What form would you like these books to take? Would you be interested in subscribing to such a line, provided the books cost somewhere around $35 a pop?
More world info, epic, monsters, options, items/gear.
titles/ideas would you like to see us explore?
I would like to see more of the world fleshed out. Would really like Psionics converted.
We're all worried about rules bloat. What is your opinion of new classes and races?
Races and Classes are great as long as there not "forced". Balanced needed roles are fine but don't make 10 to fill space when you only really need 5 of them.
Are you as tired of prestige classes as I am?
Death to Prestige classes! I'm really liking the concept of SWSE's Talent trees to customize your chosen class. It allows you to stand out even in a room full of your chosen class. It really does remove the need for prestige classes.
|
I'd like to see psionics, along with the different flavor of psi. I don't mean specific rules for manifesting, but rather such things as the use of crystal, special material crystals, psiskins, and unique culture. Example: in my group we added a bit of tibetan culture, and a few lower level psiskins.
Epic play would be great, but I don't think it needs to be right away.
New races and variants on existing races are something I would definitely like to see. New classes only if they fill a new niche or accomplish an existing role in a unique manner. No more "battle mages", those can be multiclassed/prestiged easily. Wild mage or shadowmage are good fits.
On prestige classes, I'm tired of endless variations of the same concept or great ideas with poor execution. Looking at you "Ghostwalker". A prestige class should be there for a reason other than just to be printed, such as focused abilities for specialists (dagger-fighter or priest of dream), or for organizations that do not fill the standard mold.
That all said, regardless of specific rules, have fun designing and we will all doubtlessly have fun playing. ;)
|
The current plan is to release between 2-3 hardcover rulebooks per year, including additional Pathfinder Bestiaries.
I'll happily buy 2-3 books per year. Please keep the number at 2-4, tops, because while I am, fortunately, in a position to afford more books, I don't want bloat and garbage to flow into this new system that I'm so excited about. Please don't WotC me (yes, 'To WotC' is now an official verb; please don't ask me to give its synonyms on a family-friendly forum, though).
What form would you like these books to take? Would you be interested in subscribing to such a line, provided the books cost somewhere around $35 a pop?
Yes, I'll subscribe right now, looking forward to the books and PDFs.
What titles/ideas would you like to see us explore?
Psionics and alternative campaign settings. By alternative settings I don't mean minor variations to the standard medieval/dark ages sword & sorcery; rather, Vernesque settings, post-apocalyptic fantasy, etc. done in intriguing new ways
We're all worried about rules bloat. What is your opinion of new classes and races?
Additional classes and races are, far too often, pure fluff. Unless a class brings an entirely new experience to the game, please focus your immensely talented attention elsewhere
Are you as tired of prestige classes as I am?
Yes. 'Prestige' should come via compelling new content at a 'normal' class's higher levels, feats, skills, and in-game rep, not through new classes.
I really appreciate what you guys have done with 3rd edition, and part of that is the de-emphasising of things like prestige classes.
If you keep the system fairly free of power creep and pro-munchkin architecture in general, I'll be a solid convert. That's a promise! :)
Universally great classes (and not too many of them) + solid multiclassing = win.
So, what do I want to see? A fantastic bestiary, but that's already a given. A kickass book of planes. Epic rules done right - and here, as elsewhere, I think a light touch is the way to go.
Less is more, especially in the face of conventional 'wisdom' about this. Could be it will net you less cash... I am absolutely not convinced that's the case anyway, BUT, regardless, you'll earn more respect and trust from your customer base. Well, I think so.
|
|
Psionics and alternative campaign settings. By alternative settings I don't mean minor variations to the standard medieval/dark ages sword & sorcery; rather, Vernesque settings, post-apocalyptic fantasy, etc. done in intriguing new ways
That I greatly agree with. I would love to see some Jules Verne-style, and some post-apocalypse fantasy by Paizo.
|
|
I like the idea of a splat book designed around a single core class, with perhaps variant options for the core classes.
