Search Posts
Check out "A Single Thread", a new fantasy short story set in the Kingdoms of Legend campaign setting. Written by New York Times best-selling author Elaine Cunningham, this tale follows Mellindria, a trouble-making elven bard, as she becomes entangled in a problem 600 years in the making. Available in PDF, mobi, and epub formats for $0.99!
Anybody have any feedback on this sheet? I plan to do a new revision soon (the 8th iteration). My main target will be the entire left hand column on the back of the page. I never have liked the way Domains/Specialty Schools, Spell Lists, and Spells Known/Per Day/DCs look. I am hoping to combine all of that into one comprehensive column. Clear cut spaces for domain and specialty school info (including special abilities), followed by broken out sections for each spell level which contain all of the info together in one spot: # known, # per day, & DC followed by a spell list (without super tiny lines to write on). Anything else?
Six 10th level ninja are difficult to challenge. This adventure was run as an event at Gen Con Indy 2012, and I hear that it was a bit on the bloody side in terms of difficulty. A few of the ninja did not make it through the adventure, which is a great thing for a one-shot module, in my (sometimes mean GM) opinion.
Well, one new product and one revised product. "Kingdoms of Legend: Knights of France" is a 32-page sourcebook about knights in shining armor and chivalry as well as an exploration of France and her surrounding neighbors in the Kingdoms of Legend campaign setting. Released now in PDF, the print version will follow in a few weeks or so. "Kingdoms of Legend: Ultimate Treasure Fleet" is a revised and expanded PDF which discusses the Treasure Fleet of Zheng He, including stats for his massive junks in the new stat block format from the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Ultimate Combat book. More coming soon in the expanding Kingdoms of Legend product line!
Come visit us at Gen Con Indy 2011, booth 1954! We will be selling newly printed copies of the second book in the Relics of the Lost Gods adventure trilogy (entitled Kingdoms of Legend: The Elusive Foe) and we will be holding a four day joust-a-thon, previewing the jousting rules in the soon-to-be released book Kingdoms of Legend: Knights of France! Characters provided, or feel free to bring along a 5th level jouster. Use the 20-point buy for stats; no magical weapons or armor allowed! Since we don't want to hurt anyone, we will be making use of the tournament lance* instead of the war lance. All of our other products will be on hand as well, of course, and there is still space in a few of our Pathfinder Roleplaying Game events. See you there! *a new piece of equipment found in Knights of France.
Here is a bit of history about the origins of this module, as written by the author himself: The origins of Dragon Challenge date all the way back to the days of 2nd Ed AD&D. I had long thought that dragons needed to be tougher opponents. After all, the game was named after them! At some point, I developed some house rules for a dragon's attack routine that allowed dragons to make several melee attacks while simultaneously casting several spells each round in combat. The players in my campaigns weren't very thrilled about these abilities at first, but they soon developed some creative tactics for combating them (as players always do). Ultimately, we all thought the house rules did, indeed, make dragons appropriately difficult opponents. In the fall of 1993, I was in my second year as the Concordia College Gaming Club president and we were preparing for our on-campus gaming event called Game-A-Thon. Several club members who hadn't played in my campaigns had heard stories about my dragons and they suggested that I put together a short scenario to run during Game-A-Thon. I took their advice and it was a smashing success—despite the fact that my dragon wiped the entire party. When 3rd Ed D&D came along, the game itself elevated dragons' combat abilities to the point where I no longer needed to use my house rules. Sure, they usually had to choose between making melee attacks or casting spells, but feats (quicken spell) and/or magic items (metamagic rod of quicken spell) made it possible to do both. Plus, dragons now had more interesting attack options and several nice special abilities. Also, the rules for constructing encounters made it easier for GMs to include other monsters as allies for dragons. Over the 17 years since that first Dragon Challenge, I've run the event several times at various Game Days and conventions. I've tweaked and changed things with each subsequent version. Somewhere along the line, I realized that the process of creating 20th level characters for my Dragon Challenges had become almost as important as the dragon. As a self-proclaimed rules lawyer, I’ve always enjoyed crunching the numbers to develop strong characters and the options for such powerful characters have greatly increased through the years. When