Lou Diamond |
Mark, I started buying Pazio products because I stared to play in PFS
as Pazio put out new products I have found that about 20-30% of the material that I buy is not useable in PFS.
This is a very bad precedent for a game company to keep up with it will piss off older gamers that have more money to spend on your products and they might stop buying your products.
I just bought Ultiamte Combat it is a very good book except for the feats section. IMO the feats concentrated on monks and caster type feats and left fighters out in the cold.
I really liked all the archtypes you did a very good job on them then I find out that the onle that I most would like to play are not playable in PFS. All gunusing archtypes are not usable in PFS because a small minority of very vocal old school gamers SHOUT NO GUNS in my Fanasty yet they wnat to be able to play Synthist Summoners the most over powered archtyoe in the game.
Over with bad onto the good. you hit it out of the park with the Magus Archtypes and arcana as well as all the material for the inqisitor. I have not read the vechile rules and airship rules butfrom comments that I have read about them they are good.
UC is all in all a very ggod book but let it all into PFS and not pick and choose on a hodge podge basis
Sniggevert |
I have not seen the disallowed Archetypes but PFS is Golarion based while UC is not.It could be a flavor reason or maybe a rules reason. Not everything will be allowed.
Edit: I checked just now, it does not say any GS archetypes are disallowed? Where are you reading this?
It's basically all gun using archetypes of the other classes that are disallowed, not gunslinger archetypes.
I think the reason is what you state though, the Golarion flavor. Rulebooks are setting neutral, so will have things that do not have a real presence on Golarion. It doesn't necessarily mean the rules are bad, just not really appropriate for the world feel.
Thraxital |
I do not see how it effects flavor, it would a nice twist to add a faction/country that has developed into more of a renessance.
And if it is about flavor, how is limiting the archytypes doing that? All someone has to do is multi-class one level of Gunslinger. Now they are just as out of place as a spellslinger ect.
I agree with the OP that the restrictions in society has really had me thinking twice about new purchesses.
sieylianna |
I think you are in a small minority. There are a limited number of PFS modules and you can play each one once. So any individual is only going to be able to utilize a fraction of the APG/UC/UM material in the Pathfinder Society campaign. I personally think it's hypocritical to allow gunslingers in PFS (so you can sell UC books), but disallow the changes which allow other classes to use guns. But the reality is that I'm not going to use more than a fraction of the new material in PFS even if there were no restrictions.
On a related issue, can we get rogues banned in PFS, so I can rebuild my character to something which isn't overshadowed by everything which has came out since Beta?
LazarX |
Mark, I started buying Pazio products because I stared to play in PFS
as Pazio put out new products I have found that about 20-30% of the material that I buy is not useable in PFS.This is a very bad precedent for a game company to keep up with it will piss off older gamers that have more money to spend on your products and they might stop buying your products.
It's a standard precedent for network games to not allow every single bit of material published for it. The reasons can vary, some of it may not fit the setting. (Pathfinder was written with more than Golarian in mind) and others might be not be practical to administer in network play.
RPGA, NAGA, PARADIGM all had similar restrictions in the games they ran as well. It's established precedent.
Remember that Golarian is a setting where guns are just emerging. So it makes sense that a fair chunk of the material which represents firearms advancing beyond the beginning days would not fit the world.
seekerofshadowlight |
I do not see how it effects flavor, it would a nice twist to add a faction/country that has developed into more of a renessance.
And if it is about flavor, how is limiting the archytypes doing that? All someone has to do is multi-class one level of Gunslinger. Now they are just as out of place as a spellslinger ect.
I disagree. In Golarion guns come from a single small city state. In a place magic does not work right if at all. Guns have no became common and are not all that known about or crafted outside that one place.
There is no history of Guns in the word at large. Things like the Holy gun, musketeer and spellslinger are more for worlds were the gun is not rare.
This is what the feats are for, the first steps of the gun moving outside of one small magicless city state.
Allowing those archetypes would be counter to the flavor of Golarion
Robb Smith |
Allowing those archetypes would be counter to the flavor of Golarion.
Wrong. What is the difference between a Wizard or sorcerer who takes one level of gunslinger and the rest in Wizard, or a Paladin with one level in Gunslinger and the rest in paladin?