What I don't want is an endless series of books that constantly try to be better the the last book that came out. So many of the splat books at the end of 3.5 were so powerful and broken that i have wound up outright banning large portions of them in my games.
As for PrC I would prefer to see a much smaller selection that are based around regions and groups in the Pathfinder world. You might make a larger chunk of them have some specific requirments other than just a list of feats and skills required. Eg to join a secret society certain things must have been discovered in a roleplaying context.
Once again I think that towards the end of 3.5 the PrCs were just a means to multiclass the weirdest options thay could find..
In the end I think I want to see more focus and background detail and a motto of quality rather than a glut of choice.
|
Definitly more monsters revisited books, would love to see fewer prestige classes, wouldn't mind seeing books adding more deapth to the base races with SOME feats and maybe 1-2 GOOD PRCs but I'm not really as big a customer as I'd like to be.
(darn kids and their need to eat ;p)
As long as you guys continue to treat us gamers with the respect you have shown thus far and not make the mistake of ignoring our voices I will continue to support what you've done with any purchases I can afford to make.(WoTC's dissolution of my favorite mags was my last straw with them)
P.S. Maybe one good Dagger fighter PrC could be done...all the attempts I've seen so far have sucked!!
I'd like to see topics that may not be covered all that well. Such as guilds of all types. I liked the concept of organizations and rules around those, but expand this further.
Owning a business (taverns, magic shops, etc), building and maintaining larger properties, such as keeps and castles.
Mass scale combat for larger all out wars. Vehicle combat, such as chariots, and "other" types.
Lets see some new things not just rehashes of material already out there.
Segallion
|
Campaign settings would definitely be a big draw for me if they were unique and somewhat different from previous settings available.
I like the suggestion of a post apocalyptic fantasy setting. The Desolation game for Ubiquity is pretty nice but it’s straight out holocaust and pretty bleak. I’d rather see something along the lines of Thundar the Barbarian. Perhaps an Eberron style fantasy world which has collapsed for one reason or another and the characters are descendants of the major races that may have caused the destruction. Their enemies might not only be monsters but other race factions who hold them responsible for the destruction caused to the world.
Another possibility is technology versus magic, similar to DragonStar but more directly opposing each other. The campaign book could present information on playing both sides of the war.
Beyond monster books I’d have to say I’d rather see new base classes than prestige. I do like the idea of turning epic into a variant of prestige that would create new rules for playing beyond 20th. Though to be honest I’ve haven’t seen a game go that long in a very long time. I know there are players with characters like it, but they really aren’t the norm.
New race books that introduce playable races from the monsters but designed for actual play. The monster race should be retooled to account for the playable faction that PCs would represent so that it’s balanced on level with regular races but at the same time players of that race won’t bemoan that they aren’t as powerful. Perhaps present alternative rules from the start to allow other the base races something to off set them. So break all non-basic races down to the level of the basic but then grant something to the basic races to account for the power difference. So you could have the basic races get extra feats or skills at certain levels while nonstandard races get their unique race abilities. It would be somewhat like how humans already get bonus feats and skills points for not having any racial ability in standard 3.5 only the rulebook would bring all races into line if you play with variant races. Hope I’m making sense. Just don’t want to see you turn monsters into classes like WotC did; I hated that aspect of 3.5.
|
|
I'd love to see these books sooner or later:
Cosmology. in the most extended way possible: The way the world/space/planes are structured, the laws of the Pathfinder universe. And please, GO NUTS. I love strange realms that defy imagination, but maybe that's just me.
Religion: Gods, their followers and their traditions, enemies of the faith. Angels, demons, devils, and even ghosts if appliable.
Times: A guide to play with different flavor with the same system: from victorian ages to bronze age, to set an example.
Prestige classes: As pointed out before, they are OK as long as they aren't there to fill a few pages with ideas that you would not use for an NPC, even less your PC. I love prestige classes when they are well done and are done in an way that not only it's possible to play them, but that you'd like to play them. I liked Paizo's take on the prestige classes, so I hope that you keep them coming as they have been so far.
