How do you estimate the relevance of Golarion in the future of Pathfinder products?
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Golarian works fine as a setting.
Will Paizo cling to Golarion as a setting world? Will they concentrate on a new setting in the future?
Why would they want a new setting?
Which role does D&D 5. Ed play? Is Paizo forced to create a new setting in preparation for D&D Next?
Why would they? Paizo have cut free from WotC dependency. D&D 5 is unlikely to challenge them seriously as edition fatigue sets in, in fact I would not be surprised if D&D 5 flopped compared to 4 and 4.
Golarion seems to work out just fine so far for Paizo, and there's still alot of room for improvements and additions.
So why should the scrap it and start over?
|
Golarion seems to work out just fine so far for Paizo, and there's still alot of room for improvements and additions.
So why should the scrap it and start over?
I imagine at some point (if not already) it will suffer from "lore bloat"; players, DMs, or whole groups will feel intimidated by the amount of information on the setting and pass.
There's no criticism here - there is a spectrum of players. Some don't want any pregen worlds, some want a nice middle ground with simple history, and others like lots of detail. The more details published, the closer Golarion gets to serving the latter group exclusively.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you want a homegrown world, use PF and ignore Golarion completely. Done.
If you want a "middle-ground" world, just take maybe the Inner Sea Primer or something else you like and ignore the rest.
Noone forces you to use everything, just because it's there.
As long as they don't progress the timeline the setting can continue to grow and the only difference between 'nice middle ground' and 'lots of detail' is which books you buy and how many.
This.
The great thing about a fully detailed setting is that a GM has a resource for just about anything they want. This does not dictate that they have to use anything, though. Using the skeleton of a setting to be the backbone of your campaigns is just as viable as using every last detailed description of every place, faction, government, environment, etc.
Generally speaking, only one setting I'm aware of has suffered lore bloat. So beyond that setting it really isn't something to look at as a model other settings might suffer from. In general paizos marketing of golarion seems to deliberately avoid it.
Although there may be a small amount of varisia bloat...
It may have been at it's most popular, but the splitting of the customer base is the #1 reason why TSR went out of business. It would take me a couple of hours to explain why this was the case, but as the person responsible at WotC for taking the old TSR data and analyzing it to see why they went belly up, the biggest cause that I found was splitting the customer base into segments. Whether it was D&D vs. AD&D. Or Forgotten Realms vs. Ravenloft vs. Greyhawk vs. Dragonlance vs. Birthright vs. Dark Sun vs. Planescape vs. Mystara vs. Al-Qadim vs. Spelljammer vs. Lanhkmar vs. any other setting book that they produced. Splitting the customer base means lower sales on any particular product which means lower profit margins which eventually means going belly up.
-Lisa
Extracted from Could there be a Beginner Box 2?
So, thats why I believe Golarion is so diverse as to contain space traveling, machine-goodness and firearms. Its meant to be the One Setting and try as best to fit any story.
While I dont see Golarion as the best setting ever, theres plenty of good stuff in it so I can just remove the parts I dont want and, say, replace Numeria for Hollowfaust.
So, I dont believe we are seeing anything else from Paizo other than Golarion.
Now, 5E, James Jacobs admits concern on his "Ask JJ questions topic", as well as any wise Paizofolk.
I was hoping for Paizo striking out the Epic Rules for PF at the same time 5E is released, but honestly thats just me. So far, their been silent about their move onto the RPG playing field. At least as far as I know.
I imagine at some point (if not already) it will suffer from "lore bloat"; players, DMs, or whole groups will feel intimidated by the amount of information on the setting and pass.
There's no criticism here - there is a spectrum of players. Some don't want any pregen worlds, some want a nice middle ground with simple history, and others like lots of detail. The more details published, the closer Golarion gets to serving the latter group exclusively.
I believe that Paizo will indeed cling to Golarion into the foreseeable future, and I also agree that the above is the most likely probability.
(I'm definitely okay with Paizo clinging to Golarion [as they have properly designed that world to handle a wide variety of adventures], as long as they realize that people may increasingly wish to use their APs outside of Golarion. So that means more CotCT and less JR or SD as time goes on.)
How do you estimate the relevance of Golarion in the future of Pathfinder products?Will Paizo cling to Golarion as a setting world? Will they concentrate on a new setting in the future?
Which role does D&D 5. Ed play? Is Paizo forced to create a new setting in preparation for D&D Next?
‘Cling to’ seems a loaded phrase to me. It suggests desperation / drowning / no other place to go. If we replace that with ‘will Paizo support Golarion as a setting in the future’ then you can see how one has negative connotations, and the other positive.
To be honest, I don’t really understand the question. ‘Is Paizo forced to create a new setting in preparation for D&D Next’. Why would D&D Next mean a new setting? It’s not as if Paizo are supporting 5th Edition, and their game world is in some way incompatible. Do you mean that gamers will be so excited by the prospect of something ‘new’ hitting the market that Paizo will be forced to counter by creating something ‘new’ themselves to avoid appearing behind the times and venerable?