The answer is: a couple of class abilities.
Banning those archetypes does nothing to "further the flavor of Golarion" or "limit the proliferation of guns". All it does is remove some alternative options.
The banning of all the gun related archetypes was just a token gesture to placate the people whining about Gunslingers at the cost of everyone else, nothing more, nothing less. There are probably dozens of buried "this class works differently in Golarion" rules that have not been permitted.
Case in point: Gods and Magic has dozens of rules for how Clerics of different deities operate in Golarion, yet all of them are not permitted. (And for those who are going to say "hurr hurr hurr 3.5 book", please note that there is content from this book in the resources, and if you're going to make a book available like that, you need to consider the whole)
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
seekerofshadowlight |
seekerofshadowlight wrote:
Allowing those archetypes would be counter to the flavor of Golarion.
Wrong. What is the difference between a Wizard or sorcerer who takes one level of gunslinger and the rest in Wizard, or a Paladin with one level in Gunslinger and the rest in paladin?
The answer is: a couple of class abilities.
.
This is incorrect. Take the spellslinger, they have mastered combining magic and firearms. Yet the only place where they could gain such mastery is the one place magic does not work. Same with the holy gun or the musketeer, both of theses require a world were guns are more common.
For a home game its not a big issue, but if 700 "rare" spellslingers show up in PFS, then the gun is no longer rare or new in golarion as whole schools have mastered the art of both firearms and magic and mixing the two.
Its pure flavor and it simply does not fit the setting, same with godless clerics and such. Not all generic options will fit any given setting.
Mok |
I was really disappointed to see that the Spellslinger was not allowed, mainly because it would have been an excellent way to emulate a Technic League member who is wandering Golarion with his laser guns.
As for the other gun using archetypes... basically all of them are better to use than the Gunslinger itself, which on its own is an awful class, so I'd assume, as mentioned above, is a way to placate the old-schoolers. Sure, there are guns in the game, but to fully use them you have to use a really sub-par class, and thus they will be "rare" to encounter.
sieylianna |
For a home game its not a big issue, but if 700 "rare" spellslingers show up in PFS, then the gun is no longer rare or new in golarion as whole schools have mastered the art of both firearms and magic and mixing the two.
Instead PFS gets every gunslinger who was going to be born for the next three generations, plus every gun that would be manufactured in the next 500 years. It is one small city-state after all.
Therein lies the problem. PFS has abdicated control by allowing an infinite number of guns and gunslingers into the campaign. Limiting the options to one class isn't going to do anything except mean that tables with three gunsligers and three ninja will be common.
Robb Smith |
seekerofshadowlight wrote:For a home game its not a big issue, but if 700 "rare" spellslingers show up in PFS, then the gun is no longer rare or new in golarion as whole schools have mastered the art of both firearms and magic and mixing the two.Instead PFS gets every gunslinger who was going to be born for the next three generations, plus every gun that would be manufactured in the next 500 years. It is one small city-state after all.
Therein lies the problem. PFS has abdicated control by allowing an infinite number of guns and gunslingers into the campaign. Limiting the options to one class isn't going to do anything except mean that tables with three gunsligers and three ninja will be common.
@seeker:
The concept that a wizard may have bought the gun as a curiosity in Alkenstar and moved on to somewhere where magic works just fine is somehow that unbelievable in a world where people reshape reality with a thought? There are countless ways to explain how someone could get their hands on a firearm without going anywhere near the mana wastes. Looted treasure, a "bazaar of the bizarre", gift from a wealthy traveling relative... there's but a few of them.
@ sieylianna:
And the best part is, with the archetypes restricted, all it does is make sure that every one of those Gunslingers has a high probability of being just like each other. This does nothing to change the number of guns that will be in the game, if anything all it does is focus the "Guns Problem (though I don't want to really even use that term)" into a more concentrated form - Gunslinger 1/<Class X>
Deussu |
I can't really say about Ultimate Combat, but the new Field Guide is garbage. Really, it's a copypaste from the Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play and Guide to Absalom, with some little extra salt like vanities and some descriptions of the factions. I'd much rather have the Seekers of Secrets stay as the core assumption for players as it holds information about the Pathfinder Society and its venture-captains, things the pathfinders would much more likely want to know. I already own Guide to Absalom, so I might just those few dozen pages off the book.
