Very nice preview. I love the possibility to choose a tertiary stat to boost, so as to allow more freedom in combining the different heritages with the classes. And I also like the separation between innate heritage feat and "acquired" feats: the latter seems basically like alternate racial traits you can select as you character progresses, suggesting that he or she does not only develop his class-related abilites, but also somehow make his heritage and natural gifts stronger. I like the roleplaying potential of it.
And I don't know if I am wrong, but it seems to me like we have a picture for each ancestry as fighters (the goblin was a fighter, judging from his equipment, and both the dwarf and the elf here seem fighters as well to me, their gear is very Valeros-y). Does that mean that we will get a picture of each core class-race combination? That would be incredibly awesome, let me say it...
I'm not sure whether someone already suggested this, but I think I would prefer a normal-sized Bestiary, followed by more normal-sized bestiaries. And then, perhaps a single, huge Bestiary with all the monsters from Bestiaries 1-3 in the same book, possibly containing new setting-specific information about each monster. This would make it optional, but would cut the printing costs, since arts can be used again. Also, it would cut down development costs and time, because of its nature of partial reprint. I would definitely buy both the single normal-sized bestiaries and the bigger one, but others may decide to buy only the formers or just wait for the latter.
WAR FOR THE CROWN PLAYER'S GUIDE
An excellent guide. If I may point out one thing that I really miss, though, it is the class-by-class breakdown. I know we have a huge number of classes now, so what I ask for becomes more and more difficult to achieve as new classes are introduced, but on the basis that Player's Guides do not come in a print edition I think that adding a few pages to the total would not be such a big deal.
I always considered the entry devoted to each class, detailing how its members relate to the adventure's setting, hands down the best part of Player's Guides and I would really love to see them coming back, if not now, at least in Pathfinder 2nd edition, where - at the beginning, at least - available classes will be limited to 12.
Apart from that, though, I consider this guide as one of the best I've ever read.
Ideally, I would like to see how the different classes and heritages work through all (or most) of the levels. That's not something I can accomplish on my own of course, especially as a player. So I am planning to GM a few games and join others as a player: what I want to test is the whole new edition, actually, there is not something in particular I want to test more than other things. OK, perhaps I am a bit more curious about the new three-actions system for combat, the active use of shields, and the transition betweeen "exploration" mode and "encounter" mode.
The fact that someone can fumble a DC10 check implies that Nat 1s are fumbles even if the DC isn't failed by 10 - I'm not sure I like that. I'd rather the +-10 rule replace nat 1/nat 20 for fumbles and crits and not be in addition to it - especially with skills. I really don't want Olympic class swimmers failing to stay afloat in calm water 5% of the time or people jumping to the moon 5% of the time. If it's just +-10 for crit you avoid that by setting the DC appropriately.
Well, in that case just don't ask for a skill check and assume the character is taking 10 on his check, if you are the GM. If you are the player, just take 10.
And if you are in combat, you can just assume that the character failed the check because he was distracted, not because he cannot swim.
John Lynch, thank you for your comment. Don't worry, I didn't take it as an offense. In fact, I think perhaps I explained myself not that good. I make a point of *NOT* introducing to many sourcebooks at once for new players. I have my own format to limit available sources even for experienced players, which I call Pathfinder Vintage. Although the main aim of that format is coherence, especially when running Adventure Paths (treasure, player's guide, etc.), when I apply its rules to the adventures I usually get the new players to play (Crypt of the Everflame, Rise of the Runelords), it effectively coincides with a reduction of the sources available (for both me and the players) to the Core Rulebook.
So *THAT* is not the problem. Yeah, I feel the game is a little bit bloated, but at the same time that is the strenght of Pathfinder, offering so many options to the players. My point was another: the problem is that when starting to play, new players sometimes know beforehand the differences betweeen the various systems, and in our case we can limit the alternative to Pathfinder and D&D. Usually this a priori knowledge is based on hearsay, and it is quite reductive and incomplete. The result is that, in my experience, new players tend to think about Pathfinder as a game that will become increasingly difficult for them. They know I may limit the sourcebooks at the beginning, but they know that sooner or later they will need to expand their horizons, because to them Pathfinder is "the game that offers a lot of customization and character's options," while D&D is "the game that takes it simple." This is clearly wrong, but that's what they think, at least the prospective players I've met in the last few years.