I'd love to see a book that goes all the way to detailing how to make every monster in the Pathfinder Bestiary a playable character. I don't care if some cases are ridiculous, just do the best you can and let me decide if I want to play a particular monster just for the humor value. For example, a roper could be a lot of fun...
Low intelligence should not be an obstacle. Just imagine that the character is somehow "awakened", like a talking animal. Other obstacles have similar workarounds.
A section with racial (monstrous) levels would be nice.
Something cheap and easy I would buy if it was both.
A pathfinder DM screen with some nice artwork.
|
I like good Prestige Classes. Bad ones are a waste of paper, but that's sort of what 'bad' means in this context.
To make a controversial point, if there aren't a reasonable number of additional PrCs, it's not D&D 3.x. That doesn't mean that every supplement should merely be a vehicle for PrCs and feats -- I don't see how it's possible to release as many PrCs as WotC did and not have many suck, or release as many feats as WotC did and not have a number of them synergise to break the game -- but PrCs and feats are the crunch that interfaces with setting crunch. They make the game belong in the setting. Of course, given that Paizo plan to support 3.5 and PFRPG with the same setting material, the task of producing them is perhaps going to be a little harder than it would otherwise have been. C'est la vie, as French speakers reportedly say (but I have never actually heard one say, on reflection).
I liked the 3.5e Rules Compendium, and I think I'd like a Pathfinder version that doubles as a tribute to the best Pathfinder art. The alphabetized rule per page format is very handy, and cramming it with great art would just make it a joy to use.
|
|
I liked the 3.5e Rules Compendium, and I think I'd like a Pathfinder version that doubles as a tribute to the best Pathfinder art. The alphabetized rule per page format is very handy, and cramming it with great art would just make it a joy to use.
Aha, another opportunity for me to say that I don't care about game art.
A really detailed equipment quidebook that not only tells you about the different items but also covers bargaining sales, crafting items, creating magic items, fencing stolen items, etc. Basically every aspect of economy surrounding equipment and treasure.
I agree, this would be a lot more interesting to me than a magic item compendium, especially with some creative game design to offer more rewards for investing in the Craft skill. As an arms and equipment reference, it should probably be a superset of what is in the core Pathfinder book, so you don't have to switch books when looking up equipment. The economy surrounding magic items could be a lot of fun.
I wouldn´t mind new core classes as well. For example, I have a definite fondness for the Swashbuckler, because I think it is a core concept, which sadly didn´t get enough play from WotC beyond Complete Warrior.
In case you do new core classes, please do not make the mistake WotC did of barely supporting them in future supplements. If you make them, treat them as seriously as the eleven core classes we got in the main book.
As for PrCs, I like them and support having a good number of them. But the same thing applies to them as to new core classes... they shouldn´t be "fire and forget", but rather be supported in future supplements.
As for more Bestiaries, I think they are sorely needed. I have been playing a mish-mash of standard D&D and the Pathfinder rules, and the upgrades for the classes plus feats every second level make me mewl with frustration when it comes to encounter design. My players rip through 4-5 levels higher challenge-rating encounters as if they were rice paper.
Monsters need to be rebalanced according to the new rules and, IMO, standard tactics should be given for each monster.
A Magic Item book, like the Magic Item Compendium would be much appreciated, too. We don´t know yet what your final solution to the Christmas Tree effect has been ( I hope not combining all enhancers into one slot, which screws fighters but does not affect casters ), but more interesting and varied magic items are a high priority for me.
I'd like to see some adventure books: I enjoyed Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk, and I'd love to buy a similar high-quality hardback adventure featuring legendary names in Golarion and crammed with color maps. I would also love to buy a hardback compilation of Rise of the Runelords redone for Pathfinder RPG (similar to how the Shackled City was updated for 3.5e). However, I don't think these fit the proposed rulebook subscription; and I'm worried that said proposal might diminish the chances of seeing books like these.
I'm ambivalent about a rulebook subscription. Like other posters in this thread, I'd be much more interested if pdfs were thrown in. Since the items are higher priced than the AP and come less frequently, you might need to offer some other incentive, like a goody with each item after the first in an uninterrupted subscription.