Regarding gunslinger and the archetypes, I think it kinda breaks the immersion of the game a little ... suddenly you begin to have all these gunslingers popping all around. Golarion currently has only one area where these gunslingers could even come from; the tiny little nation of Alkenstar. Sorry, but I don't think allowing any guns in PFS was that good of an idea. I have to admit though that it wouldn't be very wise to ban a huge amount of stuff from Ultimate Combat for just that one reason.
Lou Diamond |
Deussu, have you looked at all the cool flavor things in the field guide every faction gets some cool vanities to buy with prestige points
Think of the Fled guide as an updated Seeker of Secrets not everyone has bought seeker of Secrets the newer PFS most likely don't have the it and now can buy the Field Guide.
Deussu |
Deussu, have you looked at all the cool flavor things in the field guide every faction gets some cool vanities to buy with prestige points
Think of the Fled guide as an updated Seeker of Secrets not everyone has bought seeker of Secrets the newer PFS most likely don't have the it and now can buy the Field Guide.
The Field Guide has only short descriptions of the factions (1 page each), a rip-off from Guide to Absalom, suggestions for Pathfinder types, and resources. Seekers of Secrets details the duties, the life, the beginning of becoming a pathfinder. Without telling the players their characters have gone through a 3-year training they might create characters completely incompatible to the society.
Seekers of Secrets tells how the training is done. Introduces dozens of venture-captains, gives a short description of Pathfinder Society at large in the world of the Inner Sea region, and more importantly explains the history of the society. Field guide doesn't do that. As a player and a GM I find Seekers of Secrets to be a superior product.
Feegle |
Lou Diamond wrote:Deussu, have you looked at all the cool flavor things in the field guide every faction gets some cool vanities to buy with prestige points
Think of the Fled guide as an updated Seeker of Secrets not everyone has bought seeker of Secrets the newer PFS most likely don't have the it and now can buy the Field Guide.The Field Guide has only short descriptions of the factions (1 page each), a rip-off from Guide to Absalom, suggestions for Pathfinder types, and resources. Seekers of Secrets details the duties, the life, the beginning of becoming a pathfinder. Without telling the players their characters have gone through a 3-year training they might create characters completely incompatible to the society.
Seekers of Secrets tells how the training is done. Introduces dozens of venture-captains, gives a short description of Pathfinder Society at large in the world of the Inner Sea region, and more importantly explains the history of the society. Field guide doesn't do that. As a player and a GM I find Seekers of Secrets to be a superior product.
You are welcome to that opinion. But I'm not sure what that has to do with the Core Assumption. That just means that it's assumed everyone has access to the book. You have access to Seekers of Secrets. Where is the problem with releasing a new book that has more crunch that is directly relevant to PFS play? No one's going to stop you from using SoS material, and anyone who is interested in the duties, training, and life of the PFS can go back and look at the old book.
Frankly, as a newer PFS player, I find the PSFG much more useful to my gameplay.
Mark Garringer |
Frankly, as a newer PFS player, I find the PSFG much more useful to my gameplay.
Unsurprisingly to me the Field Guide is crunch-tastic. It's what a Pathfinder needs. Sadly, having Seekers of Secrets in the Core Assumption did very little to raise the average player's knowledge and understanding of the Pathfinder Society in my estimation.
I feel like the Field Guide is a great player resource and Seekers of Secrets is a great GM resource. Just like I feel like the Inner Sea Primer is great for players and the World Guide is great for GMs. Not to say there aren't areas of overlap, and there are players who will also love the World Guide but I've seen a lot of them look at it and comment that it's more than they feel they need.
Michael Brock |
Feegle wrote:Frankly, as a newer PFS player, I find the PSFG much more useful to my gameplay.Unsurprisingly to me the Field Guide is crunch-tastic. It's what a Pathfinder needs. Sadly, having Seekers of Secrets in the Core Assumption did very little to raise the average player's knowledge and understanding of the Pathfinder Society in my estimation.
I feel like the Field Guide is a great player resource and Seekers of Secrets is a great GM resource. Just like I feel like the Inner Sea Primer is great for players and the World Guide is great for GMs. Not to say there aren't areas of overlap, and there are players who will also love the World Guide but I've seen a lot of them look at it and comment that it's more than they feel they need.
