|
(now if only someone would go revive Ed Bourelle)Have you considered Monte Cook's site Dungeonaday.com? If I understand correctly, Ed Bourelle is doing the maps for that...
Yeah, thanks, I've been onboard over there since day one - I love his maps! I wish Skeletonkey would publish some tiles that could be used for Dungeon a Day.
And since we're talking about it, yes Dungeon a Day is the coolest thing since someone thought "polyhedra could be used to make dice other than the plain ol' 6-sided."
|
(now if only someone would go revive Ed Bourelle)Have you considered Monte Cook's site Dungeonaday.com? If I understand correctly, Ed Bourelle is doing the maps for that...Yeah, thanks, I've been onboard over there since day one - I love his maps! I wish Skeletonkey would publish some tiles that could be used for Dungeon a Day.
You know, I have been wondering the same thing about Ed and Dungeon-a-Day tiles. I wish he would pop in someplace and give some updates on Skeleton Key's state of affairs. I always liked his work.
|
I think he should do separate product lines for Pathfinder and 4E. It seems there are enough customers for both.
I don't have any interest for a product that I have to print out stats separately for it. The Pathfinder specific stuff I would be interested in.
Having played in the 80s, I have to agree there is surely enough customers for both! I played probably a dozen games that all used different mechanics. Now it seems nearly ALL of the games out there are essentially 3.x variants- and 4E.
Sure there is still Vampire, and Shadowrun... anything else out there that's popular that uses its own mechanics?
Sure there is still Vampire, and Shadowrun... anything else out there that's popular that uses its own mechanics?
What about Mutants & Masterminds? Sure it's technically a d20 derivative, but it really is its own system at this point that is only d20 on the surface.
Would the Cortex System (Serenity, BSG) count?
What about the new Warhammer system? Not sure how many are playing it right now...
I think he should do separate product lines for Pathfinder and 4E. It seems there are enough customers for both.
I don't have any interest for a product that I have to print out stats separately for it. The Pathfinder specific stuff I would be interested in.
+1 to this.
|
|
Sure there is still Vampire, and Shadowrun... anything else out there that's popular that uses its own mechanics?What about Mutants & Masterminds? Sure it's technically a d20 derivative, but it really is its own system at this point that is only d20 on the surface.
Would the Cortex System (Serenity, BSG) count?
What about the new Warhammer system? Not sure how many are playing it right now...
Thanks, haven't looked beyond Pathfinder in a while... :)
SERENITY! I LOVE THAT SHOW!
|
|
Back on topic... :)
Really I think the community should be encouraging Goodman to come back to 3.x with Pathfinder. I honestly don't know how well a split system product would do. Regardless the fact that he is wanting to embrace Pathfinder means he should have found a warm welcome to bring back his talent to customers of Pathfinder.
I am disappointed that the first responses were cries of outrage that he now wants to return. Regardless of "revisionist" statements, there should be no reason we don't embrace Goodman games.
Consider him the Prodigal Son... he was lost to us and now he has returned. Rejoice and celebrate more material for Pathfinder.
|
Sure there is still Vampire, and Shadowrun... anything else out there that's popular that uses its own mechanics?What about Mutants & Masterminds? Sure it's technically a d20 derivative, but it really is its own system at this point that is only d20 on the surface.
Would the Cortex System (Serenity, BSG) count?
What about the new Warhammer system? Not sure how many are playing it right now...
Thanks, haven't looked beyond Pathfinder in a while... :)
SERENITY! I LOVE THAT SHOW!
***thread jack***
Not a bad game, the cortex system is a simplified Savage Worlds I think. I never played Savage worlds but I have played the old Dead Lands and the Cortex system shares a basic game design with it. But very simplified version of the rules. The books are a bit pricey but i like the show and the game.|
|
Well, I think Goodman Games could use the same "task", "general plot" and "theme" for both PF and 4th adventures.
Task could be: "PCs investigate why the caravan is overdue since 10 days."
Plot: "Sunken City reappeared after sandstorm. Caravan camped there. Some guards investigated and woke something that slept for a long time. Furthermore, there are raiders stalking the caravan and ready to strike".
Theme could be: "Silk Road flair, mix of western and oriental cultures (and monsters)"
Now we have the same basic structure for both adventures. What might be different are the encounter (e.g. Monsters) and non-encounter challanges (e.g. Traps).
Goodman could use the same Maps and Handouts and Art.
My thinking, and mind you this is a completely non-informed statement so I could be way off, is that gaming products are so low-profit margin items anyway that taking the time and dedicating the resources necessary to creating multiple versions of the same product would result in 0 profit. Now who knows, I could be way off though.
And to clarify my earlier statements, that may have been somewhat harsh, if Goodman Games were to produce pure PF product, I'd strongly consider buying it, but ONLY if it were pure PF.
I don't want a half-a** product I have to convert.
Goodman could use the same Maps and Handouts and Art.
Well, from what I gather, 3.X D&D maps don't necessarily make good 4E D&D maps, presumably because the push/pull powers aren't very interesting unless there's something on the map that makes pushing/pulling useful.
Likewise, I'm not sure that 4E D&D maps would make good 3.X/PFRPG maps. Of course, I'm sure it's possible to make maps (and encounters, etc.) that work well in both systems, but it might be a non-trivial task.
Yeah, thanks, I've been onboard over there since day one - I love his maps! I wish Skeletonkey would publish some tiles that could be used for Dungeon a Day.(now if only someone would go revive Ed Bourelle)Have you considered Monte Cook's site Dungeonaday.com? If I understand correctly, Ed Bourelle is doing the maps for that...
Now that would be cool. I'm a "charter" member over at Dungeonaday myself... I agree with alleynbard that the material is very versatile.
|
|
Well, from what I gather, 3.X D&D maps don't necessarily make good 4E D&D maps, presumably because the push/pull powers aren't very interesting unless there's something on the map that makes pushing/pulling useful.
Likewise, I'm not sure that 4E D&D maps would make good 3.X/PFRPG maps. Of course, I'm sure it's possible to make maps (and encounters, etc.) that work well in both systems, but it might be a non-trivial task.
In 3rd edition the space (room, clearing, cave etc.) used for an encounter tend to be smaller then in 4th edition as encounters tend to be more static than in 4th.
But I don't see any Issue using a bigger space that is suitable for 4th for 3rd/PF.Terrain features like slippery ground, pits etc. are cool and usable in every edition.
So, IMHO, doing a single map for both edition is the least problem.