I love the fact that Paizo cares about what its customers want. But I also trust you guys, so don't be afraid to take a chance if one of your contributors has a good idea. I worry that with a rulebook subscription model, you might be less likely to take a chance on an untried rulebook idea for fear of losing subscribers.
|
|
I'm ambivalent about a rulebook subscription. Like other posters in this thread, I'd be much more interested if pdfs were thrown in. Since the items are higher priced than the AP and come less frequently, you might need to offer some other incentive, like a goody with each item after the first in an uninterrupted subscription.
Every other sub has pdfs thrown in; did someone say that this wouldn't?
Every other sub has pdfs thrown in; did someone say that this wouldn't?
No, I just saw others express hopes that they would, and inferred that free pdfs were not a given. I didn't notice that all subs include free pdfs. That's good to know!
Can you comment on my concern that the subscription model may limit the type of content we are likely to see getting hardcover treatment? And why people wouldn't just cancel and resubscribe as rulebooks are announced, depending on what interests them? Thanks!
|
|
Can you comment on my concern that the subscription model may limit the type of content we are likely to see getting hardcover treatment? And why people wouldn't just cancel and resubscribe as rulebooks are announced, depending on what interests them? Thanks!
It's a good question, actually. The subscription model is good for Paizo because it means guaranteed sales and it's good for us because we get free pdfs thrown in, but it has to limit what they feel they can put out as part of a sub (not that that has stopped them from putting the godamned AP maps in the Chronicles subscription, which would otherwise be a good source of wider setting material). If they release stuff outside a subscription, there'll be complaints about the lack of a free pdf, but if they chuck in a free pdf to a non-subscription product then they have the problems with the games stores that were discussed in other threads.
|
|
Miniatures that feature EVERY creature from the Bestiary as well as the Icons (which we already have). Either pre-painted or unpainted would be fine.
I can't second that enough. Although I admit, I'd much prefer pre-painted miniatures. That would just rule. Hordes of cleaver-wielding goblins just make me happy. Throw in one of those wicked-looking, three-fingered trolls....
What I'd like to see in up coming books are the following (or Pathfinder equivelents):
1) new core classes, including: Psion, Psychic Warrior, Swashbuckler, Samurai, Ninja, Warlock, Warlord, Wu Jen, Wild Mage.
2) new player races, including: aasimar, tiefling, drow, duergar, derro, dragonborn, goliath, orog.
3) new prestige classes, but only if they're good, tied to specific organizations, and have a purpose.
4) cosmology (complete world/planar orientation)
5) world setting (major cities, NPCs, kingdoms/empires, geography, organizations, gods, churches, enemies, etc.)
Breadth is good, but depth is better, because it allows up players and DMs to take the info and create our own campaigns around the information that is given to us. Too much stuff, like with what WotC did, just chokes up our own creativity.
I'd like to throw another side question in here...
If we were to do an Epic Level book or a Psionics book... would you still be interested in said book if what we did with them kept the basic flavor of the ideas but did something entirely different with the crunch side of things?
Say, an Epic level book that didn't assume 21st level was the start, but went with an entirely new way to track character advancement (at the simplest, starting over at level 1 or something, but a level 1 epic character would be more powerful than a 20th level standard character).
Say, a Psionics book that presented rules for psionics that ditched the point-based system and did psionics in a method that dovetailed easier and more gracefully into the core rules (The goal here being to ease concerns that adding psionics to an existing campaign tends to break that campaign.)
Basically: would folk still be interested in books like these if we took pains to stay true to the expected flavor of the book but rebuilt the rules drastically? Or would that be a deal-breaker?
So long as an epic characters can be imported into PFRPG and visa versa, then I'd be fine with it.
With regards Psionics, while I like the crunch I'm not precious about it, and in fact would be just as happy with something that could integrate the GR Psychic's Handbook in terms of use. I'd like the option of these powers on a sliding scale- from an optional "gift" for characters, to full fledged character Classes.