Now, take this knowledge and apply it not to new players in general, but to the *new* audience RPG have now: many of the people who love customization, depth of options, roleplaying games in themselves, game mechanics and so on, they probably already play the game. My OP focuses on the new players who fall out of those categories: people who want to try the game out, that have no previous disposition to RPGs. Now, what I argue is that D&D is currently more attractive for this kind of players, which I argue, are the majority as of now in Europe, for the following reasons.
1. It is thought to be simpler.
Now, there's nothing we can do about point 3, and as for point 1, it is more a matter of marketing than game system in my opinion. But for point 2, well, a new edition is needed. That's the only way to make Pathfinder look like a fresh game, and not a game clinging to 20 years old rules, although revised 9 years ago. New players know that. They usually know that Pathfinder is based on 3.5, and they think about that system as unnecessarily complex. They want something new, something fresh, something modern.
Of course, it is important to stress that I don't think that new players are right. I think that Pathfinder 1st edition is not so hard, and its learning curve is not impossible, if a good GM aids the players. I'm just arguing that, according to my experience, it seems so for new players nowadays. And since new players today are a bit different from new players 9 years ago, I argue that new players today not that interested, at the start at least, in countless options but rather interested in simplicity, they usually tend to look at Pathfinder as a worse alternative to D&D for them.
In my opinion Pathfinder 1st ed is not hard. It is sometimes unnecessarily complex on certain things, as Erik Mona himself said in the KnowDirection podcast, but complexity does not equate with difficulty.
Im putting this out there: if Paizo want this game to work out, they need to break into twitch in a big way. Maybe reach out to Geek and Sundry, get some of theor cast playing the playtest with a couple of big name voice actors. Make Pathfinder 2 into an entertainment to watch as much as it is to play cause that is a major driver on 5e sales. Stuff like critical role and the adventure zone have brought a lot of people to the table who would never touch rpg's if they hadnt seen celebrities they like playing the game
I agree with you. This kind of partnership draw a lot of new players to the game, in my experience. Although they usually draw people to RPGs in general, so they are quite beneficial already.
“A wider public” – A reflection on Pathfinder 2nd edition
A premise: I love Pathfinder 1st edition, and what I am going to say is driven by that love, the same love that brought me to become a Pathfinder translator for my country (Italy).
I think that a second edition of Pathfinder was unavoidable if we wanted to avoid the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game as a whole to slowly collapse and fade away. Why should you listen to me, now? Because I am going to give you a new perspective, perhaps one you are not very familiar with. I will tell you about Pathfinder in Europe.
I recently moved to Paris for work. I moved from a relatively small city in Italy where I had slowly built my party of friend with whom I have completed several Adventure Paths using Pathfinder Rules. When I left, I said myself. “Do not have fear, Giuseppe, you’re not going to give up your favored hobby! Just imagine how many people you will meet in Paris who will be ready to embark on a campaign with you! Paris is a huge city after all!”
Wanna know the results? After 4 months spent searching, posting in Meetup groups, Facebook groups, sending mail after mail to the local PFS coordinator, I gave up. And listen: I was offering to GM, not trying to get in a group as a player. Only a few people wanted to play Pathfinder, and most of them were newbies: and they all would have preferred D&D. You know what? I tried to post on a group offering myself as a D&D GM and you know how many candidates I got? More than you can imagine, my friends, and more than I am willing to admit.
But I endured. I painstakingly put together a group of 5 players: none of them had played Pathfinder before. We met on a Sunday afternoon to create our characters and…that was the moment I realized Pathfinder was going to slowly die, unless an undreamt of new edition came out. The players were confused. Too many options, too many sourcebooks (I even projected the Strategy Guide for them), too many rules. I tried to help them, to guide them, and eventually we did it, but I was left with the unpleasing sensation of having made their characters myself. Before I left, one player asked me: “Why don’t we just play D&D instead?”
This happened on Sunday, the 4th of March. You know the rest of the story.
I was excited, as though one of the Gods of the Inner Sea region had heard my unspoken prayers. Pathfinder 2nd edition was a thing!
Now, I want to speak a bit more in general. In the last few years, many friends asked me to GM a game for them. 5 years ago, when I started to play, they were all people in the category that some would define as “nerds” or “geeks”. They were driven by a sincere love of fantasy or RPG, and were willing to try out this new (to them) game named Pathfinder, which promised depth and endless possibilities of customization. They loved it, and they became my party. We achieved many RPG goals together.
It has been 2 years since the last “nerd” person asked me to run a game for him: someone with an interest in videogames, fantasy books, or other similar things. I got a lot of requests, but not from them. "RPGs? Too mainstream!," told me someone. How ironic!, I thought.
