Over the weekend I ran a long Starfinder convention mini-campaign at TotalCon in Marlborough, MA USA. As the grande finale I ran a big fat space battle. I know some folks have had some reservations about the space combat system, so I thought I would offer up this example.
First of all, there were 3 factions in the Battle for Nebula City -- the invading Azlanti Fleet (played by me, the GM), a fleet of pirate vessels that were wild cards (four players) and a station defense fleet (four other players). I allowed each player 5 tiers of ships and most of the players took 2 ships each (a 2 and a 3 or a 1 and a 4), while my invading force consisted of 6 Tier 1/2 fighters, 2 tier 6 battleships and a tier 7 flagship. The invader's goal was to destroy the defenders and run off the pirates. All told there were about 25 or so ships on the table at the start of the battle. I held a Nova Spawn in reserve in case it looked like the invaders might go down to easy.
The introduction and ship choosing phase took about an hour. Some folks had played Starfinder before but few had done much space combat. The ships came from the main book and APs as well as some commercially available on DriveThru. Most seemed generally balanced. The first round of combat took quite a while -- another hour -- while players tried to figure out their vessels in action and all the different phase action choices. It was a little clunky and frustrating -- not least because 3 of 4 almost immediately the pirate players decided they would focus fire on defender ships (even though they had been offered amnesty for helping fight off the Azlanti). The second round of combat went faster -- I trusted the players to take care of the department/crew actions that only affected themselves and enforced a "roll attack and damage at the same time" rule. By the end of that round a couple pirate vessels were dead, a couple Azlanti fighters were dead and one defender ship was very close to fireball city.
We took 10 as I got checked out of my hotel room. When I return a couple players had left for lunch and another game and had been replaced by a couple people who had been hoping to get a slot. the newcomers just took over existing ships in the pirate fleet. Two of the three players that had left were children, and while I like gaming with kids and encourage them, things sped up considerably once they were no longer at the table.
From there it was pretty smooth, exciting sailing. As the weaker ships got knocked out the battle grew more intense. As players got comfortable with the basic rules, they tried more and more options, including piloting maneuvers and stuff. The game system held up pretty well, having the same swingy quality of the RPG parts of play. Note that I let players use Resolve points to buy rerolls and such in play and so gave each player some "awesome points" to do the same thing. This certainly sped things up as some misses turned into hits and hits into crits, but many of these awesome points fizzled (you can still roll low on a reroll or a d30!) and I don't think it made the game unrecognizable.
In the end the pirates and defenders joined forces and focused fire on the pirates. Focusing fire is essential in Starfinder space combat, since it is trivial in most cases to re balance shields. So if you can get a ship's shields down and hammer that same quadrant you can do real damage and cause critical system failures. Had the pirates kept fighting the defenders or even fled the outcome was in no way certain.
In general I don't think Starfinder ship combat is especially deep, and as such it might grow stale if played constantly. That said, I was impressed on how it handled a lot of players and vessels and think it makes a good addition to the game. A space combat every few sessions can change up the pace of the game and offer a nice diversion.
Star Trek in Starfinder: how would you do it?
I don't mean a literal Star Trek Universe game. Rather, a Starfinder campaign set solidly in the game setting using the core rules as the primary tool, but intended to recreate the feel of Star Trek (go ahead and pick your poison as far as what that means specifically -- me, I am a TNG guy mostly, though I do love the Cardassian War seasons of DS9).
To me, Star Trek is defined by a generally positive future, a sense of wonder and exploration, a big ship as mobile home base, a pseudo-military command structure (which almost always moves out of the way for story purposes) and the occasional really large space battle. It has room for everything from pulpy action to political intrigue to social commentary (sometimes a little ham-handed), all wrapped up in a benevolent military sci-fi uniform.
What parts of Starfinder would you focus on? What parts would you sort of ignore? How would you integrate things like the Drift and magic in general into a Star Trek feel? What about religions and factions and powerful species?
I don't think I am alone in the opinion that the PFACG is one of the most fun, best designed games to appear in recent years. I was just curious if Paizo was actively considering giving Starfinder the PFACG treatment? obviously it would not appear for at least a year (until after the first AP is complete) but is it something the company has thought about?
