Allevrah Azrinae

Tsukiyomi's page

162 posts. No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist.


RSS

1 to 50 of 162 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

James Jacobs wrote:
And the Creative Director and Publisher are pretty much paid for their opinions, and so out they went. Feel free to keep them in your game, but all the energy we would have put into them is better spent supporting the much more interesting Aspis Consortium.

Lucky, having one of the few jobs in which you can get paid for opinions and ideas. :) I definitely understand the motivation behind dropping them, and I'm glad the Aspis Consortium gobbled up all that creative energy. Thanks again Mr. James Jacobs for your time, and answering my questions. Golarion has become one of my favorite settings since I purchased the Inner Sea World Guide, and I look forward to purchasing more products both old and new :)


James Jacobs wrote:

In pretty much every case where we've revised something on those lines, we've basically just stopped talking about the things we'd rather "phase out" of the world's canon. In some cases we changed some NPC names after realizing that the previous name was inappropriate for various reasons, but for the most part the philosophy has been to just ignore the parts we essentially want to go away from an official world canon standpoint. That means that folks who DO enjoy things like the Darklight Sisterhood can still use them in their versions of Golarion... they just won't be receiving any more official support.

I wouldn't call any of these things "major retcons on a grand scale," though.

Thank you for clarifying. It's nice to know there aren't any major lore conflicts between the 3.5 and Pathfinder lines. Dragons Revised looks to be rather interesting.

Any particular reason why groups like the Darklight Sisterhood were cut? Were there any other factions and such that were phased out?


Hello Everyone
Have there ever been any major Retcons, or revising of the Golarion world on a grand scale. I've heard mixed opinions on old content being revised and retconed. For example I've heard that the old Dragons Revisited is no longer useful as the content has been retconed and also that some stuff was dropped between 3.5 and pathfinder like the Darklight Sisterhood. So is there any major lore rework that invalidate older books, or any conflicts between old and new lore?


Steve Geddes wrote:
The modules are pretty good too.... ;)

Funds be willing. :)


Evil Midnight Lurker wrote:
Tsukiyomi wrote:
Liz Courts wrote:
All of the Pathfinder RPG hardcovers are designed to be setting-neutral, though if you're looking for system-neutral, I would check out our older 3.5 material for our product lines (Adventure Path, Player Companion, and Modules) as that might be closer to what you're looking for and easiest to convert to FantasyCraft.
Ya it's a pretty pesky problem, but I'll check out the older 3.5 stuff. If I recall correctly Paizo never retcon'd Golarion between systems, so the Lore shouldn't conflict with the newer stuff?
Bits and pieces have been retconned, like a lot of the early dragon material is no longer valid.

Just as a precaution what of the 3.5 material is no longer valid?


Curse you Paizo and your sexy campaign setting, guess I'll be grabin the whole Companion, Chronicles, and Adventure Path lines.


Steve Geddes wrote:
Like you, I like golarion but don't generally run pathfinder. I'd focus on tha campaign setting line (the flavour to mechanics ratio is pretty high in those). But the truth is, I think everything except for the rule books are useful. I find the player companions are probably least useful - since they tend to be a little more focused on giving players system gadgets.

Something I was thinking about doing with traits was to allow my players to pick one of each type of trait to help round out backstory and stuff, figured this would give a bit more mileage to the companions.


Speaking of Animal Archives, I think a better question would be what books should I avoid if I'm not going to use the pathfinder system?


FallofCamelot wrote:
I'd also say that most of the companion line is setting material rather than rules. Plus the campaign setting books are good for background.

"Buy all the things!" I'm guessing? Seems fair, I'm guessing their all lore and story hooks outside some newer companions, like animal archives.


Liz Courts wrote:
All of the Pathfinder RPG hardcovers are designed to be setting-neutral, though if you're looking for system-neutral, I would check out our older 3.5 material for our product lines (Adventure Path, Player Companion, and Modules) as that might be closer to what you're looking for and easiest to convert to FantasyCraft.

Ya it's a pretty pesky problem, but I'll check out the older 3.5 stuff. If I recall correctly Paizo never retcon'd Golarion between systems, so the Lore shouldn't conflict with the newer stuff?


Hello Everyone
Recently I've found that while I love the Golarion setting, I prefer Fantasy Craft over Pathfinder for mechanics. I feel Fantasy Craft helps convey the level of excitement and adventure Golarion seems to be going for better then it's home system. However Paizo still makes fine products and Fantasy craft being OGL allows some conversions. At the moment I own the core Inner Sea Guide and I'm looking to have an extensive Golarion library to pull lore from. As such I'm trying to make a list of the most system neutral Golarion setting books. Monster blocks, gear, and magic items aren't a problem and can be converted with a bit of effort, but archetypes, feats, spells, and roles provide little more then advice or inspiration for characters since Fantasy Craft has modified these. I know the Chronicles are pretty much all system neutral, but how about the Companions? Which of them are mechanically "lighter?" Anyone got any advice? Thanks in advance. :)

P.s. Didn't know where to post this so I apologize if it's in the wrong section.


Irontruth wrote:
Tsukiyomi wrote:
This also allows for faster play at the table, as well as pick-up play situations. Gaming becomes about the adventure instead. However your character has very little in the "depth" department, as they exist as a means of interacting with the world but aren't completely part of it. Again an example, if you go to pick-up event the most important contribution from your character is their die rolls, not your characters life long dream of becoming part of a certain martial order and their quest to regain their homeland from Orc hordes.

I guess I get into very different games than you.

I play pick-up games all the time (though usually not with a system like PF), but my experience is just the opposite. We create deep and meaningful events in the short time we play, usually directly based on the characters that are being played.

Ex: During character creation, one woman had determined that she came from a long line of educators of warriors. Her family didn't go to the front lines, they were responsible for teaching powerful magics and fighting techniques. Her son had decided that he wanted to join the fight though, but he left before his training was complete and was quickly killed. Wanting to avenge her son, she decided to stop training others and pick up the sword herself.

During play, the BBEG had the ability to bring people back from the dead and they became eternally loyal to him. So of course as part of his entrance to the denouement of the session, he revealed that her son was now to be turned against her. During the course of the battle she was able to free her son, but not just that, he joined her in the fight against the BBEG.

