"wee do nee no steenking..."
|
I prefer to use the Rebuild errata.Maybe, but it comes with the "Insane" and "Anxsty" disadvantages...Is it very bad and wrong that the first thing that was on my mind after reading "Magi" was the supercomputer from Neon Genesis Evangelion ? :)Can I get rules for my fighter having an AT field? :)
We can settle for a progressive knife and a few N2 mines ?
(Now I do feel nerdy ...)
And "Ultimate Magic" is much more than just new spells for black magic, so it's not really an accurate name.
grimoire |grim'wär|
noun
a book of magic spells and invocations.
ORIGIN mid 19th cent.: French, alteration of grammaire ‘grammar.’
As a recall, a number of historical grimoires enumerate the names of Angels and such, who featured prominently in alchemical practice. I think it is a great word for "the book of all magic", but I suppose not everyone shares that opinion. I also happen to think it would "look right" on the shelf next to Bestiary.
Creative Director
|
And "Ultimate Magic" is much more than just new spells for black magic, so it's not really an accurate name.As a recall, a number of historical grimoires enumerate the names of Angels and such, who featured prominently in alchemical practice. I think it is a great word for "the book of all magic", but I suppose not everyone shares that opinion. I also happen to think it would "look right" on the shelf next to Bestiary.grimoire |grim'wär|
noun
a book of magic spells and invocations.
ORIGIN mid 19th cent.: French, alteration of grammaire ‘grammar.’
I agree that the word "grimoire" looks good next to "bestiary." But again, the title has to look right for more than just you and me. If the title doesn't look right to buyers and distributors and the book trade, they won't know what the book is and that can easily translate into low orders and that can easily translate into a book failing at market because no one placed orders.
And again... "Bestiary" = book of monsters, and that's accurate. "Grimoire" = book of spells and invocations (using your definition)" and that's NOT entirely accurate. This book will have a new base class, new magical options for many core classes, new feats, and some other non-spell stuff, in ADDITION to spells, of course.
I'll run the idea by Erik and the rest, but names of books aren't as much up for vote. It's actually pretty unusual for someone outside of Paizo to name a book—and that includes the book authors. We name most every one of the books we publish.
|
And "Ultimate Magic" is much more than just new spells for black magic, so it's not really an accurate name.As a recall, a number of historical grimoires enumerate the names of Angels and such, who featured prominently in alchemical practice. I think it is a great word for "the book of all magic", but I suppose not everyone shares that opinion. I also happen to think it would "look right" on the shelf next to Bestiary.grimoire |grim'wär|
noun
a book of magic spells and invocations.
ORIGIN mid 19th cent.: French, alteration of grammaire ‘grammar.’I agree that the word "grimoire" looks good next to "bestiary." But again, the title has to look right for more than just you and me. If the title doesn't look right to buyers and distributors and the book trade, they won't know what the book is and that can easily translate into low orders and that can easily translate into a book failing at market because no one placed orders.
And again... "Bestiary" = book of monsters, and that's accurate. "Grimoire" = book of spells and invocations (using your definition)" and that's NOT entirely accurate. This book will have a new base class, new magical options for many core classes, new feats, and some other non-spell stuff, in ADDITION to spells, of course.
I'll run the idea by Erik and the rest, but names of books aren't as much up for vote. It's actually pretty unusual for someone outside of Paizo to name a book—and that includes the book authors. We name most every one of the books we publish.
You could always go the subtitle approach:
Grimoire I: Ultimate Magic
Grimoire II: Magic Supreme
Grimoire III: Magic so magical it will melt your face
There is a PC game and series of fantasy novels under the brand Witcher.Witcher is great idea, although there may be copyright issuesI don't think Bobby would mind.
I like Magus though I still like Mystic betterMystic sounds too religious for an arcanist.
I know.
Did Bobby object to those?
|
I kinda missed Mage (as a general practitioner of wizardly magic, opposed to specialist wizards) from the time of 2nd. Ed. so I think I like Magus. It's not the name that I would choose for melee-spellcasting class, but it has certain roots in DnD tradition.
And we can always hope that Paizo will at some point publish Pathfinder Grimoire - a hugemongus book of just spells.
