OK James, you win. I have bought the APG.
|
The Advanced Player's Guide is increasingly becoming a core part of our products. While I understand the fact that not all folks own the APG, I do ask those folks to accept the fact that we built the APG, in large part, to address what we thought were "gaps" in the game. Cavaliers, witches, alchemists, inquisitors, and oracles all more or less had roles in the Inner Sea region even before the APG came out, and we chose those 5 as base classes to fill those roles. (The summoner's the only APG class that didn't really have a pre-existing role in the Inner Sea region).Our hope is that by making the PDF of the Advanced Player's Guide only ten bucks, and by making the rules open so that they're free online at paizo.com/prd or at any one of a lot of other online fan-created sites, we get those rules out for folks who can't afford or don't own the APG in print form, so that if they see an element they're interested in showing up in another book, they can get to the rules anyway.
Importantly, by treating the APG as part of the core part of your products, you can incorporate it into your Adventure Paths so that the adventures you produce can become new, fresh and reasonably well balanced for those classes in the APG.
It's very clear that you are now doing this, too. The Carrion Crown AP is rife with such exmaples.
That's a big plus, in my books.
If it were otherwise, there would be an inevitable growing disconnect between the way many Pathfinder players are playing the game, and the default assumptions within Paizo's adventure products. If that were to happen? Things would become increasingly creaky and will ultimately break in terms of the adventure product's utility to all players and GMs. That's not a good thing.
All by way of saying: I am a BIG FAN of Paizo choosing to treat the APG as part of its core design and underlying default assumptions in the game and I believe it to be a decision which is in the long-term interest of all fans of the game.
Big Thumbs Up.
The Advanced Player's Guide is increasingly becoming a core part of our products. While I understand the fact that not all folks own the APG, I do ask those folks to accept the fact that we built the APG, in large part, to address what we thought were "gaps" in the game.
1. Oddly, I'm glad to see acknowledgment that the APG is essentially core rulebook #3. Certainly the monthly Adventure Path has been treating it as such for several months.
2. Given #1, Advanced Player's Guide seems like a sub-optimal name. ;)
3. Can we expect to see the APG added to the PFS core assumption?
As I've said in the past, I don't particularly care for APG being core, but I can live with it. Heck, I even saw the writing on the wall and picked up the APG in print.
However, I have one request: Please make the APG explicitly core -- the current "core in everything but name" situation is a bit confusing.
|
The Advanced Player's Guide is increasingly becoming a core part of our products. While I understand the fact that not all folks own the APG, I do ask those folks to accept the fact that we built the APG, in large part, to address what we thought were "gaps" in the game.1. Oddly, I'm glad to see acknowledgment that the APG is essentially core rulebook #3. Certainly the monthly Adventure Path has been treating it as such for several months.
2. Given #1, Advanced Player's Guide seems like a sub-optimal name. ;)
3. Can we expect to see the APG added to the PFS core assumption?
As I've said in the past, I don't particularly care for APG being core, but I can live with it. Heck, I even saw the writing on the wall and picked up the APG in print.
However, I have one request: Please make the APG explicitly core -- the current "core in everything but name" situation is a bit confusing.
*dons the asbestos suit, fires up the flamethrower* So, about that whole idea of "core"...
core get errata, non-core doesn't seems like a good definition to me...
Reprinted books get errata, Adventure's Armory has some. Of course, anything in the hardcover line is much more likely to get reprinted if stocks are low. I would expect the new Inner Sea Guide to also be on their list of products they always want to have in stock.
To me, the most useful definition is: Material assumed by the flagship product (the monthly Adventure Path). Given the regular inclusion of APG content in Serpent's Skull, I think we're there already, so for clarity's sake it might as well be explicit.
Not fishing for a flame-war either way. :)
I would expect the new Inner Sea Guide to also be on their list of products they always want to have in stock.
Agreed. In fact, if I'm not mistaken they've said as much.
Creative Director
|
The Advanced Player's Guide is increasingly becoming a core part of our products. While I understand the fact that not all folks own the APG, I do ask those folks to accept the fact that we built the APG, in large part, to address what we thought were "gaps" in the game.1. Oddly, I'm glad to see acknowledgment that the APG is essentially core rulebook #3. Certainly the monthly Adventure Path has been treating it as such for several months.