All this happened, without any preparation on my part (I was the GM) in a 4 hour session that included character creation, and 3 other players who all had vivid story lines. We played it at GenCon and I had never met any of the 4 players prior to the session, so I would say it qualifies as a pick-up game.

I have had a very different experience with pick-up games, and I would honestly love to have something like you described. That's pretty darn awesome. My experience has been more of fast moving adventures, but low on the character story. I like the way you handle that, and it certainly make the pick-up game memorable.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am in no way trying to start a "war," nor continue one. The discussion has been larger casual with people stating their preferences and why they have them. A few people have even given stories about their experiences. But there has yet to be any hostility. In fact the first person to post anything hostile about the topic, or another persons post is you. Now I'm not attacking you, and please don't feel as such, but you may very well be displacing previous experience with the topic on to the discussion. Now if you don't see any value in the topic, that's perfectly fine, but if no one has drawn battle lines and people are just talking, no reason to jump on in saying "This discussion is meaningless, stop fighting this war." In the same fashion as "Just because there's smoke, doesn't mean there's fire," just because people are talking about a topic that other people are fighting over, doesn't mean they're fighting. I didn't even know people were rage warring over this. I'd much prefer this to be a safe haven for people to express views. Personal preference isn't something that can be wrong, so I don't see much sense in warring over it.


JrK wrote:
The question is based on a false dichotomy and is as ridiculous as asking a person whether he would rather have his lungs or his heart working in order.

The topic is rather harmless. Again different people prefer different play styles, although the resounding majority prefers both. I know people who treat Rpg's as a purely tactical, wargame-esque exercise. Yet at the same time people across the room are playing something almost completely dice less, involving imagery and acting taking on qualities closer to storytelling. While rollplaying and roleplaying are not mutually exclusive, and do compliment each other, everyone has a preference. Merely wanted to know what others in the community preferred.


NobodysHome wrote:

This is a fascinating discussion because at the moment I have a personal stake in it: We have a player who insists on 'roleplay rather than rollplay', but uses that as an excuse to utterly dominate the table; at a table with 6 other players he easily takes 60% of all GM interaction time. If the GM won't give him something, he'll spend 10-15 minutes arguing that he needs it for his 'roleplaying'. In my game, he became very agitated with me for insisting that he pay skill points for skills before being able to 'roleplay' them.

So I will say that I strongly prefer 'roleplay' to 'rollplay' when it is possible, but unless you use the restrictions of 'rollplay', you risk having one player ruining the fun for all the others. The player in question generates huge numbers of complaints from the other players, has caused two GMs two quit rather than continuing to GM him, and has spawned an entirely separate campaign that was created solely to exclude him.

Every game system has the notion of paying for skill points, and then role/rollplaying them. I like letting players buy the skill points, attempt to roleplay them out, and then letting the roll decide the outcome.

I wish you the best of luck in dealing with this player. They sound like they just suck the oxygen out of the room. This is probably the worst I've ever heard of destructive "Roleplaying," I usually hear about the roleplaying alignment issues. Like I've had people say something like "well my character is chaotic evil, so they're crazy and jump off the balcony and start stabbing guards." This is of an example of I feel bad roleplaying. But it can be pretty destructive.

NobodysHome wrote:

Case in point: In another campaign, we have a woman who really is not a very good roleplayer. She admits it herself. Yet she's playing a paladin who maxed out Diplomacy, hence has the highest Diplomacy roll in the party. So when we have a situation requiring Diplomacy, we LET HER TRY. Her soliloquies are awkward. She will never win an Academy Award. But she TRIES, and she's endearing. And then she gets to roll the die, and THAT determines whether or not the NPCs are swayed.

And you know what? She's declared that this is the most fun she's ever had gaming, because we're so encouraging, and because when she has the highest skill roll, we let her try to roleplay it out, even though we have people at the table who could roleplay better than her.

This is heartwarming. Proving that once again all that matters is that people are having fun. She's probably having the time of her life.


Irnk, Dead-Eye's Prodigal wrote:
A Kyonin sourcebook ala 'Varisia, Birthplace of Legends' would be AWESOME! I would definitely spend money on that. Of course I already am subscribing to the Player Companion line, so FWIW...

Totally agree, I would love more books like Varisia, Birthplace of legend. I'm looking forward to the Irrisen book.


Cheapy wrote:
Mechalibur wrote:

Definitely not a fan of them here. It thankfully doesn't take anything away, but I feel the space would be much better used further exploring areas/themes of Golarion, or providing more gameplay options, which are scarce in these companions.

Explaining what types of roles are present in a culture could probably be done with a sentence or two, but I'd prefer more options to embody the roles rather than a template providing gameplay suggestions.

I too would rather have more options, but the guidance can be nice too.

Perhaps Roles could take on a capacity in the blog as part of the announcement of the book?

That would be pretty fantastic. The guidance is wonderful for new players, and makes the lore easier to put into application for those not on the up and up.


I prefer both as well, I think when done right they compliment each other nicely. I have friends who utterly hate rollplay, admittedly they're into the indie rpg scene, not that that's a bad thing. I also have friends whom prefer a good ole fashion dungeon crawl with combat & traps turned up to max. I Gm a lot and personally I love it when my players do both, but in moderation.


I personally love them. To me it's like lego sets, you can get a big bin of legos and make whatever you want(setting content and rules), or you can follow the set instructions(roles). Either way you still have a great deal of freedom and the roles don't seem to be no-brainers. Like in blood of night the roles it suggests for Jaing-shi is a stargazer oracle, not something that's clear cut or obvious. This also give a more clear connection between mechanics and lore. Now if they were roles like in DnD 4e I think we'd have a different situations.


I would love an updated version of the Elves of Golarion supplement. However I feel it is unlikely as it seems Paizo doesn't like the redo concept. I thought the new dragon chronicle and companion supplements coming out were updates to the dragon gazetteer and such, but alas they are not. I have read that Paizo does like reinventions I think so maybe not a Elves of Golarion update, but rather something like a Kyonin supplement would be more on target. Still speculation at the end of the day, but still hoping :)


Hey Community

Simply discussion topic. When you sit down at your table, do you prefer roleplaying or rollplaying? I see pros and cons in both. Both allow for you as a player to make choices, however the internal conflict is mechanical results and quick play versus character vision and detailed stories.