+1. I have met very few players who have admitted to reading Seeker of Secrets. From what I saw this past weekend, Field Guide is going to be a very good product for PFS.
Gorbacz |
My biggest gripe with Field Guide is that it is another book that dilutes the "CS line is for GMs, Companion line is for players" divide.
This book *should* be in the Companion line, but it also *shouldn't* be there, because at 32 pages it would never get the job done.
Vic Wertz Chief Technical Officer |
My biggest gripe with Field Guide is that it is another book that dilutes the "CS line is for GMs, Companion line is for players" divide.
This book *should* be in the Companion line, but it also *shouldn't* be there, because at 32 pages it would never get the job done.
There is no such divide; that's an oversimplification.
The Companion line is totally player-safe, but of course GMs can benefit from it as well.
The Campaign Setting line is aimed at anyone who wants to learn more about the setting, and occasionally contains info that PCs wouldn't know. It's not just for GMs, but players may want to ask their GM if there's anything they should be avoiding.
LazarX |
I was really disappointed to see that the Spellslinger was not allowed, mainly because it would have been an excellent way to emulate a Technic League member who is wandering Golarion with his laser guns.
You just made the best argument for the ban that's put in place. While it may sound "neat" for your character... That's a character that belongs in Eberron, not Golarian. Because guns even in magic-dead Alkenstar aren't that advanced. BTW, if you're going to cite evidence of revolvers in a long out of print Paizo work, that's been effectively errataed out just like Asmodian Paladins.
ArVagor |
BTW, if you're going to cite evidence of revolvers in a long out of print Paizo work, that's been effectively errataed out just like Asmodian Paladins.
Huh? Just because something is out of print (presumably you mean the original Pathfinder Campaign Setting book) doesn't mean that it is no longer valid as resource material in establishing what is and/or isn't canon for a particular setting.
Mark Garringer |
LazarX wrote:BTW, if you're going to cite evidence of revolvers in a long out of print Paizo work, that's been effectively errataed out just like Asmodian Paladins.Huh? Just because something is out of print (presumably you mean the original Pathfinder Campaign Setting book) doesn't mean that it is no longer valid as resource material in establishing what is and/or isn't canon for a particular setting.
He's referring, I believe, to the fact that under the original Campaign Setting, Alkenstar and guns were much, much older than they are now under the World Guide. Like thousands of years vs a hundred or so.
Thraxital |
Thraxital wrote:Guns however do not, nor are they common anywhere outside of Alkenstar. Gunslinger is a better fit for a world that has guns longer and more common then what is found upon Golarion.
Couldn't Spellslings come from Numeria?
pg 143 Inner Sea Guide bottom of last paragraph" Other rumors speak of even larger constructs, including strange insectoid behemoths capable of spitting fire and metal from ttheir boedies with devestating power" pg 142 has a picture of it.
So they have giant mechs with machine guns attached, just no guns?
Dragnmoon |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
pg 143 Inner Sea Guide bottom of last paragraph" Other rumors speak of even larger constructs, including strange insectoid behemoths capable of spitting fire and metal from ttheir boedies with devestating power" pg 142 has a picture of it.
So they have giant mechs with machine guns attached, just no guns?
They have Laser Beams not Guns!!
We need a Laserslinger class!!
;)
LazarX |
LazarX wrote:BTW, if you're going to cite evidence of revolvers in a long out of print Paizo work, that's been effectively errataed out just like Asmodian Paladins.Huh? Just because something is out of print (presumably you mean the original Pathfinder Campaign Setting book) doesn't mean that it is no longer valid as resource material in establishing what is and/or isn't canon for a particular setting.
Actually in some cases it does. There's a Jacobs response to this which explains that the material was written long before they had any idea what they'd actually DO with guns in the setting itself. Since then, guns on Golarian have been defined as being emergent technology and much of that old text is to be ignored as it conflicts with later development.
Thraxital |
Thraxital wrote:pg 143 Inner Sea Guide bottom of last paragraph" Other rumors speak of even larger constructs, including strange insectoid behemoths capable of spitting fire and metal from ttheir boedies with devestating power" pg 142 has a picture of it.
