Creative Director
|
Would the aforementioned "horror" book lean more towards Lovecraft horror, gore-horror, or something more in the realm of suspense and tension building horror?
I vote for the latter if they can't all be in the same book. I can't get onboard with the whole Lovecraft thing, because it carries a sense of utter hopelessness that I don't like in my games, though . The gory stuff is okay with me personally, but I know a lot of my players can't stomach it, and I respect that. Tension, however, is something I find our games lacking, and I can't seem to figure out how to create that.
Also, Mr. Jacobs... Rules for... Romance? Expound on your concept, please, if only a little bit. :D
Since all I know about the aforementioned "horror" book is that I put it on a list in a previous post... it could be ANYTHING.
My personal preference is certainly more towards the cosmic horrors and rural horrors favored by Lovecraft, of course, but limiting a book like that to only one type of horror would, I think, be far too limiting. It would have to encompass all sorts of touchstones within the genre to be justified as a rulebook.
As for rules for romance? Check out Green Ronin's "Blue Rose" books for an idea of where a romantic genre fantasy RPG could go. Or look at any fantasy story that includes romance in its plot. A book like this could cover things like lineages, dynasties, courtly love, relationship building with NPCs (such as is the backbone for Bioware's games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect), and so on—lots of topics even IF you don't get into the naughty stuff. Not sure there's enough there to fill an entire rulebook, but hey... I was just spitballing ideas at that point.
Since all I know about the aforementioned "horror" book is that I put it on a list in a previous post... it could be ANYTHING.
My personal preference is certainly more towards the cosmic horrors and rural horrors favored by Lovecraft, of course, but limiting a book like that to only one type of horror would, I think, be far too limiting. It would have to encompass all sorts of touchstones within the genre to be justified as a rulebook.
That's more or less what I wanted to hear. Yay.
As for rules for romance? Check out Green Ronin's "Blue Rose" books for an idea of where a romantic genre fantasy RPG could go. Or look at any fantasy story that includes romance in its plot. A book like this could cover things like lineages, dynasties, courtly love, relationship building with NPCs (such as is the backbone for Bioware's games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect), and so on—lots of topics even IF you don't get into the naughty stuff. Not sure there's enough there to fill an entire rulebook, but hey... I was just spitballing ideas at that point.
I hadn't even considered anything "naughty" really. :D But I admit that my initial thoughts were comical.
Rolling for attractiveness, making diplomacy checks to pick up chicks at bars, flowers and chocolates in the equipment section. lol Corny stuff, really. Once again I'm showing my youth and consequential lack of maturity. Lineages and such sounds interesting, though. Thanks for the replies.
EDIT: I'd look into the Blue Rose thing, but we don't have FLGSs 'round mah neck o' the woods. Can't justify buying a book online to glance at a ruleset or mechanic, so I'll take your word for it.
+1
Yes, James. Please tell us your thoughts on romance.
Nice, "James Jacobs' Rules for Romance". You might have a cross-over success there, guys.
Heck, if Steve Harvey can do it... why not YOU?
|
...
Building strongholds would be a logical element of a Kingdom Building rulebook... but it'd also be logical for a Mass Combat/War book, or a High Level book. And it could even be its OWN book, I suppose. None of these books I mention are in planning yet, so what they'd exactly contain is still open.
A "big book" of structures/regions could be neat. The cost and logistics of building, running and maintaining strongholds, keeps, dungeons, towns, cities, nations, organizations, and things like that.
Since all I know about the aforementioned "horror" book is that I put it on a list in a previous post... it could be ANYTHING.
My personal preference is certainly more towards the cosmic horrors and rural horrors favored by Lovecraft, of course, but limiting a book like that to only one type of horror would, I think, be far too limiting. It would have to encompass all sorts of touchstones within the genre to be justified as a rulebook.
That's more or less what I wanted to hear. Yay.
As for rules for romance? Check out Green Ronin's "Blue Rose" books for an idea of where a romantic genre fantasy RPG could go. Or look at any fantasy story that includes romance in its plot. A book like this could cover things like lineages, dynasties, courtly love, relationship building with NPCs (such as is the backbone for Bioware's games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect), and so on—lots of topics even IF you don't get into the naughty stuff. Not sure there's enough there to fill an entire rulebook, but hey... I was just spitballing ideas at that point.I hadn't even considered anything "naughty" really. :D But I admit that my initial thoughts were comical.