With Roleplaying your character has an innate personality and offers more freedom to express your vision of said character. Gaming becomes about seeing how your characters story evolves. However if your dice rolls don't match your vision you become handicapped and your vision may be soiled. For example lets say you want to make an all-knowing, yet feeble wizard. If you botch all your knowledge checks, but do amazingly well with test of strength your character now looks like a really dopey wizard, with a really good arm. Your vision for your characters appearance has been fundamental changed by the dice. Bit of an extreme example but I'm sure everyone has had something like this happen at one time or another. Roleplaying also allows for detailed stories but that can cause hiccups with other players stories, and the Gm encounter layout.

With Rollplaying your character has the ability to adapt better to the various dice roll results. This also allows for faster play at the table, as well as pick-up play situations. Gaming becomes about the adventure instead. However your character has very little in the "depth" department, as they exist as a means of interacting with the world but aren't completely part of it. Again an example, if you go to pick-up event the most important contribution from your character is their die rolls, not your characters life long dream of becoming part of a certain martial order and their quest to regain their homeland from Orc hordes. With that in mind characters can come across as "The Stealthy Rogue" or "The Twohanded Fighter" or one of my favorites "HEALBOT CLERIC 4000" and never really mean anything.(Still love HEALBOT CLREIC 4000 though)

Both I feel are viable an useful given the situation. But what about preference. Anyone prefer one over the other? Anyone hate one or the other. Any other advantages and disadvantages I may have missed? Any good examples of either? Discuss away :D


Enlight_Bystand wrote:
Tsukiyomi wrote:

On the topic of updates it looks like the dragon books coming out this year may be an update to the 3.5 Dragons revisited supplement. So I guess there may be hope for updates :)

Unfortunately it's not. Dragons Revisited covered each of the 10 classic types as a species, the new book will feature a certain number of individual dragons.

Ah I see, well one can hope. Thanks for the heads up.


Randomdays wrote:

I see where the OP is coming from, but I just can't imagine all the space it would take up. I started back in 1st edition, buying everything TSR and Judges Guild put out, along with the Dragon magazine and other RPGs like Traveller and such. With what I've bought since, minus the rare item I've had to sacrifice now and then to pay bills, I've still got over two bookcases of rpg material, plus ones for dvds, comics, games and paperback/ hardback books. If it wasn't for pdfs, I think there'd be no room for me in the house at all. For me to buy something in print these days, it would have to be something special and out of the ordinary.

If you just took everything that Paizo has put out like the OP wanted, how much space would that take up?

I assume you have a large collection of books on pdf. How has that worked out at your table? Do you have any experience with your pdfs and tablets computers?


Vic Wertz wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
Paizo have mentioned Print-On-Demand before and from what I understand the issue is predominantly one of quality control. I'm hopeful that once the technology improves and the quality becomes consistent enough for them that they will revisit that option and allow print-on-demand for things which have gone out of print. They've never actually said that that's on the cards though.

PoD printing does get better all the time, and I strongly suspect that one day we'll make that jump. However, quality is not the only issue—there's a prepress issue as well. Every print job needs to be tailored to the output device, meaning you can't just take the file created for our book printer, send it to a PoD printer, and expect it to come out right. At best, somebody proficient with prepress would need to make some adjustments to the file, and, in some cases, we'd even need somebody to tweak the layout of the entire book. And setting up for a second output device is often harder than setting up for the first—just ask some of the 3PPs who have done PoD with both Lulu and DriveThru.

So getting a PoD printer wouldn't mean "immediate access to everything"—it would mean the start of a lengthy process that would result in a small number of initial products growing over time.

Holy crap! Thank you Mr. Wertz for your explanation. Again while the crazy collector in me "wants it all now," I'm very glad Paizo is playing things smart. I certainly hope for something to be done with these older works, either PoD or a updated version, but not at the risk of Paizo going under. Again best of luck to you folks in your many undertakings. As much as I may prefer quality books over pdfs, thank you for making the pdfs available at the very least. An option is still better than no others.


GeraintElberion wrote:
Tsukiyomi wrote:
I certainly hope people wouldn't cancel their subscriptions and wait 10+ years for something they could get right now.

What is important is that people cancel subscriptions all of the time anyway but new people take up subscriptions as well.

It would discourage new uptake, eventually leading to a fall due to all of the other reasons for ending a subscription.

Tsukiyomi wrote:
However your probably right people would find odd ways of justifying it, and Paizo does need to pay its bills.

I don't think it would be odd to justify saving a bit of money to get an updated, superior version of a product in a more attractive format. That is how many seem to perceive the RotRL compilation.

Being a Paizo subscriber is not cheap.

Tsukiyomi wrote:
I just really wish they had a print based solution to the OOP content. Heck I'd pay extra for the copies just to have them.

The obvious solution to this would be print-on-demand for older books: they would be more expensive but still available.

As it is, you can buy the pdf and then pay a printer to produce a bound, paper version. That can get expensive though, I imagine.

Tsukiyomi wrote:
:/ I guess I should just invest in a tablet and give up on books lol.
erm...

Fair points. I did some quick estimates with some online printers, looking to be around $115 or so, depending on the quality and printer. I'm all for digital distributions, but it's sad to see the book die. Mostly because the Pdf solution hurts and damages your eyes so much already. But alas what can you do. Paizo put its foot down on the issue.


organized wrote:

It's easy enough to get 98% of the out of print materials if you do a little E-bay stalking. Amazon works as well but it's harder to find a deal on OOP there.

Isn't that the truth, a copy of Kingmaker part 1 on ebay goes for $291 and on amazon they range from $284-$899. It's just a really disappointing situation. I've read Vic's post about the whole reprinting thing, and I completely understand the whys and why nots. I also respect that they stick to their decision. It's just really disappointing that because I'm 2 years late Kingmaker is basically out of my reach, and more over for 3.5 content, and etc. It's just discouraging.


On the topic of updates it looks like the dragon books coming out this year may be an update to the 3.5 Dragons revisited supplement. So I guess there may be hope for updates :)


I certainly hope people wouldn't cancel their subscriptions and wait 10+ years for something they could get right now. However your probably right people would find odd ways of justifying it, and Paizo does need to pay its bills. I just really wish they had a print based solution to the OOP content. Heck I'd pay extra for the copies just to have them. :/ I guess I should just invest in a tablet and give up on books lol.