I can see why you might think that D&D Next as a rule system might cause the Pathfinder rules (based as they are on 3rd edition) to look out of date (I don’t share that view, but I’m trying to understand the issue here), but I don’t understand how that affects their setting. Could you perhaps clarify?
I think that by and large Paizo have attracted the players that do NOT want huge amounts of rules bloat and constantly changing rules and new settings.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
When it comes to setting bloat, the big example is the Forgotten Realms, but I'm not so sure that it was a problem of too much lore so much as it was a problem of too many big events.
If the Realms hadn't been constantly changing, I could see people having a lot less hate for that setting. While there would still be the massive amount of lore from Ed Greenwood and company, folks would still have been able to pick up the core setting and get up to speed. Instead, stuff like the Time of Troubles, the Tuigan invasion, the death of Azoun, the resurrection of Bhaal, et cetera, et cetera really emphasized that if you weren't buying the books you didn't know the setting. Basically, the Realms forced people into buying the lore by constantly updating the setting, and then folks who wanted to stay up to date wound up getting intimidated by the massive amount of lore. In theory, at least.
By comparison, Golarion is a huge setting with a lot of detail, but it's easy to ignore the bulk to the detail if you feel like it. You can get the campaign setting book and then ignore everything else and work just fine. Sure, some people might nitpick lore details, but overall if somebody says, "We're playing in Golarion," there's a common ground among everybody at the table - you don't have to specify which event has happened and so on.
|
|
I agree that the Forgotten Realms had a problem with too many big events but I also think that a problem was created because every novel added to the lore of the Realms. And added high powered NPCs and situations that DMs sometimes had to take into account.
Now, when I played the realms I just ignored most of that and played in a small area of the Realms and rarely if ever dealt with a high powered NPC.
The Realms was my default world until Golarion came around. I have been using it since Burnt Offerings was released and plan to use it (except with I run Rappan Ahtuk and Slumbering Tsar) for my world for the foreseeable future.
|
|
To me, lore bloat is about a few things:
1) Players who love setting info absolutely hate it when that info is ignored or even worse contradicted.
2) As a DM it is much harder to build a consistent world through improvisation, published adventures (especially non-setting based), and houserules when there are reams of material to negate or contradict your efforts.
It's unfortunate, but a lot of players see published material as canon and cannot move past that fact.
|
How do you estimate the relevance of Golarion in the future of Pathfinder products?
I think it will continue to be used for the foreseeable future. It is a rich fantasy setting and I see little reason to drop it, especially with so many other amazing settings still left to explore and flesh out (Dragon Empires World Guide Anyone?).
Will Paizo cling to Golarion as a setting world? Will they concentrate on a new setting in the future?
I do not think that is beyond the realm of possibility, especially with several incredible and planets within the same solar system, as seen in Distant Worlds. However, the fine ladies and gentlemen of Paizo have been kind enough not to attach themselves at the hip to Golarion in every aspect, and while most their published materials is to be used for Golarion, their GameMastery Guide gives people who want to build their own fantasy settings the tools and ideas necessary to do so.
Which role does D&D 5. Ed play? Is Paizo forced to create a new setting in preparation for D&D Next?
Why should they want to do such a thing? Don't get me wrong, I would love to be involved with play-testing 5th Edition as much as the next guy; but I see no need for Paizo to abandon the ship that is the rather robust OGL-provided rules system and swim over to the rather nebulous rules system of 5th edition. Rather, I really see a fast-approaching future in which Paizo eventually overtakes WoTC as a growing enterprise.
At one time, D&D was the gold-standard of the Table-top RPG market. With Pathfinder having spread its wings so far and in such a relatively short amount of time, I do not think D&D will be the true bellwether it once was.
Lore bloat is another reason I like Eberron. Using the 3.5e campaign converted to Pathfinder, I no longer worry about good setting having anymore added to it except what I do to it. 4e has no affect on me there.
I like Golarion a lot, but I would be buying other campaign settings from Pazio, too, if they made them (which they won't).
I would think Pathfinder 2 would be more likely to motivate a new setting than D&D:Next. Having said that, I can't see Golarion losing any support for the next few years (and hope it doesnt for considerably longer than that).
I will confess to suffering a certain "Golarion fatigue" from time to time (the more recent campaign sourcebooks dont get read as immediately as they used to) but I think that's inevitable - presumably there's a certain ebb and flow, but provided that the new customers' enthusiasm is matching those old customers' whose attention drifts somewhat, I wouldnt expect any significant impact on Paizo's direction based on that.
|
I would be delighted if Paizo managed to purchase Eberron as Paizo Publishing's 'gonzo fantasy' setting. If you want classic fantasy, there's Golarion. You want something weirder/more postmodern? There's Eberron. And high level heroes can travel between each setting happily.