I am putting together a potst-apocalyptic campaign using the Pathfinder rules and I was hoping to get some insight and opinions. First off, let me establish two important things:
1) By "post apocalyptic" I mean nuclear wasteland (and other calamities) destroyed Earth inspired by the likes of CRPGs like Wasteland and Fallout, and other media like the movie Hell Comes to Frogtown and the comic Wasteland. So I mean a sci-fi post apocalypse, with plenty of weirdness and super-science, but no magic and with protagonists (aka PCs) that are primarily human -- so NOT Gamma World type mutants.
2) I want to mine information from Paizo published materials and the Pathfinder SRD because the players want to play Pathfinder, not a different game using the Pathfinder engine.
Also, i should note that I am totally aware of the upcoming technology Guide and Iron Gods AP, which will certainly have some useful stuff to incorporate, but we plan on starting sooner than August.
All that said, I am hoping to put together a list of character options. I am going to limit race to humans, but I want to collect enough non-magical classes and class archetypes to make sure there are plenty of options for everyone while keeping all of the meta-game archtypes (including healers) in the mix. I think I'll need to allow alchemists of some sort, given a high tech paint job, in order to achieve this. I am not totally against converting some spellcaster class into a psychic if it seems appropriate and necessary.
I figure it won't be too hard to paint most monsters as mutants, and a lot of magic items can be re-skinned as high-tech. Guns might be a problem, though, up to and including rocket launchers and plasma rifles, so any suggestions would be helpful.
I am headed to TotalCon in a couple weeks and decided to sign up for 2 sessions of Pathfinder society (mostly to experience it as a player tosee if I want to do it as a GM). As I understand it, you can show up without a character and get a pregen even if the scenario is not for 1st level. Is that true? And if so, is it better to do that, presuming I don't really are about having an ongoing PC? What are the advantages of having your own character versus using a pregen?
Tangentially: what do I need with me besides event tickets? Do I need a membership card (I know I joined a while back) or anything else? Thanks.
There are occasionally threads about converting classic D&D adventures to Pathfinder, but less often is there discussion about running Pathfinder adventures or APs in classic D&D. In my case, classic D&D is B/ X but I think this discussion could easily apply to AD&D (1e or 2e), BECMI, OD&D or the various Old School simulacra.
Has anyone run an AP using an old school D&D? If so, which one? How did it go? Was it simply a matter or swapping out stat blocks or was the conversion process more involved?
My gut suggests Kingmaker might work best for a B/X (plus Companion set domain and War Machine rules) but I don't know for certain.
Thanks and good gaming!
I have so far avoided using the Ultimate books when I run campaigns (I am taking a break but was running two concurrent games, and will soon be running again). Option bloat is something that concerns me. At the same time, I have not bought the oops or even really examined the various options in the reference doc.
So, people that are familiar with those books and options, what am I missing? Why should I be allowing or using things from those books? Why not? How will allowing Ultimate resources effect my campaign?
Thanks a bunch.
I am curious how long it takes the typical group to complete an Adventure Path. My own group, which plays every 2 weeks for 3 or 4 hours, managed to just finish the second volume of Jade Regent after 8 months of play. I actually kind of burnt out running it, given it seemed like I had another year plus to go.
Please, answer in sessions or at least give your typical gaming schedule (how often and for how long). One of our group is looking at starting the revised RotRL soon and I am curious how long we can expect to be engaged in it.
Just trying to brainstorm here for a set of campaign guidelines (rather than major rules changes) for getting a more "old school" feel with Pathfinder. I use the scare quotes for a reason -- old school means different things to different people; in this case I mean early 80s D&D, both B/X and 1E (I actually grew up with BECMI and 2E, but "regressed" to preferring the previous editions of each).
Some things that come to mind:
Slow advancement chart.
The goal would be a document I share with the players so everyone is on the same page. What else comes to mind, or what of the above would you modify or omit.
Also, full disclosure: I'm cross posting this to a couple other forums just to get a variety of opinion.