Sir Jolt wrote:

You would only do a compilation when the original is OOP; in whole or in part. If the AP is still fully available then there's no need to do a compilation but once even one module goes OOP the market for it is pretty dead if you aren't going to re-realease..

That's the problem I have with PF: if you've been following since the beginning (or close to it) it's great but new players kind of get the shaft. There are a lot of books, it's very expensive, and even if you're willing to pay all that there are still many things you just can't get.

I completely agree. I really do feel shafted by starting up now. I like the idea of compilations of OOP content. Kinda sucks that by the time I get the supplements most likely to fall OOP, even more will be just about to drop. It's like juggling eggs, the instant I fail to grab one at the last second its gone for good. Really sucks when I think about how someones work is just being left to rot almost. I'd sign up for the subs right now but I have to wait and grab the older stuff first. :/


graywulfe wrote:

The problem isn't whether compilations would sell. It is how they would affect the purchase of the APs in the first place. The general belief is that if people knew that compilations were on the horizon, they would not purchase the APs and instead wait for the compilations. This could end with Paizo having to close its doors, as the income from the Monthly APs is the backbone of what keeps Paizo running. At least that is my understanding from many posts by staff over the years.

I personally think they would be safe releasing compilation updates for those APs printed in 3.5. However I have no training, nor experience, running a publishing business. Also doing the updated compilations would take away from the time they have to work on the regular lines. Time they desperately need right now, if the delays that have crept into certain lines are any indication.

On a side note, your list in the second post is all new stuff. The Dragons Unleashed book is the closest to what may be an update. Everything else is new, never having been done by Paizo.

Even if they only release compilations of the 3.5 AP, and did an update for 3.5 content, I feel that would be a step in the right direction. A compilation of the oldest AP without a compilation, could keep both the old and new content viable. Like for example if they were to do a compilation of Curse of the Crimson Throne this year while the AP Reign of Winter had its run, both would be on the market at the same time. As far as the end of subscriptions goes if they went in order, you'd have to be a very patient person, as again with the above example you'd be waiting about 11 years for the Reign of Winter compilation. The compilations would be good for new comers, collectors, and general pathfinder lovers.Just an idea, and I'm sure it has flaws.

You mentioned delays, can you speak more on this, I'm a bit curious? Didn't I mention the second list was content coming? I'm sorry for the confusion if I didn't, I meant they were all forthcoming.


This is just a dream list. But looking at it all at once that sinking feeling is just getting worse. It's just the visual of how much of the content is split between the two systems. Realistically I wouldn't ever expect Paizo to reprint their 3.5 modules as conversions are pretty simple between 3.5 & PFRPG, depending. But supplements like Elves of Golarion, and Osirion, Land of Pharoahs could use a touch up. Also the AP's could all use the compilation treatment. I know Paizo said RotRL was special case but I'd buy compilations of the APs in a heartbeat. It would also fix that weird issue you get with Legacy of Fire, and Second Darkness where there Player's guide are these odd semi supplements. They could also put one of the older compilations out each year in the same kind of Anniversary edition format. However looking at the announced content for these next few months it looks like a few updates are on the way. What other Content do you think has already been updated?

Supplements
Players Companions
-Dragon Slayer's Handbook
-Quests & Campaigns
-Kobolds of Golarion
-Champions of Purity
-Dungeoneer's Handbook

Chronicles
-Dragons Unleashed
-Castles of the Inner Sea
-Fey Revisited


Hey Community
I've finally decided to take the full plunge into Pathfinder and Golarion. With limited funding for table gaming pathfinder has become my go to game. I also really enjoy Golarion as it's a "new" take on high fantasy. It just feels fresh for some reason. Paizo's products are also stellar with good quality and content. However there is just one problem. I'm a bit obsessive about content. Now that I know Pathfinder is gonna be my go to game for tabletop, I hunger for all the content. I want to get all the Core rules, Chronicles, Companions, Adventures Paths, and Modules. I'm also a bit of a traditionist about my books. I greatly prefer books over Pdfs. I work with computers all day and spend most of my time staring at a screen, so it's a welcome break when I get to actually sit down with a gaming book and read.

So I've been looking in the store at the various supplements and noticed many are out of print or outdated. After doing some research about Paizo's reprinting policy, I'm greatly saddened by the fact these supplements are stuck in a "Pdf graveyard." I understand the legalistic of reprinting and how it's not business wise to reprint old supplements. I also understand that at the end of the day Paizo is a company and they need to make money. I just can't shake the feeling I've some how been "punished" for not signing on sooner. As far as I can tell there are no plans to update any of the old 3.5 content. Nor any plans to release any more adventure path compilations(Rise of the Runelord AE is fantastic!). Just a real bummer. Anyone else feel the same? Anyone else love to see updates or compilations?

List of supplements I'd love to see updated/reprinted/put into a compilations

Updated/Compilation
-Curse of the Crimson Throne
-Second Darkness
-Legacy of Fire

Updated
-3.5 Modules
-Pathfinder Chronicles: Guide to Korvosa
-Pathfinder Chronicles: Classic Monsters Revisited
-Pathfinder Chronicles: Gazetteer
-Pathfinder Chronicles: Guide to Darkmoon Vale
-Pathfinder Chronicles: Gods & Magic
-Pathfinder Chronicles: Into the Darklands
-Pathfinder Chronicles: Guide to Absalom
-Pathfinder Chronicles: Dragons Revisited
-Pathfinder Chronicles: Dark Markets—A Guide to Katapesh
-Pathfinder Chronicles: The Great Beyond—A Guide to the Multiverse
-Pathfinder Chronicles: Dungeon Denizens Revisited
-Pathfinder Companion: Elves of Golarion
-Pathfinder Companion: Osirion, Land of Pharaohs
-Pathfinder Companion: Taldor, Echoes of Glory
-Pathfinder Companion: Legacy of Fire Player's Guide
-Pathfinder Companion: Second Darkness

Reprinted
-Pathfinder Adventure Path #25: The Bastards of Erebus (Council of Thieves 1 of 6)
-Pathfinder Adventure Path #31: Stolen Land (Kingmaker 1 of 6)
-Pathfinder Adventure Path #32: Rivers Run Red (Kingmaker 2 of 6)
-Pathfinder Chronicles: Seekers of Secrets—A Guide to the Pathfinder Society
-Pathfinder Companion: Cheliax, Empire of Devils
-Pathfinder Companion: Dwarves of Golarion
-Pathfinder Companion: Gnomes of Golarion
-Pathfinder Player Companion: Goblins of Golarion

Compilation
-Council of Thieves
-Kingmaker
-Serpent's Skull
-Carrion Crown
-Jade Regent
-Skull & Shackles
-Shattered Star


LazarX wrote:
Tsukiyomi wrote:
LazarX wrote:
They're still worth buying as setting background material.

