theneofish's page

290 posts. No reviews. 3 lists. 1 wishlist.


1 to 50 of 290 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

Story Archer wrote:
Gar0351 wrote:
What I'm looking for are suggestions or related experiences others might have had for including Lissala in the AP and suggestions on properly themed archetypes or bloodlines or classes or other ideas for the rival party.

A few thoughts, but first some background...

I'm currently running a grand campaign that primarily uses the Rise of the Runelords to tell the Shattered Star story. Its required a little re-work (which I love to do anyway) and it includes the six Runelords volumes as well as volumes 2, 3 & 6 of Shattered Star and volume 2 of Curse of the Crimson Throne, 'Seven Days to the Grave'. Its really come out spectacularly.

I've also created an entire subplot that might appeal to you - the background (in condensed form) is that a separate group which has infiltrated the Aspis Consortium is using their resources to gather the Shards themselves, with a specific intent on using their combined might to fully resurrect Lissala. To aid in that subplot, I'm including a half-dozen or so Pathfinder Society scenarios which mostly take place around Kaer Maga, dovetailing nicely with the Asylum Stone. If you want to flesh out your cult of Lissala side-plot, these are the scenarios you should consider - all are available for download and are relatively inexpensive. Among other things, they'll get another Runelord (and high priest of Lissala) to fight - I highly recommend that you give them a look.

PFS Scenario 3-26 "Portal of the Sacred Rune"

PFS Scenario 4-08 "The Cultist's Kiss"

PFS Scenario 4-10 "Feast of Sigils"

PFS Scenario 4-12 "The Refuge of Time"

PFS Scenario 4-20 "Word of the Ancients"

PFS Scenario 4-26 "The Waking Rune"

I do use a handful of other PFS scenarios to flesh out my story, but these were the ones that seemed specifically suited to your intended purpose.

In my particular campaign, the 'nemesis party' isn't competing with the group to find the Shards first so much as pursuing/tracking them and choosing opportune moments to try and steal,...

These sound like superb ideas. Our party actually did 3-26 as a sidequest immediately prior to Beyond the Nightmare Rift,so would be a very satisfactory inclusion. Do you have your Inquisitor statted anywhere? What kind of level did you pitch them at?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zhyth wrote:

My party just reached the entrance to the Embassy of Leng at the end of last session, and I've been re-reading through the last parts of the book the make sure I don't miss anything. Reading through Cadrilkasta's statblock and tactics, I've got a question:

How long is the tunnel from F9 (The Great Temple to the Crawling Chaos) to F10 (The Cursed Dragon) supposed to be?

Since Cadrilkasta sends her Lillends up the tunnel to the PCs after they're done healing her up, I don't imagine it can be more than a couple of hundred feet long, since the Lillends are only around for 15 rounds. The only thing I could find relating to the length is in the description of the temple itself, where it states that "A long tunnel connects the temple's far side to a higher ledge on the other side of the mountain," which doesn't really help to clarify anything.

This puzzled me as well. Originally I envisaged it as half a mile or so, because the temple is not that large, and if you enter on one side of the mountain and exit on the other, for it to be a short tunnel they temple must be set in the peak of the mountain, or else the top of the mountain forms a long, thin, spire. In fact, the latter must be the case because when the pcs arrive through the portal, we're told that the mountain extends upwards for another mile above them. So I can't really reconcile it.

These look great, but are they pdf only?

Pledged. I'm not familiar with the publisher or other releases, but this looks amazing. I really hope the City design is as spectacular as the art.

Dragon78 wrote:
I can't see a hardcover book devoted to one city. I would prefer hardcover books for distant worlds, a book of the planes, and each continent before we start with just a city.

Although, James once replied to a post of mine saying he would love to do just that. I'd suggested a city box set, he said that would be too expensive, but he'd love to do a book dedicated to one city in just such a way as Greyhawk or Waterdeep.

The mentioned long ago but seemingly forgotten add-ins for the jungle / serpent themed AP.

Hi, I've moved home since the original Kickstarter, and have emailed Frog God and Bill twice to tell them since the despatch was announced, but have had no reply. Any likelihood someone can check my delivery and see where it's gone / is going? I really don't want this going astray.



Could someone contact me with regard to the above issue? I had an email from Customer Services yesterday stating that my payment had been declined. I spoke to the bank, and they told me it hadn't, and even quoted the authorisation number for the transaction. I then emailed Customer Services but have received no response.

Could you clarify the above and confirm that my sub will be posted as per normal?