As an alternative to the threat/confirm mechanic of critical hits in PF, I was thinking that perhaps using exploding dice instead(that is, if the maximum value on the damage die is rolled, that die is rolled again and the next result is added to the maximum result). I worked out the numbers and tried to determine the probability of any given die type of producing a "critical" result.
First, both the extreme low end (d4) and high end (d12) die types give weird probabilities in regards to "exploding" so I would take them out -- make a d4 a d6/2 that only exploded on a 6, and make d12 a 2d6 roll (which pushes us ever so slightly into bell-curve land, but we'll leave it be for now). Second, we have threat ranges to deal with, as well as high crit multipliers.
At is most basic, with a simple weapon the chance for a double damage critical hit is about 2% to 4%: 5% (roll a 20) times whatever the probability of landing a hit is. If we look at the exploding d6, we can see that at about 3% probability we have 13 points of damage (note: this is neither a maximum nor an average; there is a 3% chance of doing 15 points of damage on exploding d6's).Now, that's pretty high but does not include additional damage from strength, magic and other sources, which would be doubled in the traditional critical system but not in the exploding system.
If we look at the long sword, favored weapon of sword and board fighters editions over, we see there is a 4%-8% chance of critical (10% chance of a threat times the difficulty to hit), doing 2d8+bonusesx2. On exploding d6's, 4%-8% gives us a range of about 12-15 points plus normal damage bonuses. Not too shabby, but we can see how the higher the die type, the lower the probability of a high damage critical occurs. It is even more pronounced with the d10: the halberd (d10/x3) has a 2%-4% chance of doing somewhere in the 30 points of damage range (1d10+5 being a reasonable assumption of damage output for a halberd wielding warrior) whereas 2%-4% on exploding d10's puts us in the high teens+bonuses.
I would be inclined to have every weapon do d6's in damage: light weapons do 1d6/2, one handed weapons do 1d6 and 2 handed weapons do 2d6. This would pull down per-hit averages, but with the higher chance of a critical overall (there is a 16% chance of rolling a 6 every time you drop a d6) it might work itself out over time.
I am not sure what to do with spell damage. Rays can critical, of course, so they should use exploding damage too, but what about fireballs? What about other sources of damage in general -- exploding damage on everything from falls to ability damage makes the world a very dangerous place, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing (though a Hackmaster style hit point kicker might be in order).
I am honestly not interested in adding an avalanche of new player options to Pathfinder -- feats, spells, classes, etc -- but I am curious what new rules are present in Ultimate Combat and Ultimate Magic that are worth using in a typical campaign. I'm thinking stuff like the chase or guild rules.
One of the things that I find difficult is dealing with monster/enemy stat blocks in Pathfinder. While I enjoy the game and I know my players enjoy all the mechanical fiddly bits associated with it, as a GM I make an effort to be able to improvise and run on the fly. "Old school" versions of the game -- AD&D, B/X and the like -- made this easy with much simpler stat blcoks, as well as an assumption that monsters worked on a different system than do PCs.
What follows is a basic system for statting and using monsters in a manner more consistent with the old style, for the sole purpose of making the job of the GM easier. Some inspiration is taken not only from the Old School, but also games like Castles and Crusades and even D&D 4E.
First off, I am using the monster design rules (founde here) as a basis for my math -- even though I am not sure the math actually works out. Second, I am doing my "conversion"/design work on creatures from Jade Regent, simply because I am running that AP right now and splitting my prep time resources is a bad idea.
My primary goal is to eliminate a good chunk of the random numbers inherent in a stat block and harken back to the Old School days where much of the information you needed to run a monster was in its Hit Dice. For this project, I have looked into using both CR and HD, and I keep falling back on the latter simply because the core information I want to stop worrying about (attack bonuses, saves, skills) are all based on HD values, not CR values.
Anyway, allow me to explain by example. Here's the Dire Corby. It's PF stat block can be found here. What I want is something that looks more like this:
DIRE CORBY (CR 1; 400 XP)
As to the missing information, it's tied up in HD. Initiative=+HD. Attack Bonus=+HDX1.5. Good Saves=+HD+2. Poor Saves=+HD/2. If a "skill roll" is needed, the creature makes an ability check. For a Prim ability, it is +HDx2, or just +HD for a non-prime. I am not sure whether this stuff should be put right in the stat block (which will gum it up) or if it should be on a handy dandy chart to hand on the GM screen.