So the only difference is the core system being different. Paizo didn't do an across the board update on the lore persay with the pathfinder line? If so was the nature of the inner sea guide update purely system side?

The Inner Sea Guide has more new stuff and some overlap. There's considerable value in having both.

Oh okay, well its good to know I can purchase the older stuff and not have any major conflicts. However Taldor and Osirion, for example, are pretty important areas in the Golarion lore, any chance we'll see a new content books for those older regions anytime soon?


Gorbacz wrote:

The Inner Sea World Guide does retcon and alter a few small things (Alkenstar's gun discover was made more recent, Darklight Sisterhood is gone) however most of the content was expanded, not changed. Nothing dramatic.

Also, you should have posted this question in the Campaign Setting forum - this forum is for system and rules stuff mostly.

Thank you, and my apologies.


Self bump for clarification.


LazarX wrote:
They're still worth buying as setting background material.

So the only difference is the core system being different. Paizo didn't do an across the board update on the lore persay with the pathfinder line? If so was the nature of the inner sea guide update purely system side?


feytharn wrote:
Tsukiyomi wrote:
feytharn wrote:


I would add Ulfen and Taldan to the human ethnities, as both ethnities have Varisisa as one of their favored regions (and I think the non-ethnic Varisian was described as a Cheliaxian/Ulfen mix somewhere). The same would go for the Tian, but I see them as a little more exotic - still, maybe a good choice for a more exotic character.
I decided to included all three as they all have Varisia as a favored region. I figure however it must be a little hard for both Tains and Taldan to get into Varisia "easily," so I made a concession about Outlanders similar to what darkwarriorkarg suggested. I'm hoping to have the players call Varisia home in one place or another, but a bit of an exotic flare wouldn't be bad.

Regarding the Taldans:

Taldor ruled over much of the inner sea region, once, including Cheliax. The population of Cheliax probably includes a fair number of ethnic 'Taldans', so does the 'Cheliaxian' population of Varisia. Remeber: the different human 'races' represent ethnicities, not nationalities.

Good point, thanks for the reminder.


Hey Community
Quick question about old versus new content. Now I know Pathfinder is backward compatible, but has Paizo made any big changes to golarion in there new stuff? Like for example are Taldor, Echoes of Glory and Osirion, Land of Pharaohs still worth buying or has this information been updated for the Pathfinder line? I know the Inner sea guide got such an update, I'm just curious how extensive this world update was before I start buying more Golarion content. Thanks


dunebugg wrote:

I'm actually just nearing the end of book 1 with a group of mostly new players, so I do have some good feedback I hope. Here is a list of rules that I gave my players:

- Core races are all allowed
- If you want to be anything outside core races you need to have a really good backstory as to why you are here and I need to approve it
- All core/base classes allowed
- Newer players are encouraged to pick martial characters or spontaneous casters. These usually require less pick up and play knowledge. Fighter, rogue, barbarian, sorcerer, and oracle are what I would define as the "easiest"
- If you are playing a class with more complex rules (vancian casting is something my group has real difficulty learning, animal companions, melee combat in general) you are required to *learn your class* and be ready to go at game time
- You could say that archetypes are only allowed with character background to match (I for example played an elven Spire Magus, who was in fact, from the Mordant Spire)
- If they're mostly new players dont let them play the magus. They are SUPER rules intensive; it will be a lot of work for both you and the player unless they are willing to learn it inside and out
- Give them 20 point buy. Maybe even 25. RotRL has been a TPK-fest for me and my 5 players.

In regards to player immersion... The first thing I did with my group, who are ALL new to golarion (minus one player), was whip out the poster map of Varisia. I explained to them in brief detail each of the major places, ethnicities, and history of the region. If the players have noooo idea where they are from in terms of the world, they are less likely to care. "Well I'm Ulfen, that means I'm a viking. I run and punch him in the face." <- That doesn't really cut it after a certain point. So give them extra resources that they can read up where they came from (lots of info on Sandpoint + Magnimar out there, where I encouraged my party to be from).

Require each of your party members to have a trait from the RotRL players...

This is all fantastic, thanks for the tips. I've heard RotRL is a TPK-fest often so ya 20points would be better. Considering I'm using hero points I'm worried about 25 point buy however. Again awesome stuff.

p.s. It's kinda weird we have the same Avatar haha


feytharn wrote:


I would add Ulfen and Taldan to the human ethnities, as both ethnities have Varisisa as one of their favored regions (and I think the non-ethnic Varisian was described as a Cheliaxian/Ulfen mix somewhere). The same would go for the Tian, but I see them as a little more exotic - still, maybe a good choice for a more exotic character.

I decided to included all three as they all have Varisia as a favored region. I figure however it must be a little hard for both Tains and Taldan to get into Varisia "easily," so I made a concession about Outlanders similar to what darkwarriorkarg suggested. I'm hoping to have the players call Varisia home in one place or another, but a bit of an exotic flare wouldn't be bad.


marvin_bishop wrote:

I would add one thing, having run RotRL once and looking to do so again. Since you're including character restrictions, I would have your characters find some reason to care about the town of Sandpoint. The adventure hooks are much easier when you have characters that care about something or someone in Sandpoint and are willing to work to protect it.

The first time through, my group was not well invested in the town and it was work to keep them on task. When I run the AP next time I'm going to make the Sandpoint connection mandatory, as well as requiring one of the characters to be interested in Thassilonian lore.

As of right now, one of my players is really interested in the Cyphermages so I'm sure that will help. Thanks for the suggestion on investment in Sandpoint. I was going to have them be invested in Varisia in some fashion, but your right they should have some vested interest in Sandpoint.


Bellona wrote:
Tsukiyomi wrote:
I'm looking for something similar to the shackles AP players guide, where it advises archetypes and other options so that players are flavorful, optimal, and fun.