I think there's a real need for a good overview like this. Great read, but yes - notations or extrapolations in brackets would be ideal. But I'll be copying this for my players, no question. Well done!

Bill Webb wrote:

What I was illustrating is the short pdf (and yes Steve, probably later on hardcovers) I will start on after I get done w/ SOA--the goal is to nail all named locations in the Lost Lands w/ a short write up, encounter tables, and 4-10 fixed encounter areas/features for each one.

I have a lot of glue to tie together after almost 40 years!

Really, this is music to my ears. The one thing I was going to pitch and and ask for re short pdfs would be some Lost Lands specific locations, something to add some 'places of mystery' etc. Sounds perfect and I'll be buying these for sure.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rynjin wrote:

No, you don't sometimes fail at things that are ingrained in you like that.

A master chef is never going to sometimes forget how to make a grilled cheese sandwich.

A master swordsman is never going to cut at something and fail so hard he severs his own leg.

Things like that are things that don't happen in reality, with normal people, so why should it happen in a fantasy game with people who are beyond human?

By 6th level you've surpassed humanity. You should be getting better at things without a 1% chance of going "Whoops, guess all my training is useless".

And NOBODY is going to forget something as simple as 2+4, even for a moment, much less a guy who makes his living on numbers. Come on now. Even when you brain fart, I doubt it's something to do with your livelihood, and as you know the answer, you just can't vocalize it. It's not the same thing.

You might go "Hand me that...thingy over there" when you mean a screwdriver, but you're not suddenly going to be like "And what's this for again?"

Also the way Knowledge checks work mean you CAN never try again but that's a whole 'nother basket of stupid that's not related to your rule at all.

I'm not going to go as far as to say your rule is horrible and you're terrible for using it or whatnot, I've fooled around with fumble rules too, but I don't think it makes sense like you implied it did.

I get what you're saying here, and, after all, house rules are for the individual GM, but I can't help feeling that fumble does not necessarily = 'forget how to do it.' Sometimes, freakishly, circumstances are just against you. I've gone to make a grilled cheese sandwich and the knife has just flown out of my hand, or the match has snapped in half. We've all seen YouTube vids where Olympic athletes fail at doing something they've excelled at all their life - equipment breaks, or they slip.

So that Barbarian - if he rolled a 1 one at my table while trying to kill a cowering child - well, I'd say 'ok, the rock that you put your weight on while you swing down is actually unstable, and twists under your foot, throwing you off balance. Your swing goes wide.'

Circumstances can be against you, and that's what I use fumble for, not intimating that the player / character forgot everything they ever learned in an instant.

If you mean London, UK, you could try checking the Orcs Nest messageboards where people post their games wanted and available lists. I've found a few players there in the past, and they weren't all deranged. Haven't looked for a couple of years though.

Whereabouts in London are you?

I've subscribed to Big Finish audios in the past, both on their main Dr Who range and on other series. They are hugely experienced and are more than capable of turning out top quality audio drama, as Erik says. I'd concur that you can't really compare an audio play with all the voice talent, music, sound effects etc and a recording of someone reading a book, which can easily take 8 or 9 hours. The price point is a little on the expensive side, but it's certainly in keeping with their product line overall.

Having said that... generally speaking, the most successful of Big Finish's audios are the two disc ones, an hour and a half to two hours. I find they often struggle to achieve the same level of storytelling on the one disc, one hour stories. In those instances though, it's usually a factor of what the source material demands. I'm currently listening to season 4 of their Jago and Litefoot series, and have found the previous three seasons - each consisting of four one hour stories - to be magnificent; tightly plotted, great acting and excellent direction and production. They have had many successful productions across a range of genres, so I'd be very hesitant to label them 'not fantasy fans.' So I'd also echo Erik, and urge folks to keep an open mind - they are more than capable of producing something of the highest quality. Whether they will or not, or whether other constraints will undermine it, remains to be seen. I'd love to know how this range came about though, who approached who, and what the decision not to produce it as a two disc range was based upon (I'm guessing cost and uncertainty about the saleability).

Oh, and all of their products are generally available for download as well as in physical form.

Joshua Goudreau wrote:
I really should have called this thread 'Slumbering Tsar - Merits and Flaws.'

Well, what some people see as a merit, others will identify as a flaw. I'm quite happy with a series of encounters - I don't have the time to create my own dungeon environments, but what I do enjoy is creating the story to fit in around that, with plenty of rp and plots / conspiracies tied in. The Frog God / Necromancer modules give me exactly that.