And "Ultimate Magic" is much more than just new spells for black magic, so it's not really an accurate name.As a recall, a number of historical grimoires enumerate the names of Angels and such, who featured prominently in alchemical practice. I think it is a great word for "the book of all magic", but I suppose not everyone shares that opinion. I also happen to think it would "look right" on the shelf next to Bestiary.grimoire |grim'wär|
noun
a book of magic spells and invocations.
ORIGIN mid 19th cent.: French, alteration of grammaire ‘grammar.’I agree that the word "grimoire" looks good next to "bestiary." But again, the title has to look right for more than just you and me. If the title doesn't look right to buyers and distributors and the book trade, they won't know what the book is and that can easily translate into low orders and that can easily translate into a book failing at market because no one placed orders.
And again... "Bestiary" = book of monsters, and that's accurate. "Grimoire" = book of spells and invocations (using your definition)" and that's NOT entirely accurate. This book will have a new base class, new magical options for many core classes, new feats, and some other non-spell stuff, in ADDITION to spells, of course.
I'll run the idea by Erik and the rest, but names of books aren't as much up for vote. It's actually pretty unusual for someone outside of Paizo to name a book—and that includes the book authors. We name most every one of the books we publish.
While your at it...
:D Have you considered including a class capable of using magic in a way similar to the magic of Mage? Given Sean K Reynolds' involvement with McWOD, I can see real potential for a pure, unadulterate ritual magic awesome.
|
Creative Director
|
While your at it...
:D Have you considered including a class capable of using magic in a way similar to the magic of Mage? Given Sean K Reynolds' involvement with McWOD, I can see real potential for a pure, unadulterate ritual magic awesome.
Nope.
With the magus, our base class count will be up to 18. I'm not sure we'll be going up to 19 base classes without also introducing an entirely new subset of rules.
|
|
While your at it...
:D Have you considered including a class capable of using magic in a way similar to the magic of Mage? Given Sean K Reynolds' involvement with McWOD, I can see real potential for a pure, unadulterate ritual magic awesome.
Nope.
With the magus, our base class count will be up to 18. I'm not sure we'll be going up to 19 base classes without also introducing an entirely new subset of rules.
That means it's time for you to do psionic rules (mind magic) :)
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
I like magus, but the plural gives me troubles. Two items, one iconic, already use it. The staff of the magi isn't really the right staff for a f/m-u, since the staff of power is the one you whap people upside the head with. And the robe of the arch-magi isn't that well suited for a presumably armored caster. Both of those are going more with "magi=wizards". Maybe those could be shifted in future printings to "staff of the mage" and "robe of the archmage"?
Also on that note, somewhat concerned with confusion between mage/magus and mages/magi, since magus is essentially an archaic form of mage.
I like magus, but the plural gives me troubles. Two items, one iconic, already use it. The staff of the magi isn't really the right staff for a f/m-u, since the staff of power is the one you whap people upside the head with. And the robe of the arch-magi isn't that well suited for a presumably armored caster. Both of those are going more with "magi=wizards". Maybe those could be shifted in future printings to "staff of the mage" and "robe of the archmage"?
Also on that note, somewhat concerned with confusion between mage/magus and mages/magi, since magus is essentially an archaic form of mage.
That is the only problem I have with the name Magus, too. It is already deeply associated with mage which is usually wizard.
A name like Mageara, one of the Greek Furies, is mage like, but not already assosiated with regular arcanist. What could be more furious than a mage with a sword?
It is just the name needs to not be pre-linked to something already.
Maybe call it a Fury, if there aren't any other Furies in Pathfinder.
A name like Mageara, one of the Greek Furies, is mage like, but not already assosiated with regular arcanist. What could be more furious than a mage with a sword? Maybe call it a Fury, if there aren't any other Furies in Pathfinder.
WOW!!!! Fury as the actual name of the class! That would be bad-ass! "I'm playing a Fury in Kirth Gersen's game; last session he fireballed a contingent of guards before spitting the Evil Overlord on his blade." I really, really, really like this one.
Is it too late to change Paizo's mind on that? I hope not; this one has the potential to be a real winner.
|
Creative Director
|
A name like Mageara, one of the Greek Furies, is mage like, but not already assosiated with regular arcanist. What could be more furious than a mage with a sword? Maybe call it a Fury, if there aren't any other Furies in Pathfinder.
