I think in general people place too much stock in the name of the classes. I try to ignore them, personally, but maybe that's because I prefer to have a more open way to build characters than with classes.
In my opinion there's nothing wrong with opening classes up in a way that allows them to fit a broader variety of archetypes inside of a general theme they represent. I see some of the barbarian abilities as semi-shamanistic sort of abilities that harness the powers of spirits and nature and such. A warrior who allows the greater spirits of nature to take him and guide him through battle in a frenzy.
This is going to sound bad, but here goes, D&D is a game of Archetypes. There are a lot of gaming systems that are more free form, and even variants like True20 which redo D&D into a free form system, but they aren't D&D, or I suppose they aren't MY D&D.
It is my opinion that D&D has thrived because it has such iconic archetypes. Just the name breeds mental images of those cliche moments that make it what it is. Got Dungeons? Got Dragons? Fighter, Cleric, Theif, Mage? All check? Then your probably playing D&D. I know this forum is littered with a thousand threads and flamewars arguing this point, but Pathfinder is an update to D&D and not a whole new game. So to me, again specify my opinion, constrained archetypes are an asset not a flaw of the system, they make D&D what it is, and we shouldn't stray or change it.
Okay, I agree with your opinion that DnD is a game of archetypes, and a lot of people like that. There's nothing wrong with it. I personally do enjoy some more adaptability, but that's me. I'm also not saying that DnD should get rid of classes altogether. I just believe that every archetype has multiple facets to it and there is wriggle room for some variety and some individuality without destroying the archetype. I also think the classes can represent a specific style rather than a profession or background. To me a barbarian doesn't need to be a barbarian, just barbaric. Honestly, elemental weapon did seem strange to me as well.
I think in general people place too much stock in the name of the classes. I try to ignore them, personally, but maybe that's because I prefer to have a more open way to build characters than with classes.
In my opinion there's nothing wrong with opening classes up in a way that allows them to fit a broader variety of archetypes inside of a general theme they represent. I see some of the barbarian abilities as semi-shamanistic sort of abilities that harness the powers of spirits and nature and such. A warrior who allows the greater spirits of nature to take him and guide him through battle in a frenzy.
As for the rogue minor and major spellcasting... rogues have always been 'dabblers' as far as I know. From ability to use wands and scrolls at higher levels in earlier editions to.... the ability to try and use wands and scrolls at all levels in the more recent. You'd think that eventually they'd figure a little something out.
That rage ability isn't even very munchkinny. I suppose that depends on how you draw the lines between munchkin and powergamer, which is something people could argue about endlessly. If you define munchkin as someone who is more interested in the flavour of their character 'being' and appearing bad-ass and all powerful, then I suppose it is somewhat. If you define munchkin as someone who exploits the rules to their maximum to be sure that their character IS bad-ass and all powerful, and they're taking that feat, then they fail at munchkin.
Multiclassing is actually pretty broken too, I wouldn't multi-class into sorceror or wizard in order for a couple cantrips in a standard campaign. If I have a character concept that is essentially my character went to some arcane school but dropped out and decided he liked hanging out with hoodlums and stealing old ladies' purses, or if I decided that, hey, my rogue can maybe remember some of this crap he's reading from these scrolls I'd need to sacrafice a WHOLE level for some mechanical representation of flavour? That stinks to me.
Any system that allows for synergies of any sort is going to be unbalanced in one way or another. If you want to make sure the game is pure and balanced (if I am understanding the intention correctly) then you'd need to make all character options equal to all classes and races and equal to each other when in combination with other options such as feats and class features. That's a hard task, one that could only realistically be accomplished by moving back to the very early editions when a person chose a race and a class and said "Let's roll."
For a game that's established a reputation for being played by nerds and brainiacs, for a game being so full of user input, imagination, creativity, discussion, possibility and freedm that seems awfully simplisitic, cut and dry.
Quick search of Ebay (the one true market of supply and demand) reveals that Pathfinder #2, Skinsaw Murders is selling for $30 and the 4E PHB/MM/DMG are each selling for $20 (most of which, without any bidders, most of those with bidders are closer to $10).
The market has spoken. Pathfinder is worth more then 4E.
Well... that doesn't neccesarily mean anything. I'm not saying you're automatically wrong, of course. This could even be a humour thread and I'm missing it, and I'm just a lowly drop-out, but...