Brent started Interaction Point Games, I quickly approached him with the idea of publishing Dragon Challenge. I knew that the concept was risky. Would people really be interested in a 32 page module that was essentially just one epic encounter? I knew that I had to sell the idea of it being a multipurpose product—usable as either a fun stand-alone event or as the ultimate climax for a campaign. In addition, I stressed that most people rarely play 20th level characters, which means they don’t have a lot of experience running them. Along the same line, very few GMs have ever needed to learn how to run the powerful monsters required to threaten these characters. For these reasons, I felt that people would enjoy a product that discusses these challenges. Finally, who could resist the chance to face off against the MVP of monsters: the great wyrm red dragon?!? Fortunately, Brent bought into the idea and here we are more than a year later. The pdf version of Dragon Challenge is now available with the print version soon to follow. I’m very proud of the final product. It is everything I had hoped and more. The most interesting part of adapting Dragon Challenge to the Kingdoms of Legend was the historical research involved. Obviously, most of the core elements of the adventure are fictional, but much of the supporting information is historically based. The island of Thasos is a real island in the Aegean Sea and Potamia is a real town on Thasos. Mount Ypsario really exists and it was historically mined for marble and gold—just not by dwarves. Also, some of the treasure pieces and magic items introduced in Dragon Challenge are inspired by historical people and places. This project has required a lot of work, but it was also a lot of fun. I hope that it inspires your imagination and invites you to delve further into our Kingdoms of Legend products. Thank you and good luck against Aestus Anguis! Allen Drees Jr.
Interaction Point Games (IPG) is a small, new game company based in Robbinsdale, MN. IPG is proud to release the first books in the "Kingdoms of Legend" line of Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Compatible products. "Kingdoms of Legend" is an alternate history, Medieval-flavored Earth circa 1415 CE. More information can be found on the IPG website: http://www.interactionpoint.com The first book, "Kingdoms of Legend: World Guide" (IPG0100), is an introduction to the campaign setting, and is available both in print for $12.99 through the IPG Online Store and in PDF for $3.00 from RPGNow. The second book is an adventure for 1st level heroes entitled "Kingdoms of Legend: The Hidden Threat" (IPG0200). This book is also available in print for $12.99 at the IPG Online Store and as a PDF for $3.00 at RPGNow. The latest book is the just released "Kingdoms of Legend: All Hands on Deck!", a nautically themed rules supplement. It is not yet available in print, but can be had for (you guessed it) $3.00 at RPGNow. We also have a stupendous 2 foot by 3 foot poster map of the campaign world, selling for $12.99 at the IPG Online Store. Last, but not least, IPG will be an exhibitor at Gen Con Indy 2010! We will be running a number of events as well: as of right now only one Pathfinder event (of ten!) has any tickets remaining. Drop by and check us out at booth 533! We will be selling all of the products mentioned above, plus two new card games ("Third and Long" and "Knock Down, Drag Out").
Hello Paizo people I love what is going on around here. I have one nebulous concern, however. It relates to the "inverted pyramid" business model you seem to have (a appropriate description, as discussed in some online review I read somewhere)-- namely, thus far you have done the opposite of what TSR/WotC did historically. Whereas they made core rules then (maybe at times grudgingly) made other stuff to drive sales of said core rules, you started with the other stuff (APs, other Adventures, etc) and will, at least in part, use sales of the core rules you are coming out with to direct new focus back to the other stuff. The genius stroke is really the new scheme of having subscription based supplemental materials! Great idea! It is a continuation, in effect, of the magazine business in a different form. I am sure most (or all) of this happened because of the unique history of Paizo, the Dungeon/Dragon cancellation, the 4th Ed GSL mis-steps, etc. I guess my long-winded question is simply this: how long can you keep it up? How many Pathfinder Chronicles and APs and card decks and Adventure Modules can you write before the market is saturated? I fear that it is not sustainable to stick with the ultra-aggressive release schedule you've had thus far. OR... Is Paizo in effect still a magazine business whose issues are now broken into three or four different lines of physical product (and thus, sustainable forever?), or is there a real danger of reaching a point where you are on the 12th AP and nobody has yet finished playing the 4th AP? And is that such a bad thing? Comments? Ideas? Clarifications?
