hells yeah!!!
Yes!!!!
emphatic hells yes!
Yes! Put Styes on the new Campaign Setting's map somewhere! Then use it! Can you imagine an AP with two of the six 96 page adventures set in and around the Styes? That would be both Hot and Schweet! I demand such a thing, right after the Runelords runs it's course.
Styes! Styes!
I deleprechaund it!!!
Creative Director
|
I hate to be the party pooper... but the Styes is the Intellectual Property of Wizards of the Coast, like everything else that's been printed in Dungeon. SO: We can't do anything more with the Styes.
That Said... I'm a HUGE fan of the Styes, and by extension, a fan of Richard Pett's work. Which is why he's going to be writing the second adventure in Rise of the Runelords over in Pathfinder.
And finally, while Dragon and Dugeon are no longer going to be printed, we're still on good terms with WotC. The possibility of doing further licensed D&D products with them is still very much on the table.
I hate to be the party pooper... but the Styes is the Intellectual Property of Wizards of the Coast, like everything else that's been printed in Dungeon. SO: We can't do anything more with the Styes.
Don't distract me with facts! I want Styes!
Don't distract me with facts! I want Styes!
Really? Here is a few more "Stye" fact for you...
A stye (also spelled sty) or hordeolum is an infection of the sebaceous glands at the base of the eyelashes. While they produce no lasting damage, they can be quite painful.
Geesh, who would want THAT!?!?!
(Just kidding)
Sean Mahoney
Don't distract me with facts! I want Styes!Really? Here is a few more "Stye" fact for you...
A stye (also spelled sty) or hordeolum is an infection of the sebaceous glands at the base of the eyelashes. While they produce no lasting damage, they can be quite painful.
Geesh, who would want THAT!?!?!
I've actually had one of those before. Not fun.
I have no doubt, with Rich Pett and James Jacobs continuing to work on Pathfinder, that we will find some new and even more twisted locales in the pages of Pathfinder that will replace and displace the Styes and Scuttlecove in our memories.
How about calling it the Schmyes (wink wink, nudge nudge)?
(wink wink, nudge nudge) is part of the name.
Hello Chums! The Styes thread seems a strangely appropriate place for me to chime in.
I have to say as ever that you people are astounding, the support you give to James, Erik and the guys is fantastic - but totally deserved. They are a pleasure to work for - encouraging, good at listening, open to ideas and when they edit adventures they add a twisted dimension from somewhere to make it extra memorable. And I don't just say that to please them - it's the truth, as anyone who has worked for them will confirm - they are a joy to write for even if they give us sleepless nights demanding ever more twisted ideas...
So for example the Styes - James takes a subtly different twist on the original idea and then lets me get on with it, together we come up with something that is memorable, not just for the words but for the layout, artwork and maps around it. The same I hope can be said for Scuttlecove, Prince of Redhand, the Weavers - and I have to say it comes down to this - when working for someone is a pleasure you go that extra mile, stretch yourself and try that bit harder because you know that the people you work for appreciate it and the people who read it expect it. Combine that with the current strength of writing at Paizo (yes ok even Logue's) and it creates something special. That's what you as loyal readers deserve and will continue to get from the writers. As contributors we also want to see the next generation of Vaughns, Greers, and Hitchcocks coming along because that's how we started ourselves, so its great that Pathfinder will also still have contributions - I just hope there isn't another Logue out there just yet - two lots of enthusiasm like that could cause me misery...
That something special isn't about to change as far as I can see - in fact it'll be strengthened by having more freedom, and I'll give you a new example you'll be seeing soon - the Skinsaw Man is horrible, I mean really really horrible, but I hope memorable not just for being a great baddie surrounded by equally bad baddies who all loathe him and think they are badder, but because he has motives, he has goals and desires - some of which may surprise you - assuming he's a he that is...Skinsaw is about the best thing I've written and is chock full of investigation, horrible murder, terror, ghostly moorlands full of screams and a whole host of nastiness - oh yes and scarecrows, lots and lots of really vile scarecrows - and that's just the first project>)
Now, to the Styes, I still run the Styes camapign and will contuniue to populate it with characters without redemption being manipulated by even more loathesome creatures, hopefully they'll all see the light of day sometime - who knows, but what I can tell you is that other districts have become part of the Styes Campaign - including the fetid Spice Islands and Festival Town, with its horrific secrets - and some really horrible wilderness areas populated by just the sort of fine country folks you'd want to invite home for dinner - these are the places I hope to share with you soon - I promise you that in everywhere and everyone I write about I'll try to pander to your twisted mentalities and write something memorably vile.
