Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think one of the things you may be missing is that Dungeon and Dragon were not tied into 1 game world. All of the adventure paths now fit into Golarion. So do all the Pathfinder Society and Modules lines. Paizo isn't in the buisness of publishing random adventures that were found in Dungeon, where you had support for many different campaign settings.
I think this is a blessing and a curse. I like that Paizo can focus their creativity and energy in 1 place. I like that it fits together nicely. Overall, I think it works. The downside is though that Paizo is not producing as much adventure support for things that do not fit into their world. It reduces the creative material for people who want to do non-standard campaign settings. In general though, I don't think that is something that Paizo needs to work on, and I would rather they focus and don't compete with themselves the way TSR did.
Worth keeping in mind are two of the MOST common comments we had from subscribers and customers for Dungeon magazine:
1) "I only buy issues with Adventure Path installments in them."
2) "I don't run games set in [insert campaign setting here], so any adventure that's set in [that campaign setting] is useless to me."
I think one of the things you may be missing is that Dungeon and Dragon were not tied into 1 game world. All of the adventure paths now fit into Golarion. So do all the Pathfinder Society and Modules lines. Paizo isn't in the buisness of publishing random adventures that were found in Dungeon, where you had support for many different campaign settings.
I think this is a blessing and a curse. I like that Paizo can focus their creativity and energy in 1 place. I like that it fits together nicely. Overall, I think it works. The downside is though that Paizo is not producing as much adventure support for things that do not fit into their world. It reduces the creative material for people who want to do non-standard campaign settings. In general though, I don't think that is something that Paizo needs to work on, and I would rather they focus and don't compete with themselves the way TSR did.
I think the support for non campaign specific AP's is not an issue.
Any generic module or AP would still have to have place names, that DM's could include or change at will.
I ran Legacy of Fire in FOrgotten Realms and it worked out perfect for Zakhara. I changed some background that is all.
After the inner sea guide I decided the quality was equal to the old forgotten realms so I made the switch.
I think for some people and some games it has a major effect. Its not just location, but the feel of the campaign. Forgotten Realms feels different than Darksun, Planescape, Mystara, and Dragon Lance.
Sure, I can write an adventure that feels in place in most of those with minor fluff changes. But I can also write a Mystara adventure that goes into its more steampunk/renaissance aspects. When I write a Dragon Lance adventure, there is a feel of much lower level of magic in the everyday world, so low level characters going after a powerful artifact, that is really only a +2 weapon, makes sense, and you can utalize non-magical ways of doing things very well. In Forgotten Realms, the idea that the same weapon is powerful is laughable, and using more fantastical elements works.
If I do a Darksun module, I can explore aspects of magic reducing the life in the surrounding area. I can further develop the setting, and maybe explore something new, thanks to that setting having this unique aspect. You may be able to reflavor the module, but it will take more work than a simple reskinning to make it work right in annother setting.
Planescape can bring in all sorts of weirdness into the game. These things are not easily replicated in a more generic fantasy setting.
Golarion has a certain feel. Things work a certain way. Ideas conform to that way of thinking. When new, awesome ideas get introduced, they still fit into that mold. If you only support 1 mold, your not producing as much stuff for people who don't want to use any mold.
AP’s are great for my group I don’t see them getting stale anytime soon. My group has always loved the linked together campaign adventures. For 2.0 and 3.5 my groups best experience have been; Against the Slavelords, Dragonlance (both the original and the one the new one that came out a few years ago for 3.5), the Oasis campaign, Iron Mountain, and Taulus. We got in a rut and wanted something like this but couldn’t find anything. 3.5 was on its way out we hated the idea of 4.0. Our group that has been together playing since 1979 was about to stop playing table top games. Then we discovered AP’s. We have played RotR, CC, SS, and in the middle of Kingmaker. On the docket we are planning on playing Jade Regent, Bones and shackles. CotCT.
So far there is no burn out here.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ Caineach,
Earlier in the Thread I mentioned Birthright, Dark Sun & Planescape -- I used those as examples not just because they are really different from traditional-like GH, FR & Golarion, but because they were quite popular.
.
But I believe setting Fluff is only part of it -- Golarion is designed to have lots of various settings all in one.
