Well, I'm running a 4th edition campaign set in a future Golarion, certain things have occurred and while some aspects of the world have remained the same a significant amount has been changed to fit my personal vision of a 4E version of Golarion. Chances are in some twisted alternate dimension where Paizo jumped on 4th edition and converted their 3.5 Golarion to said RPG system and used the setting as I have some of the changes would ignite nerd-rage across the message boards akin to what occurred with the Forgotten Realms transition. :P
I, however, digress.
I am curious, there are certain elements of 3.5 that don't transfer well to 4e and certain elements of 4e that I'm having trouble finding a Golarion counterpart for. One example are the gods. In the first gen 4e core books each god has a Divine Power feat associated with them. Any advice on who might get what feat or has anyone written up anything custom to the gods of Golarion? If so I'd love to see a thread or website that includes it.
Should I not get anything here I suppose I could get off my lazy butt and page through the PH to find various equivalents.... :P
I believe Scott Betss and his Tales of the Rusty Dragon Blog converted the Channel Divinity feats for Galorian.
Well, I'm running a 4th edition campaign set in a future Golarion, certain things have occurred and while some aspects of the world have remained the same a significant amount has been changed to fit my personal vision of a 4E version of Golarion. Chances are in some twisted alternate dimension where Paizo jumped on 4th edition and converted their 3.5 Golarion to said RPG system and used the setting as I have some of the changes would ignite nerd-rage across the message boards akin to what occurred with the Forgotten Realms transition. :P
You must see the parallels - instead of making the game work with the world, you did the same as wizards did and changed the setting.
Apparently, Paizo is not alone with the opinion that 4e can't work for Golarion. :P
Oh, and words like "nerd-rage" won't get you any friends, you know. It sounds condescending.
I think "nerd-rage" is pretty funny.
I am converting my Curse of Crimson Throne campaign over to 4E mid-way through Escape from Old Korvosa. We'll see how it goes.
I believe Scott Betss and his Tales of the Rusty Dragon Blog converted the Channel Divinity feats for Galorian.
While you can find Golarion Channel Divinity powers and their associated divinity feats on Tales from the Rusty Dragon, they were not created by me. The powers were made by NChance, and he provided me with them and gave permission for them to be published as part of the project. He deserves all of the credit for those feats and powers.
Well, I'm running a 4th edition campaign set in a future Golarion, certain things have occurred and while some aspects of the world have remained the same a significant amount has been changed to fit my personal vision of a 4E version of Golarion. Chances are in some twisted alternate dimension where Paizo jumped on 4th edition and converted their 3.5 Golarion to said RPG system and used the setting as I have some of the changes would ignite nerd-rage across the message boards akin to what occurred with the Forgotten Realms transition. :P
You must see the parallels - instead of making the game work with the world, you did the same as wizards did and changed the setting.
Apparently, Paizo is not alone with the opinion that 4e can't work for Golarion. :P
Paizo doesn't think that.
So just to be perfectly clear, it's not the fact that the rules in 4th edition are different or that there's a "decency clause" in the GSL that won't let us "tell our stories the way we want to" that, honestly, was the main element that convinced us at Paizo that we were better off with 3.5/Pathfinder RPG. Rules are in large part irrelevant to story, and the fact that many are playing Pathifnder adventures with 4th edition rules is proof of that. Likewise, while we DO skew toward more mature content, we don't have to—we operated under the same "decency clause" with Dragon and Dungeon, after all, and were able to do pretty much everything we wanted to do there.
He goes on to explain that the real issues with moving to 4th Edition centered around the GSL and being dependent on another company's work to survive.
.../...
Paizo doesn't think that.
.../...
He goes on to explain that the real issues with moving to 4th Edition centered around the GSL and being dependent on another company's work to survive.
/agreed
Let's try to be objective and fair.
No partisan statements, it is not the topic of this thread.
|
Apparently, Paizo is not alone with the opinion that 4e can't work for Golarion. :P
Huh? I know some of the editors mention 4th is not how they play, but I've never came across posts the system can't work with Golarion.