Rolling for attractiveness, making diplomacy checks to pick up chicks at bars, flowers and chocolates in the equipment section. lol Corny stuff, really. Once again I'm showing my youth and consequential lack of maturity. Lineages and such sounds interesting, though. Thanks for the replies.
EDIT: I'd look into the Blue Rose thing, but we don't have FLGSs 'round mah neck o' the woods. Can't justify buying a book online to glance at a ruleset or mechanic, so I'll take your word for it.
Personally my favorite (non d20, mind you) romance setting/rules is Lace & Steel-- also my favorite swashbuckling setting-- though some rules are a little clunky. This game gives traditional female characters something to do, which helps with pseudo-historical verisimilitude.
Bujold, Lackey (Valdemar was major influence on Blue Rose), McKillip, to a certain extent DeLint, and -- one my favorites (again swashbuckling also)-- is Kushner's Swordspoint and its sequels (note that this is a gay romance, in part) are all great resources for a perhaps Taldan-centered romantic campaign (with gritty and dark elements). I can't think of any "pure" good fantasy romances simply because romance describes a plot element and style and fantasy includes a lot of additional material which make it hum. Of course nearly all the medieval "romances" had romantic elements, unless they were religious and misogynistic.
James & Erik, I just wanted to express a big THANK YOU with regards to your plans for the Pathfinder RPG, and more importantly, with regards to a 2nd edition. I'm loving the Pathfinder RPG, more importanly, my kids are, and if I can avoid the edition treadmill for a while, you've got some happy campers in my house.
Aye, an alternate (more real-like) crafting system would be nice to have - ultimate skill or, if it really had *gasp* a whole simplified Pathfinder economics model or some article on this theme (including magic shops and items, states, ...) wow. That could take a good deal of world-builders/high level manual.
I can't wait to pre-order Toon: Golarion.
Aye, an alternate (more real-like) crafting system would be nice to have - ultimate skill or, if it really had *gasp* a whole simplified Pathfinder economics model or some article on this theme (including magic shops and items, states, ...) wow. That could take a good deal of world-builders/high level manual.
Yes. And expanding on that a bit, the more that the ruleset is carved up into pluggable modules, the more flexibility for all. In fact, if you have enough alternate, pluggable systems layered on top of the current core, you may never need to do a true PFRPG 2nd edition. You can just change which modules are default and which are optional.
I'm not worried. I think Paizo has done a great job so far. I'm still finding things all the time in the books that surprise me. Little changes and improvements I hadn't yet noticed, still recovering from 3.5.
Every new playtest/book I think: "Okay, so now what? They can't surprise me anymore." And then they do.
I think there are many genres and new settings to explore - not to mention adventure paths - before the well runs dry.
While not a rule book, I would like to see more big, hardcover settings books. I think some subjects just need a higher page count. The Great Beyond is a good example of that. Awesome book, but could have used about three times the amount of volume.The tricky thing there is that we don't produce world content in our rulebook line. A big hardcover book about the planes WOULD be cool, but it'd be in the Pathfinder Campaign Setting line, like the Inner Sea World Guide. And it would be in ADDITION to the rulebooks we do already... and adding additional hardcovers to our schedule is, at this time, not a good thing for employee sanity or health.
Is it possible that the rulebook line is suspended when enough* rule topics have been covered, while all other lines (APs, Campaign Setting) would continue?
Or will the switch to a new edition happen when enough* rulebooks have been added, despite the other lines having the potential to continue far longer beyond that point?
*enter your definition of "enough"
Steampunk rules
*metal gear solid enemy alert exclamation mark appears*
|
Is it possible that the rulebook line is suspended when enough* rule topics have been covered, while all other lines (APs, Campaign Setting) would continue?
Or will the switch to a new edition happen when enough* rulebooks have been added, despite the other lines having the potential to continue far longer beyond that point?
*enter your definition of "enough"
Good question. I personally would prefer that the first option be followed. You could then divert the resources that you have working on the RPG line into the APs and other setting lines. And maybe every ones in a while you could throw out a "Best of Pathfinder AP" hardcover that collects the odds and ends of new rules you do introduce in those products.
* But keep the annual Bestiaries. No such thing as too many monsters.
Steampunk rules*metal gear solid enemy alert exclamation mark appears*
Looking at GUNS, I won't hold my breath for steampunk rules.
Dude, have you EVER made a post where the positive outweighed the negative? Short of saying "I POSITIVELY hate ____."Looking at GUNS, I won't hold my breath for steampunk rules.Steampunk rules*metal gear solid enemy alert exclamation mark appears*
I'm sorry? Would you like lies and bs instead?