What we see now is that, though several mini-settings are used the overall feel of most of the adventures are becoming more and more uniform. Part 1 of pretty much all the APs have many similar construct or framework motifs. Some of that you can't avoid because those really early levels don't have much room for framework variability. But even in the other volumes some of the same things can be seen every time.
The first time this was pointed out to me it was in our Carrion Crown game. One of the Players (pretty new to gaming) remarked that the room we'd just entered was, in one form or another, in all the Paizo adventures he's seen (maybe half a dozen). That prompted a brief discussion in the group about similar motifs in all of Paizo's stuff.
As the lone subscriber & House Paizo-super-supporter, I spent my time defending Paizo (of course -- Paizo rules all!), arguing that things such as safe rooms in a dungeon, plenty of time off the plot for crafting, the same ole Knowledge &/or Diplomacy aspects, etc., etc. have to be in all the adventures because they have to appeal to a variety of DMs and gaming groups.
And that's absolutely true.
But after a couple days thinking about it I realizied that despite that, so many of the individual dungeons or towns or sub-plots or whatever are the same.
And as we've said, Paizo's current AP model cannot allow for big risk taking trying something new. And the Society Scenarios, by design, need to be standardized. That leaves the Modules -- to which I'm a Charter Subscriber as well.
But the Modules are the same as everything else. Even the Superstar winning modules feel like everything else.
I just figured that with the upheval in the industry right now it might be an opportune time for Paizo to see if they want to alter the AP model into something a bit different in a year-and-a-half at GenCon 2013.
I guess it's not.
Yeah it would be pretty foolish to change the Ap style with subscriptions still strong and it making money.
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If folks are seeing "exact same rooms" showing up over and over again, it's a lot more helpful if one actually mentions what room you're talking about and how it's the "same" as other rooms in other adventures. Because I suspect the likelihood of that happening is VERY high... but whether or not it's by design or on accident I don't know. Can't know, without knowing what room is being talked about.
AKA: When giving feedback, more details are ALWAYS useful than skirting the issue. Use spoiler tags if you're worried about giving something away... but I can't address or consider possible problems unless I have those details.
So sorry to threadjack, but...
And we'll keep testing boundaries and limits with the APs. Coming up we've got things like naval battles, adventures that start the PCs out with NO equipment, true sequals to previous APs, and plenty more "risks and innovations" planned for the future for APs that I'm not yet at liberty to speak about.
.....James, can you say which one if we ask nicely? :D
Shattered Star, which will come out after Skull and Shackles is more or less Rise of the Runelords part 2.
Shattered Star, which will come out after Skull and Shackles is more or less Rise of the Runelords part 2.
....oh my. Thanks for the info.
|
Creative Director
|
Shattered Star, which will come out after Skull and Shackles is more or less Rise of the Runelords part 2.....oh my. Thanks for the info.
Actually... Shattered Star is more or less the sequel to all of the Varisia-based Adventure Paths, particularly Rise of the Runelords AND Curse of the Crimson Throne, but also to a little bit to Second Darkness.
It doesn't really carry on the exact storylines or themes of those previous Adventure Paths, though... it's more a sequel in that Shattered Star will assume that the events of Runelords, Crimson Throne, and Second Darkness have all occurred, and thus Shattered Star progresses with key elements from those APs in recent memory... things like:
Shattered Star, which will come out after Skull and Shackles is more or less Rise of the Runelords part 2.....oh my. Thanks for the info.Actually... Shattered Star is more or less the sequel to all of the Varisia-based Adventure Paths, particularly Rise of the Runelords AND Curse of the Crimson Throne, but also to a little bit to Second Darkness.
It doesn't really carry on the exact storylines or themes of those previous Adventure Paths, though... it's more a sequel in that Shattered Star will assume that the events of Runelords, Crimson Throne, and Second Darkness have all occurred, and thus Shattered Star progresses with key elements from those APs in recent memory... things like:
** spoiler omitted **
Awesomeness. Looking forward to it!!
I spent my time defending Paizo (of course -- Paizo rules all!), arguing that things such as safe rooms in a dungeon, plenty of time off the plot for crafting, the same ole Knowledge &/or Diplomacy aspects, etc., etc. have to be in all the adventures because they have to appeal to a variety of DMs and gaming groups.