Link, please.
EDIT: Scott Bett posted James response. However, KaeYoss, I'd be more than willing to read those posts you're basing your argument on.
|
Just to add to this, I've run Rise of the Runelords in 4th edition, and am currently just starting up Legacy of Fire in 4th. The mechanics do not cause any particular difficulty at all. We find Golarion and the mechanics to be a fine fit.
For those who want the difficulties, though, I can give you those too...
Races: 4th added new races, and their PHB2 makes it look like they will continue the trend. Wizards' points of light setting is just fine for regularly introducing new races, but that's not really so in Golarion. At the moment, we're restricting it to 3.5 races, plus those in the original 4th edition PHB (for which we've got good fluff invention.)
Size: In many cases, the rooms in adventure paths are not quite large enough, since 4th edition is built with the idea of group-on-group combat. Converting the encounters is not that bad (but see below), and my usual response is to simply double the printed dimensions where that seems necessary. Sometimes we come up with areas that are a little too large, but we've mostly agreed to ignore that.
Encounters: One thing that does come up frequently in encounters is that the published module has an encounter against a group of 1 type of monster. Again, 4th edition's bias is towards mixed groups. So I need to come up with pairings (or trios) that still make sense in the adventure. I'll add that 4th edition has a greater bias towards the fantastic - we don't see too many normal animals, and those are a staple of low-level 3rd edition play. But if you're doing a conversion, you've got to get used to making up or reskinning monsters anyway.
Traps: This is honestly the hardest part of conversions for me. The role of the trap has changed drastically from 3rd to 4th edition. Most traps in the adventure paths are intended as an encounter unto themselves. In 4th, they're expected to be one component of an encounter, effectively replacing a monster or two. But the layout and adventure only rarely make it possible to retrofit those. It's usually one of the harder parts of the conversion for me.
Anyway, that's a quick overview. Converting them is a reasonable amount of work, so I'd only recommend it as an experiment, or if you actually prefer the 4th edition mechanics (I'm in that latter category.) But the feel of the world - that's not a problem.
Drew Garrett
Thanks for sharing that, Agarrett.
And it makes complete sense.
A campaign setting is mainly fluff, about kingdoms, sites, people, factions, religion and other specific information.
All this is not really system relevant.
Therefore, any setting could be played with any system, as long it's of the same genre. There might be a little work to convert some things, but nothing major.
You can play on Toril with Pathfinder rules, on Golarion with D&D4, or on Eberron with True20.
What matters is not the system, not the rules, but how you play, how you are consistent with the atmosphere of the setting.
Just to add to this, I've run Rise of the Runelords in 4th edition, and am currently just starting up Legacy of Fire in 4th. The mechanics do not cause any particular difficulty at all. We find Golarion and the mechanics to be a fine fit.
For those who want the difficulties, though, I can give you those too...
Races: 4th added new races, and their PHB2 makes it look like they will continue the trend. Wizards' points of light setting is just fine for regularly introducing new races, but that's not really so in Golarion. At the moment, we're restricting it to 3.5 races, plus those in the original 4th edition PHB (for which we've got good fluff invention.)
Size: In many cases, the rooms in adventure paths are not quite large enough, since 4th edition is built with the idea of group-on-group combat. Converting the encounters is not that bad (but see below), and my usual response is to simply double the printed dimensions where that seems necessary. Sometimes we come up with areas that are a little too large, but we've mostly agreed to ignore that.
Encounters: One thing that does come up frequently in encounters is that the published module has an encounter against a group of 1 type of monster. Again, 4th edition's bias is towards mixed groups. So I need to come up with pairings (or trios) that still make sense in the adventure. I'll add that 4th edition has a greater bias towards the fantastic - we don't see too many normal animals, and those are a staple of low-level 3rd edition play. But if you're doing a conversion, you've got to get used to making up or reskinning monsters anyway.