I would like to see a rules light or basic version of the game created. Something that is easy to play that is similar to OD&D.Microlite Pathfinder?
Quick play rules would be nice or maybe a starter box. Would be nice to help introduce people to the game.
Hear hear!
A starter pack with copies of Pathfinder Lite would be fantastic- the sheer size of the core books is what turns off so many newbies from even trying gaming out!A heavy cardboard, high end GM screen, possibly from the same stock as the flip mats
Oh and a copy of the Golarion Map sold separately and rolled up would get my cash too.
|
|
Hi,
I'd like to see prestige classes to be what they were originally supposed to be - an in character advancement with a roleplaying aspect to it, i.e. linked to an organisation, someone who taught you something extra so you gain those extra abilities at the cost of notmaintaining your current training (i.e. your class).
Is that really "what they were originally supposed to be"? I like PrCs associated with societies or organisations a lot, but the idea that that's what they have to be I find enormously limiting (and would, therefore, make the game less enjoyable for me and my groups). Likewise a one-PrC limit; if the game's balanced off that assumption, I won't play. I prefer Jason's approach of beefing core classes to make them more attractive to artificial limitations on taking PrCs (and also, now, multiclassing amongst core classes comes with no XP penalty, to match the situation with taking PrCs; if the XP penalty is in play, players are forced to take PrCs if they multiclass much, so I am glad that it's gone).
Regarding the other stuff, I hope they take few cues from Second Edition (to me, Second Edition was like realising after years and years that people were getting bored with tapioca and ingeniously replacing it with... blancmange). Talk about unlovely bloat; Second Edition was the beginning of it (although arguably you could see it in late 1e; the Greyhawk Adventures book didn't seem very well thought-out and Unearthed Arcana was broken in at least parts).
Is that really "what they were originally supposed to be"? I like PrCs associated with societies or organisations a lot, but the idea that that's what they have to be I find enormously limiting.
You are exactly correct.
RP options are one of the many things that PrCs bring to the game. But that is far from all they offer.There should certainly be a swashbuckling "3 muskateers" PClass in a game where this group fits. And that class should have all kinds of RP and social aspects to it. However, I'd be quite let down if that PClass existence somehow automatically excluded the duelist PClass for any character (PC or NPC) who was just simply good at that kind of combat with no RP obligations whatsoever.
As to multiple classes, that comes down to good DMs and being in a group with people who want the same play style you do. Even if you don't have options for the group of people you play with, arbitrary restictions disallowing other people to play the way they want, will not end up makign your own experience more rewarding.
Stick with more options.
|
|
I buy a lot of minis, but I won't buy pre-paints other than really huge ones (like the four Dragons WotC released, and even then I'd have preferred them unpainted). The paintjobs on pre-paints are wretched (not that I'm some expert painter, but man, they suck).
Well, I think unpainted minis are already being done. And I don't paint minis, so the pre-painted minis are ideal for me. They might be "wretched" for some, but they're fine by me. Hell, they're better than some of the paint jobs I've seen on some minis....
|
|
On the xp penalty, it's not there in PFRPG. It wasn't there for PrCs in 3.5 (although they omitted it from the rules and stuck it in the FAQ) but it was there for core classes.
As for min-maxing, that's a DM issue. In my experience, spellcasters didn't do it through multiclassing (they might take one PrC but didn't have to do anything odd to own the mundanes if that was their aim) and anything that the non-casters could do to stay relevant was generally fair enough. However, I think that multiclassing -- weakening the idea that classes are somehow a job for which qualifications are required, like civil engineer so it'd be hard to be a concert cellist too -- is one of the great achievements of 3e (arguably at least one edition too late, as just about every other major game was already more flexible). In this and in other ways, it means that 3e is prone to min-maxing; that's obviously a problem if not everyone wants to do that. But that's a group dynamic and a DM issue; I don't see how 3.x can be changed so that such behaviour is ruled out without it not being like 3.x, because the system inevitably invites it, if that's what people want to do. The game just isn't, and can't be, guaranteed to be balanced, or seem sensible, whatever the players do.
|
|
If prestige classes were retooled so that they were more in line with how the bard was in 1st ed, namely you had to jump through a lot of hoops to get the big pay off, I think they wouldn't be such a problem. However most of the time you got a lot of nice features for little work with 3.5 PrC. If Pathfinder cuts back on the number of PrCs and ups the restrictions to obtain them so that not only do they make valid RP reasons for playing them, but also reward the player for the effort to obtain them; then I don't see the reason to exlcude them.