I'd recommend reading through 'The Slumbering Tsar - Starting, DM Set up, Questions, and Advice' thread since this features lots of recaps of play sessions and will give you some idea as to whether this is for your or your group. On the whole, however, if you like something that is strongly 'story flavoured', with set chapters of events and lots of interaction in an ongoing narrative, I'm not certain Tsar is going to be for your. Personally, I love both this and Rappan Athuk, although Tsar probably has the edge for me in terms of the actual setting and backstory. RA suffices more as somewhere to repeatedly venture into, whereas Tsar is more of an epic quest.

necromental wrote:
How about a product line for all the old APs?

I'm still holding out for the Serpent's Skull plug-ins that were mentioned in the early days. That idea seems to have slipped out of sight, which is a shame - if anything is crying out for a makeover, it's City of Seven Spears :(

I ran our new group through Godsmouth Heresy, which is awesome, before embarking on Shattered Star. Going into that they were a mix of 3rd and 4th level (as they had some other adventures in between). Sure, the beginning was fairly easy for them, but it soon evened out and the party were nearly wiped out navigating the last two levels of the dungeon. Sure, I could easily have beefed up the earlier encounters, but was pretty happy with easing them into it. So, my advice would be - I don't think it really matters, just find a scenario you like that fits in with the overall theme of the AP you decide to run. Godsmouth was perfect for us as it introduced the concepts of the Runelords and ancient Thassilonian ruins / magic.

Kthulhu wrote:
Fig wrote:
Tholomyes wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
theneofish wrote:

Whilst I really don't want Paizo to go down the path of producing rule books that don't have any in game support (a major disincentive to buying 3e Wizard's books), I can understand how it would be difficult to do so with mythic content. Doesn't it have to be all or nothing? You can't really just drop a mythic NPC into an instalment of an AP or module, as you could with a character option that people might not be so keen on. Either it's a mythic adventure, or it isn't. That's how I read it, although I'll put my hands up right now and say I don't have the mythic rules - I fully intend to get them, but at this stage my group can barely cope with the core rules and don't need additional complexity dropped on them.

Have the powers that be made any comment yet on whether mythic will see further support, or will it be left to 3PPs?

They've already published sub-systems that have seen no support.
I'm interested in what you're referring to with this; not that I specifically disagree, as I can point to some things that have seen little support, like Teamwork feats, but I'm interested in what you had in mind.
Perhaps Words of Power? This is a system I would love to see a bit more support for, either from Paizo or 3pps.

Ding ding!

Hell, it's not only not seen any support, it didn't really feel like it was finished.

Yes, I guess Words of Power is what is being referred to? But to clarify, I see that more as an optional system within a larger rulebook - same with Hero Points for instance. What I really meant was I object to entire rulebooks being published that subsequently have no in game support, such as Magic of Incarnum or Weapons of Legacy.

And if I can direct a question to James with regard to his post, would you consider it possible for a mythic character or monster to appear in a module / adventure without that adventure itself being labelled mythic, or otherwise having mythic content? As I said, I'm afraid I'm ignorant of the rules at the moment, but could 'ordinary' characters face off against mythic adversaries without being instantly squished?

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ral' Yareth wrote:

Also, if the Paizo moderators have a bias against aggressive, jerky, demeaning, homophobic, misogynistic and racist comments, I am OK with their bias.

You see, I don't know if I am. I would rather such views were challenged wherever they appear, so they can be shown to be offensive. Is silencing debate good or moral in and of itself? Being aggressive, yes, because that's not an opinion it's just bullying, but I would rather someone were called out for being homophobic / misogynistic / racist because those are legitimate opinions, however misguided, and I would hold out the hope that people who hold them could have their opinions changed. Just putting your hand over someone's mouth isn't going to change their world for the better.

I don't know, I'm ambivalent about this. I do believe the above, but I don't necessarily believe that a family friendly forum like Paizo's is the place for it, or that folks on an internet forum are necessarily going to respond appropriately. I guess the danger is that being 'jerky' is rather a moveable feast, and whilst it's easy to identify things that fall into the category of 'demeaning / homophobic / racist' and get those removed, I'm not so confident that there isn't someone who can be offended by anything. One of my co-workers has just made an official complaint about the girl she works with for being too quiet. And if that person is a Moderator are they always adhering to company policy on what's offensive?

I dunno. 'Who'd be a Mod?' seems to be the lesson I'd take from this thread. The bigger and more successful Paizo becomes, the harder the job is.

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
I've kind of suspected from the beginning that The Real Issue here is: "some moderators express views which I don't like (and even worse, by voicing these views they empower others), so let's build an elaborate argument against them taking part in discussion".

