Over on EN World, Clark Peterson mentioned that Necromancer Games is going to make a new Adventure Path for 4th edition.
Considering the recent partnership, is Paizo publishing this?
Wouldn't this thread be better suited in the Necromancer section of the boards over the Pathfinder section?
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
We will be distributing Necromancer's roleplaying products.
This is not a product I have discussed with Clark, and I can think of a few obvious reasons why we would want to keep the Adventure Path focus on Pathfinder.
Clark likes to announce things before all of the information comes in or before he has discussed them with me. It is part of his charm.
--Erik
Clark likes to announce things before all of the information comes in or before he has discussed them with me. It is part of his charm.
LOL!!!!!
Ah, Clark - you gotta love him.
edited. better judgment prevailed.
Bummer...
|
For those of you who do not haunt the Necro boards, too: The Iron Tower Series of Interrelated Adventures is an idea Necromancer Games is toying with. The first adventure will be a free intro to 4e in the tradition of The Wizard's Amulet (highly recommended by the way).
Personally I hope they do it!
Necro isnt really set up to do Adventure Paths in a monthly format. The Iron Tower series is something that I conceptualized some time ago but lost steam as our then print partner WW wanted a narrower and narrower product schedule.
In any event, our 4E freebie--Winter's Tomb--will be sort of a lead in to the series of adventures. Of course, it will be its own stand alone too.
By the way, I certainly havent "announced" that we are doing it. I am thinking about it and I would like to do it but it is hardly an announced product. The only announced products so far are Winter's Tomb--a pdf freebie at 4E launch, Tome of Horrors 4th Edition and Tegel Manor.
Dont tell Erik I am announcing things. It gets him all nervous. :)
Clark
Necro isnt really set up to do Adventure Paths in a monthly format. The Iron Tower series is something that I conceptualized some time ago but lost steam as our then print partner WW wanted a narrower and narrower product schedule.
In any event, our 4E freebie--Winter's Tomb--will be sort of a lead in to the series of adventures. Of course, it will be its own stand alone too.
By the way, I certainly havent "announced" that we are doing it. I am thinking about it and I would like to do it but it is hardly an announced product. The only announced products so far are Winter's Tomb--a pdf freebie at 4E launch, Tome of Horrors 4th Edition and Tegel Manor.
Dont tell Erik I am announcing things. It gets him all nervous. :)
Clark
Well if this was the product that had you stoked and you wanted to write, go for it.
The World needs more of your adventure writing.
Boy, that's nice of you to say. I will say I am totally amped up to write Winter's Tomb. I have it mostly written. It sounds like 4E is going to incorporate some rules for things I already wanted to do. I had some real dynamic settings planned for encounters--shifting floors, cave ins, combats that jump from floating ice block to floating ice block (not in the initial adventure), etc. Cinematic type stuff. The first encounter in the adventure starts post-cave in with the good guys and bad guys dropped into a cave and dipsersed around the room. I cant wait to see what mechanics 4E might offer to handle these things.
Clark
Hey - you've lost your Orcus username.
You're a mere mortal now - what gives?!!?!
It was changed for purposes of the RPG Superstar competition. I go back to "Orcus" after that.
Clark
OK - so whats the scoop on this?
|
Boy, that's nice of you to say. I will say I am totally amped up to write Winter's Tomb. I have it mostly written. It sounds like 4E is going to incorporate some rules for things I already wanted to do. I had some real dynamic settings planned for encounters--shifting floors, cave ins, combats that jump from floating ice block to floating ice block (not in the initial adventure), etc. Cinematic type stuff. The first encounter in the adventure starts post-cave in with the good guys and bad guys dropped into a cave and dipsersed around the room. I cant wait to see what mechanics 4E might offer to handle these things.
Clark
Hmm, wouldn't that be: 4th edition rules, 4th edition feel?
Nothing wrong with this, I just want to know if Necromancer will shift its Focus from the famous "1st edition feel"?
We are still waiting to see just how Wizards will let us 3rd party publishers support 4E. But I have a design team together for Iron Tower and I am ready to rock.
My plan is to create a campaign that is the giants/drow of 4E. That is my goal.
Clark
I was a little worried for Paizo when I saw this over at ENWorld. Shot in the foot came to mind, or at least friendly fire.
I've always been fine with 4e. I was awaiting its release and was going to switch as soon as Paizo published a module.