Traps: This is honestly the hardest part of conversions for me. The role of the trap has changed drastically from 3rd to 4th edition. Most traps in the adventure paths are intended as an encounter unto themselves. In 4th, they're expected to be one component of an encounter, effectively replacing a monster or two. But the layout and adventure only rarely make it possible to retrofit those. It's usually one of...
This is a pretty solid summary of how conversion work goes. It's daunting at first, but becomes easier as you get the hang of the process. I'm publishing the RotR conversion for the community so that the bar for entry is a little less heinous.
I can see how some of the magic system changes could have social effects that would require some significant adjustment well beyond statblocks. For example, persistent creations are largely gone, though that may change as more rituals are published.
That said, I don't see how Golarion and 4E are inherently incompatible. If nothing else, Golarion definitely strikes me as something of a PoL setting (though I'm most familiar with Varisia).
Over at Pinnacle, there are fan-grown rules using Savage Worlds for Eberron.
Interesting.
If i was running Eberron, i would use Mask of the Red Death. Or Etherscope. Or both.
I can see how some of the magic system changes could have social effects that would require some significant adjustment (well beyond statblocks; for the most part persistent creations are gone).
That said, I don't see how Golarion and 4E are inherently incompatible. If nothing else, Golarion definitely strikes me as something of a PoL setting (though I'm most familiar with Varisia).
Yeah, Golarion is definitely a pretty firm Points of Light setting. Sandpoint is a tiny point of light surrounded by the darkness of: the Catacombs of Wrath, Thistletop, Foxglove Manor, and any number of adventure locations mentioned briefly in the setting but not fleshed out in a published adventure.
Apparently, Paizo is not alone with the opinion that 4e can't work for Golarion. :P
Huh? I know some of the editors mention 4th is not how they play, but I've never came across posts the system can't work with Golarion.
Link, please.
EDIT: Scott Bett posted James response. However, KaeYoss, I'd be more than willing to read those posts you're basing your argument on.
He might be basing it on THIS and other comments made by Erik Mona and James Jacobs earlier on in the Pathfinder announcement days.
Still searching for some more of thier inital comments here and on ENworld...
|
|
Apparently, Paizo is not alone with the opinion that 4e can't work for Golarion. :P
Huh? I know some of the editors mention 4th is not how they play, but I've never came across posts the system can't work with Golarion.
Link, please.
EDIT: Scott Bett posted James response. However, KaeYoss, I'd be more than willing to read those posts you're basing your argument on.
He might be basing it on THIS and other comments made by Erik Mona and James Jacobs earlier on in the Pathfinder announcement days.
Still searching for some more of thier inital comments here and on ENworld...
Coolio. Thanks, ShinHakkaider.
Apparently, Paizo is not alone with the opinion that 4e can't work for Golarion. :P
Huh? I know some of the editors mention 4th is not how they play, but I've never came across posts the system can't work with Golarion.
Link, please.
EDIT: Scott Bett posted James response. However, KaeYoss, I'd be more than willing to read those posts you're basing your argument on.
He might be basing it on THIS and other comments made by Erik Mona and James Jacobs earlier on in the Pathfinder announcement days.
Still searching for some more of thier inital comments here and on ENworld...
I do remember reading those comments back when they were made, but they are appear to be contradicting what Jacobs said recently. I'd prefer to think that some of the Paizo people have since come to understand that there isn't anything about the system itself that would prevent them from telling the stories they want to tell.
Yeah, Golarion is definitely a pretty firm Points of Light setting. Sandpoint is a tiny point of light surrounded by the darkness of: the Catacombs of Wrath, Thistletop, Foxglove Manor, and any number of adventure locations mentioned briefly in the setting but not fleshed out in a published adventure.I can see how some of the magic system changes could have social effects that would require some significant adjustment (well beyond statblocks; for the most part persistent creations are gone).
That said, I don't see how Golarion and 4E are inherently incompatible. If nothing else, Golarion definitely strikes me as something of a PoL setting (though I'm most familiar with Varisia).
That only really plugs Varisia as a Points of Light type area. From the descriptions in the Campaign Setting, it would seem that Golarion is not a Points of Light setting. It is just that there are parts of it that would fall into that archetype, just like other areas fall into different ones.