No safe rooms in dungeons or time off for crafting in Second Darkness. (That's the only AP I know all the way through, as I'm DMing it and playing in most of the others.)
As far as Knowledge and Diplomacy rolls being important ... aren't they in all adventures beyond straight-up hack-n-slash? No one complains about Acrobatics or Perception or Stealth being useful in all the Paizo APs, and I'm willing they get used a whole lot more than the one or two PCs who generally shoulder the role Knowledge and Diplomacy checks for the party.
|
|
It's the room with the monster and the treasure in it.
At the risk of sounding sincere, the incident from specifically from our Campaign that came up was...
(I didn't mention specifically earlier cuz I didn't want to deal with spoilers, but, it was asked, so.)
Also, please take my comments as they're intended, sure constructive criticism but more just customer concern -- from a fan and long-time customer who, though I enjoy the stuff I subscribe to, am concerned that we're not too far from design stagnation.
.
.
.
@ Joanna,
It's not so much that Knowledge & Diplomacy are there -- I dunno how to articulate it -- it's just that the situations or whatever all happen exactly the same way no matter the adventure. I wish I could be more articulate.
What other dungeons have "safe rooms?" The only one I've run across was in Crypt of the Everflame, although as I said, I haven't run all the way through any of the other APs but SD.
|
Creative Director
|
I do take the comments as they're intended... never fear.
But yeah... the inclusion of "safe rooms," particularly in really low-level areas, is kind of important, especially in cases where the PCs might not be able to quickly retreat. Resources are SO limited for low level characters (some more than others) that we put "safe rooms" in adventures on purpose, so that the PCs DO have a chance to periodically stop, catch their breath, and recover.
If those safe rooms do nothing more than force some GMs who get a bit too eager to overwhelm PCs with wave after wave of foes to give the PCs a break, then good.
THAT SAID... just as you'll stop being frightened by and start anticipating the scares in horror movies if, like me, you watch hundreds of them... if you play a lot of Adventure Paths by Pazio Publishing, you'll start to get in sync with our design philosophies and or ruts and all that. If you do this and your players start noticing patterns and that actually starts to distract from the game... the GM needs to notice this as well—it's as much (perhaps MORE) the GM's responsibility to present a fun game to the players as it is ours, after all! In such a case, with the players expecting safe rooms, maybe it's a good time to have a safe room actually NOT be safe.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
RL kickoff: Help Ameiko deal with a family tragedy.
I don't see RotRL like that at all. The kickoff is GOBLIN ATTACK, followed by a few things around town in the aftermath of that. It's more like the 3rd thing to help Ameiko, and even then, when I've run it twice, the players were much more focused on more goblins being in town causing mayhem, and that there's something behind it, than that there's family trouble for Ameiko.
...that being said, it's a matter of personal perception, but I don't think you characterized the kickoff of RotRL accurately.
|
I think that these kickoffs are being shoehorned.
ST kickoff: Help Lavinia deal with a family tragedy. Not read
RL kickoff: Help Ameiko deal with a family tragedy. Nope: goblins
CT kickoff: Help Zalara deal with a family tragedy. Nope: Revenge me of my murder is not 'deal with family tragedy.
CC kickoff: Help Kendra deal with a family tragedy. Not read.
JR kickoff: Haven't read it but it sounds a lot like a "damsel in distress" kickoff again with Ameiko. Help Ameiko deal with a family tragedy in her home country. Are you kidding me! How is 'damsel in distress' the same thing as 'deal with family tragedy'? And that's not even how it works...
So that's a maximum of 2 out of 11.
Man, that trope is painfully old hat...
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To W E Ray, I think the claim that APs make Paizo disinclined to try new things or experiment is clearly and demonstrably not true. James rattled off a laundry list of oddball experimental topics, themes, situations, and mechanics that the APs have introduced and employed to keep things fresh and different, from romance and notoriety to running a business or a kingdom to participating in a play or trial or stopping a plague to making a hundred wishes. These are miles away from common ground that has been trod a hundred times.
Variability in adventures is finite, but I think you're selling it far short of reality in claiming that APs aren't already being pretty adventurous and inventive.
It's the room with the monster and the treasure in it.