WOW!!!! Fury as the actual name of the class! That would be bad-ass! "I'm playing a Fury in Kirth Gersen's game; last session he fireballed a contingent of guards before spitting the Evil Overlord on his blade." I really, really, really like this one.
Is it too late to change Paizo's mind on that? I hope not; this one has the potential to be a real winner.
We're locked in with magus.
And we kind of already have furies in the game—erinyes devils are modeled after the furies.
I'll run the idea by Erik and the rest, but names of books aren't as much up for vote. It's actually pretty unusual for someone outside of Paizo to name a book—and that includes the book authors. We name most every one of the books we publish.
I understand completely. I'm simply advocating my preference, which is what I do best! :)
I'm not sure such a battle is necessary, as in the book's title is something that we need to build in-house for a number of reasons. Not the least of which is that the title should be something that the buyers and distributors can identify and get behind. "Bestiary" is pretty well known and established in the industry as meaning a "monster book," but "grimoire" is not. And "Ultimate Magic" is much more than just new spells for black magic, so it's not really an accurate name.Oh, I definitely think it should be Grimoire. That battle is for another thread, where we can appeal at length to the linguaphilia of the editorial staff. They used "Bestiary" and it was great. Grimoire should be next.Ah well, there's been enough squabbling over terminology in this thread!No there's not! Grimoire is the perfect name for such a book, and if there is an english word for a textbook of magic it should be used!
Anyways, I'm totally down with the name Magus for the class. It's vague enough to fit the bill, and sounds totally magical.
As a hardcore shadowrun player for 19 years, I respectfully disagree about the utility of the book title "grimoire".
Also I think that roleplayers, in general, tend to have highly developed vocabularies. Just look at Dark Heresy, which has got some serious sales. That game has got ridiculously obscure, overly flowery book titles, and it works establishing a mood for the game at the get go.
If anything, a title like "grimoire" or the like gives the game more nerd-cred (which you guys have in droves, but hey who says there's too much of a good thing).
Edit - DOH! came to that reply a little too late. Yall type to fast :P
We're locked in with magus.
Bummer. Every time I play a gish, I'll invariably picture some dude in a turban with a box of myrrhh.
I'd associate magi with Testament, rather than Pathfinder!
While your at it...
:D Have you considered including a class capable of using magic in a way similar to the magic of Mage? Given Sean K Reynolds' involvement with McWOD, I can see real potential for a pure, unadulterate ritual magic awesome.
Nope.
With the magus, our base class count will be up to 18. I'm not sure we'll be going up to 19 base classes without also introducing an entirely new subset of rules.
that sounds like psionics to me
I would like to see some more non-magic base classes though, like a Noble class or something but thats just me
Also I think that roleplayers, in general, tend to have highly developed vocabularies. Just look at Dark Heresy, which has got some serious sales. That game has got ridiculously obscure, overly flowery book titles, and it works establishing a mood for the game at the get go.
I would guess that Pathfinder RPG players in particular prefer old-fashioned, literate language. Just a guess though.
Thank, Thank you!
Do I get a prize? Or at least a pat in the back, like "Well done buddy, thank you for playing or something?"
I would like that :)
ya did name it first, nice going. Maybe the iconic Magus should have "Xum" in it's name :)
ya did name it first, nice going. Maybe the iconic Magus should have "Xum" in it's name :)
That would be AWESOME to the MAX! At least an X... or a note in the book, like "Thanks to Xum" ... man, I would cry.
I would have t agree with the awesomeness of that yes.
ya did name it first, nice going. Maybe the iconic Magus should have "Xum" in it's name :)That would be AWESOME to the MAX! At least an X... or a note in the book, like "Thanks to Xum" ... man, I would cry.
Xumagus, Magus of Xum?
Magus wouldn't be my first choice, but as I said, I think it's decent; certainly a far cry better than gish and it sets itself apart from the overused warlock.
I also think it would be a good thing to make Xum cry. :)
Xum… the iconic magus.
Man, I'm really happy about this... gotta say this is turning out to be the best week of my life so far, and this is helping quite a lot...
I also think it would be a good thing to make Xum cry. :)
Normaly people don't like to cry, but I would be glad to in that situation, too glad...