The goal, of course, is to make life easier, not slavishly "convert" the PF info. You'll note, for example, I left out the necessary acrobatics check for the Dire Corby pounce ability. It is, IMO, a needless complication.
My next goal is to eliminate the "spell like ability" and simplify SLA-heavy creatures with unique and interesting powers. I will be freely examing and probably stealing from 4E for this.
Allow me to start by saying that I really like the APs overall. I started with Kingmaker and thought it was brilliant, and am now running Jade Regent and we are having a great time. However, I have a criticism:
Today I was spending time prepping for tonight's game and realized that a lot of valuable information is buried too deeply in the prose. In this case, I am specifically referring to Brinewall Castle, but I think it applies more broadly.
I would like to request a change in format that lays out the important game elements of a room or encounter more clearly. An example would be the room description in Monte Cook's Dungeon-a-day. Whatever other problems DaD had, Monte came up with a nice format that gave a simple summary, door info, vision and light (plus sounds and smells) and room contents all in a concise and usable package. I shouldn't have to spend as much time prepping by mining the prose for important info as it would take to write the adventure myself.
Please consider how the APs are used at the actual table, and how making them more GM friendly increases their utility and therefore, hopefully, your sales.
I decided to order C&C Complete last night, due to a desire to find a middle ground between Old D&D/Clones and "New School" D&D (3.x, Pathfinder). I don't even have it yet, so I am not sure I am going to like it, but assuming I want to give it a go, has anyone run a Pathfinder AP using C&C? How did it go? How much conversion work had to be done before hand? How easy was it to adjudicate/convert on the fly? Did the flavors match?
Thanks a bunch.
Of course, I don't mean real realism. I mean "grittiness" or "simulationism" or any other word that implies making the Pathfinder rules and their implied universe more "medieval."
I think the first thing that needs to happen is to increase the value of the shield. Shields are perhaps the most common and important article of war in the world, across cultures and throughout history. Shields should drastically increase a character's survivability. This is, after all, why they saw such widespread use, and still do today. I suggest increasing the shield bonus to AC and allowing it to apply to CMD at the very least.
Second, spellcasting doesn't need to be reduced in power or utility, just efficiency. Pathfinder (and d20 in general) spellcasters are extremely efficient and the world should look nothing like a medieval Earth given their presence. Making spellcasting slow, costly and uncertain would go a long way toward adjusting this. However, the point wouldn't be to nerf PC spellcasters, so perhaps rarity is enough of an answer (although this can create problem with PC casters getting access to new spells, teachers, etc...)
What other rules changes or assumptions could be used to help anchor Pathfinder to a more "realistic" milieu?
(I hope this is the right forum for this.)
Contests. Open calls. Standard submissions (with or without query). On spec assignments. Taking writing resumes.
I started a thread under Paizo General about writing for PF, and the majority of the response pointed toward "write for a 3rd Party Publisher." Okay. I'll buy that.
So, who's hiring? I know many 3PPs are one-or-three man operations done as a labor of love, but some of you have to be open to submissions or be willing to give assignments. And I am certain that I am far from the only one on this board to be interested in such work.
So here's your chance. Let us know.
What books would you like to see for the Pathfinder Campaign Setting line? My wishlist includes:
Skies Over Golarion: from floating castles to winged elves to sky pirates! This book would cover all sorts of aerial adventure locations and flying races/creatures/etc...
Seas of Golarion: the nautical book! Ships, piracy, sea serpents, undersea cities!
Eldricht Events of Golarion: Instead of locations, a book of strange magical events that occur in Golarion and how they affect the people and the world. Mana storms that temporarily turn magic wild! Convergences of the stars and planets that potend doom! Nights every 666 years when the dead rise and orcus is free to walk the earth! Fimbul winters and searing summers!