Long Post Warning - EDIT: Also, I've been Ninjaed many times over. I took a dinner break during the writing of this post and a lot of activity hit this thread in that time.
a significant amount has been changed to fit my personal vision of a 4E version of Golarion.
I'm running 4e Golarion as pretty close to standard as I can. I hate the old FR, like the new FR, but love Golarion as published.
I am curious, there are certain elements of 3.5 that don't transfer well to 4e and certain elements of 4e that I'm having trouble finding a Golarion counterpart for.
That'll happen. I'm going to get into it more below, but might I suggest that there's a better approach than trying to convert elements from one to another? More below.
One example are the gods. In the first gen 4e core books each god has a Divine Power feat associated with them. Any advice on who might get what feat or has anyone written up anything custom to the gods of Golarion? If so I'd love to see a thread or website that includes it.
This is particularly easy. Just ask what each god is about.
- Asmodeus E(Power, domination, tyranny) = Asmodeus
- Avandra G(trade, luck, change, travel) = Desna
- Bahamut LG(Justice, honor, nobility, protection) = Iomedae, Apsu
- Bane E(War, conquest) = Gorum, Urazra, Zursvaater
- Corellon U(Arcane magic, spring,beauty, the arts) = Shelyn, Nethys, Findeladlara, Yuelral
- Erathis U(Civilization, invention, laws) = Abadar
- Gruumsh CE (Turmoil, destruction) = Rovagug, Dahak, Hadragash
- Ioun U(Knowledge, prophecy, skill) = Nethys, Irori, Sivanah, Yuelral
- Kord U(Storms, strength, battle) = Gorum, Angradd, Chaldira Zuzaristan, Kurgess, Trudd
- Lolth CE(Spiders, shadows, lies) = Gyronna, Lamashtu, Norgorber
- Melora U(Wilderness, sea) = Gozreh, Besmara, Erastil, Hanspur, Ketephys
- Moradin LG(Creation, artisans, family) = Torag, Folgrit, Brigh, Minderhal, Kols, Grundinnar
- Pelor G(Sun, summer, agriculture) = Sarenrae, Erastil
time
- Raven Queen U(Death, fate, winter) = Pharasma, Groetus, Fandarra
- Sehanine U(Trickery, moon, love, autumn) = Calistria, Sivanah, Shelyn
- Tharizdun CE(Annihilation, madness) = Rovagug, Groetus, Lamashtu, Gyronna
- Tiamat E(Wealth, greed, vengeance) = Dahak, Calistria, Dranngvit, Norgorber, Thamir Gixx
- Torog E(Underdark, imprisonment) = Zon-Kuthon, Venkelvore, Magrim, Haggakal, Droskar
- Vecna E(Undeath, secrets) = Norgorber, Urgathoa
- Zehir E(Darkness, poison, serpents) = Ydersius
Remember, it's almost always better to say "yes" to a player than "no." Especially when there's not really a balance issue or any similar factor going on. So if the player can even remotely justify the equivilancy of a PHB god with a Golarion god, let them count as worshiping it for purposes of selecting feats, paragon paths, etc.,. There's just no real reason to say no as they all cost the same single feat, paragon path choice, etc.,.
Also look at the effects of the Channel Divinity feats. For example, The Raven Queen's Blessing. If you knock someone to 0 HP, someone gets healed. Which Golarion gods might grant such a power? Pharasma as the obvious equivilant to the Raven Queen, but why not Gorum, who would reward someone who demonstrated prowess in battle?
Basically if you can in any way by common domains of the gods or an explanation of the effect have it make sense, it's better to say yes than no.
Also remember that there are way, way more dieties and diety like beings in Golarion than in the implied setting of 4e, so there's bound to be some overlap.
Apparently, Paizo is not alone with the opinion that 4e can't work for Golarion. :P
Back to the idea of converting elements from one game to another.