If WotC prints 100,000 books and 20% of those are being resold that means that only 80,000 people want their books and 20,000 are reselling, which would make e-bayers sell them cheaply.
If Paizo prints 10,000 books and only 5% of those are being resold that would mean that only 9,500 people want their books and the other 500 don't, which would keep the value somewhat in tact.
Of course that shows that people are actually buying the books, but it doesn't really give any indication as to how many people want them. It only tells us that a -few- people -really- want them.
Overall, I don't have much understanding of the business, so I have no idea where the EDITION WARZ!!1! will lead, but I think ebay resell value is a poor model to guage success with.
I'm personally a fan of diversity in systems and hope they can both find their niche in the market.
Edit: Thought your handle was DrMcCoy and referred to you as a doctor. Now I've saved myself the embarassment and come clean anyway so I'm not sure why I did it.
On looking closer I found that there was not enough... of what? Everything. I'm used to having 1,000 books to look through for feats, spells, and classes.
Then are you making a fair comparison? You are measuring the core books for 4e against all of the material available for 3.5? Nothing can stand up to that kind of comparison if you are looking for options instead of essentials.
I know, and I was expecting to feel that way, really. I'll just need to wait for some splat books to come out.
I found that the class paths (such as warlock's pacts and rogue's brutal scoundrel and whatever whatever) are, in a way, limitting. Basically making certain choices suboptimal or unavailable due to a level 1 choice.
As made clear in the beginning of the chapter, class paths are optional.
Cole Lane wrote:
The warlock, if it works as my quick look leads me to believe, is ridiculously limited and is my idea of poor class design.
The warlock is far more flexible than its 3.5E counterpart, who was basically a guy who threw black beams of energy. Still, I agree with you that the class seems to lack options compared to other classes.
There are premade class packages, and there are also paths that that are class features.
I'm going to use the rogue as an example, since it's the class I'm most interested in and also the only one I've looked at in depth.
It has two class packages that are archetype suggestions: brawny rogue and charming rogue. The brawny rogue archetype suggests you take the brutal scoundrel rogue ability instead of the artful dodger rogue ability, and the charming rogue archetype suggest you do otherwise. Those two abilities are part of a path feature I -think- is called "Rogue style".
The brutal scoundrel ability gives you a bonus to sneak attack damage equal to your strength modifier, while the artful dodger ability gives you +cha mod to your AC vs opportunity attacks.
The choice you make here also determines whether or not you get bonuses to certain powers. Brutal scoundrel gives a bonus to torturous strike while artful dodger gives you a bonus to .... whichever low level power lets you shift your opponent.
Someone who doesn't care about effectiveness can ignore all that, of course, but they are certainly trying to encourage you to take these abilities by providing these bonuses to powers that match with their idea of the rogue archetypes.
I basically wrote this post earlier, but it's not here. It was either eaten, or I closed the window without paying attention.
My initial reaction was that it's okay. Has ideas I like and ideas I dislike. On looking closer I found that there was not enough... of what? Everything. I'm used to having 1,000 books to look through for feats, spells, and classes.
I found that the class paths (such as warlock's pacts and rogue's brutal scoundrel and whatever whatever) are, in a way, limitting. Basically making certain choices suboptimal or unavailable due to a level 1 choice. The warlock, if it works as my quick look leads me to believe, is ridiculously limited and is my idea of poor class design.
Now... the main thing I like about 4th edition is something that I've suspected for some time: It's exceedingly easy to make the game classless. Yeah, I really do hate classes, honestly, and I find that 4th edition DOES limit what each class can be, although it does give most of them a wider array of combat options.
If they take the weapon proficiency, then sure, let them if they want. Also 3rd ed Druids can use metal weapons. The sickle and scimitar, for example, are on the Druid weapon proficiency.
Yeah, and that's like what? TWO whole metal weapons they can use? Two weapons does not equal druids can use metal weapons, sorry.
I was just pointed to devestating blow, and would like to point out that it is... rather powerful. I mean it's powerful enough to defeat most opponenets in one attack with a high damage fighter.
Devestating blow + scythe = Wow, every round.
Combine that with power attack and the barbarian rage ability that allows them to add their barb level to attack bonus, with awesome rage point savings compared to the damage gained.