Watch this space>)
|
Hello Richard,
thank you for this information.
But how to fit future adventures of yours into Pathfinder?
The way I understand Pathfinder, it will be adventure path exclusive. The quality of your adventures stems from actual game play in your campaign, though. And campaigns usually don't progress at a one adventure per month rate (apart from that each authour is supposed to contribute one adventure to a whole path, isn't he/ she?).
So future *single* adventures of yours (i.e. Styes campagin) would rather fit into Gamemastery modules (i.e. 32 page confines).
So will there be "reservations" in Pathfinder issues for small individual adventures?
After all low level adventures of an adventure path wouldn't take up as much space as climactic boss monster encounters, would they? ;-)
Greetings,
Günther
Good queston (but then you always ask good questions:)) and probably one for James to answer better than me however, my own take on it would be that say Scuttlecove had been created in our next AP I would really like to revisit it - either as part of the Gamemastery series, another AP, in depth article or whatever - whether that comes about or not with future settings would be down to Erik and James and co I guess but knowing how flexible they are I'm sure they'll go where people want them to if they can.
That means in terms of settings I hope to be able to have some freedom in creating many more generic districts like the Styes and if people wanted to go back to them we could. I have quite a few in mind, a bear in mind that the actual Styes campaign has now moved out of the area to somewhere much worse for a while:) I've also been playing about with some pretty horrible areas of countryside that I'd like to write about and I guess the same would hold true with those in that if people like them we'd go back, as well as some monsters we've been working on - some of which are really horrible... I mean horrible...
And that's just me, you should see what Greer is doing - urgh
It's also worth adding, as much as it disgusts me to do so, that Logue and I have something in a Styes mould we've had a play about with, so I guess watch this space...
I hate to be the party pooper... but the Styes is the Intellectual Property of Wizards of the Coast, like everything else that's been printed in Dungeon. SO: We can't do anything more with the Styes.
That Said... I'm a HUGE fan of the Styes, and by extension, a fan of Richard Pett's work. Which is why he's going to be writing the second adventure in Rise of the Runelords over in Pathfinder.
And finally, while Dragon and Dugeon are no longer going to be printed, we're still on good terms with WotC. The possibility of doing further licensed D&D products with them is still very much on the table.
Speaking laws, that sounds like a awfully strange ruling.
The only way their version is true, is IF there was a Dungeon Inc, that you were renting of sorts..While if as I suspect, you were using the Dungeon Brand, they cannot aquire by any means sole property of the content of the magazine... any more than Santa Claus Inc owns coca-cola from coca-cola using santa in their marketing..
The brand can however have aquired co-use rights.. but by no means sole use..
|
|
Good queston (but then you always ask good questions:))
Do I? *lol* Thanks for the flowers anyway. :-) Maybe this is the reason why most people simply ignore my questions (exceptions are proof of the rule...) ;-)
(...) and probably one for James to answer better than me however, my own take on it would be that say Scuttlecove had been created in our next AP I would really like to revisit it - either as part of the Gamemastery series, another AP, in depth article or whatever - whether that comes about or not with future settings would be down to Erik and James and co I guess but knowing how flexible they are I'm sure they'll go where people want them to if they can.
I think the question is how much of Dungeon and Dragon magazines is owned by WotC. Remembering the discussions about whether Dungeon issues could be digitally re-released, I guess, that it is largely depending on the authours' permission - not Paizo's...