2. Given #1, Advanced Player's Guide seems like a sub-optimal name. ;)
3. Can we expect to see the APG added to the PFS core assumption?
As I've said in the past, I don't particularly care for APG being core, but I can live with it. Heck, I even saw the writing on the wall and picked up the APG in print.
However, I have one request: Please make the APG explicitly core -- the current "core in everything but name" situation is a bit confusing.
When we were working under WotC with the license to do the magazines, our philosophy was that only the three main rulebooks—the Player's Handbook, the Dungeon Master's Guide, and the Monster Manual, were the "CORE" rulebooks. Why? Because not only could we assume that every GM owned those books, but they were in the SRD, which meant that even if a GM didn't own the books, he could get to the rules for free by looking at one of countless online resources, from the official WotC SRD to websites like d20srd.org. Very few of the other books WotC produced were open content, and thus the only way to get to those books was to buy the books, and so we didn't assume they were core books. Furthermore, WotC produced a HUGE amount of hardcover supplements... sometimes more than one a month... and thus it was ridiculous to assume all gamers could keep up with that very aggressive release schedule.
We're in uncharted territory still with Pathifnder. Unlike the WotC model, we're keeping all of the rules content of our hardcovers as open content, and thus those rules are a LOT easier to get to and check out, since they're all free online. Furthermore, we're only doing 3 or so hardcovers a year. That's a small fraction of the books WotC put out in a year for 3rd edition. The combination of fewer books and having their rules content be open and, essentially, free, means that we're a LOT more comfortable relaxing as to what we're completely reprinting in adventures and supplements. This is pretty liberating for us, since not having to fully reprint all the rules for a witch or for an umbral dragon or whatever gives us more room to use that space for actual NEW content.
Despite this... you really DON'T need anything but the Core Rulebook and the Bestiary to play the game. Furthermore... since we use the word "CORE" in the title of our core rulebook... saying that othter books that don't have the word "CORE" in their titles are core rulebooks would be even MORE confusing.
So as a result, we're taking a less hands-on approach. Honestly... the only one who should be able to decide what is and isn't "Core" for any game is that game's GM.
Despite this... you really DON'T need anything but the Core Rulebook and the Bestiary to play the game. Furthermore... since we use the word "CORE" in the title of our core rulebook... saying that othter books that don't have the word "CORE" in their titles are core rulebooks would be even MORE confusing.
But doesn't this situation already exist in the form of the Bestiary (explicitly core, but doesn't have "core" in the title)?
Also, I'd argue that if you want to use the Adventure Path, you really need the APG (in one form or another). If I pick up Carrion Crown, which books do I need to run it? That's the concept of core that really matters.
|
Creative Director
|
Despite this... you really DON'T need anything but the Core Rulebook and the Bestiary to play the game. Furthermore... since we use the word "CORE" in the title of our core rulebook... saying that othter books that don't have the word "CORE" in their titles are core rulebooks would be even MORE confusing.But doesn't this situation already exist in the form of the Bestiary (explicitly core, but doesn't have "core" in the title)?
Also, I'd argue that if you want to use the Adventure Path, you really need the APG (in one form or another). If I pick up Carrion Crown, which books do I need to run it? That's the concept of core that really matters.
For Carrion Crown, you'll want the Core Rulebook, Bestiary 1, Bestiary 2, GameMastery Guide, and the Advanced Player's Guide.
Although at the game table, you'll likely be able to get away with only having the Core Rulebook and the 2 Bestiaries handy for most of it.
none because the PRD is up for free.
*sigh* Yes, I get it. But that's beside the point. Why? Because Paizo is a print company. That's where they make their money. For the sake of argument, assume someone wants books. Or they don't have Internet access. Or whatever.
My point is that: 1. The concept of core explicitly exists, and 2. The most functional definition of "core" I can come up with is this: Which books do I need to use this product?
For Carrion Crown, you'll want the Core Rulebook, Bestiary 1, Bestiary 2, GameMastery Guide, and the Advanced Player's Guide.
Although at the game table, you'll likely be able to get away with only having the Core Rulebook and the 2 Bestiaries handy for most of it.