Requiring all rogues to use only a finite list of weapons doesn't actually serve a constructive purpose, all it does is limit character options. The scimitar, for example, isn't on the rogue weapons list. Neither is the kukri, or hand-axe. And yet all of these are easy to picture as "rogue weapons." This doesn't mean the answer is to give rogues the kukri proficiency from the get-go, I just feel very strongly that limiting player creativity and the ability to design a unique character isn't a good move.
And I disagree. If that's your supposed logic then I guess ALL characters should be able to use all weapons? A mage with a greatsword? A cleric using bladed weapons? Druids with metal weapons? Your argument does not work. Also what weapons you can or can't use is NOT creativity or "ability to design a unique character" that comes from a thing called ROLEPLAYING. You sir are focusing too much on the ROLL-playing aspect or "crunch". 4th ED D&D is limiting rogues to only being able to sneak attack with "rogue" weapons but I don't see what soever how this limits creativity. Your confusing creativity with the ability for "pwnage" by being able to do +10d6 sneak attack damage with a greatsword. I don't care either way if it is changed or not but I was offering a suggestion for how to supposedly keep rogue sneak attack damage a little more under control by limiting the weapons it can be done with. You haven't offered any suggestions as far as I've seen.
In my mind anything that limits options has a side effect of limiting creativity, and she does know what RPing at the expense of power is. She has some of the most crippled characters I have ever seen.
At its core DnD is very largely based around combat. That's why everything has some form of combat statistic or bonus ingrained into it. You can use the system to play out non-combat encounters, sure, and it enhances the game, but the main assumption of the game is 'fight monsters, earn loots.'
If you provided someone RP experience for social encounters and that somehow increased their level they would get more durable, better at fighting in melee, more competent in unrelated fields of skills, possibly learn new magic, and gain an odd suite of character abilities depending on class. If you excuse this with 'behind the scenes training' then nobody needs practical experience to become more powerful and anyone with a stick can become a level 20 fighter.
I really enjoy the creativity provided by point based systems because they are very open ended, and generally allow you to make what you can imagine. Dungeons and Dragons is already fairly limitting in its character concepts due to the needs of the genre. I'd really hate to see all classes shoehorned into specific weapons by limitting their class abilities. It's one of the things I don't like about that new edition. There are things I do like. Just not that.
Unfortunately I have to follow 3.5, Pathfinder, AND 4e now. Geeze.
Uh... according to the Alpha 2 release, wearing the item for 24 hours makes the enhancement bonus permanent. So just get one of each belt/headband, wear each one for 24hrs in a rotation, then shove 'em in your closet. Voila, problem solved.
I don't believe it was intended to work that way. The item description says that after 24 hours they become a permanent bonus as opposed to a temporary bonus, however, I am given to believe this is only for stacking purposes. IE, after 24 hours you can stack a Cat's Grace spell with the effects of the DEX-boosting belt.
The Glossary notes on Ability Bonuses say that, while the effects become permanent, you should also note the changes separately "in case they are removed." I could be misinterpreting this, but I believe this means "in case the item giving the bonus is removed," elsewise I don't know why the effects would be any more likely to disappear.
I believe the permanent bonus just allows skill points to be added from intelligence boosters.
A permanent enhancement bonus is still an enhancement bonus and would not stack with another bonus of the same type.
As for multi-stat boosting items: that's fine, in my opinion, as long as some come with the book. Some players don't create items, or are not even aware of all the possibilities of doing so.
All classes may use con and dex, but I would argue that anything melee related is more reliant on these stats.
how about stat items and rings of protection/ amulet natural armor not take up 'slots'.
leave those for more interesting but less vital magic items
In my mind that's really a much better solution.
It would still result in people spending their gold on things that just boost numbers without neat factor, but it makes interesting loot more worthwhile.
Under 3.5, Belt of Gian Strength +4 plus Gloves of Dexterity +4 and Amulet of Health +4 cost 48000gp... under the item cretion rules a Belt of Strength/Dexterity/Constitution +4 acomplishes the same thing as the three older items, uses only one slot and costs 64000gp. The extra 16000gp cost frees up two body slots and so is worth it in my opinion.
Ideally there would be an item right out of the book that prevents this imbalance, without having to use that work around. I'm not even sure if the PRPG system would 'allow' such a thing. I know the game's customizable, but that's not a good excuse for poor design and imbalances. Heck, to some people this may not even seem like an imbalance.
I'm not sure if this has been covered already, but I believe the new slotting for physical stat and mental stat boosting items strongly favours casters.