Most of the prospective players were girls who had seen Stranger Things and were interested in finding out what a RPG was. Others were people in search for a new pastime. No previous interest in fantasy, no love for RPG, and unsurprisingly…no love for math and complex character building processes. I made Pathfinder players out of them of course, but that was not easy. I had to work hard and many of them asked me to simplify the game, because they didn’t have the time read all the published books.
And now I am left with this feeling that Paizo is doing the right thing at the right moment. Carpe diem. I am not a veteran player by any means, I have not seen previous edition wars in the past, and I was not there when Pathfinder first came into light. But this time I will be. And I will work hard as I ever did in order to promote it. I hope it will be a bit less complex, with a slightly more comfortable learning curve for new players. Because we have to deal with it: RPG games’ public has widened significantly over the last few years, and Pathfinder 1st edition was not in line anymore with the new players. And although we could continue to ignore those “newbies”, I have realized how crucial they are not only for Paizo’s sales and consequently for the quality of its products, but for the diffusion of our game in itself. Annoying as it may seems, we must take them into account, and give them a reason to prefer OUR game to the others on the market. Their exigencies changed, and the game needs to change as well, because as Cicero said “the shifts of fortune test the reliability of friends.”
Just my two cents. I may be wrong on several, or all points of my post. After all, I've never been to the U.S, and I'm sure it is a completely different world over there. But that is what I am feeling, and I needed to share with you guys.
I also think that Pathfinder has become the legacy of the old guard, and is no longer at all an attractive game for a new audience, unless they are inducted by a Pathfinder-player. Making a game that's exciting for both new and old players is a pretty important evolution, even if it's painful to transition.
I second this.
Besides, as far as I am concerned more personally, I only started playing Pathfinder in 2013, and I always felt like I had arrived later to the show, such as when you start watching a movie from minute 45 or so. I love Pathfinder, but I didn't feel completely at home while playing it. There were a lot of old good stuff that I never got to play, because they became too old in the meantime. Now, I can finally see the story begin, and that will probably push me to buy more products than in the past :)
What should I do?
It is quite urgent, so please help me solve this problem as soon as possible.
I find it nice. A bit minimal, but nice.
[u]Underline[/u] definitely works now. And oh my god, also [color=red]colors[/color] do!
And also, it is possible to use a second font to separate things:
This is going to have a huge impact on the way I format my posts in PbP!
Wonderful stuff there GM Ladile, thanks!
Guisseppe, your name sounds like my real name...or the way english-speaking people usually write it! :D
Anyway, I'm going with a Str magus. I don't know how I'm going to bring him up to a decent level though: I'm not so experienced with PFS neither, so I would like to ask you if you have any advice on this. Would that be a problem if I bring a level 1? I have some GM credit to apply, but I have only GMed Core games.
Hey everyone! Glad to have the chance to play with some of my experienced players on the other side of the screen. My character for this exciting scenario is going to be ... *drum roll* ... him! A human, Taldan swashbuckler. A young lordling trying to put his skills to test within the PFS. He's also a confirmed agent, so you'd better watch out! :D
I still need to make some purchases before we start, but I will do as soon as possible.
There's a mistake in the recruitment applicants sheet. Giuseppe Capriati is my username (and real life name XD), not my character's name. My character is Vasilyan Medvyed. I would define him as something between a ranged tank and a ranged striker, with the ability to act as the secondary healer.
DM Jesse Heinig wrote:
Wow, thank you for that answer. I'll try to build the best character possible for this campaign!
DM, what are your thoughts on a divine hunter paladin of Erastil? And, in a more general sense, what do you think about paladins in this campaign? I had the chance to play KM in person last year (we only went through the first book, though), and I was playing a paladin. There were no problem at all with party members, since we felt like Erastil tenets were very easy to share in the Stolen Lands, but I'm asking your opinion nonetheless. I've got other ideas in case this wouldn't work or isn't reccomended.
I've been waiting for a campaign like this to pop up on these boards for months. I'm going to be through moving this week, so I'm not really sure I'll have the time to create the character I've got in my mind, but with some luck and hard work maybe I'll be able to throw my hat into the ring in spite of everything. I'm a huge fan of the Heart of the Jungle book, one of my all-time favourites, and the idea to join a homebrew campaign set in the Mwangi Expanse is something great. I'll try my best to come up with a character before the recruitment closes.
The game content guideline mean that races are limited to core races correct?