I just noticed that there are a couple of spells (Fumble and Mass Fumble) and a magical weapon quality (Sure Grip) from the Paizo Critical Fumble deck that aren't in Pathfinder RPG Alpha 3. I'd like to see them added; I think the more Paizo makes a united front across product lines, the better. You already seem to have (judging by the art in the Beta previews) tied into the Item Cards very nicely by sharing art across those product lines. Very nice. There are probably more areas where you can cross-check for this kind of thing, and I'd think it would be worth the little time it would take. Not a big deal, obviously, but another detail that could add some value (and cross-promote your various lines!)
I have been having a great time reading up on the developing world of Golarion, but two things have been nagging at me for awhile. Some small portion of my brain not quite loving everything I see and read. I think I have figured out what the main problem is: Anachronisms! In my mind, D&D is a Medieval-flavored fantasy game. Specifically, it appears that "classic" D&D is set in something like the Earth year 1450 or so... the state of the art is a harness of plate armour and there usually aren't any guns, for instance. A setting like Eberron challenges some of these notions, of course, by having things like "detectives" (a word from 1830-1850) and trains and airships. Kind of cool, in a film noir way, but not "classic" fantasy. And yes, I realize that this is the point of Eberron; to be different, etc. Golarion has some of the same bits that stick out and conspire to keep me from staying in the classic fantasy mood when reading. A good example is the "Lumber Consortium" from Darkmoon Vale. "Lumber" is a term from ~1662 and "Consortium" is from 1820-1830. I would prefer to think of the smaller scale quasi-Medieval business models of guilds, etc instead of advanced business concepts like the definition of "consortium" implies: [from Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)]
That sounds like smoke filled rooms of Texas oilmen deciding the fate of the countryside at the end of the wild west, not like a group of woodcutters from a quasi-Medieval flavored classic fantasy setting. The second item I'd like to critique is the art. Most of it is GREAT and I really appreciate the consistent look and feel across the board. I do not, however, personally care for the Final Fantasy-sized swords that many of the people carry! Again, I suppose the need to separate yourselves from all that came before is paramount, but here is one reader who'd favor a toned down approach in this regard. Both of these are minor considerations, but something I'd like to discuss. What say you, fellows?
I think it might be a good addition to the game to make all of the special manuvers covered by the CMB rule more like the way spellcasting while in combat is done. Specifically, with respect to the Attack of Opportunity. For instance, if you attempt to close in and grapple with someone, you could suffer an AoO. You could get hit and damaged. If you aren't killed outright, then you simply go ahead with your grapple as normal. A spellcaster, however, has to make a Concentration check (DC = damage dealt) when casting a spell, if he's hit with an AoO. The penalty for failure of this check = lose the spell (pretty harsh). I'd say an AoO which hits should, in general, do damage AND (possibly) disrupt an enemy's plans. This disruption is variable (requires an opposed roll of some kind versus damage dealt). This also has a nice effect on people using reach weapons... if they get a successful AoO followed by a failed opposed roll on the part of their target, then the target's advance toward them is halted.
I propose making it harder to fire ranged weapons while wearing armour (apply both the Armour Check Penalty and the Max Dex Bonus restrictions to the ranged to hit roll). In return, the damage dealt by ranged weapons should be doubled. This would make ranged weapons attractive, but force people to specialize in them. Think of Legolas (specializes in light armour and shooting arrows to devastating effect) versus Gimli (standard tank-like fighter who doesn't care for bows. Or arrows)
I propose a cap of +7 total to the Armour + Shield component of the AC (not counting magical enhancements to either). What this does is adds just a touch more realism to the game. In the real world, shields fell out of favor as plate armour became available. As the shield was rendered redundant and unnecessary, knights found they had a second hand freed up and began opting for two-handed weapons... which they needed to crack open the improved armour of their (also in plate) enemies.