I can't comment on the new slotting because I'm AFB right now, but I have always thought that RAW slotting was in need of a change. It really put the screws to any Cha based character due to the Cloak of Resist/Cloak of Cha problem. Wis based characters have a similar issue with Periapt of Wis/Amulet of Nat Armor, which might have been intentional but I don't think so given that everyone has the Amulet of Health/Amulet of Nat Armor problem. Item slots as a whole are arbitrary BS, case in point; Gauntlets of Ogre Power/Girdle of Giant Strength. Yeah, there's a reason I don't bother with slots anymore.
TS
Yeah, I know what you mean. I do think there is a fine balance though. Of course, I'm not sure what that balance is. I'm remarkably shortsighted.
They just need to have a list of options rather than a few hardwired features.
MSN transcriptish thingy!
Spoiler:
tic says: Like, Khob'ael in Pathfinder would be a rakshasa with bat wings
tic says: like wtf
I say: You have to have wings?
tic says: If you take the Infernal bloodline
I say: That's silly.
tic says: and as a rakshasa I think you are obviously quite infernal
Should EVERY infernal caster abound suddenly grow wings, or would it be better to perhaps have a few options to choose from.
Rather than giving a set progression you can either have two or three options at each bloodline power level for each bloodline.
Or make a list of ten equally balanced (I know, easier said than done) abilities for each bloodline and let the player choose one every X levels.
You can add in bizarre/neat abilities as well as abilities that circumvent one of the sorc's most limitting factors: its spell selection. That would only work by giving choices at specific levels, of course. Say a Infernal sorc has a choice of wings or an aura or having Demand added to its spell list. In addition to making it an extra spell, let them access it a level early , since the primary complaint on the forums seems to be with slow spell progression.
I'm not sure if this has been covered already, but I believe the new slotting for physical stat and mental stat boosting items strongly favours casters. I should say I haven't actually done any playing with these.
The 'optimal' choice a caster needs to make in this system is fairly straightforward as far as I'm concerned. They need their casting ability boosted, either int, wis or cha, and they'll probably only really want con. It's very straightforward for them.
A physical combat needs, to varying degrees, all the physical ability scores, and nearly none of the mental scores. Almost anyone can benefit from wis though, thanks to the will boost. Int is magically ineffective on an item, and cha is a dump stat for many physical characters from the get-go. (I know some people are RPers or weird and quirky, but that's not what this is about.)
With the current system the wizards, clerics, and sorcerors are almost certain to have more hitpoints than the rogues, bards, and monks, since each of those archetypes have a focus in dex. (and certainly benefit from it)
By the time a character has a +2 physical stat boosting item a low HP caster is likely to be on par with bards, rogues, and monks in HP. Past that things get worse. At +6 items the fighter and paladin either have focused on con and are doing little damage, or the cleric has as much HP as them and the sorcs and wizards only have 1 less per level.
Throw in all those delicious defensive spells and the fighter's just not cutting it anymore.
The barbarian does not suffer as much, since the rage points have caused his con to be linked directly to his overall damage output even more than with just rage.
Anyone know this? My group just finished Crown of the Kobold King and want to spend some of their hard earned coin, but there's not much to buy in such a dreary little town.
I don't think they pied about any LANs, so much as they were preparing to take matters into their own hands if they did not think things would work out for Pathfinder in the new edition.
With a majority of its fanbase very vocal regarding their ... disapproval of the 4th edition of Dungeons and Dragons they had one strong incentive to stick to OGL. Add to that the recent previews making it more and more obvious that their setting would not work as intended (without considerable rehauling, anyway) in the fourth edition, and the constant delays of the GSL making it less and less likely to get a well done product out in time for that convention everyone talks about, I thought the choice was pretty obvious. Take the energy they would've used to rehaul the 4e system to match their setting and use it to do something closer to what their fans were asking for.
Still, I hope you guys make SOME sort of 4E material. I'm one of those young and naive folks that thinks it's not an either or sitation, and can honestly see good and bad things with both editions of the game (as I know them now).
Sounds like same kind of advancement I had with my players, they were also on fifth level after Kobold king.
Carnival is lighter in treasure than Kobold king, but actually the amount of tresure in Kobold king is far more than expected wealth level. For example they can get their hands on mithral full plate on 2nd level.
How many players do you have? If you think your players will be bummed because there is not enough treasure in Carnival, I'm pretty sure it doesn't hurt if you add it a little. My players have far more treasure than they should for their level, and the adventures have still been very challenging. Deadly even.