Not the one with the Orc guarding a treasure chest?!?!?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I believe there was a pie in that chest.
|
|
I think by "exact same" room he was describing how there is (pretty much) always a room in a hostile complex where the PCs can hole up and rest. I believe this is a deliberate design choice and not some kind of overlooked error or lack of creativity. I personally love the safe room and my AP experienced players always gleefully seek it out upon entering a hostile complex. However, I have been on the opposite side of popular opinion on these boards enough to say that I understand the "complaint" even though I don't subscribe to it.
Yesterday I was re-reading the Gamemastery guide and noticed a sidebar suggesting to implement safe rooms in big dungeons, so doing that it is a game philosophy for Paizo.
In my games I will implement them or not depending on what the players have done and the actual organization of the opposition. I generally dislike the "sleep safe 1 room away from the monster lair" of most computer RPG and so I avoid it in pen and paper games, but it can be used when the opposition is unthinking or has reason not to aggressively search for the player characters. naturally my players know of this prference so they rarely try to hole up in a room to rest.
Might Paizo initiate a dialog in the near future to consider changing the model for its flagship product, the Adventure Paths, now that the gaming industry, changes led by other companies, is heading for a major overhaul?
I see two possibilities:
Paizo will keep its publishing model and ride the "stability" platform to get new customers unhappy with other companies' new stuff.
Or,... Paizo will begin deciding if "soon" will be a good time to consider moving from Adventure Paths to something else, about the same time other companies publish their new stuff.For my own preference, I hope paizo considers moving away from Adventure Paths. Publish Shattered Star and maybe one final one in Absalom & The Spire of Nex, then begin a new model after volume 72 (12 full APs).
That will be GenCon 2013, the most likely date when other companies will finally publish their new gaming models. And Paizo introduce its shiny new flagship publication to replace the Adventure Path.
This also means that the final 2 APs would be more traditional, a Varisian "Rod of 7 Parts" campaign and an "Undermountain/ Greyhawk/ Ptolus" campaign -- right during the year long open playtests and greater industry dialog.
Hopefully a 96 page, softcover, perfect-bound book on high-quality paper featuring 2-3 independent adventures, one of which can be part of a longer campaign, and 1-2 gaming articles, plus comics, an editorial, book and game reviews and great art.
Um, F#$* THAT!
Reflexive reaction aside, it is business stupidity to throw your business model -- not to mention your highly successful business model -- out the window based on the unproven success your competitor MIGHT have.
Paizo beat the odds and moved to its most successful by doing what "conventional wisdom" told them was suicide. After Dungeon & Dragon were pulled from them, they could have crashed, burned, and folded, but they didn't. I'm sorry that D&D fans lost an adventure resource because of that, but you only have WotC to blame.
Paizo is not beholden to another company for its success now. Why in God's name would they willingly throw that away?
Seriously, WTF?
Sorry for such a strong reaction, but as a Paizo customer, an AP subscriber, a Companion subscriber, and a RPG subscriber, this kind of crap really pisses me off.
PF 2E?
No.
That's my prediction & my vote.
I don't know if saying the Modules line is struggling is actually accurate. It's not our best-selling line, for sure, but it does what it aims to do. Could we have more subscribers for it? You bet. But it gets no less attention than our other lines, and I believe offers things that no other line does or can without changing those lines away from the formula that makes them the successes they are. While you are correct that we currently publish three different lines of adventures, each is aimed at a different goal, and thus they wouldn't really serve to replace one another if one of the lines went away.
Just subscribed. I've been thinking about it for a while, but with the pace my kids' campaigns are digging into them and looking at the current lineup -- no more waiting.
I do not think the design philosophy of the APs needs to change.
There will always be ways to tweak the particulars to be better. But notice, that is precisely what we have seen. As long as we keep seeing rich and new campaigns, and ongoing interest in addressing common concerns that pop-up with APs I think we are good.
Noooo, please no Pathfinder 2.0. One reason why we changed games to Pathfinder is because we were pissed off we sunk so much money into 3.0 and 3.5 books just to have it all go to waste when 4.0 came out. We were simply not going to buy another Players handbook, Dungeon Master Guide, Monster Manual and a host of other books from WotC for the 3rd time in 10 years.