James, I truly appreciate you taking the time to answer that question (even though it was rhetorical).
It still seems to me that "core" is conceptually vague, a situation I'd like to see remedied. However, it seems I'm either not getting my point across or folks simply don't agree. Either one is fine. :)
bugleyman,
I understand what you are saying and what is needed is a descriptive word that is in between core and optional. To me, the one or two books needed to make a character and run a game are the core books, no matter the game system. Next are the additional main books that contain more spells or additional base classes or basically anything that the publisher feels should not need approval from the GM for a player to use. Third are all the books labeled as optional by the publisher or those from 3PPs.
Also, I think "Core" can sound vague and confusing because that is what they are called in the PFS "core assumption" material. I think if that had never been done or if that phrase were changed, maybe we would be less confused by what is core and what is not.
|
bugleyman,
I understand what you are saying and what is needed is a descriptive word that is in between core and optional. To me, the one or two books needed to make a character and run a game are the core books, no matter the game system. Next are the additional main books that contain more spells or additional base classes or basically anything that the publisher feels should not need approval from the GM for a player to use. Third are all the books labeled as optional by the publisher or those from 3PPs.
Also, I think "Core" can sound vague and confusing because that is what they are called in the PFS "core assumption" material. I think if that had never been done or if that phrase were changed, maybe we would be less confused by what is core and what is not.
"Recommended"? Nice to have, definitely will enhance the use of the adventure, but not (absolutely) vital, especially if one has access to the PRD?
|
|
Bugley, the real question is, who cares apart from you and Seeker?
If we see a flood of AP subs cancellations due to "Core Violation", yeah, sure, but I don't see it happening as of now.
I'm a RPG subscriber, so I have all the books anyway. So I don't care.
However, in the extremely unlikely event that Paizo brought out (say) Ultimate Magic 2 and I hated it and refused to buy it, and then Paizo plastered UM2 material all over their next AP, then it would become an issue.
|
|
Bugley, the real question is, who cares apart from you and Seeker?
If we see a flood of AP subs cancellations due to "Core Violation", yeah, sure, but I don't see it happening as of now.
I'm a RPG subscriber, so I have all the books anyway. So I don't care.
However, in the extremely unlikely event that Paizo brought out (say) Ultimate Magic 2 and I hated it and refused to buy it, and then Paizo plastered UM2 material all over their next AP, then it would become an issue.
Yeah, but given that according to what is known the Ultimate Combat will be the last "generic splatbook" in the RPG line, with el weirdo stuff like epic rules and monsters-as-PCs books next, so I doubt that we will have an over-saturation of material anyway.
...specific spellcaster schools in the Inner Sea region, and so on.
Oooo...did The Twilight Academy (Galduria in Varisia) make the cut?
Bugley, the real question is, who cares apart from you and Seeker?
I'd submit that someone who picks up an AP volume from the shelf, and with no prior knowledge of Paizo, asks "Cool! Which books do I need to play this?" cares very much.
But since that doesn't describe you, it can't be important...right?
Bugley, the real question is, who cares apart from you and Seeker?I care for one, and have fought this battle before.
I'm just more resigned than Bugley. (Well that and the need to shower after realizing we agree on something) ;-)
Come to the dark side -- we don't bathe. :)
I doubt it, but I will ask anyway, will there be in any new magic items in this book?
|
|
none because the PRD is up for free.*sigh* Yes, I get it. But that's beside the point. Why? Because Paizo is a print company. That's where they make their money. For the sake of argument, assume someone wants books. Or they don't have Internet access. Or whatever.
My point is that: 1. The concept of core explicitly exists, and 2. The most functional definition of "core" I can come up with is this: Which books do I need to use this product?
Well I was actually being serious. In that if you could ask on the forum what you needed, that you can get it all free at PRD. I wasn't trying to be snarky about it. Now that your position is more clear and I see what your asking.
1) Core as a concept does indeed exist, I agree.
2) From what I gather and this is purely my own point of view. To me Paizo has core and then recommend. Core is always used in every adventure, AP etc they make. They are then sprinkled with optional stuff, but that optional stuff constantly changes.