I'm glad that Paizo is limiting the number of PrCs to begin with an hope they really work on making them fit in both mechanically and RP wise. However if a PrC would be better fitting as a base class I think they should be taken that way first; by this I mean swashbuckler or pirate class before a PrC of the same name.
|
|
If prestige classes were retooled so that they were more in line with how the bard was in 1st ed, namely you had to jump through a lot of hoops to get the big pay off, I think they wouldn't be such a problem. However most of the time you got a lot of nice features for little work with 3.5 PrC. If Pathfinder cuts back on the number of PrCs and ups the restrictions to obtain them so that not only do they make valid RP reasons for playing them, but also reward the player for the effort to obtain them; then I don't see the reason to exlcude them.
I'm glad that Paizo is limiting the number of PrCs to begin with an hope they really work on making them fit in both mechanically and RP wise. However if a PrC would be better fitting as a base class I think they should be taken that way first; by this I mean swashbuckler or pirate class before a PrC of the same name.
I am pretty sure that increasing the power of the base classes is in part to bring them into line with some of the stronger PrCs (although not ones that are way too strong). I personally don't want a return to the first-edition bard; after alignment tongues (did anyone use them?), I think that the 1e bard was about the worst thing in the entire game. Although it was just wasted paper, really, as I never saw anyone that actually took it.
If Pathfinder were to take 3.x back in the direction of being more class-bound -- which 4e rather does -- then I genuinely think that's a horrible mistake. Breaking those particular shackles is one of the best things about 3.x over earlier editions. Fortunately (for me!), I am pretty sure that James Jacobs or one of the other Paizo staff has indicated that relative ease* of multiclassing is pretty much going to stay.
Of course, as PrCs are a DM option, there's nothing to stop individual DMs erecting hoops if they want to, either by further associating the classes with organisations or by adding in other constraints. I don't have a problem with that, I just don't want it in the core rules, because that's a DM preference.
*Modulo meeting the requirements to get into the class.
|
|
I buy a lot of minis, but I won't buy pre-paints other than really huge ones (like the four Dragons WotC released, and even then I'd have preferred them unpainted). The paintjobs on pre-paints are wretched (not that I'm some expert painter, but man, they suck).Well, I think unpainted minis are already being done. And I don't paint minis, so the pre-painted minis are ideal for me. They might be "wretched" for some, but they're fine by me. Hell, they're better than some of the paint jobs I've seen on some minis....
As far as the prepainted minis being "wretched", that's a matter of opinion. Me? I am not into making "display pieces". I just go in and game. This is why "prepainted" would work for me (whether metal or plastic).
I can now hear complaints of "Well if we had preainted minis (especially plastic ones) then they would have to be sold in assorted multi-pakcs where you have to buy several boxes before you get the one that you want!". Well, says who? I am sure that the prepainted minis (wheter metal or plastic) can be sold differently than how WotC sold them. Actually I didn't mind the "randomness" of WotC's Minis. I only had an issue with the fact that WotC didn't keep any particular series going long enough.Perhaps someone can use a price-point for individual minis based on size and rarity. That way a horde of goblins would be cheap but one Storm Giant would be more costly. However, the cost should be that your average gamer can easily afford most anything ($100.00 for a Red Dragon? Get real!)
|
|
The reason I say that they're wretched is that I can't believe that anyone with remotely normal coordination couldn't do significantly better. I understand that some people don't have the time (also an issue for me) or don't enjoy painting, etc, and that's fair enough, but the quality of the painting? It's terrible by the standard of comparison with what just about anyone else could do.
|
|
What titles/ideas would you like to see us explore?