Merchant Houses of Golarion: A look at trade and the great trading houses, companies and nations of the world. Expanded rules for trade in the campaign, plus expanded Caravan rules (per the Jade Regent PG).
Some years ago, I used to write RPG material professionally (primarily for Exalted 1st Edition, plus some work on the d20 version of Gamma World). I have been meaning, now that the kids are a little older, to get back to it. Unfortunately i am having a case of writers block at the moment. When I was freelancing, I found that having an assignment and a deadline made me a better writer, so let's give that a shot.
Here's the rules:
1) Whatever "assignment" I accept, I get it done in a week (7 days).
Other than that, I'll write anything. Need a villainous organization for your campaign? A magical event or location? An expanded or updated monster or race?
Assume I have access to Core + Bestiary + Inner Sea.
Now, I am NOT saying that a playstyle focused on characters builds or an extreme focus on "game balance" are badwrongfun. People should do what they do and enjoy themselves, and there's plenty of room for us all in the PF sandbox.
However, I just don't like those lines of thought or types of discussions. I guess you might call me a "simulationist" in that I think a character, monster, spell or whatever should look, mechanically, like it looks, non-mechanically. By that I mean, the gulf of power between the fighter and the magic-user (one way at low levels, the other at high levels) never bothered me at all in previous editions. Obviously, if the game mechanics just *don't work*, that's a whole different issue, but there's no reason to ensure that every choice is as "good" as every other choice, if you are trying to produce a certain result from a "fluff" perspective.
And as to powergaming builds: blech. I have never had to suffer through a powergamer at my table (and likely wouldn't do so for long) and I am super appreciative that most "build" discussions occur in "build" threads on most message boards. But when they do start to intrude on "regular" discussions, I either tone out or, occasionally, get actively annoyed.
Sorry. Just a little rant inspired by a few threads today. :)
I just found mine:
"Elephants are never legal for play."
From the Pathfinder Society "Additional Resources" page. Whole quote:
"Pathfinder Player Companion: Adventurer's Armory
I can count on one hand the number of modules I ran between when I started with the red box in 1985 and when I finished my last big campaign in 2005 or so. In between, as I played 3.5, I had lots of stops and starts, mostly fueled by a failure to keep up with the work of preparing games.
About the same time I switched to PFRPG, I started using modules more and more. Even though I am from the "middle school" (I started with the Red Box) I have some "old school" sensibilities, so I used primarily DCCs from Goodman Games and some Necromancer Modules. I also subscribed for Kingmaker, and made use of bits and pieces of that. Over time, I mutated from a "home brew" GM to a module GM, including using Monte Cook's Dungeon-a-Day for my store game and now seriously considering using Jade Regent for the new home game.
And I, as GM, am having more fun. Letting someone else do all the creation allows me to be more creative. Not only does it free up time to write and do other things, it allows me to put more effort into actually prepping for play and making the modules come alive. It's funny -- I always scoffed at modules as a lazy GM's way out. Maybe I've just gotten lazy?
I still love to create adventures, but for games I find it easier to run on the fly. I recently ran a weekend long mega-adventure/mini-campaign using Mutant Future. I sketched the entire thing out in a half dozen pages of notebook paper, maps included, and jotted down some stats and went to town. We had a blast. I don't feel I could pull that off with Pathfinder (or 3.5 or 3.0, for that matter). And that's okay. I have my old books and my retro-clones for seat-of-my-pants gaming. For long term, solid gameplay, I have PFRPG and modules.
Now I have to decide whether to run an episodic game or an AP...
I know -- probably a dumb question -- but I want to start a regular PFS game at my FLGS with the new season (I am running regular PF game now, but it isn't really "organized play"). So when does the new season start? I would like to be ready to jump on it, having contacted my venture captain and hyped it and all that so that on Day 1 I am ready to rock and roll.
One thing I have always disliked about 3.x systems in having to look up the spell like abilities of various monsters, and one thing I did like about 4E was the integration of those abilities into the monster stat blocks.