I'm a pretty decent writer (people say)... maybe they would let me write a short story or something later on, who knows? My grammar sucks though, maybe it has something to do with the fact that I'm Brazilian and english is not my main language.
P.S.: Dreams DO come true. So, I can try :)
AWESOME STUFF!!! Congratulations mate! I knew you could make it! Hehehehe....
It's an honor to GM to you!
AWESOME STUFF!!! Congratulations mate! I knew you could make it! Hehehehe....
It's an honor to GM to you!
Thanks Brother!
|
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
Grimoire _might_ be a good name for a book containing only spells, but then again probably not because most of the book buyers won't know what it means.
Ultimate Magic is the name of this book because it'll be the "ultimate" magic book for Pathfinder.
At some point in 10 years or what have you we'll probably do a Great Big book that compiles all the spells we've ever published, and maybe we'll call that book "Grimoire."
But probably not, because again, many of the important people in the chain between Paizo and the customer won't understand what that word means.
Grimoire _might_ be a good name for a book containing only spells, but then again probably not because most of the book buyers won't know what it means.
Ultimate Magic is the name of this book because it'll be the "ultimate" magic book for Pathfinder.
At some point in 10 years or what have you we'll probably do a Great Big book that compiles all the spells we've ever published, and maybe we'll call that book "Grimoire."
But probably not, because again, many of the important people in the chain between Paizo and the customer won't understand what that word means.
Any chance that you might consider using another adjective other than "ultimate"? "Ascendant" maybe? Ultimate makes me think of this .
Grimoire _might_ be a good name for a book containing only spells, but then again probably not because most of the book buyers won't know what it means.
So did plenty of others, I'm guessing.
While your at it...
:D Have you considered including a class capable of using magic in a way similar to the magic of Mage? Given Sean K Reynolds' involvement with McWOD, I can see real potential for a pure, unadulterate ritual magic awesome.
Nope.
With the magus, our base class count will be up to 18. I'm not sure we'll be going up to 19 base classes without also introducing an entirely new subset of rules.
that sounds like psionics to me
I would like to see some more non-magic base classes though, like a Noble class or something but thats just me
What about something like a truenamer and truename magic? That seems like it belongs in an Ultimate Magic book. I don't know what goes into planning and developing one of these books, but is it possible that we will see alternate magic systems in this book?
Always gettin' the short end of the magic stick.
Always gettin' the short end of the magic stick.
"Need a job?"
I want to grow up to be a Magish ... like my father!
"Magish is over rated. What ya want to do is stab folks with an unholy sword, pillage the land, sweep across nations like a swarm of unholy locusts. Burn! Massacre, to delight in the screams of the fallen , to feast on the suffering! To make your name a thing of legend to reap the blood of whole races, to drain the souls from whole worlds and leave them as crypts of the dead. As testaments to your might!. That and we also have good dental insurance"
One last thing about the name Magus, is that Super Genius Games have a Pathfinder RPG class called Magus.
|
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
Grimoire _might_ be a good name for a book containing only spells, but then again probably not because most of the book buyers won't know what it means.So did plenty of others, I'm guessing.
I'm willing to guess that none of those people were book chain buyers, and that that book sold fewer copies than we need to sell to make a profit.
But it's just a guess. I'm not really willing to take a chance one way or the other.
|
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
Who are these non-geeky people? I guess I could see the buyer from Barnes & Noble not knowing the word, though if they had to deal with the Harry Potter line plus all of the knock off young adult books all these years they ought to have some idea.
Not just Barnes & Noble, but also Borders, Hastings, Booksamillion, Ingram, Baker & Taylor, Chapters/Indigo, US Military, and lots of smaller ones.
But aren't most of the buyers distributors to FLGS's? Haven't they spent decades buying weird game stuff of every kind?
You'd like to think so, and in many cases yes, they are huge nerds and even big Pathfinder fans. In other cases they know absolutely nothing about RPGs and I can't figure out how they are qualified to do their jobs.
So it's not a risk I'm willing to take.
|
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
It's tricky, but I'm afraid that the current title is something which makes the GM in me cringe and instinctively want to ban it from any game I run. :(
Well, gee, Chuck, maybe you should read more than the first two words on the cover of the book before you make that decision, eh?
I am sure that the book is going to be awesome, and can't wait for it. But, I really dislike the name. :(