I haven't read every post in this thread, but I'd like to just say a few things about Adventure Paths, Modules, Golarion, and my purchasing patterns.
I bought RotR, Kingmaker and parts of a couple other adventure paths. I ran part of RotR, and am using parts of Kingmaker in my current campaign. As a DM, I got BORED running RotR, because I was making so FEW design and creative decisions as a DM.
However, Golarion is a very distinctly flavored world (for comparison, I play an E6 version of 3.5e) and it doesn't really suit me. I would LOVE to have Paizo-quality adventures that were NOT Golarion specific, that were fairly low-level and were easy to tweak to fit my campaign world (at least some of the time).
So, I don't buy Paizo adventure paths, or modules. And I mourn... :(
Even a "twice yearly" compilation of adventures that were generic would THRILL me.
|
|
I haven't read every post in this thread, but I'd like to just say a few things about Adventure Paths, Modules, Golarion, and my purchasing patterns.
I bought RotR, Kingmaker and parts of a couple other adventure paths. I ran part of RotR, and am using parts of Kingmaker in my current campaign. As a DM, I got BORED running RotR, because I was making so FEW design and creative decisions as a DM.
However, Golarion is a very distinctly flavored world (for comparison, I play an E6 version of 3.5e) and it doesn't really suit me. I would LOVE to have Paizo-quality adventures that were NOT Golarion specific, that were fairly low-level and were easy to tweak to fit my campaign world (at least some of the time).
So, I don't buy Paizo adventure paths, or modules. And I mourn... :(
Even a "twice yearly" compilation of adventures that were generic would THRILL me.
I'm sorry that you had that experience. I ran RotRL and completely made it my own. I took the AP as a base and turned the whole thing on it's head. Instead of discovering the Runelords and Thassilon, I had the main theme more of a "You are connected to Thassilon, but you have forgotten, over the course of 10,000 years..." and my players loved it!
I did fall into the trap of letting the AP do the work when I was lazy, which led to some problems that I had to fix later (with the changes that I had made earlier) but all in all it was a great springboard and reference for me as I really made it mine.
|
|
I'm opposed to Gillian's idea.
I've got tons and tons of GH adventures that I like to run or play in: In the last 2 years I've played a Homebrew in Istivin in the time of Vaughan's Abyss trilogy, the A Series, and now a Homebrew Return to Tsojcanth campaign. I'm also designing a Horned Society campaign and have pretty much every "famous" GH adventure ever written to run.
I've also got tons of FR adventures and though it's been a few years since I've played or ran there -- I will certainly play there again.
What I have less of (and thus a desire for more of) is Golarion stuff -- although as a Charter AP & Modules subscriber and purchaser of a few dozen Society Scenarios, my Pathfinder stuff is catching up.
The thing that has always troubled me is my Dungeon collection of generic adventures. With over 500 Dungeon adventures on my shelves, most of which I could grab and play today, the hardest thing for me is deciding if it should be in GH or FR or Golarion (or maybe DL or somewhere else.)
And when I'm just taking bits and pieces from Dungeon -- which is more often the case nowadays -- the struggle is convincing myself this generic adventure is "more or less" good for the campaign I'm designing.
About a year ago I did a Homebrew mini-campaign in GH and went bonkers deciding if I should supplement it with this or that piece or map from Dungeon.
Let 3RD party Publishers make the generic-setting adventures while Paizo continues to make theirs in Golarion.
That's my vote (assuming we're counting).
|
Creative Director
|
ANY publishing company can publish world-generic adventures. Only one can publish adventures set in Golarion—Paizo.
That in and of itself would be argument enough to keep us focused on Golarion.
But more to the point... Golarion is very important to us. We've tried a couple of times to shift adventures away from being obviously set in Golarion, and the results were less than satisfying. Furthermore, we don't want to split our audience between those who prefer Golarion world content and prefer non-Golarion world content. That's just not the way we do things.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a DM, I got BORED running RotR, because I was making so FEW design and creative decisions as a DM....snip...
This is I buy Adventure Paths.
I am a busy bee, I don't have the time for campaign design any more and, if I am honest, I'm not as good at it as the Paizo crew.
Golarion is an amazing world in which to adventure, my players love it.
Just a different perspective.