I think that's quite unfair, although it's an easy shot to take. I love that the staff engage in debate, or take up cudgels in defence of their own world view and cultural position. It's what really sets this company apart from other forums that I belong to. I think what's being objected to is the danger that Mod A states a position, and poster B objects to that position and states an opposite one, does Mod A then remove said post or let it stand and counter it by reasoned debate? Can you be objective where you are emotionally invested? Should you even try? The company I work for will not allow anyone to work on a case where there is a conflict of interest, and that includes moral objection to a client's business where this is likely to interfere with the job being undertaken, where the staff member in question thinks this may prove problematic.

What you're suggesting is that the entire thrust of this thread is that people would like to see opinions from mods that run contrary to their own censored. It might be the case, but which statements in the thread do you believe support this view?

I have to say I've never had a problem with the moderation on the site personally, and I've never been subject to anything heavy handed (or even light handed). I have seen a few people behave like asses or state things that I thought were pretty objectionable, but the mods have for the most part let those views be challenged in open debate. So, for me, it's more a consideration of what seems logical.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Deanoth wrote:
Arnwyn wrote:
thejeff wrote:
It might also be a good idea for staff not to moderate discussions they're taking part in. Pass it on to someone else.

Holy cow - this, so much this.

In fact, I'm shocked this even needs to be brought up.

Moderating a thread in which you're also taking part is deeply inappropriate. (There's at least one Paizo staffer who does this far too often, and probably a couple more.)

Very inappropriate.

How is it inappropriate? You will find that most staffers and or mods even from different sites take place in conversations and such in most threads. If they were to excuse themselves from moderating simply because they are taking part in the thread they would not be much of a moderator then.

If you have a problem with a moderator and their discussion and or moderation actions you have the report link in their post. Many mods and staffers have brought this up.

Isn't the issue that - when participating in a thread they personally feel strongly about the subject matter of - the moderation runs the risk of becoming subjective rather than objective?

Whilst I really don't want Paizo to go down the path of producing rule books that don't have any in game support (a major disincentive to buying 3e Wizard's books), I can understand how it would be difficult to do so with mythic content. Doesn't it have to be all or nothing? You can't really just drop a mythic NPC into an instalment of an AP or module, as you could with a character option that people might not be so keen on. Either it's a mythic adventure, or it isn't. That's how I read it, although I'll put my hands up right now and say I don't have the mythic rules - I fully intend to get them, but at this stage my group can barely cope with the core rules and don't need additional complexity dropped on them.

Have the powers that be made any comment yet on whether mythic will see further support, or will it be left to 3PPs?

caddmus wrote:
Buri wrote:

I give you a CR 1 swarm immune to weapon damage.


This set the tone really well for my Shattered Star group.

Tell me about it, my group is doing Shattered star now, we up to book three, but those swarms man, we lost the druid pet and a party member to those things when we were low level.

Same here in book one, almost a wipeout to the swarm in the lower level, took three of the party down to below zero as they fled in panic.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Two of my favourites from Doctor Who:-

  • Soldeed watching his plans go up in smoke - 'You interfering hussy!'

  • Minions destroyed, attempted palace coup thwarted, soundly beaten in climactic swordfight - Count Grendel pauses before leaping from battlements into the moat to escape: 'Next time I shall not be so lenient!'

Is there any update on Hero Lab files for this (and other Dreadfox Games) supplement? As per usual with a lot of 3PP products, I see something that looks very interesting, and has excellent reviews, but using it is completely impractical for us - I have two dyslexic players who can't read through lots of text either to establish a character or work out levelling up options. I'd love to offer this class on a trial basis, but Hero Lab is a must have.

I agree with Shadowmage. You can't continue to let those who are really keen be dictated to by those who drop by if they've got nothing better to do. Organise a game with the guys you know are reliable, tell the others what date you're playing, and if they want to show that's up to them. I have six in my gaming group, but it's rare that they all make it. I make it clear that if we have at least me and two players, it's going ahead regardless of the consequence. I'll run a missing player's character for a couple of sessions as an npc, but three missed sessions means they're left behind at the earliest opportunity.

The party I DM has a fascinating propensity for fumbles and failed skill checks, a talent they have demonstrated to great effect in Shattered Star. The barbarian fell from the roof of the disused warehouse in the earlier part of the adventure after rolling a 1 on her climb check whilst swinging her greatsword, and subsequently also rolled a 1 climbing up a stationary ladder, and fell fifty feet into the sea. This continued once they got into the adventure proper.