I am POSITIVELY giddy for steampunk d20 Pathfinder rules!
Just not Golarion-centric "steampunk" from Paizo.
Any plans for a Pathfinder rules-based RPG videogame?
I was really bummed out when I realized that ALL of my d20 video games would be based on 4ED in the future.
That's going to be a lot better as far as games are concerned. Anything that requires any DM adjudication anywhere does not translate well to a hard-coded game.
|
|
Epic Rules
Romance rules
Comedy rules
Rules on how to run high level (not Epic level) games
The rules for high level (non epic) play could come out within the pages 'Test of the Starstone' AP; the hardcover Epic rules themselves released at the time of that AP. Maybe with an Epic level one shot for the Module line related to the AP (or a previous AP).
How about a tie in rulebook for Romance/Comedy/Modern wherein a nutty RPG Creative Director decides to bring his favorite rogue iconic mini to life. 1980s style hilarity ensues (Anthony Michael Hall eat your heart out). Cameos by Baba Yaga and The Whispering Tyrant as the nosey landlord.
; )
edit: How about Epic Romance rules?! With guns!
|
|
i would like to know what that comedy book might entail, Mr Jacobs
also as to what i would like to see, some alignment axis books, like the book of vile darkness and exalted deeds, but done better, way better, going into reasons for being that alignment, what it means, roleplaying implications and so on as well as a few rules here and there (maybe a way to end all the LG arguments?). also it would be nice to see a lawful and a chaotic version of said books
and a book of chthulian dinosaurs :P
|
Yes, James. Please tell us your thoughts on romance.
Good stuff from JJ above, but I just wanted to comment why this caught my eye.
As a typical married gamer with young child, I get to game with a group less than monthly and play one-on-one stuff most of the time. So, for my purposes, anything that deals with game styles that differ from 'kill the monsters; take their loot' is helpful to me. So, intrigue, romance, comedy stuff would be great.
Hmm. What about a book exploring iconic themes? So stuff to help craft a classic murder-mystery adventure, or a tragic-romance, or an escape-the-disaster, all referenced back to literature and film examples? Hints of how to make such things work in the game-world where divination exists, etc.
It's also good to see the core line potentially reaching out in directions beyond those that are needed to support the Golarion lines.
What KIND of rulebooks? (snip)
Epic Rules
#1 on the list!
|
It's quite an impressive list of books James and the others at Paizo want to work on. I wish them the best on that. Still I rather they not promise backward compatiablity on a new edition because it's not something imo that can be promised or implemented again a second time around imo. You make it too backward compitable and chances are it will not sell as well as the previous edition. If ot's not too different thta you may not have as much interest as PF 1E had. The timing was right for the curent version of PF. Will it be the same for a similar version again no one really knows.
I can't begin to tell you how much I want a book on running a low magic campaign. Especially where characters are not running around with ability scores above 18, and most ability scores being much lower.
I can't begin to tell you how much I want a book on running a low magic campaign. Especially where characters are not running around with ability scores above 18, and most ability scores being much lower.
Presumably the book will tell you how to retweak all the monsters in the bestiaries so you can run said game past level 3.
Why do so many people want to play Commoners & Housecats rather than Dungeons & Dragons?
I can't begin to tell you how much I want a book on running a low magic campaign. Especially where characters are not running around with ability scores above 18, and most ability scores being much lower.Presumably the book will tell you how to retweak all the monsters in the bestiaries so you can run said game past level 3.
Why do so many people want to play Commoners & Housecats rather than Dungeons & Dragons?
Because housecats are cute! ;)
Because housecats are cute! ;)I can't begin to tell you how much I want a book on running a low magic campaign. Especially where characters are not running around with ability scores above 18, and most ability scores being much lower.Presumably the book will tell you how to retweak all the monsters in the bestiaries so you can run said game past level 3.
Why do so many people want to play Commoners & Housecats rather than Dungeons & Dragons?
Good thing I maxed out Profession (Homemaker) or it would take me forever to sweep this floor!
Good thing I maxed out Profession (Homemaker) or it would take me forever to sweep this floor!Because housecats are cute! ;)I can't begin to tell you how much I want a book on running a low magic campaign. Especially where characters are not running around with ability scores above 18, and most ability scores being much lower.Presumably the book will tell you how to retweak all the monsters in the bestiaries so you can run said game past level 3.