The RotRL Player's Guide for the Anniversary edition only gives half a page of "Character Tips", plus one page or so of campaign traits. Maybe that could be blended somehow with the 3.5 RotRL Player's Guide, which has four pages of character advice (for 3.5, so no APG classes, and no archetypes).

... And my mind boggled at the player who thought that it was a good idea to play a merfolk character in the middle of a desert. WTF?!?!? Was he/she even listening?!?

Ya it's pretty mind blowing, but I've since not welcomed them back. At the moment players are pretty excited about paizo's "roles" inclusion. Does anyone have any experience with Birthplace of Legends supplement? How effective was it in creating theme, and providing a world view for players?


Tsukiyomi wrote:

I'd like to thank you fine folks for your comments and suggestions in dealing with this issue. I've gotten a chance to browse the Vasiria, Birth of Legends supplement. I very much like the idea behind roles, and the character suggestions it gives. Characters invested in the world work much better for a serious game. With that in mind, I may revise my restriction to further help my players define themselves in the world. I had intended to use the classic rolling method but point buy would insure strengths & weaknesses in characters.

Books
-Core
-Advanced Player Guide
-Varisa, Birthplace of Legends
-Ultimate Magic
-Ultimate Combat
-Inner Sea World Guide

My revised list would be
-All Races, but human being limited to (Chelaxain, Varisian, and Shoantian)
-All core classes
-All base classes(APG classes)
-Magi
-All feats
-All spells
-Two traits
-Hero points
-No alternative racial features
-No favored racial options
-All roles in Varisian, Birthplace of Legends and their corresponding archetypes and prestige classes(This would create a long list of flavorful options however to use said options I'd require a player to "buy into" the role, in a all or nothing fashion),however no archetypes allow outside the use of roles.
-Multiclassing
-Additional prestige Classes of Hellknight,all in the core other then pathfinder chronicler(Id like to save the pathfinder society for a shattered stars game),and all in the APG.
-All equipment
-All bonus class feature options(rage powers, rogue talents, ranger combat styles etc)
-One class of Arcane(Wizard,Sorcerer,etc), Piety(Cleric,Druid,etc), Brawn(Fighter,barbarian), & Guile(Rogue,Alchemist,etc) types required in the party as to promote a balance.
-15 point buy
-No Evil
-Character must desire to be a hero for some reason (Fame, Power, Glory, etc)

Thoughts, comments, concerns? Personally I find all of the options presented in Birthplace of legends to be pretty exciting and flavorful. Their also deeply connected to the world. As such I want to...

Just wanted more feedback on this semi-new character list. Thanks


darkwarriorkarg wrote:

Suggestions:

I'd go for 20 pt buy. Can't hurt/. It gets deadly pretty quickly.

Human (Tien) should be allowed. One could be a retainer for the Kaijutsu household.

Further, some could be outlanders on the run.

But from your above example, it seems that teh palyers made characters without consulting each other.

They should discuss their concepts and roles with each other and then come up with a reason they're in Sandpoint.

Now, importantly: take note of character backgrounds and use them. You're on the run? Look who eventually shows up. You grandparents were killed by Alamon Scarnetti 42 years go? Well, that caused a mess that needs fixing today.

Origins:
No more than two should play outlanders (outside Varisia), and one should be a local boy (Sandpoint). The idea is that they want/need to stay.

Pun Names:
You can't stop this. But they need to less juvenile than Zom B Maker. Our group's fighter is Procktar Sylax (Proctor-silex), which sounds Chelish, Our musket master (on the run from people in Alkenstar) translates to "Lion of the thunderous roar" (in bad arabic).

You should at least insist that pun names be good puns!

And I agree with the above. You're not going to really get a serious game with the people who are used to, and don't want one. But you can blend a humourus game with serious consequences. (Look up the webcomic: "Looking for Group" or even Order of the Stick). You are NOT going to get Lord of the Rings. Lord of the Rings is storytelling, where the author dictates everything. This is a cooperative game, where all you can do is lay things out and manage repercussions dues to player action/inaction.

A greater deal of communication is definitely needed between the players. I agree with your idea of origins, expect I'd rather not have outsiders. As far as pun names go they have their place at the table. I agree with them having to be good puns, but also not something that will quickly wear out it's welcome. I've had a player role a dumb gnome barbarian whose first memory was waking up in a cannon, and thus named himself Cannon. The joke was amusing but never got in the way.

The funny thing is I've spoken to my other two players, and they are rather happy the game is more serious and are even looking forward to it. I agree that you can't force a group of 4-5 people to do something they don't want to, and in the end the game is about fun for all. But I've advertised the level of seriousness I'm hoping to run. You are correct that I'm not just going to get Lord of the Rings because I'm gm. I apologize if I've made that impression. I'm looking for Lord of the Ring as a SHARED vision for the game. That is also not to say their won't be jokes at the table, as there should be. The key thing is while there should be jokes at the table, the table should not be a joke. I realize now I should inform all my possible players of this fact and make sure that if they do play they're down with that.


Butch Arthur wrote:

It seems to me like your players are consistently building character concepts in a vacuum. That is to say, they are looking at archetypes and classes and thinking up interesting combinations, and then bringing that to the table. They aren't looking at your setting or your campaign, or your theme, and using any of that in their creation.

What you might do is 'frontload' a little more information about the campaign, setting, and theme by giving them some more information about the region and its people. You might mention the archetypes and classes that are 'unusual', but native to the area. Once they see what is already there, maybe they will find something they are excited about.

This is the same conclusion I came to, they're coming up with charecter rosters and then just picking one when we go to sit down at the table. However what makes this even more frustrating is I'm a very involved Gm. I like to keep my players informed about all the character relevant information at all times. I sit down and work with my players one-on-one with each character in some fashion, and characters are usually fleshed out over the course of several weeks. However some fault is mine in that I used to run things in a kind of "The player is always right" fashion. I would try to fit character idea into the game in some fashion or another. Learning to say "No" has been wonderful, but I realize hearing it isn't something they may be use to. I'm hoping the inclusion of the Birthplace of Legends supplement will help them see what's there to be excited about.