Shattered Star Spoilers:

During the later fight with the donkey rats and tower girls the party ranger first shot an arrow into the party bard, and followed this up by criting himself in the eye with his own arrow (critical fumble followed by critical hit on himself). Perhaps it was a mercy that the party mage subsequently fumbled a stealth check whilst scouting the derro enclave, resulting in the deaths of both the ranger and himself.

Last Friday night’s game was another typical session. The (expanded) group have penetrated the Lady’s Light, and were advancing along the corridor towards the large room holding the dhampir. Having taken him unawares (he was busy being morose), the gunslinger decided to boot open the door and fling himself into the room so he could get a shot off. ‘Are you doing that?’ I asked. ‘Yep, I take a run, boot the door and leap through.’ ‘Ok, well the door is securely locked, so your net achievement is a loud clang, a sore foot and a bruised and bloodied face, and the guy has got to his feet, drawn his sword and is walking over to the door.’

At this point the party rogue – a dwarf – whipped out his picklocks and set to with the lock. And rolled a 1. ‘Ok, the tools are jammed in the lock, you’ll need to clear them before you can try again.’ Next action, rolls to clear the lock – gets another 1. ‘Ok, your tools are now broken off in the lock, it’s comprehensively jammed and you’ve destroyed your picklocks.’ Finally, the frustrated gunslinger, taking a break from hopping round on one foot, shoves the dwarf out of the way and says ‘I shoot out the lock’. And, of course, rolls a 1. Lock hopelessly mangled, door irretrievably locked, dhampir smirking, and has time to cast all his defensive and buff spells whilst this carnival is enacted on the other side of the door.

We spend a lot of time laughing in disbelief at our dice rolls.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Another big thumbs down for the cover, I'm afraid. After appropriate / thematic illustrations for other region specific APs like Jade Regent, Skull and Shackles, and Reign of Winter, I find this a crushing disappointment as I really hoped this would shout Egyptian / Osiriani. Poor decision, IMO.

zoewolverine wrote:

Forgive me, I am only about a third of the way through reading the adventure, so it's possible that these questions are answered later, but they are bugging me so I thought I'd ask:

Exactly what part of the ossuary have the cadavers been disappearing from? Were they fresh bodies or older? Are priests of Pharasma only present in the main ossuary part of the time? Has Svilennius been entering and exiting the main ossuary from the same door that seals off the lower level? How has he avoided detection?


From memory, there's a staircase from Svilennius' quarters that exits via a hidden door in a less travelled part of the Ossuary. I think he's just been lucky to avoid detection, but I can't remember if it's mentioned whether he takes fresh or historical cadavers though. I just remember having a blast running my group through this, and thought it was one of the best 1st level modules I'd come across.

Skeeter Green wrote:

In general, we are not currently supporting mythic rules.

Now, there could be exceptions (like we always do), but it's not in our game plan right now. We might offer suggestions in an Appendix or something, but main content won't see mythic for the foreseeable future (unless something changes tomorrow, which is sorta how its been in the past...)


I'm not unhappy with that decision I must say!

I'm also keen on 'new' modules being set in that world - yes, love to see updates of Bard's Gate, Barakus etc, but at the same time let's see that material being expanded on, or continued in new ways. Having said that, one of my faves was Hall of the Rainbow Mage - I'm not sure it was ever one of the more popular FG books but I and my players had a great time adventuring there. Love to see a follow up to that.

My only caveat with regard Dreamscarred psionics is that - if you're building something that is compatible with Pathfinder but takes a 3rd party psionics approach - what do you do when Paizo bring out their own approach to psionics, based on a completely different mechanic? Will you tie your entire gameworld to a system that isn't the one used by the ruleset you're championing?

Just saying...

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Forest Guardian Press wrote:

My own unfamiliarity with HeroLab necessarily limits my ability to add this functionality. Perhaps an enterprising member of the HeroLab forums/community could set themselves up to provide HeroLab-conversant support/service to enable more 3PPs to add HeroLab support for their products. Perhaps this has already happened?

Thanks for your comments! And regarding the above (and I can only speak for myself), but I don't expect publishers to provide this kind of content for free. I'd be happy to pay extra for Print + HeroLab (or PDF + HeroLab) in the same way I currently would for Print + PDF.

My immediate feeling would be that it should represent a holdover from a previous age, perhaps Thassilonian? Certainly one of the Kingdoms to the north of the Inner Sea rather than something more exotic. Have you had a look at Lost Kingdoms to see if there's anything in there that would suit?

