Pathfinder Pawns: Heroes & Villains Pawn Collection

I have all of the pawns too. You guys are being ridiculous if you're going to complain because the pawns have no names. I always have to cover the names so the meta gaming scum that passes for my players don't read them. Figure out another way to sort them or make your identifying names for your spreadsheet, but low rating a set of perfectly usable pawns because they're not named is silly.

I have several thousand pawns, it is neither silly nor ridiculous to want the pawns to have some sort of name or identifier in order to keep them organized, especially when every prior release of pawns had exactly that. I won't be purchasing these pawns, despite getting all the other sets, for exactly that reason.

Rating a quality product one star because you can't organize it is indeed silly.

That doesn't affect how they're used on the game table.

It absolutely affects how they're used. Being able to find a pawn is pretty much a prerequisite for using the pawn in the first place.

Rating a quality product one star because you can't organize it is indeed silly.

That doesn't affect how they're used on the game table.

Maybe they're not rating it based on how it's used at the table.

Logistic considerations such as this are important to me, irrespective of "how they're used at the table". I'll review things based on my subjective criteria, you use yours. People are being calm and constructive in their reviews and saying what their issue is. That's the system working as it's supposed to.

You are declaring that people who rate things differently than you do are silly or ridiculous. That's uncalled for and against the forum rules, quite frankly.

Yep, we should let competing reviews speak for themselves. The readers can decide. We don't need to come on to the forums to argue that reviews we don't agree with must be wrong. [Note: I don't have this product and haven't reviewed it, so I'm neutral!]

So, wait, there's no identifying information of any kind on the pawns? Not even the usual number and set identifier that every other pawn set has had? Why not? What line of thought led to this decision?

I agree with Terminalmancer -- this is a disaster. I have a lot of the pawn sets; Bestiary Boxes 1 through 5, NPC Codex, Inner Sea Codex, Monster Codex, Summon Monster, PFS, Wrath of the Righteous, Shattered Star. I like pawns.

I mainly use them as a GM. It's nice to have a variety of character art as a GM. But, what I do is go through my various binders and collect the pawns I need for a scenario. Those go into a craft box, separated into compartments by encounter.

Later, when I'm back home, I sort pawns back into their original binders, so that I can find them next time I need them.

Without any kind of identifying or even organizing information on the pawns, it will make these pawns much harder to use in this system. There are just way too many at this point to rely on memory, or looking at everything. So, OK, perhaps "the unnumbered set" can just be one thing, and I won't have any way of sorting them into the binder, and that will be the one set that I have to look through without any guidance whatsover as to which page of the binder I want to look on. That's annoying... but if another set comes out with the same issue, then I will no longer be able to sort things back.

Many of us do not use pawn sets in isolation. We have LOTS of pawns. Being able to maintain some kind of organization is crucial. If we can't do that, then it becomes prohibitive to actually find the pawns with the right art for what we want to do. If we're not using pawns with the right art, we may as well just use glass beads or similar. (Or minis of something that's the right size but doesn't look anything like what the creature actually is.)

I'm very sad to hear that a pawn set has been released without information on the pawns needed for maintaining organization. I strongly urge Paizo never do to this again. I was excited about this pawn set, but I probably won't buy it given this problem.

Presumably it's a result of not being tied to one, specific book but rather including characters from all over the place. As such, I doubt it's going to become the new normal. I'll be interested to hear the background story though.

(Is there any hope of a reprint with identifying information added? This sounded like a very good pawn set until this latest news.)

This is kinda why I wished the reviews talked about the art, which is to me the only reason I would get the pawns, where did the art come from? Does the specific art have names attached throughout Paizo products? Or is at all unnamed pieces?

If the latter we would have probably ended up with things like Male Elf (1), Male Elf (2), Female Dwarf (1), Female Dwarf (2), etc. Which if it's the case I can see why they didn't bother labeling it since that doesn't seem as helpful to me and wouldn't really be useful in a preview (and since it's blank it means you could label it yourself in the case of a PC or custom NPC, so I view that at least as a plus). Can't really comment beyond that since, again, I don't know what art is in the box.

I'm tempted to buy the pdf come July 26 just so I can hunt down all the art and label it since that's what seems to be the only thing perceived wrong with the product.

"Human wizard in black robe on P. 25 of [book]" wouldn't be that useful I think though...