No. It means that only the core races AND all playable races from the Bestiary and Bestiary 2 are allowed. Of course, I already had the opportunity to say that because this is a heavily RP oriented campaign, my suggestion is to avoid monsters such as hobgoblin, orcs, tieflings, etc. since they could experience a very hard integration into the campaign.
I allow every race in the legal sources that has the "x characters" wording, such as "orc characters", "tiefling characters" and so on. Hobgoblins and Aasimars included. Of course, the problem here is the same as for the orc: I'll develop a very precise setting and as far as I know from my readings, hobgoblins are considered monsters by the common people, so pacific interactions may prove difficult. Aasimars don't have this problem at all: to the contrary they tend to be accepted and sometimes even made the center of a lot of attentions and pressures. Developing an aasimar's psychology could be challenging, but aasimars are far and away more fitting to the campaign compared with hobgoblins. My world will be populated mostly by humans and so races like goblins, kobolds, hobgoblins, orcs, tiefling, etc. must face the fact that probably will be trated with ostility or feared by the common folk, will have hard times trying to get the NPCs acceptance and so on.
I simply misunderstood your intents. I'm fine with a bleachling, even if as I said above I expect that a he/she has a very deep psychology, which must reflect the pains he/she has endured and the new way of thinking and acting that becoming a bleachling entails.
I have a couple of ideas for this, but one needs a question answered: Since Gnomes of Golarion is legal, can I make a Bleachling Gnome? Been wanting to make/use one since I first read it, but never really been in a game that I could work it in, or found some new toy (read: new stuff that came out) that I wanted to try. If not, that's totally fine and I can come up with something different, just thought I'd give it a shot.
No problem with a bleaching gnome, but as stated in Gnomes of Golarion you'll be making a Will saving throw each year to avoid the terrible effects of the bleaching.
I'm thinking of an elf barbarian. Her name is Sizara which means Cheetah of Storms in Elven. Since her spirit animal is a cheetah. I hope I have time to finish her up. Busy with work. Stats are easy. It's the background and description that are the hard parts.
I know it's hard, but it's supposed to be that way. I like the character's concept, maybe you could think about making her a savage elf (Ekujae tribe). Unfortunately we know so little about Ekujae, but in my opinion it's a concept that deserves to be explored. Spirit animals will play a big role in the campaign, so the connection is appropriate.
Marcus Olgran De Macini wrote:
I've read the back story and analyzed the crunch. It seems pretty solid and thematically fitting (I've especially appreciated the familiar choice). Only one question: the weird punctuation is done on purpose? I don't want to be pedantic, but in a game entirely focused on writing and reading a wrong punctuation could make everything harder, especially when it comes to roleplaying posts.
Orcs are allowed but be warned that this campaign is very focused on RP and building relationships with NPCs, so maybe an orc could have hard times, but you're free to try the challenge.
The Pale King wrote:
I will tell you now that if you posted the recruitment thread you will have tons of interest, APs always do. You'll have a lot of people to pick from but it can be a lot of work to do so.
My character's creation requirements will be very demanding, since I am going to ask to any player who applies to read some pages from various sources regarding the campaign setting. I wish this can help to reduce the number of people demanding for a spot, at least those who aren't really interested.For example, as you may already know, PCs are supposed to hail from one of various cities (Corentyn, Senghor, Bloodcove, Magnimar, Corentyn, Ilizmagorti, etc.): PCs backgrounds and personality must reflect this origin, since many of those cities are very well detailed (in books such as Cities of Golarion, Magnimar, City of Monuments, Heart of the Jungle and so on). My intent is to choose those whose characters fits best with the AP and prove that they're part of Golarion both in background, motivations, personality and player's options (such as archetypes, feats and so on). I want players to be part of the Serpent's Skull world, I want characters who are heavily involved in the stories we're going to tell, and not only universals that go floating around the world in search of a suitable adventure to join.
GM Mowque wrote:
One quick question, have you GM'ed before? Even if not PBP?
Of course yes. I GM'ed Council of Thieves, Serpent's Skull (two times) and Carrion Crown until the end of each in person. I also GM'ed Rise of The Runelords, stopping at chapter 4. I'm actually GM'ing Skulls & Shackles for my physical players.
So, after a long time spent seriously considering all the facets of the thing, seems like I'm inclined to start a new experience as PbP GM.
This post is intended to check users' interest about my project, interest which must take into consideration the list of things detailed below:
Looking forward to know if are there enough people who intend to applicate and if I can get any suggestions that the extraordinary people here has got for a fresh new PbP GM.