So my guess is
Core = PFRPG book, Bestiary 1, GM Guide
Those two seem to always be used no matter what. While
Optional = Bestiary 2, APG etc
While most products have some of them in it, it is different and some parts of those books still have not shown up.
Anyways that's my take on the whole core issue for Paizo.
While I understand bugleyman's point, I don't really see a random person picking up an Adventure Path (especially since it's labeled 1 of 6) and saying "Hey, this looks like a cool game system, I think I'll run this."
It really does vary based on what you're doing. Are you playing PFS? Running a home-brew campaign? Running a module? Running an Adventure Path?"
Each one of those assumes different books. I think the whole concept of defining the "core books" fails to be helpful in any real sense of the word, given the number of contexts it could be used under.
Probably the best Paizo can do is what they have done - print a blurb in the AP saying where the rules can be found.
In my mind, the only unfortunate part of the whole thing is the humongo tome that is the core rulebook. I understand *why* it was released as one book instead of a player/GM pair of books, but that means anyone who's just a player has no option but to get the GM material as well.
Obviously a moot point at this time :)
|
Creative Director
|
I doubt it, but I will ask anyway, will there be in any new magic items in this book?Don't quote me on this. But I think it was said their would be a few Golarion specific magic items in this book. Though I might be thinking of a different product.
Nope; not really any new magic items in this book.
|
|
Nope; not really any new magic items in this book.I doubt it, but I will ask anyway, will there be in any new magic items in this book?Don't quote me on this. But I think it was said their would be a few Golarion specific magic items in this book. Though I might be thinking of a different product.
Likely a different one I was thinking of. You guys make so many good ones, i often get confused what is in what.
I removed a handful of posts that were taking things too personally and generally not actually contributing to the discussion. Replies to these posts were also removed.
couple of things:
1) this book is already purchased, Paizo just wont get the money till later, lol
2) regarding the whole setting vs non-setting stuff, i LOVE both. just did a quick count and about 1/3 of my D&D library of both 3.5 and Pathfinder is setting specific. I have most of the books from FR and Eberron and am slowly but surely working on getting as many for Golarion as well.
3) in response to the "Core" debate: really people? we're arguing over which word best describes the books you need to play Pathfinder?
to me, the only book that is "Core" is the PFRPG Rulebook, aka the tome of death(cuz u easily kill somebody with it...just sayin). Everything else is optional, as a GM could create n run monsters himself, players can create their own PrCs, archtypes, etc and one could easily make their own world.
the PFRPG rulebook has all the basic info to create base characters and play the game, without needing to ever branch out into another book. That to me is "Core"
Well, I for one, am keen on seeing "Inner Sea Combat" - that is the non-magical version of "Inner Sea Magic".
And if it makes a difference, I'll be happy with 8 pages of spells or less. The more crunch is on the classes/archetypes/feats the better.
Yeah, but given that according to what is known the Ultimate Combat will be the last "generic splatbook" in the RPG line, with el weirdo stuff like epic rules and monsters-as-PCs books next, so I doubt that we will have an over-saturation of material anyway.
Is this confirmed? I'm not keen on psionics, epics and monsters-as-PCs. (To that end, I'm not sure what some people are clamoring for: an additional sub-system to handle a different type of psionic-magic? I rather have more variants/archetypes of existing things. I have no trouble with calling mage armor "mind over matter", so my psions are already making Golarion a better place.)
|
|
Yeah, but given that according to what is known the Ultimate Combat will be the last "generic splatbook" in the RPG line, with el weirdo stuff like epic rules and monsters-as-PCs books next, so I doubt that we will have an over-saturation of material anyway.Is this confirmed? I'm not keen on psionics, epics and monsters-as-PCs. (To that end, I'm not sure what some people are clamoring for: an additional sub-system to handle a different type of psionic-magic? I rather have more variants/archetypes of existing things. I have no trouble with calling mage armor "mind over matter", so my psions are already making Golarion a better place.)
It seems that all three topics (pisonics, epics, monsters PCs) have a steady following, so I think that books on those are inevitable.
It seems that all three topics (pisonics, epics, monsters PCs) have a steady following, so I think that books on those are inevitable.
Though for some of us GMs, it's actually monster NPCs that we're looking for. The players at my table will probably never play characters that have monstrous races.
Other GM's mileage may vary :)