So, as an experiment, I was wondering how difficult it would be to "fix" Pathfinder monsters by integrating their spell like abilities into their special abilities list. Following is what I came up with for the derro. It seems workable:
Special Abilities (CL 3; DCs CHA based)
Darkness Mastery(Sp) Derro can create a field of magical darkness at will, causing illumination levels in a 20' radius to drop one step. The darkness is centered on an object touched and lasts for 3 minutes.
Daze(Sp) Once per day, a derro may attmept to daze a humanoid creature with 4 HD or less. Range: 30'. Save: Will DC 13 negates. Duration: 1 round.
Madness (Ex) Derros use their Charisma modifier on Will saves instead of their Wisdom modifier, and are immune to insanity and confusion effects. Only a miracle or wish can remove a derro's madness. If this occurs, the derro gains 6 points of Wisdom and loses 6 points of Charisma.
Poison Use (Ex) Derros are not at risk of poisoning themselves when handling poison. They use Medium spider venom to poison their crossbow bolts, and generally carry 10 pre-poisoned bolts at all times.
Sound Mastery (Sp) A derro has magical control over sund. At will, they can create illusionary noise as loud as a pack of barking dogs or small group of men charging, up to 30 feet away. This auditory illusion lasts for 3 rounds (Will DC 13 reveals the sound as an illusion). Once per day, a derro can focus their magical sound abilities into a burst of noise that deals 1d8 sonic damage in a 10' radius spread up to 30' away. Anyone taking damage from the attack must make a Fort DC 15 save or be stunned for one round.
Vulnerability to Sunlight (Ex) A derro takes 1 point of Con damage after every hour it is exposed to sunlight.
Obviously, you'd have to do the work for every creature in the book, but if you made it park of your basic game prep you would end up with a pretty comprehensive "monster manual".
An alternative would be to create a "standardized" list of monster abilities based on the spell like abilities, so Darkness = Darkness no matter which monster has it, but you'd want to find a way to either quickly assign level dependent values or eliminate them entirely.
I am considering starting a fresh campaign in Golarion, and after some investigation I thought I would start with the Godsmouth Heresy. I ordered that and City of Strangers, but are there any other sources of information on Kaer Maga? Other modules? AP "issues"? I plan on getting Dungeons of Golarion, too, when it comes out.
Thanks a lot.
Starting in March, I will be running a bi-weekly ongoing drop-in campaign of Monte Cook's Dungeon-a-Day at Cave Comics in Newtown, Connecticut. It will be the first and third sunday of every month, from 12:45 to 4:45, up to 6 players, first come first served for seats.
If you live in the area, come play!
Here's a link to the poster I made up: http://www.flickr.com/photos/18291320@N06/5422464009/
I am just about to start running Monte Cook's Dungeon-A-Day at my LFGS using Pathfinder and though the "outside world" won't much matter given the format I'll be running under, I would like to place the dungeon in Golarion anyway (mostly to promote the use of Pathfinder material).
I don't know much about the Golarion setting, so what is a good possible location for the Dragon's Delve megadungeon? It is located in a recently (100 years ago) fallen duchy on the verge of civilization, if that helps.
A megadungeon is one of the hallmarks of old school play. It is a massive, non-linear multi-dimensional dengon complex, and underground sandbox environment built for exploration. Ultimately, the megadungeon was the gensis of the hobby.
The question, then, is this: does Pathfinder supprt a megadungeon campaign? Is it feasible? What sort of changes/liits/houserules would be required to successfully run such a campaign? Is there any interest for a megadungeon Adventure Path or product? Are there any published megadungeons for Pathfinder.
Most importantly: have you run or played in a megadungeon using Pathfinder? Did it work? Was it fun?
I am considering building a "living" megadungeon for use with pathfinder, to be run at game stores and conventions and such. But it may be too much work, especially when compared to doing so with a game more well suited to it, like Labyrinth Lord.
Just out of curiosity, what old d20/3.0/3.5 books are you still using with Pathfinder?
I get a lot of mileage out of MM III and MM IV, plus the Tome of Horrors (I revised and II). Every once in a while I pull something out of Relics and Rituals. I plan on using a few things like the Hexblade and Ninja for the Drow of my campaign setting (they are going to be non-Asian ninjas and martialartists).