Does anyone remember the text from various RPGs in the past decades that are usually found in a "What is an RPG?" section in the introduction? Usually they'll reference something like kids playing make believe. Cops and Robbers for example. One kid yells "Bang! I shot you" and the other says "No! you missed". RPG rules provide a way of resolving this.
RPG Rules serve the purpose of giving authority/credibility to one person or another's statements about the shared game. A player can declare they attack a monster, point at the dice result and appeal to the authority of the game rules to make their desired effect credible to everyone at the table.
4e can't work for Golarion? Nonsense. Because you only need to reference the rules when the credibility of a statement is in question. Any edition of D&D, Pathfinder, GURPS, whatever can work for Golarion. As long as it can serve to give authority to people's statements about the shared game, it will work.
So instead of converting elements from 3.x/Pathfinder to 4E, it's best to think of them in story terms and ask yourself how you'd resolve/adjudicate/grant credibility using the new system. Don't convert, just represent.
One of 4th edition's strengths is that it is an exception based design that embraces the concept of "design for effect" rather than "design for a framework/formula." The mechanics and the fictional description aren't married anymore. There isn't some humanoid leveling rules for making NPCs. There's not some absolute framework where the monsters and the PCs all follow the same formulas and rules. NPCs don't have levels anymore. They have whatever they need for the effect the DM needs them to have. A local priestess of Serenrae might be able to raise the dead. Is she a high level cleric? Not necessarily. She might have 1 hit point, no combat abilities, and the ability to cast the Raise Dead ritual.
You'll find this approach rampant throughout OD&D, Redbox/BECMI and 1st Edition AD&D. It wanes during 2nd edition AD&D and 3.x heavily embraces the formulaic/framework approach. In this way, 4e is definitely a revival of a traditional/old school approach to D&D.
So instead of trying to figure out some sort of conversion formula or how to transfer the mechanics of 3.5/Pathfinder specific stuff in Golarion, just represent it using 4e mechanics. And only ever define as much as you need to in order to give the statements about the given element the authority and credibility they need to be accepted by everyone as part of the shared game.
Creative Director
|
I love 3.5's rules. I love Pathifnder RPG's rules even more. I'm not fond of 4th edition at all.
Absolutely none of that should matter to anyone who wants to run a Pathfinder AP or product using 4th edition rules; it CAN be done, and relatively easily. One of my best friends is doing so.
So by all means keep posting advice on how to convert the games and adventures here. But please avoid confusing that with trying to second-guess how we at Paizo feel about the games or trying to spark edition wars or confrontations. Those old and tired tactics that make me sad.
Frankly, I'm done trying to justify WHY we chose to go with Pathfinder RPG and not tag along behind 4th edition. We made that choice and there's pretty much no turning back now. So let the "what ifs" and "James contradicted himselfs" lie, and focus on the fun part of it all. Which is playing the game... no matter what system you prefer.
|
Creative Director
|
Coolio. Do you think he'd be willing to post some of his/her stuff here?
Absolutely none of that should matter to anyone who wants to run a Pathfinder AP or product using 4th edition rules; it CAN be done, and relatively easily. One of my best friends is doing so.
Probably not, since he's not really into the messageboard scene and its flammable nature.
My apologies if the term "Nerd Rage" hurt any feelings. I was part of that anger toward WotC for their changes to the realms however I think people here on the paizo boards have thick enough skin to take it with a grain of salt. I do find it a touch disheartening that it took that many posts before someone actually addressed the question at hand.
Thanks to those who stuck with the post.
James Jacobs, I, for one, am very glad you and Paizo chose to stick with 3.5 and make the Pathfinder RPG. My 4e Pathfinder game is more of an experiment on a PbP site and is the only 4e campaign I'm running at this time.
I do find it a touch disheartening that it took that many posts before someone actually addressed the question at hand.
I might be missing something, but didn't Ratchet's reply (the very first reply of the thread) pretty much answer your primary question about Channel Divinity feats in Golarion?
I know this board can get sidetracked easily, but at least in this one we made sure to get the actual questions in the OP addressed before flying off on tangents.