Butch Arthur wrote:

For example, the region around Sandpoint has Shoanti barbarians, cyphermages in Riddleport, Varisian Harrowers, etc. There's stuff like the Varisian bravo (cad fighter) and Fortune-teller (tattoed sorceror) and the Shoanti Outider (mounted barbarian) and Totem Shaman (animal totem druid). There's feats like Thunder and Fang and Deadly dealer to fight with the Earthbreaker and Klar (or with a Harrow deck!), as well as exotic weapons like the bladed scarf. There are the Golemworks and Stone of the Seers in Magnimar, as well as the Hellknights.

Maybe giving them an idea of the 'weirdness' that is appropriate to Sandpoint and Varisia will help channel their creative urges productively.

I'm not sure you need a lot of creation restrictions, as much as you need each person to tone down the 'unusual' choices they made. For instance, you might allow everyone a little flexibility, but not a lot on any character.

For instance, you might define 'normal' for choices (here's just an example):

Normal Races: Human, Elf, Dwarf, Halfling, Half-Elf
Normal Classes: Fighter, Cleric, Druid, Rogue, Wizard, Ranger
Normal Archetypes: only the base archetype
Normal Ethnicity: Chelaxian,...

This is a great idea and something I will use both now as well as in the future. I've never nailed norms down in this fashion, but I like how it works. Thanks


I'd like to thank you fine folks for your comments and suggestions in dealing with this issue. I've gotten a chance to browse the Vasiria, Birth of Legends supplement. I very much like the idea behind roles, and the character suggestions it gives. Characters invested in the world work much better for a serious game. With that in mind, I may revise my restriction to further help my players define themselves in the world. I had intended to use the classic rolling method but point buy would insure strengths & weaknesses in characters.

Books
-Core
-Advanced Player Guide
-Varisa, Birthplace of Legends
-Ultimate Magic
-Ultimate Combat
-Inner Sea World Guide

My revised list would be
-All Races, but human being limited to (Chelaxain, Varisian, and Shoantian)
-All core classes
-All base classes(APG classes)
-Magi
-All feats
-All spells
-Two traits
-Hero points
-No alternative racial features
-No favored racial options
-All roles in Varisian, Birthplace of Legends and their corresponding archetypes and prestige classes(This would create a long list of flavorful options however to use said options I'd require a player to "buy into" the role, in a all or nothing fashion),however no archetypes allow outside the use of roles.
-Multiclassing
-Additional prestige Classes of Hellknight,all in the core other then pathfinder chronicler(Id like to save the pathfinder society for a shattered stars game),and all in the APG.
-All equipment
-All bonus class feature options(rage powers, rogue talents, ranger combat styles etc)
-One class of Arcane(Wizard,Sorcerer,etc), Piety(Cleric,Druid,etc), Brawn(Fighter,barbarian), & Guile(Rogue,Alchemist,etc) types required in the party as to promote a balance.
-15 point buy
-No Evil
-Character must desire to be a hero for some reason (Fame, Power, Glory, etc)

Thoughts, comments, concerns? Personally I find all of the options presented in Birthplace of legends to be pretty exciting and flavorful. Their also deeply connected to the world. As such I want to include them as options for my players.

Thanks


Bill Dunn wrote:

How about being an oracle of bones? And if he wants to be a junkie, take the wasting curse and show him pictures of meth addicts.

As far as the hermit thing goes, what gets him into adventure? Prophecy, maybe? An all-consuming greed grows and even the stones feel it. Suggest maybe that he's part of a Varisian clan and his hermitage is a wagon that usually parks apart from the rest of the clan... who are all in Sandpoint for the Swallowtail Festival.

He looked at the oracle but didn't seem interested. I may have a hard time selling it to him. What get's them into adventuring is one of the biggest questions I ask my players, and they know it. He has yet to come up with an answer. I do like the Varisian clan in Sandpoint idea, as I have another player who's a Varisian. I'll past this idea on to the both of them. It's a very simple way to have them at the festival. Thanks


Does increasing the number of minions work across the board for the encounters or are there some that are good for 6 players as written?


Hey Community

I'm once again in need of help, and the community is always fantastic.
So I have gotten a chance to read the first part of the RotRL adventure path in detail while skimming the remaining parts. However currently I'm having an issue with what player options, and character creation rules should be available. My group has a long history of players suffering from as I like to call it "archetype bloat". Regardless of the game being played, setting, theme, etc they like to apply archetypes almost for no other reason other then "it's there so why not." These decisions compounded with the fact that many of these characters are only skin deep leads to the creation of sub optimal characters. They usually play rocket tag(the practice of having nothing but offensively minded characters, with no healing, buff, and such), and as such can't make it past the 3rd to 5th levels to which they complain about not getting into higher level play.

For example in my last home brew setting I gave the players the option of choosing what part of the world they wanted to start in. I informed them of the threats and conflicts going on and what the theme of each was, then gave them a movie reference to further cement the idea. They choose a desert region, which was the ancient lands of a long dead empire. The area was largely populated by nomadic gnomes, however undead were beginning to crawl out of the sands and roam the dunes for some mysterious purpose. The game was going to be a undead centric very classic pulp adventure kind of game. The theme was a mixture of "Indiana Jones" and "The Mummy". I made sure they were fully informed of what fighting undead was like and advised them on some pro-versus undead choices. However the party I got was interesting...if not dysfunctional. It included a Halfling Summoner with one of the best accent I've ever heard, a combat medic Monk of the Four Winds, a Human Invulnerable Barbarian, a pacifist Merfolk Oracle of the Wind, and a Tengu Sandman Bard. I again informed some of them of the inherent weaknesses in their characters but they choose to continue anyways. The party wiped on the first dungeon encounter versus two mummies when 3 party members were 5th level and the other two 3rd. I designed the encounter as a straight fight and not something they could cheese a victory out of. In hindsight this encounter may have been impossible, but at the time I was hoping to put some fear in the players and force them to realize they had to buckle down.

Now I'm fine with party wipes, I'm not okay with unhappy players and boy did I have some unhappy players. My summoner player didn't realize the summoner isn't an offensive caster and was miffed at a 0-level cantrip being the only damaging spell he had. My oracle made my other players unhappy as he was a huge liability, and he opted to not take a single useful spell other then cure light wounds and spent his time creating water on enemies and casting sanctuary on himself. My monk player was completely invalidated as the use of cure light wounds undermined his selection of feats,traits, etc. My bard didn't get to use any of his class features ever. The only player whom didn't have any issue was the barbarian(whom is important for later, we'll can him "The Player"). Now after this experience I got a great deal of lamenting from the players,about both the difficulty of the encounter and/or the sub optimal class options they had taken. While no one blamed me for their choices they were upset at the fact they were useless or at the least not what they were hoping for. I got so much of this, that I questioned my everything available ruling for content. At the time the only rules I had was no laptop for players and only content form a book someone owns a print copy of, as computers have a distracting nature for my players.