Every once in a while, i get a hankering to run AD&D 1E or something like Labirynth Lord. The problem is, however, that I have some GM ADD issues and have been warned that switching up games or campaigns (again) is going to cost me players. Therefore, I am going to have to get my "old school" fix with PF.
So I thought I would start a thread where we can make suggestions and share tricks and tips for running PF (with all its new fangled player empowerment elements) in an Old School style.
The very first is simple: Let The Dice Fall Where They May. No fudging. No "action points". No re-rolls, no matter how much the players cry and/or beg.
I was just curious if there is any intent by Paizo to create other kinds of games using Pathfinder/Golarion as a base. For example, a CCg or non-collectible card game, or an adventure board game along the lines of FFG's Runebound or Descent.
I believe the brand is strong, and Paizo has some great artists, world builders and game designers at their disposal. Perhaps it is too expensive to get into, but it seems a shame that Pathfinder/Golarion would forever be limited to the TTRPG.
Also: Eventually, wouldn't it be nice if we had a big old DragonAge style Pathfinder PC RPG, something moddable so folks could recreate all the great adventure paths?
I am currently re-reading The Hobbit, and as much as I adore LotR and Middle Earth in general, the Hobbit is my absolute favorite Tolkien work and the one most likely to get my gamer juices flowing. Perhaps it is merely that I discovered both The Hobbit and D&D at about the same age, but that's neither here nor there.
So, how would one build a Hobbit-inspired campaign using Pathfinder? What would you include? What would you remove?
Forgive me if this has been asked a thousand times, and/or there's a big obvious answer right under my nose, but does Paizo take submissions, for modules or the web fiction or anything else? if not, do they hire outside freelancers? If so, what's the who, what, where and how on that?
Just curious. Thanks.
I am running a Pathfinder campaign in a homebrew world (a D&D-ized post-Roman Britain) that I hope lasts through multiple campaigns (we're at "just after Rome's fall/Saxon (hobgoblin) invasion now).
What I am wondering is what products from Paizo (or 3rd parties) are good for non-Golarion campaigns? Why?
Note that I am open even to APs if there's a solid reason and trhey seem adapatable. I am using Kingmaker Kingdom and Mass Combat rules, frex, for the current campaign even if there's no real chance of using the adventures themselves. I haven't detailed every aspect of the world, either, so things I can steal to fill out cultures, religions, etc... are good (it is in a post-roman britain, which implies characters that can come from anywhere).
The one sort of supplement I don't imagine would be a whole lot of help are the Races of books, since the races are the one area i have really developed and they are very non-standard D&D overall.
(cross posted from EN World)
While I have decided that D&D 4E is not for me, I commend WotC for creating the new Red Box and Essentials line as an attempt to draw a new generation of gamers to the game in the same way I was drawn in by the Red Box of 1983 (my brothers and I were not introduced by an existing group; we received the Red Box as a gift and explored it ourselves). Of course, I'd rather the game that creates a whole new generation of tabletop RPGers *not* be 4E, and that means it is incumbent upon Paizo (sorry guys!) to see WotC's move and up the ante.
So, what should "Pathfinder Basic" look like -- not just the game but the line? What strategy should it take? What should it include? Exclude? How should it relate to the "main" Pathfinder game?
For my part, I think Pathfinder Basic should also be a 3 level boxed set with trimmed down options and distilling the "essence" of Pathfinder (or, as I like to call it, D&D). But here's the thing: those 3 levels in Pathfinder (at medium progression) promise a whole lot more play time before the inevitable leap to the "main" game. That means there's an opportunity to produce a few modules in different styles and sub-genres for Pathfinder Basic, and perhaps even an "Expansion Set" going up to 5th or 6th level with new monsters, treasures, options, etc... I don't advocate a full on second game line like BECM D&D (versus AD&D), but perhaps half a years worth of adventuring that doesn't just give the kids a taste, but gets them truly hooked so they are begging for PFRPG, Bestiary, Gamemastery and the APG for Christmas (protip: release Basic in May and the Basic Expansion in late September or October, with modules sprinkled throughout).
What are others' thoughts? Do you think Pathfinder even needs a "Basic Set"?