When PRPG was announced all discussion of switching or not switching to 4e was moot for me. I play Paizo adventures. I trust, by experience, I'm going to have fun playing them. If PRPG is the way to get Paizo goodness, so be it. (And it's not bad at all! Love the direction "turn undead" is taking, CMB, etc. Hopefully levels 13 and up will be fixed too ;) )
The point being, like me, many will follow the adventure but if there is Paizo magic for 4e then we'll most likely go 4e. And I'd wager that wouldn't be good for Pathfinder Chronicles and PRPG bottom line. Unless I'm crazy and I belong to a disproportionate minority.
The problem here is that not many people know Paizo and Necromancer are two separate companies. Saying "Adventure Path" and "Paizo" in the same sentence will sell stuff; people of my disposition, but with less information on the relationship between companies, are not going to go PRPG because they'll play the new "4e AP from Paizo"... Friendly fire.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
The problem here is that not many people know Paizo and Necromancer are two separate companies. Saying "Adventure Path" and "Paizo" in the same sentence will sell stuff; people of my disposition, but with less information on the relationship between companies, are not going to go PRPG because they'll play the new "4e AP from Paizo"... Friendly fire.
We intend to ensure that the products that come out of the Necromancer partnership feel like Necromancer products. Nothing's been designed, but I'd expect to see an obvious Necromancer logo on the front, and a smallish Paizo logo on the back. These will be Clark's babies—we'll be more like doting godparents.
Dear Clark,
I am in a desperate need of your products. Basically, Pazio has chosen to go the Pathfinder RPG way. One implication of this is that they are unlikely to produce any adventure path for 4th edition (how could they if all their writers are involved with Pathfinder?).
This leaves a huge gap to fill. Who else is going to give me the means to take my party of adventurer from level 1 to level 20....
Hence, I hope you do not think too long and come to the right conclusion.
Dear Clark,
I am in a desperate need of your products. Basically, Pazio has chosen to go the Pathfinder RPG way. One implication of this is that they are unlikely to produce any adventure path for 4th edition (how could they if all their writers are involved with Pathfinder?).
This leaves a huge gap to fill. Who else is going to give me the means to take my party of adventurer from level 1 to level 20....
Hence, I hope you do not think too long and come to the right conclusion.
Don't you mean to level 30?
Don't you mean to level 30?
Heh. The path just got longer. :)
So Clark...do you have a backup plan if the GSL ends up being the screwjob for 3rd parties that some of us grognards believe it will be?
--Guru Grognard
Yeah, if the GSL doesn't allow adventures, it might as well not exist. :)
Yeah, if the GSL doesn't allow adventures, it might as well not exist. :)
My prediction: the GSL will only allow the publishing of adventures (not sourcebooks) AND it will require the paying of some kind of fee or royalty to even do that.
Just you watch and see.
Guys, the GSL/OGL/whateveritwillbe wont be a screw job. Trust me. Scott and Linae and the people at Wizards are good people and they support open gaming. There is no need for a back up plan.
This is the same kind of paranoia that ran rampant with 3E too ("they'll never finalize the OGL, they will steal everything that the third party publishers do and republish it and drive them out of business"! same paranoia, different edition).
Guys, the GSL/OGL/whateveritwillbe wont be a screw job. Trust me. Scott and Linae and the people at Wizards are good people and they support open gaming. There is no need for a back up plan.
This is the same kind of paranoia that ran rampant with 3E too ("they'll never finalize the OGL, they will steal everything that the third party publishers do and republish it and drive them out of business"! same paranoia, different edition).
It's not WotC I'm really worried about - it's Hasbro.
Your still coming up Clark and not Orcus (but we all know you're still evil).
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
It's not WotC I'm really worried about - it's Hasbro.Guys, the GSL/OGL/whateveritwillbe wont be a screw job. Trust me. Scott and Linae and the people at Wizards are good people and they support open gaming. There is no need for a back up plan.
(protoss voice) You think as I do (/protoss voice)
As I've been packing to move and put thigns in storage, I've been re-reading some of my necromancer stuff. Doom of Listenshire is still one of my favourites.
|
|
Guys, the GSL/OGL/whateveritwillbe wont be a screw job. Trust me. Scott and Linae and the people at Wizards are good people and they support open gaming. There is no need for a back up plan.
I really, really, really hope you are right. (About the GSL - I'm sure you are right about Scott and Linae!)
3rd party support is very important to me (not even WotC can keep pace with my book buying addiction on their own). I worry that I'm very much in the minority on this, so I could understand if it was not important for WotC.
Anyway, I'd love to see a Necromancer adventure path.