We're all worried about rules bloat. What is your opinion of new classes and races?
Are you as tired of prestige classes as I am?
Discuss.
I'm late to this discussion, so I'll begin at the beginning, so to speak.
I'd like to see something similar to how 3.5 was done, only with the Paizo flair I'm used to. I'd like Race-specific books; I'd like Class-specific books. I'd like books that are directed at DMs, as well as others that are mostly for PCs. I like the themed books too, like monster types like "Libris Mortis" or "Drow of the Underdark", or like the genre-types like the "Heroes of Horror" types for those who play the darker style.
But since you're talking about only doing a few a year, I think concentrating on the class and/or race books would probably fit the bill best. I don't have a problem with rules bloat - to be honest, to me, one of the great things about 3.5 is that there is so much variety and choice. You can't get that without a ton of source material.
On the other hand, what makes Pathfinder so exciting is the backwards compatability - so a lot of the existing 3.5 stuff will port easily enough over to PF with just a few modifications to equate the challenge and such. I don't HAVE to have a PF Drow book as long as I have the WotC one - but if you made a PF Drow book, I'd most likely buy it. :)
As for your last Q, I'm actually not tired of Prestige Classes. Like I said with the rules bloat Q, I love the variety and freedom of choice. If I think a certain PrC sucks, I don't ever have to play it. But it's neat to have them all. Again though, the fact that WotC did so many of them for 3.5 means that if you don't want to create any new ones, that won't upset me either. I'll just make a few adjustments to them so they match up with PF power-wise, and use the existing stuff.
One final thing I'll add - I'm not a big fan of psionics at all. I know a lot of people are, and more power to them. It just doesn't fit into my little perceived notions of fantasy roleplaying. So if you do a lot of that, I won't buy it. But that doesn't mean other's won't, and if you can profit with them, then I hope you do make them.
Hope that makes as much sense to you as it does to me - I'm kind of making it up as I go here! :)
|
|
Actually what would be awesome and refreshing would be to pull a WotC and hold a new campaign design contest. That's something I'd like to see again. Another possibility would be a community of designers campaign where you design a world and run it kinda like Thieves World where each designer would be responsible for certain contributions and developing it over the long hall. They could contribute as much or as little as they wanted. So each country could be designed by someone, say country X is designed by Monte Cooke, country Y by Erik Mona, and so on just to give an example.
|
|
The reason I say that they're wretched is that I can't believe that anyone with remotely normal coordination couldn't do significantly better. I understand that some people don't have the time (also an issue for me) or don't enjoy painting, etc, and that's fair enough, but the quality of the painting? It's terrible by the standard of comparison with what just about anyone else could do.
I agree that the paintjobs could have been better. Then again, the workers making them didn't have much motivation to do a good job considering...I'll stop before this gets too politcal.
The more I think about this, the less I really want a PFRPG book that introduces crunch on its own. Perhaps a guide to running campaigns, an epic level book, or what have you, but for the most part, I really don't want dedicated crunch books.
Well, except for monster books. I love monsters.
I'd rather see feats or traits or PrCs or spells or magic items introduced in setting books, or adventures rather than just have a crunch book that does the same thing. For example, while none of the spells introduced in Gods and Magic seemed like some perfect min maxer's dream, they did seem to be well tied into the faith in question.
Rather than see an expanded spellbook, I'd much rather see a book that deals with spells that are common to a given region, so help fill out the flavor of, for example, Garundi magic versus the magic common to the north.
If we get new base classes, I'd rather seem them introduced because the section of Golarion that a given sourcebook or adventure deals with. For example, a Tian Xian book introducing ninjas and samurai.
If you want to produce an OGL shadow based spellcaster, introduce it in a book that deals with Nidal, and if you want a Knight/Cavalier, put it in a book that has to do with Taldor or Mendev.