Why do so many people want to play Commoners & Housecats rather than Dungeons & Dragons?
That's what cantrips are for.:)
That's what cantrips are for.:)Good thing I maxed out Profession (Homemaker) or it would take me forever to sweep this floor!Because housecats are cute! ;)I can't begin to tell you how much I want a book on running a low magic campaign. Especially where characters are not running around with ability scores above 18, and most ability scores being much lower.Presumably the book will tell you how to retweak all the monsters in the bestiaries so you can run said game past level 3.
Why do so many people want to play Commoners & Housecats rather than Dungeons & Dragons?
Cantrips?! This is low magic! I don't even have the ability scores to cast cantrips if I even had them!
Cantrips?! This is low magic! I don't even have the ability scores to cast cantrips if I even had them!That's what cantrips are for.:)Good thing I maxed out Profession (Homemaker) or it would take me forever to sweep this floor!Because housecats are cute! ;)I can't begin to tell you how much I want a book on running a low magic campaign. Especially where characters are not running around with ability scores above 18, and most ability scores being much lower.Presumably the book will tell you how to retweak all the monsters in the bestiaries so you can run said game past level 3.
Why do so many people want to play Commoners & Housecats rather than Dungeons & Dragons?
LOL!!!
I can't begin to tell you how much I want a book on running a low magic campaign. Especially where characters are not running around with ability scores above 18, and most ability scores being much lower.Presumably the book will tell you how to retweak all the monsters in the bestiaries so you can run said game past level 3.
Why do so many people want to play Commoners & Housecats rather than Dungeons & Dragons?
For many of us, it's more about emulating sword-n-sorcery sources of inspiration rather than starting there and ending up being fantasy superheroes.
There are other genres & games for the capes & tights.
Also, low magic doesn't mean commoners & housecats. It means magic is a dangerous, often uncontrollable & sometimes corrupting force rather than a sterile, perfected technology/skill replacement.
I can't begin to tell you how much I want a book on running a low magic campaign. Especially where characters are not running around with ability scores above 18, and most ability scores being much lower.
+100.
I don't care which rulebook it falls into, but if I can get options for lowER-magic, elmination/reduction of the Christmas Tree Effect, and a way to offset the desire (some will claim need) for god-stats, I'll pre-order today!
I can't begin to tell you how much I want a book on running a low magic campaign. Especially where characters are not running around with ability scores above 18, and most ability scores being much lower.Presumably the book will tell you how to retweak all the monsters in the bestiaries so you can run said game past level 3.
Why do so many people want to play Commoners & Housecats rather than Dungeons & Dragons?
For many of us, it's more about emulating sword-n-sorcery sources of inspiration rather than starting there and ending up being fantasy superheroes.
There are other genres & games for the capes & tights.
There are also other genres and games for low fantasy with or without basic magic. D&D 3.X and Pathfinder are high fantasy games with serious magic both on the part of monsters and players. The game is built with specific assumptions in mind inherently that a "low magic" game completely ignores while it tries to be a swashbuckling, no magic adventure.
I would like to see a couple things:
Kingdom/Home Base rules using Kingmaker as a beta would be great.
High Level Play: How to counter typical high level tactics and allow your players to do the same: rules for making permanent anti-teleport and scrying zones or teleportation circles. Guidelines for how the setting can change in a high level world. Once your economy breaks, how do you fix it?
Would love some alternate crafting rules. Rework how assisting works when crafting so you can have teams of people making a single object, slow down magic item enchantment, rework magic crafting feats, rules for unique items in crafting. Lots of potential for improvements here.
Setting theme rules would be great. Something to help GMs decide what to not allow for an Asian/Pirate/Swashbucking/High Sorcerry/Low Magic settings. Help the GMs define what it is about their custom game they want ot expand on to help them tell the story they want.
Which means Commoners and Housecats. Which is actually more interesting than the game you are left with once the magic is gone. Hint: The magic is everything, so when it's gone you are left with nothing.
Deterministic statements about a style-of-play issue?
Where do you get off telling other people what they would enjoy? The core mechanic is perfectly serviceable in low magic settings. I've done it dozens of times.
When you start to make rigid pronouncements about people's style of play, you aren't just wrong; you can't possibly be right.
We should remember that there is a lot of material that was produced in 3.x, that is not open content. That means that even if game producers wanted to put it in products, they could not. I can see Paizo making versions of many of those rules as time goes on (obviously it can't be a 1-1 conversion, since it is not open content, but material inspired by it is possible). And I realize that there as some that feel that is bad, but let's remember it sold in 3.x, and it will sell in PF, some people want it.