Well, I have to say I had something of a paradigm shift as far as my opinion of D&D 4E recently, alright... paradigm shift might be a bit extreme but it changed my take on 4e from a general dismissive loathing to an acceptance. Once upon a time I was on the EnWorld boards and got involved in a thread about how 3rd edition had lost the 'feel' of D&D with its hot-off-the-assembly-line magic items and the like. Someone made an argument that I didn't realize until the recent D&D gameday for the PH2 release.
I decided, on something of a whim, to give the game day a shot. My face to face group was on hiatus due to some drama and I was aching for some dice rolling. I arrived a little late and got assigned the Dragonborn Paladin seeing as the group I was in had all the other characters taken. The scenario had just gotten underway. We went through it and while we laughed at some of the more ridiculous rules (DC 20 acrobatics checks to move through mud puddles... yeah...) but all in all had a good time. It was capped off with a battle against a demon and a devil and I managed to finish off the BBEG with a nat 20 on the final attack. After that it was just mopping up the little badguys. All in all we had fun, which is what gaming is about, people sitting around a table rolling dice and having a good time. I still disagree with many aspects of the system but I had a good time, I figure if I can have a good time playing the system perhaps I was just taking things a little too seriously.
A gamer taking things too seriously, now that's something new :P
FROZENWASTES:
Thanks for the advice. I'll take that into consideration. I have a tendency to approach things in a manner that is a little more complicated than it has to be. That list helped greatly by the way.
I do find it a touch disheartening that it took that many posts before someone actually addressed the question at hand.I might be missing something, but didn't Ratchet's reply (the very first reply of the thread) pretty much answer your primary question about Channel Divinity feats in Golarion?
I know this board can get sidetracked easily, but at least in this one we made sure to get the actual questions in the OP addressed before flying off on tangents.
You are right indeed. Might serve me better to read things a little more clearly before making comments like that.
FROZENWASTES:
Thanks for the advice. I'll take that into consideration. I have a tendency to approach things in a manner that is a little more complicated than it has to be. That list helped greatly by the way.
I found making the list really helpful myself. I just got Pathfinder Chronicles: Gods & Magic and it was good to pull it out and really familiarize myself with the cosmology of Golarion. Something I was planning on doing anyway.
As for approaching things in a way that is more complicated than it has to be, I've been doing that for decades when it comes to RPGs. It took me a long time to come to the place where I felt everyone agreeing produced a result with more credibility than one produced by the rules/formulas/dice mechanics of the game.
The core of RPG rules are task and conflict resolution. Until someone has a stake in the results of an attempted task or a conflict, the system doesn't need to enter into it.
I'm going to continue to make things like the Deity table and eventually assemble a pretty complete 4e Golarion document. I wouldn't call it a conversion article, but more of a representation advice article. I don't think there will be a single bit of new mechanical crunch involved as 4e already has everything you need to play in Golarion.
So if you have any "how would you handle..." questions, definitely post them. Otherwise I'll likely only ever think of things that come up in my game and miss a lot of things that might be inspirational. I'm no expert, but I am enthusiastic about Golarion.
So far as I can tell making a God in 4E really is extremely easy. I run a cleric of the Raven Queen and mechanically speaking a God is just a channelled divinity feat that references the fluff text of the God in question.
Hence one simply needs to work out the background fluff on the God in question and then design a Channelled Divinity Feat for each of them. Really should not be that hard to do for Golorian or any setting really. Things may well get a little more complex when Divine Power hits and the Gods presumably get an added layer of complexity but for the moment it strikes me as dead easy. Heck you can work with your player on what the feat ought to be and simply not bother with the feats for Gods no one has chosen.
Things may well get a little more complex when Divine Power hits and the Gods presumably get an added layer of complexity
Ohh! Excellent point!
However, I think it'll actually make things simpler than harder. The best thing about 4e is that the fictional description of what's going on and the mechanical effect are pretty much completely separate. So every additional option that Divine Power presents is simply another element waiting to be reflavoured and repurposed.