Flash forward to the present and I'm going to run RotRL. I want to avoid what happened before and also have a party that can live up to the epic high fantasy feel of the adventure path. I also want players to feel part of a truly epic story and be excited about gaming because their invested in their characters, not because they want to play some more grand theft auto pathfinder edition where they can just have some crazy antics and wreck up the place. I'm looking for Lord of the Ring, Game of Thrones, level seriousness and fun. I'm not a hard knocks Gm, but I don't want to run another Monty Python the holy grail kind of game. It's also looking like I'm going to have about 3-4 brand new players whom have never played pathfinder before, so I want to avoid the "option flood" that can discourage and confuse new players.So I came up with a list of restriction that I felt were fair. I've never run the adventure before so this is very blind leading the blind.I only have options from the core, inner sea guide, and advanced players guide as far as player content goes, and still have my need a hard copy rule in place.

-All core classes
-All base classes(apg classes)
-All feats
-All spells
-traits open(4 a piece,this equal two bonus feats)
-Hero points
-No alternative racail features
-No favored racail options
-No Archetypes
-No Multiclassing
-No Prestiage Classes
-All equipment
-All bonus class feature options(rage powers, rogue talents, ranger combat styles etc)

So I give this to my players are I get a "Awwwww thats dumb" kind of reaction from some of the players. I explains my reasons as being to provide an environment in which no class has any more options then a another, and that I'm trying to insure there are no "wrong choices". I also explain I'm looking for leveling to be quick and simple, and to avoid builds and dipping. I also inform them of my desire to have a serious and intense game. This is at a very impromptu meetup and only has a few of the group there. Two of my players(The summoner and the monk from the previous game. These guys are two of my closet friends and are really great to game with.They always try to step up their game and surprise me) move on from the issue and even look forward to the seriousness of the game, but one has been rather discouraged by the restriction. Now I don't feel "bad" about the restrictions persay, although I do want to know if I'm being fair or being overzealous. I don't want to solve a problem with a wrecking ball when I could solve it with a hammer. But I'm having trouble with helpping this player find new character options, and he's being difficult. He's the type of person whom will be stubborn just because someone is pushing. He's also a player whom gets all if not most of his inspiration from video games and manga, and he's been playing Diablo 3 lately. This is also the same person whom played the barbarian in the previous game who didn't have anything bite him in the butt. While brainstorming characters at this meetup he comes to me and...

The Player:"so I've got a great idea for a witchdoctor character."
Me:"oh, do tell."
The Player:"Well he's an herbalist who..well did you ever play WoW and start picking herbs and then end up on the otherside of the world and not know how you got there."
Me:"Umm, no..but okay...I guess"
The Player:" ya thats how I figured he'd join the party and I figured out his name too. Doctor Zom b machker, he's gonna dress himself up in a nice suit and carry himself like a real doctor"
Me: O_O
The Player:" I was going to use the gravewalker archetype but that restricted, but I could make them a alchemist instead"
Me:"Well the character isn't up to the level of seriousness I was looking for but let's look at the races and regions and see if we can find something that works"

Two hours and a name change later we have a Ulfen witch who fled Irrisen as a young boy. Orphaned after his parent died trying to protect him from being claimed by a witch coven. He selected a snow weasel as his familiar and an animal patron. Largely a recluse he tries to not reveal much about himself as he's fearful of what would happen should news of his whereabouts reach the witch coven and those who pursue him. The player is for the most part happy and I feel much better having avoided the "Doctor Zom b Machker" incident. All is going well until two hours after I get home I receive a message saying he's reconsidered and now wants to change his patron to plague as "if i was going to do anything with animals I'd be a druid" and "plague fits the witch doctor theme more", I explain the inherent difference between the witch and the druid and that the patron only determines bonus spells. I also comment on how witch doctor is only a different term for shaman or medicine man, but that falls on deft ears. The player however is very insistent that he rather be a hermit recluse whom makes undead and that he largely want the character to now be ,for lack of a better term, on drugs. I explain that this won't work and ask why he's so insistent on this "witchdoctor" idea and if there is anything else he's considered. He replies that the witchdoctor idea is the only idea he has that could "fit" in the restriction, as his two other ideas a multiclassed martial artist monk savage skald bard, and some kind of farmer boy. As it stands now this player has no character, and the future looks grim as far as possibilities. I personal dislike joke characters as their existence is justified only by something the player finds witty and only as long as they find the joke funny. Once the joke has run out the player stops having fun with the character and usually becomes bored at the table.

So my questions are

A)Am I being unreasonable in both my restrictions and with dealing with The Player. I want to make it so my player characters "fit" the adventure path and have been advised on the usefulness of Varisia, Birthplace of Legends supplements usefulness for such. But even more I want people to have fun with a serious game, I want it to be immersive and exciting. The very reason I picked up the RotRL adventure was because of the reviews of its challenging nature and epic quality content. I'm looking for something similar to the shackles AP players guide, where it advises archetypes and other options so that players are flavorful, optimal, and fun. How can I get the best of all three worlds here?

B) How would you deal/dealt with my "Zom b Machker" player. How should I go about being both stern but also fair and encouraging?

Thanks

P.s. Thank you for being patient and reading this. I truly appreciate it.


Just ordered my list. Beginners box, bestiary pawns, RotRL Pawns, Face cards and inner sea guide. I had a moment to chat and consider my new groups experience as well as their interest in the setting. Generally interested in playing but experience ranges from little/rusty knowledge to overall technical knowledge of the system. I have 2 people that dig through the prd, srd, and pdf's for tools for characters but I have 5 people not familiar with pathfinder. So I'm gonna play to the least of my group, gonna keep them involved and excited but not overload them by handing them a ton of information and telling them they need to read it all. My most experienced players are more just happy to play and pretty easy going. Keeping it simple. I opted to get the inner sea guide as both to have it and also has a reference, and everything else is just functional. The Vasira guide seems useful, but I'll probable just grab it later, again keeping it simple.

1 to 50 of 162 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>