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Sure, there has been in the past some below par 3PP material. But, really, the cream has risen to the top and the field is now, if anything, full of top quality products and designers. I simply don't understand how someone can say '90% crap' when they're often the exact same designers as Paizo use. Maybe they think the design philosophy or something is different, I dunno.

So, there are a bunch of 3PPs I would love to buy stuff from, but I'm really limited to those that produce Hero Lab files for their products, which I use extensively in my game. I have several players who have disabilities in the reading area and wading through hundreds of pages of text simply isn't an option, so Hero Lab is a must have product. This limits me from a lot of the players option type 3PP products out there, unfortunately, although whenever there's a kickstarter with HL files I'm usually there.

Probably just as well, considering the amount of stuff I'd buy if I could use them.

This looks terrific. I'll echo that you can never have too many great city sourcebooks, and I really like the unique feel the Byzantine twist will give it. Looking forward to the final product.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
brock, no the other one... wrote:
GeraintElberion wrote:
If this was a UK forum then 'bastard' would be censored in the same way that 't+$!', 's!$&' and 'wanker' would be.
I've been turning it over in my head all evening, and the only place where I've heard the word used to represent a 'mixture' would be in 'bastardise', and even then it implies corruption and pollution.

To be fair, it's used often in faux mediaeval literature to denote illegitimate - I'd be astonished if it hasn't appeared in Game of Thrones, for instance. Of course it still carries a pejorative tone, hence the corruption of the original word into one of abuse.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Vic Wertz wrote:

The main reason for this product is that I believe the Core Rulebook presents a number of barriers to entry into the game for many people, among them...


This book is intended to solve those problems, and I believe that it will bring many more players to the table.

Wasn't that the Beginner Box though? Back at the time of that product, I remember a discussion (and it may have been from James, or I may be misremembering) that one of the perceived problems of D&D 4th Ed was the number of 'entry products.' There were too many books on the shelves whose intention seemed to be to 'bring players to the table.' It confused people and led in itself to a barrier to play. I remember Paizo staff being very conscious of that and wanting something that was clearly labelled 'Start Here.' To me, the title of this product doesn't say 'start here', and if it doesn't, how will it aid in recruiting gamers? And, if it does, then aren't we back at the headscratching of new gamers / parents looking at the Core Rulebook / Beginner Box / Strategy Guide and thinking 'what the heck?'

If the driver for this is a perceived failing in the design / complexity of the core product, then maybe that's an argument for revisiting that book rather than increasing the range of product offering overall?

This looks like a fantastic product. Underdark, one of my favourite things!

Can I just clarify though? It doesn't mention at the $150 level about receiving the 6 print copies of WoW; it only mentions this under the description, where it says 'you may receive print copies of all six'? Is this definite or contingent upon something? Why is it not mentioned in the pledge levels?


Unruly wrote:

I have a feeling that the answer is no, since there aren't hardcover reprints of the APs(aside from RotR AE), but it can't hurt to ask. I'd just much rather have a handful of hardcovers than have a ton of softcovers. If only for the fact that hardcovers are typically more durable and can take much more sustained use before falling apart. But it's also be nice to just have just a single reference book for multiple things, so long as those multiple things make sense to be in the same book.

And I think the answer will be 'no' for the same reason that Paizo (quite rightly, IMO), won't even entertain a discussion about further AP compilations. Once the possibility is even raised, existing stock is dead in the water for a percentage of buyers, and holding dead stock is anathema to a healthy business.

Wait till it's all sold through, is my guess.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Pitching in here with my tuppence ha'penny worth (that's 2 cents I guess for you US folks); I say lose the fiction. I've been a subscriber since Serpent's Skull, never read it, never will. Nothing against it, but it's not what I buy gaming product for. I have NEVER wanted fiction in a gaming product, and that goes back to 1st Edition. Nothing against fiction at all. Everything has its place, but an adventure game product isn't it. I'm a published writer, I can do my own, thanks. What I'm not is an adventure designer. I've read tons of fantasy, I've got tons that I haven't read queued up, and tons more on my Amazon wishlist. I don't care what fills the space; I understand maps / adventure expansions aren't practical, but to be honest I'm happy for any kind of crunch - more monsters, more ideas, perhaps extra info on locations in the adventure, more anything. I must admit, when I first bought Serpent's Skull I assumed the fiction was going to be that - the storyline of the AP fictionalised, which I thought might at least give me a couple of ideas. When I realised it wasn't it seemed to have even less point, and I was baffled at its inclusion other than a fairly cheap way of filling the page count.