The labels aren't needed just for finding out what's in the set; they're also needed on the physical pawns for managing them, and storing them back where they go after they've been used in a session. I have literally more than a thousand pawns now.

Presumably it's a result of not being tied to one, specific book but rather including characters from all over the place. As such, I doubt it's going to become the new normal. I'll be interested to hear the background story though.

That hasn't stopped them from labeling the Pathfinder Society set or the adventure path sets. Even the Inner Sea Box had characters from all over the place.

If the latter we would have probably ended up with things like Male Elf (1), Male Elf (2), Female Dwarf (1), Female Dwarf (2), etc. Which if it's the case I can see why they didn't bother labeling it since that doesn't seem as helpful to me

This would have suited me.

I would have even liked H&V1, H&V2, etcetera over unlabelled ones (though your method would be far better, imo).

Steve Geddes wrote:

Presumably it's a result of not being tied to one, specific book but rather including characters from all over the place. As such, I doubt it's going to become the new normal. I'll be interested to hear the background story though.

That hasn't stopped them from labeling the Pathfinder Society set or the adventure path sets. Even the Inner Sea Box had characters from all over the place.

Yeah, I shouldn't have said "result". "Related to" may have been better.

Hopefully a paizonian will pop in at some point and shed some light. There's probably a reason (I wonder if the upcoming traps/dressings set will be the same?

The number and set name is crucial. Up to now, every pawn set has had that. (Bestiary Box doesn't have set name, as it was first; fortunately, Paizo recognized the need for set identifiers on pawns as they published more. So, when I see a pawn with just a number, I know it goes in the Bestiary Box binder.)

Yeah if I were buying Pawns or Minis I would be interested in how they look, not if they're labeled. While labels are useful for quick categorization and for using them with published material it's rather moot since these aren't associated with a module or AP to my knowledge.

Ah! I imagine the bestiaries and codexes aren't exactly your thing then, either? :)

I primarily have a usability concern, not an art concern. This is not exactly how everyone else is going to review it, and that's okay--I was expecting that my review would be one review among... if not many, then several, eventually. But anything that makes me say "I will not buy another set like this" is worthy of a 1-star review, no? Because to Paizo, that's fundamentally what it's about--will I buy it or not?

Here's a quick story about how we actually use these suckers. Maybe it will help illustrate why this was enough of a problem for me to write a review.

We paint our own miniatures, and I won't say we're spectacular at it. However, if we want something pretty or impressive or whatever, we'll paint a miniature instead. Pawns, on the other hand, are a very small image printed on a flat cardboard sheet with a white background.

To us, the advantages of pawns is that they're easy to find and we can usually find one that's close enough to what we're looking for that it doesn't cause a ton of cognitive dissonance for the players. I need the players to be able to tell the difference between two pawns. And in order for that to happen, the pawns have to make it to the table. Doesn't matter how pretty they are; these won't make it to the table. They break just about every part of our existing process. :)

Your mileage, as always, may vary.

Terminalmancer wrote:

If you are going to suggest ways to possibly make use of the pawns, specifics would be helpful, though. When some of us complain that Paizo has removed all information that we could use to easily sort the pawns, saying that we could use "other" criteria is not as helpful as pointing out some specific criteria we could be using to sort with. Since there's no text associated with any of the new pawns, I'm not sure what that would be--but if you have a good idea I may very well adopt it!

I haven't seen the pawns yet, but sorting them by gender would be a start. Perhaps sort by race? Sort by class (roughly; heavily armed guys might be a category, for example).

It's not a bad thought. The problem is when you start running into stuff like the member of the Pathfinder Society Decemvirate that I'm pretty sure is in here. I suppose it's probably human and probably male, but I might not always come to that conclusion. (Text is so much easier and less subjective!)

They should post at least some preview of this set, I have all previous sets but I shall not buy something totally unknown.

We appreciate your feedback. We will ensure that future sets have labels.

We appreciate your feedback. We will ensure that future sets have labels.

My binders and spreadsheet thank you! (And I do, too.) The response is very much appreciated, too.

We appreciate your feedback. We will ensure that future sets have labels.

Thanks, Vic. Greatly appreciated.

We appreciate your feedback. We will ensure that future sets have labels.

Excellent, thank you.

I know Paizo really appreciates reviews. There's no reason to say I can review the pawns and you cannot. If you have or will get a set of them, write a review!

No worries, I already planned to get the collection and review it. Getting different reviews is not only helpful for Paizo but also for other customers.