Oh, and if you notice that your players are staying behind expected levels for modules, give them little extra xp, for saving Falcon's hollow or something. =)
Yeah, I noticed that Crown of the Kobold King gave lots of treasure. I think Carnival of Tears lack of it was an attempt to balance that.
The Crown of the Kobold King and the Heartripper Blade are particularly nice. I didn't realize how good the Heartripper Blade was until just yesterday when I thought of dying opponents on the ground and bleeding to death.
Some of the players would probably be pretty bummed about the lack of treasure available in Carnival of Tears, but I think the added emphasis on RP and a unique scenario will more than make up for it.
Since entering the dungeon there's been very little opportunity to RP with NPCS in Crown, because the route they took has avoided all the children so far. They went down the elevator and in a room or two before they found signs that they should backtrack. :P
The Forge Spurned Encounter was great. It's been their first battle that had them on the edge of their seat and they hooted when they beat it, probably only because the sorceror lunged at it with a second shocking grasp, knocking himself unconscious in the process. I just hope nobody tries to use its chain...
Unfortunately Jurin Kreed was already dead, and they've already been doing a lot to anger the Gavel, so there may be some tough times ahead of them.
If your going to run all the modules you mentioned, your players will be far over tenth level. I used modules Last hope, Kobold king, Bloodsworn vale and Carnival of tears. My players are on ninth level and we have just started Carnival of tears. So I quess they will be tenth level by its conclusion.
I wouldn't mind that much if you don't have a module for the exact level your player's are. I'm running Carnival of tears for ninth level players, and the adventure is meant for fifth level. It's going just fine =). I understand that you want to be as close as possible, but one level off doesn't hurt that much in my opinion...
Hmm, neat. The module after the very early levels tend to advertise as one level per module, so I was slightly concerned. I'm glad I'll be able to skip past using Seven Swords of Sin easily, because it has a reputation of being deadly, and these are new players, so I don't want to dismay them too much.
I've totalled it out so that the players will be about a third of the way through level 5 by the time they finish Crown of the Kobold King, so they should be good to go for Carnival of Tears from there. That's a sure thing. I noticed that Carnival of Tears is light on treasure though, on a quick flip through. Has this caused any problems for any goups out there?
I'm currently DMing for my group of mostly new players. I chose to start with a one shot adventure (Last Hope) to give them an idea of how the game worked and such. After completing that, they decided they wanted to continue on with their characters.
Currently I'm running through Crown of the Kobold King, and they're rocketing upwards in level. About one every two or three sessions. Once they're done with this I plan to do Carnival of Tears, Conquest of Bloodsworn Vale, Seven Swords of Sin, and then Gallery of Evil (of course any of these could be replaced by an equal level module and some may be skipped due to extra experience putting the party over the recommended level.)
My problem is that there's no 9th level module. I was wondering if anyone has played or DMed through the modules like this and can tell me if the party generally gets enough extra experience in each module to skip ahead to 10th level, which -should- be available by the time they're at that level. I hope!
I'd really prefer to keep things right on the dot if possible, and my time is very limited right now, so I can't really afford to adjust the adventures, except for filling in possible plot holes on the fly.
Currently Paizo offers:
Spoiler:
1st level available: 3
1st level announced: 0
2nd level available: 1
2nd level announced: 0
3rd level available: 0
3rd level announced: 0
4th level available: 0
4th level announced: 2
5th level available: 1
5th level announced: 0
6th level available: 2
6th level announced: 0
7th level available: 1
7th level announced: 0
8th level available: 2
8th level announced: 1
9th level available: 0
9th level announced: 0
10th level available: 0
10th level announced: 1
11th level available: 1
11th level announced: 1
?? level available: 0
?? level announced: 3
Once they're done with the one shots and understand the system better, including really understanding feats, and prestige classes I'll take them through an undecided Adventure Path, and I'm looking forward to it, but for now the one shots are great!
Poor Nick. He wants to write for Wizard's, and if there is something he doesn't like he may not feel comfortable saying it because he is doing business with them. I'd rather judge for myself and spare Nick the problem of attracting angry people who think he's being guarded because of his business affiliations. Just my 2c.
1) Do you plan to convert to the new edition of D&D?
I'll at least get the core books. I think I'll even play some games using the 4th edition as well, and probably end up getting splat books. (Stop staring! I don't need to justify myself to you people.)