First off, let me say that I have been on-board with the AP's since their inception. I was a big fan of the format in Dungeon, and when the chance came to switch the Pathfinder APs, I gladly converted my subscription dollars.
I LIKE the APs. Overall, I enjoy reading and running them, and I am looking forward to many more.
The O.P.'s point did remind me of the only...limitation(?) I can see. Multiple APs that cover ground or storylines, that my group is not interested in. So aside from mining it for good ideas to seed into other adventures I have had months go with no real workable AP to use.
I know I am but one person, who represents just one group, I know this. I just wish there was a way to spread the love around if there happens to be a stretch of APs that do not pertain to me.
I also purchase the modules, and at one time or another, I have subrscribed to every part of the Pathfinder line that exists. This should not be taken as a complaint, there is just soooo much to explore, and it seems as though there are times when they hit on things that do not always pertain to all groups, a more specialized...flavor(?)
The Jade Regent and Skull & Shackles are two good examples. I like the Jade Regent as a read, and Skull & Shackles sounds like it will be pretty cool, I do not have the party interest in them, so will have a black hole in my game lists for a year straight.
I guess this is just a long winded way to say, "I wish there were a profitable way to see more adventure (paths) set in a wider area of the world."
Format change? Nah. I like the set-up, and various articles of interest, although the fiction is something I usually skip over to tell the truth.
As a DM, I got BORED running RotR, because I was making so FEW design and creative decisions as a DM....snip...This is I buy Adventure Paths.
I am a busy bee, I don't have the time for campaign design any more and, if I am honest, I'm not as good at it as the Paizo crew.
Golarion is an amazing world in which to adventure, my players love it.
Just a different perspective.
+1
being a single father I just get my one day a week to run my game let alone how much time I would need to create adventures on the scale of the AP my stuff isnt even close. I do make small changes to the creatures and some of the stuff but I think most people put their own spin on their APs
We've tried a couple of times to shift adventures away from being obviously set in Golarion, and the results were less than satisfying.
I'd like to underline this for you.
Within my groups Golarion has never really "clicked". We play all our games there but it's with limited enthusiasm. It's not bad by ANY means, but we got really hooked on Eberron and Golarion just didn't steal our hearts*.
That all said, I too prefer Paizo stay Golarion-centric. For anyone playing in Golarion, generic content means work to interpret and run. For anyone not playing in Golarion, generic content STILL means work to interpret and run.
There's really no logical argument for Paizo producing generic content, I think. Now... if you want to buy the Eberron property from WotC, I will happily be your minion for life.
In a nutshell, Eberron's setting is under tension. With the Last War having just finished four years earlier, and with the Five Nations and the hangers-on only marginally and uneasily at peace, and with the warforged being the very new and WTF race, and with the Quori doing their thing in Riedra, and, and, and... there's a bunch of "stuff" going on. Even if an adventure doesn't directly speak to any of those setting-events, the setting feels alive (to us) because of what's going on. Things appear to be happening, present tense. In Golarion - cool as it is - you've got a place where things are. There is a history, but there's few... world-shaking things going on that are central to the setting. Yes, the worldwound is a danger, but it's not... immediate. Paizo's design choices are such that the tension comes from an individual module or adventure path. Unfortunately my group got addicted to the habit of entangling our plots with the setting's plots, weaving a richer tapestry and having inspiration. That's 100% our opinion, and I only offer it in case anyone actually is interested in the reasoning, from a design standpoint. Again, we haven't actually played in Eberron in years, but we miss it sorely.
|
Personally I'd like to see MORE adventures and fewer "splat" books. That was my big attraction to Paizo and Pathfinder. But lately it seems like the rulebook/supplement book-to-adventure ratio is more like 3:1 or something. Opening up a whole 'nother continent (Tian Xia) and soon Planets(!) just seems like its going to dilute the adventures more.
Personally I'd like to see MORE adventures and fewer "splat" books. That was my big attraction to Paizo and Pathfinder. But lately it seems like the rulebook/supplement book-to-adventure ratio is more like 3:1 or something. Opening up a whole 'nother continent (Tian Xia) and soon Planets(!) just seems like its going to dilute the adventures more.
I agree. We have a massive landscape that has been barely touched in some cases, and it is expanding again? Tian Xia was inevitable I guess, but Planets as well?