So they have giant mechs with machine guns attached, just no guns?
They have Laser Beams not Guns!!
We need a Laserslinger class!!
;)
Well it says it is metal coming out, but besides that the whole Technic League sounds like the perfect basis for many of the gun archetypes. I didn't write the book, but it is in there. To say they do not exsist in Golarion is false.
If I am to ignore this material(which is a 2011 copy), then I guess no reason to buy any of the books previously printed since it is going to conflict. They must be taking ques from George Lucas.
Stormfriend RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32 |
Mark Moreland Director of Brand Strategy |
We have not created rules for future tech within the Pathfinder RPG except in a few cases in Kingmaker and Dungeons of Golarion. Turns out, we have a whole 300+ page book coming out next Gen Con on equipment; if that book contains rules for the type of technology found in Numeria, we'll consider it for legality in the campaign at that time.
ArVagor |
We have not created rules for future tech within the Pathfinder RPG except in a few cases in Kingmaker and Dungeons of Golarion. Turns out, we have a whole 300+ page book coming out next Gen Con on equipment; if that book contains rules for the type of technology found in Numeria, we'll consider it for legality in the campaign at that time.
Wait -- in Kingmaker?!?!? Where??? I need to go have a chat with my DM! >:-)
Mok |
You just made the best argument for the ban that's put in place. While it may sound "neat" for your character... That's a character that belongs in Eberron, not Golarian. Because guns even in magic-dead Alkenstar aren't that advanced. BTW, if you're going to cite evidence of revolvers in a long out of print Paizo work, that's been effectively errataed out just like Asmodian Paladins.
Well, I'm not all that concerned with guns anymore. They are here to stay and we've got perhaps the rest of the decade for their presence to percolate in the genre conventions. Younger gamers will only know a fantasy world where guns sit along side swords and armor.
What I want to see are the laser guns from Numeria.
While the Spellslinger isn't legal, good old "skinning" is still available. I've been working on a Summoner build that would be used to make a Numerian Technic League member who's become a Pathfinder to help find and report on lost Numerian tech that has been distributed in the world.
The Summoner has a nice long list of spells that I can use wands for that will allow to be reskinned as laser guns. Meanwhile the Eidolon will be a Gearman from Skyfall in Numeria, who is "summoned" via a cranial receiver that the Technic League guy had implanted. The Gearman is housed at Skyfall and can be brought to the Technic character via Star Trek like Transporter beaming, and likewise has failsafe devices to transport it back if it is too damaged or just needs to be sent away.
I might dip into Gunslinger to get the pistol to act as some kind of short range low strength phaser.
I've got some appropriate Star Wars figures, a guy with a gun in hand, plus a droid for the gearman. With those on the table and me saying "Pew! Pew!" when I roll to attack with my scorching ray wand it should ensure that everyone at the table knows this is a guy from Numeria with out of this world technology.
The legacy of Expedition to the Barrier Peaks shall not be forgotten!
Illrigger |
We have not created rules for future tech within the Pathfinder RPG except in a few cases in Kingmaker and Dungeons of Golarion. Turns out, we have a whole 300+ page book coming out next Gen Con on equipment; if that book contains rules for the type of technology found in Numeria, we'll consider it for legality in the campaign at that time.
Well, cat's out of the bag on that, then ;)
lostpike |
Robb Smith wrote:seekerofshadowlight wrote:
Allowing those archetypes would be counter to the flavor of Golarion.
Wrong. What is the difference between a Wizard or sorcerer who takes one level of gunslinger and the rest in Wizard, or a Paladin with one level in Gunslinger and the rest in paladin?
The answer is: a couple of class abilities.
.
This is incorrect. Take the spellslinger, they have mastered combining magic and firearms. Yet the only place where they could gain such mastery is the one place magic does not work. Same with the holy gun or the musketeer, both of theses require a world were guns are more common.
For a home game its not a big issue, but if 700 "rare" spellslingers show up in PFS, then the gun is no longer rare or new in golarion as whole schools have mastered the art of both firearms and magic and mixing the two.
Its pure flavor and it simply does not fit the setting, same with godless clerics and such. Not all generic options will fit any given setting.
This is what I am afraid is going to happen after the race book comes out. We will have 700+ Asimars running around....