Please strongly consider adding the Indulgence piece "Art of the Duel" by Craig Shackleton and Nicolas Logue to the Pathfinder RPG. I think we have needed for some time a way to make fighters who aren't wearing full plate but who are effectively protected. I think a combo platter of special feats seen in this document are a great addition to the game, allowing for more swashbuckling without suffering too much for low ACs.
There are some facets of combat in 3.x that bother me. Specifically, the fact that a character's choice of armour and weapon (and implied combat style) seem to be so independent of each other. I realize that D&D is not a historical game, but follow this line of reasoning for a bit: Before 1300 (European) knights would wear mostly mail armour. They would also carry a rather large shield to complement their defenses (especially, I think, to protect against arrows) and hence used single handed weapons. As plate armour became the norm, first through the coat-of-plates concept and finally up through a full plate-style harness, two things also happened: 1. The shield mostly went away as irrelevant (this suggest that plate is more or less impervious to flying arrows, except lucky shots hitting a joint or hole... maybe?)
This is the only way to explain the myriad types of weapons that aren't swords that fill the PHB. All sorts of 2-handed polearms with pointy ends and axe heads and picks... good at attacking heavily armoured opponents; particularly puncturing or breaking armoured plates. Not to mention the ol' blunt force trauma routine (maces, hammers, etc)-- armoured plates don't protect as well as one might like from blunt impacts which transmit force through to the person in the armour. Anyway, I'd like to see if an effort can be made to re-imagine arms and armour in this light. Some possibilities: 1. Armour having different AC bonuses for different attack types (sounds a bit cumbersome... slash AC, blunt AC, pierce AC, arrow/bolt AC) 2. Plate being very expensive, but great... I think in the Medieval days it wasn't a question that it was the best armour you could get... standard men-at-arms and foot soldiers (i.e. non-nobles) just couldn't afford it. 3. The choice of weapon used vs opponent faced making more sense... you can see this a bit when a party faces undead. Put away the swords and pull out the clubs, or whatever. Now it could also be: oh crap, there's a knight in plate-- ...Discuss...
The Pathfinder RPG represents an opportunity to address one of my pet peeves with D&D. One of my major problems with 3.x has been the dominance of the fighter class in combat. At first glance, of course, this seems like a silly statement... of course the fighter should be great at combat, that is the whole point of the class. The standard answer to questions of in-game balancing goes something like this: "Just wait until we get to the gala ball, then my Bard will shine and that stupid fighter will look like a dolt!" or "My Ranger will show everyone who's really boss when its time to look for food in the forest or find our way back home from the dungeon." My points are these: 1. every session we get into combat
I grow weary of the fighter hitting more frequently AND doing more damage AND not getting hit that often. There have been games where the fighter and the barbarian have each dished out 100+ points of damage in a single round... and my 13th level Bard shot his light crossbow (and probably missed!!!) In my opinion, each character should be approximately equal in the amount of usefulness they bring to combat... each should be able to do their thing in their niche and be useful. To that end, I think redefining HOW the fighter is better in combat is perhaps called for... and the answer shouldn't just be "They hit harder and more frequently." For instance: The fighter should be the best in terms of being able to use all the various types of weapons/tactics/armour available in the game. Other classes, by comparison, need to specialize their choices of weapon, etc. This has nothing to do with actual "Skill At Arms"; the fighter and the Rogue (and maybe the Wizard?) may be equally skilled with a Dagger, for instance, but the fighter is ALSO that good with a bow and a longsword and a mace. What do you think? Am I being an unreasonable "fighter-Hater"? I don't want to make every class into quasi-fighters, nor do I want to completely "de-claw" the fighter class itself. On the other hand, I really don't think it's fun to sit so completely on the sidelines with a Bard, Ranger, Monk, Druid (less so with Cleric, Wizard, Sorcerer, Rogue) while the fighter so impressively clubs everything to death. |