That means in terms of settings I hope to be able to have some freedom in creating many more generic districts like the Styes and if people wanted to go back to them we could. I have quite a few in mind, a bear in mind that the actual Styes campaign has now moved out of the area to somewhere much worse for a while:) I've also been playing about with some pretty horrible areas of countryside that I'd like to write about and I guess the same would hold true with those in that if people like them we'd go back, as well as some monsters we've been working on - some of which are really horrible... I mean horrible...
And that's just me, you should see what Greer is doing - urgh
I am definitely looking forward to the next exploration of your setting. You know that I am part of the praising crowd here. ;-)
Greetings,
Günther
|
|
I hate to be the party pooper... but the Styes is the Intellectual Property of Wizards of the Coast, like everything else that's been printed in Dungeon. SO: We can't do anything more with the Styes. (...)Speaking laws, that sounds like a awfully strange ruling.
The only way their version is true, is IF there was a Dungeon Inc, that you were renting of sorts..
While if as I suspect, you were using the Dungeon Brand, they cannot aquire by any means sole property of the content of the magazine... any more than Santa Claus Inc owns coca-cola from coca-cola using santa in their marketing..The brand can however have aquired co-use rights.. but by no means sole use..
I am doubtful, too (see above). But then I didn't have a closer look at the contracts Dungeon authours sign when committing their adventures...
Greetings,
Günther
|
|
Nope. WotC owns everything that's appeared in Dragon and Dungeon. It's been part of the license from the start, and it's in every contract every one of our contributors has to sign before we can pay them.
Hello James,
thank you for the quick reply.
That's really bad news. But then Richard is right, isn't he? Anything sufficiently generic should be able to make its way to Pathfinder... hhmm... even though it would be more aptly called Sitefinder in that case... ;-)
I appreciate very much your prompt and patient answers.
I just start to fear for your health. Does anyone of you guys get some sleep in between?!
Greetings,
Günther
|
CEO
|
I think the question is how much of Dungeon and Dragon magazines is owned by WotC. Remembering the discussions about whether Dungeon issues could be digitally re-released, I guess, that it is largely depending on the authours' permission - not Paizo's...
The answer to this question is pretty much everything. The exceptions to this rule are a) the comics in the magazine and b) the non-D&D fiction in the magazine. Everything else, including all the maps and artwork, is owned by WotC.
-Lisa
ahwell damn.. keep forgetting how you live in that country ruled by lawyers.. thank goodness everyone over here is a engineer, so laws tend to operate more on the principle of laws of physics.
A agreement like that wouldn't hold water in a court, as its a loopsidedly one sided one. Just out right dismissed..
Same reason why many user agreements we are supposed to sign on say programs etc coming across the pond are completely meaningless too. Otoh, a lot of things do apply, regardless of whether they are written down ;)
oh btw.. if everything that has ever appeared in dungeon belongs to them now, lets hope the concept of adventure paths isn't theirs as well..
Do Wizards also own the stuff about Perdido Street Station that appeared in Dragon some months ago?
oh btw.. if everything that has ever appeared in dungeon belongs to them now, lets hope the concept of adventure paths isn't theirs as well..
Nah - those have been done for ages in all sorts of products. An adventure path is simply a series of linked modules. Against the Giants/Descent to the Depths of the Earth was an Adventure Path.
What Paizo has done is create high quality highly focused APs but they did not invent the concept completely in Dungeon. In fact the interesting aspect of APs from the perspective of Dungeon was the idea to actually do such a thing in that magazine. That was the part that had never been tried. Dungeon had never done a long highly focused series of adventures that each played off the last instalment. But conceptually that idea had been done outside of Dungeon on a fairly large number of occasions. Particularly the Dragonlance series of modules.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Do Wizards also own the stuff about Perdido Street Station that appeared in Dragon some months ago?
There are a handful of exceptions to the "Wizards owns everything published in the magazines" statement. Most notably, they don't own non-D&D fiction, and they don't own the comics; those are owned by their creators, for the most part. As for things like Perdido Street Station, Wizards owns the text of the article and the game content, but not the material that the game content is based on.