I missed it if it was said before. Will the non-Pathfinder modules share the same online options as the Pathfinder books? Something as simple as being able to get digital, non-marked players' versions of the maps or downloadable handouts and images makes miles of difference in my games.
Sounds reasonable. Just know that player versions of the maps is waaaaay at the top of my wish list.
|
Suggestion:
Periodically updated Campaign Setting "book" online.
As new modules and Pathfinder issues are released, descriptions of new regions, organizations, important NPCs, religions, etc. could be added, creating a compiled flavor text Campaign Setting.
You could even do a bestiary, with the new/adapted monster's CR and a brief bit of flavor text.
Obviously you don't want to give away what others are paying for, but some general descriptions and flavor text compiled in one location as the setting builds would be very nice.
I'm sure the idea of a setting wiki that people can subscribe to has been batted around in Paizo's office.
|
|
I was thinking more along the lines of something that Paizo would update (I know you guys are busy, but...) on a somewhat regular basis.
Let's say, for example, that a new module introduces information from a previously undetailed part of the campaign setting. I read a preview of the module, and I decide that it isn't something that I want to run. However, my campaign(s) is(are) running in the new setting. It would be nice to be able to get some of the information on the newly detailed part of the setting without having to purchase a module I'm not going to use.
I fully intend to run the APs from Pathfinder, and possibly some of the modules. But, if I like the setting, I (and likely many others) may decide to run my own adventures in the new setting as well. Something like this would make it easier to run large scale campaigns. When the players ask "Well, what is the kingdom of 'such-and-such' like?", it would be nice not to have to say, "Uh, I didn't get that module."
A wiki might be good for the portion of the setting that is being put aside for developement by players, but I think for the portions that are being developed by Paizo through Pathfinder/modules it would be safer (no chance for accidental spoilers) and less cluttered (no "this is what happened in my campaign") if Paizo did the updates.
Paizo has to make money, to stay in business, to pay employees, to make product, to make money...
You understand where I'm going with all this?
|
Perhaps a limited-access wiki that's managed by a few volunteers, so that the Paizo guys can keep toiling away (18 hours a day, mind you) to give us the incredible product we've come to expect.
(To be honest, I don't know squat about how wikis even work, so maybe by it's nature a wiki can't be limited-access.)
That way, you avoid "this happened in my campaign", while not requiring a staffer to handle the actual job.
Of course, doing that could cut into Paizo's margin. I dunno.