of sacred hamburger between the pages of the new ruleset -- but I think the return in story depth would be worthwhile.

My group switched to 4e for the 5th module of Rise of the Runelords. With a few monster mods/changes it has worked quite well so far. Our end of the 4th module was a little bigger than written. (Of course Ive also added in a good deal of AOW as well). If you do want to do it you'll need to change/invent some magic items for 4e. Either way the story and detail is what really brought me to Paizo, and keeps me here.

Scott Betts wrote:
Steerpike7 wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:
4th Edition, in the aggregate, is an example of an improvement in game design over D&D 3.5, I believe.
But that statement just goes to show the subjectivity, because while I play and enjoy both I find 3.5E to be superior :)
I'd love to hammer this out in terms of a debate, but this isn't quite the place. I simply consider 4th Edition to be superior in terms of gameplay, and I feel reasonably assured that this can be supported in terms that would be very difficult to disagree with.

A lot of the problem is the gameplay people want. 4e is better balanced at all levels in terms of powers/damage for classes. This in some ways makes them similar. I find 3e offers more in its general design. However, 4e seems to work better for more casual gamers. Since my group keeps sliding in that direction so am I.

However, to do it they removed and simplified the magic items to do it. A wand of wonder makes no sense in this new game. I was converting CurseAzureBonds to 4e and thought of all the odd use magic items that don't fit anymore and how they would break the balance. Of course I'll probably add them back in, maybe a scroll mechanic that cost dailies or something.

pres man wrote:
You don't. Instead you tell a story about "dark elves" (using standard elf stats). Of course if you don't use the word "drow" then don't get to have those meanful arguments like, "is it 'drow' with 'row' as in 'row your boat' or is it 'drow' with 'ow' like in 'cow'?"

Why would you want to miss out on that fun? :)

My understanding is you couldn't reimagine an idea from the monsters manual etc. under the GSL. Called Drow or not, you are either redesinging elves or drow. Of course you could come up with a new name. However, it seems you'd be hoping WOTC doesn't see it that way. They dont seem very answering about GSL questions. Heck when were the 3pp told they were coming out?

Id like to see some paizo 4e, I just dont think it's wise for them right now.

Scott Betts wrote:
Steerpike7 wrote:
The problem with using evidence of previous edition changes is that no other previous edition change had ongoing support for the former edition like 3.5E/OGL/Pathfinder. You switched or your were pretty much done in terms of ongoing support. That's not the case this time, do I don't think evidence of past changes means a lot here.

And while this is all well and good, I'm talking about the people who initially said "I hate 3rd Edition/3.5/4th Edition, it's just not D&D!" and then eventually decided, years down the line, that it was their favorite game and how could anyone have enjoyed 2nd Edition/3rd Edition/D&D 3.5. There are plenty of those now, with the same attitude towards the new edition that others had in past edition changes. Yes, the old edition is still receiving support, but that wasn't what mattered to these people coming around. It was that the initial "offense" of updating a product to a new edition eventually wore off and people actually began to enjoy the game for what it was. This may take just a bit longer on average now that people can turn to Pathfinder for their 3.5 needs, but as long as more and more people continue to adopt 4th Edition, its exposure will increase and slowly people who swore it off initially will come around. Even in past edition changes, it's not like the old edition's books were taken forcibly away from the players and burnt. People still said "I spent $XXXX on my 2nd Edition books and I'm going to continue playing it, gosh darnit!"

By the way, this isn't just true for role-playing games. Plenty of other concepts operate the same way (think operating systems).

Maybe your right and 4e is inevitable and we all will be playing it soon (my group so far likes it, of course none of the groups near us do and the store isnt getting more 4e products). However, it doesn't get around that many 4e supporters (especially new ones) will stick with Wizards products only. Paizo switching to 4e would have hurt them greatly the past few months. Since they'd have wasted products to...October now? Even their next AP wouldnt work in the GSL. Effectively they'd have to stop production for a while and restart. I wonder if they can afford that. Especially if it requires getting rid of people who are currently paying money.

Arcesilaus wrote:
DMcCoy1693 wrote:
Arcesilaus wrote:
but it is certainly capable of telling the stories that Paizo is publishing.
Could they tell Hook Mountain with a guarantee that Wizards won't change their mind at a future point in time that it violates their community standards?

Ummm. Sure. Why not? I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here ...

Let me state again, for the record, that I am not arguing that Paizo should be telling their stories using 4th edition mechanics. I am saying that it is certainly possible for someone else to do so (which is, I believe, what the OP was asking).


How do you tell a story about drow that your not allowed to use by GSL?

yoda8myhead wrote:
tbug wrote:
Maybe subscribers could have an option that when a line has two releases in a month then one will be deferred until the following month?
That would just postpone the double charge. Or result in an ongoing delay in getting the product, as one month would keep getting pushed into the next.

Actually it wouldn't since the website currently has nothing for Chronicles in Sept, unless the site hasn't been updated (possible).

Im definitly for the vote of one product per subscription per month.

Well Lyrie didn't make it in my campaign. However Orik did and was convinced to help against Naulia. He needed quite a bit of healing.

Anyway far later in the campaign he is leader of the pc's gaurd at the Fort.

1 to 50 of 176 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>