As for PF2, if I had a say, I would suggest that the current campaign setting be "retired" and a new world be developed for PF2. A new world with new rules of "reality". Paizo could even license some other company to take over the stewardship of Golarion for those that wanted to stick with PF1.
|
Which means Commoners and Housecats. Which is actually more interesting than the game you are left with once the magic is gone. Hint: The magic is everything, so when it's gone you are left with nothing.Deterministic statements about a style-of-play issue?
Where do you get off telling other people what they would enjoy? The core mechanic is perfectly serviceable in low magic settings. I've done it dozens of times.
When you start to make rigid pronouncements about people's style of play, you aren't just wrong; you can't possibly be right.
Hey look, more hand waving and false statements.
Fact: D&D has magic ingrained to it. It's not removable. Even the guys who have no magic of their own have plenty of magic from others built in. Without this, they cannot function.
Fact: Because of the previous fact, removing magic means removing everything. Removing everything, of course leaves you with nothing. As any magic you leave behind breaks the game.
Fact: Because of the previous fact, Commoners and Housecats results in a more interesting game than... nothingness. After all, you are most likely a Commoner. Perhaps you even have a Housecat. Yet there are still plenty of things you can do. They are just all very mundane.
So you see, the solution to a "low magic D&D" game is to walk away from a DM who clearly has no idea what he is doing or talking about, and instead play Commoners and Housecats. That's life, if you haven't caught it yet.
You can remove the Big Six by just building the bonuses into the characters without the items being present. Start on a 25 point buy and give an ability score increase at every even level to balance the lack of stat-boosters, give a +1 bonus on all saves every 3 levels, give a +1 dodge bonus to AC every 3 levels, base weapon and armor quality off of material strength instead of magical enhancements (and add in new materials to duplicate the effect of more popular enhancements like Keen). Remove Craft Magic Arms and Armor and just let people craft with their Craft skills. Rework DR/magic to just need better materials. Add in Reserve Points from Unearthed Arcana to allow some non-magical healing, and sever potions from spellcasting by basing Brew Potion off of Craft (Potions) or Profession (Herbalist) instead of Caster Level. Handwave all spellcasting requirements for making potions. Make drinking potions a move action that doesn't provoke, add a potion bandoleer that allows people to draw them as a swift action. Lastly, ban all primary casters because they don't fit in with low-magic.
So how did you limit the game to support the removal of magic?
We dig a new well.
I do enjoy playing the pathfinder campaign at times. It's very monty haul to our normal style. I think Kingmaker may be the best adventure ever published in an RPG. Enjoy the heck out of it. It may be the adventure style that I use as a model for many future homebrew adventures. I personally believe that the folks at Paizo and Green Ronin are making me a better story/adventure writer.
But at the end of the day I don't want to play a guy that causes blindness (or dazzled on a successful saving throw) to a wizard when he detects magic and looks my direction.
One of the main styles of roleplaying that I grew up with is that you don't become dependent on magic. Encounters should be solveable with good thinking and/or roleplaying and not die rolls. Some of my favorite published adventures were 2E Ravenloft. You could not use pathfinder rules for any of those adventures. Nothing wrong with that either. But I am getting older and more busy in my professional life (sigh), and what I would love to see is good adventures where a 16 is a high ability score and 14 is more than good enough, and magic items are not something that just buffs a person. Gosh I love the eversmoking bottle, useful item to have, not a single stat modifier to it (in 2E or earlier). But i digress, there are times I enjoy a magic heavy setting, but not all the time (or most).
I think these writers here at Paizo are currently the best anywhere, Steve Kenson and some of the guys at Green Ronin kick ass too. I would just like to see their take on a low magic fantasy setting, because I think they are genius and mastermind at what they do. That said I do still play RC (but we did away with thAC0 before 3E ever came out, it was controversial too, may players thought if you could not figure out thAC0 then you were not smart enough to play with us). Maybe there is no market for my style anymore, if not keep doing what you are doing, because you do it masterfully. But if you think there is a market for a Low magic setting, I will snap it up.
I removed a post and a reply to it. "Don't be a jerk" is the very first forum rule here. Don't forget it.
So how did you limit the game to support the removal of magic?Is this directed at me? Because if it is, I have my list of changes posted above.
There was an Evil Lincoln post that went away somehow.