It's not the idea of exploring more that bothers me, it's the lack of attention this will invite. It has already been stated that the stable of manpower and talent is nearly over-used as it is, adding more to the plate must then logically lead to other things getting moved to the back-burner.
I kind of like the idea of the Adventure Paths covering new territory ("countries") EVERY story arc. Each story could take place in a neighboring area, so that the stories could still have some cross-over ability.
|
|
In a nutshell, Eberron's setting is under tension.
I loved Shadowrun background and the way it evolved, with every RL year being mirrored by a 1 year evolution in the world storyline and by some of the previous adventures being subsumed in the world backstory but that made older adventures outdated and sometime totally unusable depending on the year in which you started your campaign.
The Eberron setting has the same problem. To feel alive and under tension the way you want it it need to evolve constantly. But then the adventures more linked to the landscape of the world become obsolete.
I lord X is a great mover and shaker of the world and in one adventure you are supposed to thwart his plains hard, forcing him to flee to another country, all the adventures set in a later date would assume he will live in a foreign land and doing his manipulations from afar. So you could not play any earlier adventure in the same setting with Lord X in power unless you respec Lord X (essentially changing the character name). But after a time respeccing all the characters in identical clones with a different name will break your setting, making it extremely static.
"What matter if we defeat X? We will get Y that is identical to him."
Managing a constantly evolving world is problematic, especially as the player schedule will not be consistent with the world schedule.
For the players a year can pass in the blink of a eye or a day in the playing world can require several weekly encounters.
I love some evolution in the playing world but generally it need to be done in a way that will not disrupt play.
|
Personally I'd like to see MORE adventures and fewer "splat" books. That was my big attraction to Paizo and Pathfinder. But lately it seems like the rulebook/supplement book-to-adventure ratio is more like 3:1 or something. Opening up a whole 'nother continent (Tian Xia) and soon Planets(!) just seems like its going to dilute the adventures more.I agree. We have a massive landscape that has been barely touched in some cases, and it is expanding again? Tian Xia was inevitable I guess, but Planets as well?
It's not the idea of exploring more that bothers me, it's the lack of attention this will invite. It has already been stated that the stable of manpower and talent is nearly over-used as it is, adding more to the plate must then logically lead to other things getting moved to the back-burner.
I kind of like the idea of the Adventure Paths covering new territory ("countries") EVERY story arc. Each story could take place in a neighboring area, so that the stories could still have some cross-over ability.
Paizo have said that they're not going to expand into more continents soon, and they won't be coming back to Tian Xia in the immediate future except possibly in PFS. The next six months will involve fully detailing the Shackles, and then the next six months will be back to Varisia.
Random speculation implies that Irisien will see development next year, but nothing is definate that far out.
|
|
I just wanted to throw an idea out there that I would like to see that would kind of harken, back to the days of Dragon / Dungeon and maybe appease some of the folks that aren't as big on the APs.
I miss the old Best of Dragon collections and I'd kind of like to see something similar for Pathfinder. As an example, I know some of the articles fromRotRL were cut from the revision that's coming out, so throw those in the first one, along with maybe some from Curse. Fill out the rest of the book with useful articles ( maybe expanded) from the Paizo blog, like the Sable Company ranger or the expanded list of subdomains, and you'd have a good book.
I think a book like this, once a year, would be really nice. It would let Paizo touch on topics that they maybe don't want to devote a whole book to, but would let them get something out there. It might even be a place where they could test the waters to see if a certain topic attracts enough interest for further development.
Anywho, just an idea...
Personally I'd like to see MORE adventures and fewer "splat" books. That was my big attraction to Paizo and Pathfinder. But lately it seems like the rulebook/supplement book-to-adventure ratio is more like 3:1 or something. Opening up a whole 'nother continent (Tian Xia) and soon Planets(!) just seems like its going to dilute the adventures more.
I don't understand how detailing new locations, be they cities, countries, continents, or planets, might dilute the adventures.
Then again, I love planets. My dream AP would be one that spans all the planets in Golarion's solar system. Or at least the most interesting ones (Castrovel, Akiton, and Eox).
Besides, it's only one book about the planets. Unless there are droves of planet-fans like me, chances are it will only ever be one book.