In a way the Adventure Paths are an amalgam of what Dungeon and Dragon used to be, but to my mind I'd rather it was more of the Dungeon plus crunchier articles from Dragon, than the fluff. I've no time for it - to my mind it's plagued gaming products for years. I realise I'm an extreme case - I don't even like flavour text in rulebooks - but I'd rather get at something that helped me at the gaming table. I play rpgs because I have an imagination; I can visualise adventures, create characters and immerse myself in an ongoing, complex storyline. The help I need for that is for someone to provide the skeleton, not flesh, bones and formal attire as well.

I'm aware James Sutter has said up thread that it's a risk to drop it, and for commercial reasons Paizo have to balance the folks (like me) who keep buying even *though* the APs have fiction, against the folks who'd cancel if they didn't, but seriously? How many people on here buy the APs for 6 pages of fiction, and would cancel their sub if it went? Has anyone in this thread so far - even those who really, really like the fiction - said they'd stop buying if the fiction was dropped? Where's the sense in that? That must be the most expensive six pages of fiction on the market.

The Adventure Paths are to my mind just about the best ongoing gaming product out there right now, and I've got no doubt at all that when D&D reappears in its new guise there'll be a monthly adventure sub built in. I suspect there will be a fiction component there too, but I'd like to see Paizo having evolved to the next stage before then.

Well, you could always stat him as an 'unknown' Runelord, since it's established that in some cases the ones we know and love replaced previous incumbents of the role - ie,

Spoiler for Shattered Star:
The mural of Alaznist slaying Thybidos in Shards of Sin

I'm doing something similar with a long term villain in my own campaign, which will explain how he ended up powerless and expelled to another world.

GeraintElberion wrote:

Paizo are already handling this:
- PFS has a meta-setting (the Pathfinder Society) which allows everyone to develop their characters as 'pathfinders in Absalom' with an internal coherence that does not need to be forced.
- PFS seasons now have meta-plots which allow casually play and a sense of involvement in epic events.
- PFS regularly has series of 3 or 4 linked adventures which build to a larger plot and are tied to the season plot.

But to be fair, that the modules are available for Pathfinder society play is somewhat irrelevant. They're produced for a much wider market - ie, the general gaming public - and I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of those don't have any knowledge of organised play. They look at the products on a game shop shelf for what they are, not whether they're legal / helpful for PFS. And that market return is clearly indicating that larger and more involving modules are what they want. I'd be interested to know what % of the 3% cited above sell to people who want them for organised play.

I think the clear intention is to capture a wider slice of the general gaming population.

HolmesandWatson wrote:

The announcement I saw on the magazine made it look like they were going to cover a very wide array of RPGs. I mean, a BUNCH. I don't believe fans of primarily one or two RPGs (i.e., Pathfinder, Traveller, D&D) are going to commit to a magazine that has a significant amount of content for RPGs they don't play.

I can't imagine it lasting beyond a few issues if it doesn't focus in on a few core games and hope to get the players of those games to invest in it. How many folks on these boards are going to support a magazine that is, say 20% Pathfinder content?

I can't help feeling you're correct on this. The more game systems you support, the more fragmented the buy in. Rightly or wrongly, I don't buy stuff for systems I don't run, no matter how good it might be, or how many great ideas I might garner from other articles. That's certainly what stopped me subscribing to KQ. My loss, sure, but that's the way it is. Are there any successful multi platform mags for rpgs?

In my book, pick one market and sell the best stuff to it. Or, if you want to be cosmopolitan, don't do it in one product.

Generic Villain wrote:
theneofish wrote:

People who 'don't like the dungeon-centric nature of SS' should sit this one out, in the same way folks who don't like horror, or urban, or pirates have sat out others. That way, really, the AP line retains something for everyone.

Just want to point out that I agree and said as much in my post. In case I wasn't clear, I'm glad Paizo is keeping things fresh and don't expect everything to always work for me. Given the nature of this thread however, I thought I would also mention what I found lacking in SS.

You totally did, and I apologise if any part of my post came across as a criticism of your opinion. Really, I commend you for your evenhandedness, I just wanted to express a heartfelt 'noooooooo!' to folks expressing a dislike for the whole concept of the AP. For aspects of how it's been executed, sure, I don't have any problem with that, I just don't want Paizo to take away an overall feeling of negativity from the posts because an extended dungeon crawl is what some of us here have been crying out for (and with regard to Mike Shel's post - I've noted the change to the modules with glee and am definitely going to subscribe to the line now).