I know Paizo wants to sell to people that want to continue with 3.5, but that shouldn't make them loose focus of what they have actually had as their strength, i.e. the setting of Golarion and their adventures.
Perhaps after naturally coming up with a few new classes and spells tied to the AP or adventures or sourcebooks, Paizo could put out a compilation book that puts these options together in one place as an update and for those that don't get the setting specific products from Paizo.
I'm just worried that there will be a temptation to adopt WOTC's 3.5 model of putting out a ton of material that exponentially increases the number of crunch driven books, and I've been down that route already.
Are you as tired of prestige classes as I am?
For sure, I am quite wary of an extended series of splat/classbooks. I have 2 problems with them in any RPG system:
1) most of them are really boring to read
2) after a while, PrClasses and class options get repetitive
3) I am unlikely to use much of those in a campaign and I don't really like buying a book to use around 3 pages of info, if that.
4) I would not appreciate future Adventure Paths and other campaign products becoming more dependent on rulesbooks beyond the core rules.
Maybe I am weird, but all of the above killed me as a buyer of 3.5 WotC materials. I would not like to see PF going down that path. Actually, the equilibrium between new materials and a "classic fantasy" feeling is really well-achieved in the present state of the APs, PFC and so. I hope that the shift into PFRP builds on it as opposed to introducing too many changes.
On the other hand, things I would like to see:
1) Background/theme books. Maybe in the vein of the old Dungeoneer's and Wilderness Survival Guides, with more suggestions and optional rules for running and designing adventures in given settings (Underdark, ships and sea, mountain regions, primal forests and jungles). I would not mind seeing a few PrClasses (or better, substitution levels), in the wider context of a themed setting. That would also be an attractive way of including "theme" bestiaries, as opposed to a yearly A-Z "just monsters" book. Mini adventures or sidetrek encounters would round up such a volume nicely.
2) There are two areas (again, a mix of rules and background themes) which seem to be present in the PF range (as per Golarion setting) and also a part of traditional pulp-fantasy, but have not been covered by PFRP rules yet:
- Psionics, as already mentioned
- "Planetology", that is, otherworld fantasy settings (I am thinking of the fascinating Golarion solar system and its obvious pulp fantasy inspirational sources).
3) I can see a PFRP Manual of the Planes.
4) A volume on fantasy warfare rules would be fun. Outside the traditional AP structure, some groups will want to use PF for some scenario involving epic fantasy battles (and not using miniature armies). That would actually fit in a "level range" book, as commented below.
My concern is how much of these hardbacks would overlap with the Pathfinder Chronicles series (and, to a lesser extent, with the Companion). Even if the PF series are Golarion-focuses, I hope that the PFRP hardcovers also have that world as the "default reference" (as in the deity list). Personally I prefer my rulebooks well steeped in a concrete setting (though flexible enough to adapt). I would like to see the ongoing series focuses on geographical and thematic particulars of Golarion, with the hardbacks offering more generic rules and mechanisms (bestiaries, sidetreks, optional rules) for running campaigns.
The idea of a "level range" handbook is pretty nice. Though I love the concept of AP, some areas of the game could do well with optional expansions, like the type of situations 10th-15th lvl parties find themselves in, like dominion rules, cohorts and high level politics-diplomacy. As APs tend to end at around lvl 15, such a book would be useful for gaming groups who want to continue (at least as a side game) with their well-seasoned party.
All in all, I find the AD&D 1st edition range of hardbacks (and the total volume thereof, as compared to 3.x hardcover hysteria and to the 2nd ed insanity of optional rules in growing accumulation) a better model: periodical bestiaries (like MM, FF, MM2) and themed volumes (OA, DSG, WSG, MoP).
If you guys avoid much of the splat and crunch and keep the hardcovers an inspiring and entertaining read (that is, something I want to flip through and read in bed for fun, instead of just browsing in .pdf format for a given feat or spell), I would easily support 2-3 volumes a year.
Just don't grow too much in that direction, please. IMO your strong point are high-quality adventures and campaign setting books. Keep the focus right.