If you are going to suggest ways to possibly make use of the pawns, specifics would be helpful, though. When some of us complain that Paizo has removed all information that we could use to easily sort the pawns, saying that we could use "other" criteria is not as helpful as pointing out some specific criteria we could be using to sort with. Since there's no text associated with any of the new pawns, I'm not sure what that would be--but if you have a good idea I may very well adopt it!

Personally I use only race and gender to sort PC / NPC pawns.

Race: Half-orcs and half-elves are simply added to their orc / elf parents, that saves me from staring at tiny ears for hours respective from analyzing the green hue of the skin. If I can't figure out the race, there is a special pile for such pawns. Sometimes you might want to have an NPC where the race is a mystery - so the pile can be useful. But it's actually rare for a pawn to end up there.

Gender: This one is usually clear, just elves can sometimes give you a headache. In doubt I'd simply assume it's male, since I need slightly more male pawns for both players and NPCs. Alternatively you could go for a separate 'ambiguous gender' pile for this race - or throw it on the general 'ambiguous race' pile.

Alternative: You can also take a pen and add both a name and number you find fitting. Or let your players do it, if they enjoy it.

Thank you Vic! That's good news.

Removed a series of posts. Let's not refer to mental illness/disorders as a means to dismiss other folks' concerns. Thanks.

Alternative: You can also take a pen and add both a name and number you find fitting. Or let your players do it, if they enjoy it.

For organizational purposes, this would be prohibitive to do to every set.

Given that H&V is the only set that will be lacking labels, I may do this for this one set, if I end up getting it.

Thank you Vic! Also I think this might just be a one off or something.

Worst comes to worse, I'll find a new place for this set. I am interested though!

We appreciate your feedback. We will ensure that future sets have labels.

Thanks Vic! Just so you know, you and Paizo both are rock stars, and I really appreciate how over the years y'all have been enormously responsive to customer feedback.

*agrees with Duiker* Best website feedback this side of the Pacific.

I want PC pawns just like they had in the beginner box. You know one pawn for every race, gender and class combination. That was great. Right now I spend a lot of time flipping through my pawns (NPC and IS mostly) to pull out suggestion for my players to pick from. Be great to be like, ok female, gnome, sorceress, here you go. I was thinking that this would be it but sounds like it is not quite there.

I am sure I am wrong but there is like 22 PC races or so. And 27 classes? So that would be about what 1,188 pawns. Be about 3 boxes or so I guess without large and huge pawns. So they can maybe just start with the core races. That be about 378 pawns right. Can call it the PC Codex or something. And if it sells good can follow up with more races. Oh and can have one of the new base colors included instead of black. That would be neat. Anyways I am sure my count is way off but you get the idea. Expand the PC pawns from the beginner box, name them just like you did there and give them an ID number like all the other boxes.

What do you guys think.

I just use the NPC codex pawns for that. Granted, the selection is limited to only a few race/class combos, but I can get close enough to maintain my suspension of disbelief, cardboard on a plastic stand not withstanding. Keep in mind, however, race/class isn't the only variable... weapon, too. It gets mind-boggling quickly.

Of course, something like this would certainly beat buying a new Hero Forge character every time you start a new campaign or play a different character.

I just use the NPC codex pawns for that. Granted, the selection is limited to only a few race/class combos,

Yea that is what i want what is missing. This hypothetical set needs to be a complete set but i would not mind if they reused the art from the NPC codex, if they want. Just want ever gender,class,race combo in the end.

As for weapon, armor and what not. I agree you have to draw that line at some point. And what you use can change from time to time and i don't expect someone to get a new pawn. So i am not to worried about that.

And to be honest, i don't really look at the PC pawns in terms of art once you get into a campaign. When you pick it out I am like yea that look cool it fits and then never really give it a second thought.

Lastly not to beat a dead hours. But to find a PC useing the NPC is hard. First i flip through the book looking at the pictures. Find what looks like what i want, then look up it name in my spread sheet to get its number, then find its pawn in the tray. And the IS is just blinding flipping through it. A pawn with the name Female Gnome sorceress would be easy to find.

I don't seem to have the trouble organizing my pawns that so many on this thread do. I keep it simple. My NPC Codex box is in rows. The first row is for shorties: gnomes and halflings. If I need a gnome, that's where I go. The next row is monstrous half races like half orcs or tieflings and other odds and ends. Next are dwarves, then elves and finally humans. The last row consists of large pawns arranged from good to bad if that makes sense.