Much as I like diplomacy and urban exploration, a couple of my players are just not up to it, and they're really only happy when they've got a corridor, a secret room, and a monster to hit. Takes all sorts, and other elements of roleplaying I'll be weaving in and out of the AP for the benefit of my other players. That's where my job comes in.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Generic Villain wrote:

I don't like this AP, but not because I'm bored per se. Individually I've actually really enjoyed most of the volumes - particularly The Asylum Stone and Beyond the Doomsday Door. I have two main complaints though. First and foremost, I don't like the dungeon-centric nature of SS. I prefer one or two main dungeons per AP with the others being smaller and more interspersed with roleplaying elements, travel, etc. Up until now every AP has followed this pattern, so I understand that SS is an effort to mix things up and throw a bone to the mega dungeon crowd. It just so happens I'm not in that crowd.

And that's really exactly what it is, and is why I'm enjoying it so much. As James has stated, APs offer a variety of styles of play to satisfy different players. Our group wasn't interested in Pirates or Far East, so although I kept up my sub, we sat the adventures themselves out. This is a hark back, not only to Paizo's early years, but also to the 'traditional' dungeon crawl. That's never going to be to everyone's taste, but for those for whom it's an ideal mix of 'dungeons and diplomacy', I think we shouldn't begrudge either the idea or the execution of the AP. People who 'don't like the dungeon-centric nature of SS' should sit this one out, in the same way folks who don't like horror, or urban, or pirates have sat out others. That way, really, the AP line retains something for everyone.

Like others here, I'm not sold on the Pathfinders though. In my campaign I have a powerful and longstanding NPC family who have been targeted over the last few years by a powerful and unknown enemy. So, the matriarch of the family has hired the party to take up Sheila Heidmarch's quest, but covertly do so for her with every intention of siezing the Sihedron when it's complete. We'll see how that plays out, but really, the point is that a creative GM doesn't need to foreground the Pathfinders or require undying loyalty towards them from the team.

Just caught this, brilliant news! Exactly what I wanted from the modules line. I will definitely be able to justify taking out a sub now.

And thanks for the comments folks - about to start Shattered Star this weekend and very much looking forward to the Sacred Necromancer being part of the mix. Scott - thank you; can't wait for more products from Zombie Sky.

That will be a massive boon, thank you!

Scott Gable wrote:

Glad you're enjoying the class, theneofish! Yeah, as Cheapy said, we followed the spell schools explicitly, so the cure spells are not on the default necromancy spell list.

The psychopomp can heal using their channel energy, but they don't get the cure spells, I'm almost positive without it in front of me (since they're more about the incorporeal than the corporeal). The chirurgeon, however, does get the cure spells with the healing lore whisper. (It would be a simple matter to allow the psychopomp access to the healing lore whisper by a house rule since they can already channel positive energy. Or even create a new field based on healing.)

We'd love to hear how it goes playing the class! :D

Thanks for the elucidation Scott! This is a great product, and I'm looking forward to getting the character integrated into the party. The group will be without a traditional cleric, so healing options will be shared between this, a bard, and judicious use of wands and potions. At the same time the party mage is pretty clueless, so I was also hoping that it would be able to pitch in with some arcane strength when required. This fits the bill perfectly.

Do you anticipate any future support for the class in the way of new options / archetypes or paths? Also - and a bit of a 'dream on' one for me - any likelihood of Hero Lab files? Our group relies pretty heavily on this, and we usually stick only to 3PP classes etc that we can utilise in this way. This one was just too cool to pass up, but it would still be a massive bonus.

Thanks again - and as others have said, love the artwork.

Cheapy wrote:

Hope I can help. The sacred necromancer gets all necromancy spells. For whatever reason, the designers of 3rd edition made Cure Light Wounds a conjuration (healing) spell, rather than a Necromancy skill. Alternatively, they for some reason made Inflict Light Wounds a Necromancy skill, and not a conjuration spell.

Basically, it's an issue that's been in the game for a while, where the "evil" version of CLW is a different school of magic.

I believe that the Psychopomp calling gets the cure spells, but as necromancy spells. This was a decision to allow some calling to get the healing spells.

Excellent, that's what I'd hoped; it's a Psychopomp one of my players would like and it seemed counterintuitive not to let the good guys get healing if the bad guys got Inflict. Now you've explained it I can see it's based on existing logic, however faulty. I will amend my game accordingly - very useful, thanks!

I would definitely up my subscriptions if there were a cheaper option. I wait for everything to hit the UK, and then get from Orcs Nest or Amazon. I keep up the AP sub because I want to show support for Paizo, but I just can't justify the cost beyond that.

1 to 50 of 290 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>