Erik Mona wrote:
2) If Paizo converts its RPG products to 4.0, how will that affect your purchasing patterns for our products?
It won't.
Erik Mona wrote:
3) If Paizo does not convert its RPG products to 4.0, how will that affect your purchasing patterns for our products?
Back to topic, can I ask why the increased involvment in AP#3? And I'm not alluding that there's anything wrong with it at all, I'm curious? Is it something you're excited about, or will it have a lot of tie-in to material that will play a role in "big picture Golarion" topics?
To what extent can we pester you with questions?
My involvement hasn't been made public yet, but as soon as it is you can pester me all you want. :)
I'm going to start a rumour!
I have a sneaking suspicion that the Second Darkness has something to do with the blocked off caverns beneath Droskar's Crucible in Darkmoon Vale featured in Crown of the Kobold King.
I could be extremely wrong, as it has been known to happen.
Oh, Logue, how can you spurn me in such a way after we had shared such a passionate exchange. Your silence speaks cliched volumes on how it is you feel. I will cause you no more discomfort.
Everyone else - I am sorry that you had to see me at my worst. Maybe there will be better days ahead for you, but for me there is no more light. Please, excuse me while I get my collection of razors.
Nic should run an online game using a virtual tabletop. He should run a game every night of the week for us. I think I'd pay to play in a Nic Logue game.
Ya keep yer dern hands offa mah man meats now y'hear?
Seriously though, I was thinking of some more personal one on one sessions with the man himself, in the flesh, so to speak.
Of course, whatever Logi-Bear says is what goes, in my world. Far be it from me to deny him a smorgasbord.
Thanks Cole! There is nothing I like more in life than DMing...well few things anyway. Here's hoping we get to throw the bones together sometime.
Oh, and Aberzombie...Damn you, damn you!!! ;-)
Oh, Nic! I've prepared a spare room for you. I hope you will honour me with your good graces up here in the frigid north. We can roll some of 'em bones if you know what I mean. ;)
I would love to have you running a game for me, but just having you in my life would be enough to make all my greatest dreams come true.
Ar-har. Just over 400 words, in collaboration with someone else who will remain unnamed. That's what happens when you notice these things on the last day. Now I'm going to bed.
You know, this would be really disturbing if it weren't so sad. I think he's an OK writer (except for that Eberron crap), but "majestic".
No offense Logue, but if I was drinking milk right now I'd be snorting it out my nose.
Edit: Of course, I do envy Logue's talent at securing a nice little cult following.
Well I've never read anything done by him. I've just never seen someone DM with as much energy as he was in that Seven Swords of Sin delve video, and I thought it was awesome.
I don't know whether I should be honoured that you would compare me to the majestic Mr. Logue, or insulted that you would try and bring him down to my level.
I must confess I have a bit of a man crush at the moment.
Don't worry, you're not alone. While at Gen Con I realized I had never seen a guy starf!~~ed like that in my entire life....and by gamers. I don't know how he stayed so damned cheerful on so little sleep.
I think I can understand. I get overly cheerful and confused when I don't get enough sleep. I once buried my face in my pants because I couldn't figure out how to put them on because I was too tired. :<
Of course I was all giggly about it and the people watching me thought I was really weird as I rubbed my face in my pants asking nobody in particular "WHAT ARE THEY DOOOIIINNG?"
The point is: More videos of Logue.
Or does anyone have videos of this Iron DM competition?
I only visited this thread because I thought Nick was involved some way in an adult video. It would be the only adult video you ever saw with drama, suspense, and a TPK in the finale! ;)
A lot of people on these messageboards are deluding themselves. As soon as 4e is released Paizo will change over to it. It won't happen overnight (they may want to finish their 2nd Pathfinder series first) but the 3rd Pathfinder series will be 4e as long as it's OGL. The only way they won't change to 4e is if it's not OGL.
Also, if the changes from 3.5 to 4e are not catastrophic Paizo may end up providing conversion notes for the 2nd Pathfinder series and change over to 4e midway through the adventure path.
I'm not sure it will be immediate, but I suspect you're right.
Since I've been keeping track of Pathfinder I've been wondering why the new APs are 15 levels in six months. 4th edition has 30 levels. If six months is 15 levels then 12 months should be 30.
Of course it could just be coincidence, but it struck me as a strange choice from the get-go.