All of my other boxes are similarly organized. All I have to do is flip through it like a comic box until I spot what I need and I'm ready to go. If your organization is such that you have to consult ten sheets to know where your pawns are, you might want to rethink it a bit.

For some things, yes. Most of my pawns are still in boxes (though slowly but surely, I'm getting to them all). I have Bestiary 1-4, NPC Codex, Monster Codex, plus a few AP collections. They're all scattered around in various zip-lock baggies right now for applicable campaigns we have running (nearly a dozen start and stop affairs). Once I get to organizing, I'll have a similar strategy, though organized a bit more by creature type, e.g., undead, dragons, etc. It won't be hard to put these in with things that match named pawns with a similar theme. I'm more concerned about what this set consists of, and names, any names, would help.

I picked up the Heroes and Villains set, and I LOVE the artwork. But I also hear what everyone else is saying about not being able to sort and index them. So, I started putting together a spreadsheet of the pawns in the set and cross referencing the artwork back to original source material. I'm far from complete in this task, and if you have comments or suggestions on which source these items were culled from I would be happy to incorporate it.

I've kept the sheets in the order in which they were packaged, so I numbered the pages 1-8. Each sheet is sorted into numbered rows and lettered columns. I've tried to use the title of the character from the source material as best as I could, but in the absence of any identifying name or generic title I've added a descriptive phrase based on the surrounding text or the image itself.

Here's what I've been able to pull together so far.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1z8uhFe6sq9zjLnozKb9G8ozJ7e91vw-rGrr zTbvcrvM/edit?usp=sharing

Further comments and sources are appreciated!

Thank you!

Hi Marzuq... I'm unable to access the link you provided. Did you take the file down?
(I copied the second line to make sure it was included. I'm still getting the message "Sorry, the file you have requested does not exist.")

Hi Marzuq... I'm unable to access the link you provided. Did you take the file down?

(I copied the second line to make sure it was included. I'm still getting the message "Sorry, the file you have requested does not exist.")

Try this.

For some reason the webpage tends to add spaces to URLs unless they're tagged as such...remove the extra space and it works fine. :)

Ahhhh, yes! Thank you bugleyman. That works wonderfully :-).

Thanks for putting this together Marzuq!

Yes thank you Bulgey and Marzuq for this! :)

As a player I am glad that there are no labels for these pawns. If I use them for my PC, is better for me to not see the label. We printed are own custom pawns for PC, they are without labels too.

As a GM, yes, it could be a little annoying, but it is not the end of the world. There are a worse problems than this.

I don't seem to have the trouble organizing my pawns that so many on this thread do. I keep it simple. My NPC Codex box is in rows. The first row is for shorties: gnomes and halflings. If I need a gnome, that's where I go. The next row is monstrous half races like half orcs or tieflings and other odds and ends. Next are dwarves, then elves and finally humans. The last row consists of large pawns arranged from good to bad if that makes sense.

All of my other boxes are similarly organized. All I have to do is flip through it like a comic box until I spot what I need and I'm ready to go. If your organization is such that you have to consult ten sheets to know where your pawns are, you might want to rethink it a bit.

Ok, so, you've just GMed a season (or, even more, a con with several sessions, including an encounter-heavy Special). You have a whole bunch of pawns to put back in their storage areas. Suppose that more than one set has no labels. You're looking at a pawn. What box or binder do you open to find a spot for it?

Before that con, you see a given monster listed. You aren't sure if you have a pawn for it. You could open and look at every box. Or, *if* pawns are labeled, you can do a quick search of all your text files to lean that (say) the Shattered Star pawn set has the pawn you need. What's more, thanks to the number, you can turn right to the right page in your binder to find it.

Paging through to find what you want may not seem like such a task... Until you have *6* Bestiary boxes, two or three full size boxes of npc-style pawns, and several smaller sets. Add to that the need to find a whole bunch of pawns for GMing at GenCon, and you HAVE to be organized if you want to be able to use the best pawns without a prohibitive about of prep time. A form of indexing had long been recognized in many contexts as being a great aid to organization.

I like having tags on pawns, not for any organizational reasons (which tin is Mummy's Mask in again?) it's just nice knowing who they are, even if the players use them (if anything it'll get the players curious about who they are).

Just my two cents (please don't take them, i might need them for groceries because I bought Starfinder).