I am not too concerned about Forgotten Realms. It was glorious back in the day, but too many scalpels and mismatched world events have made it a weaker franchise. Also there's too much similarity with the Tolkienesque world of Golarion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I figure Golarion ain't broke, so I doubt Paizo's in a hurry to fix it.
Distant Worlds (to say nothing of Numeria) allows for plenty of "Gonzo Fantasy," I've ported many a Ravenloft pastiche into Ustalav, and the Dragon Empires have as yet gotten a mere cursory going-over. Then you have to figure we know next to nothing about Vudra, Iobaria got a single article in the Kingmaker path, Qadira stretches far to the east of the current map...
Paizo will have books to sell long after the Inner Sea region has been exhaustively cataloged.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having a single campaign setting is a business decision. With a single setting, even a kitchen sink setting like Golarion, you don't split your market for a particular product. I don't see Paizo's current ownership/management ever leaving Golarion, there is still enough to be filled in.
Before a new setting is developed, Paizo can work on: (1) the nations of the Inner Sea we have yet to see much of (Druma, Jalmeray, Molthune, Nex, Numeria, Rahadoumm, Thuvia); (2) the southern two thirds of the continent of Garund; (3) multiple unexplored continents like Arcadia and Sarusan; (4) the nations under the surface of the Oceans; (5) the Darklands across Golarion including the myriad vaults of Orv; (6) the distant worlds of the solar system; (7) the nearly infinite reaches of the Dark Tapestry; (8) the infinite planes of the Great Beyond; (9) Blackros Museum in Absalom.
The only places I personally think we have enough detailed info that I don't particulary want to see more are Absalom and Varisia.
While Pathfinder Campaign Setting isn't my favorite setting, I have to admit it is smart from a business stand point and from a GMs standpoint. Want a horror campaign, set it in Ustalav. Want a kingdom hopping and easy to topple kingdoms, River Kingdoms. Viking? Pirates? Jungle. Its all there. One setting that can cover over 90% of all campaigns you could want to play in. Its smart as a business and its smart as a GM. All you need is one core campaign setting book and the few books that cover that specific country you're playing in to get more depth.
And yes there are some people that do not care for it, feel it is to bland and so forth. But that's why us 3rd party publishers are here. We provide a different opportunity option for you without having to change rules systems.
Take Shadowsfall for example (shameless plug). Sure, you've got undead in Ustalav, but you don't have an overrun zombie apocalypse there. The Worldwound has is overrun with demons and there are crusades, but in both locations you do not have a sense of man kind is doomed and you're just trying to stay alive as long as possible type of feeling. You don't have roving warlord that may do questionably moral things to stay alive but are not outright evil. If the Pathfinder Campaign Setting did have them and you wanted to escape it, you could goto the next country and you'd be safe. That's what 3PP settings like Shadowsfall can deliver.
But how many people want to play that verses a basic goblin squashing game. Not as many actually. So it was smart of Paizo to go the route they did. And us 3PP will be here to help those looking for something else.
And about 5E, I really don't think Paizo has anything to fear from them.
|
|
Noone forces you to use everything, just because it's there.
Well, only if you're playing by yourself -- or with a group that wants everything you want or just follows whatever you want.
The caveat is that most groups have gamers who want different things. This was a big problem in playing FR -- some Players didn't know squat and that was cool for them; some Players new a little bit, kinda like your just-keep-the-primer example except in FR's case it's more like just-read-a-few-novels; but some Players know tons and tons and want to use it all.
In mixed groups like this it can be really tricky to find the right "degree" of published material to use. It can already be tricky if, for example, the DM has the Inner Sea Guide and the APs and a couple Players have the Inner Sea Guide and tons & tons of Companions & Chronicles.
Unfortunately, some gamers feel that the "solution" is to rule that whatever the DM wants to use is legitimate.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When it comes to setting bloat, the big example is the Forgotten Realms, but I'm not so sure that it was a problem of too much lore so much as it was a problem of too many big events.
This is a spot-on diagnosis I hadn't considered before.
A corollary from my personal experience is Dark Sun. I loved the original Dark Sun and all the actual setting books, but the advancing timeline with world-spanning events rapidly destroyed any interest I had in the setting. Not because the events were bad, necessarily, just because it became a pain to keep up with them.
So, as long as Paizo continues doing what they're doing, leaving it to each campaign (be it adventure path or homebrew) to advance the timeline and insert worldchanging events, we're going to be just fine.
Cheers!
Landon
|
Unfortunately, some gamers feel that the "solution" is to rule that whatever the DM wants to use is legitimate.
The problem with that is? The superior solutions are?
You could do what everyone else did and cut Numeria out of the game.
Why don't you just speak for yourself, rather than pretending to speak for everyone else? This is not a rhetorical question, it is a genuine inquiry.
You could do what everyone else did and cut Numeria out of the game.Why don't you just speak for yourself, rather than pretending to speak for everyone else? This is not a rhetorical question, it is a genuine inquiry.
Don't you see the horns? Can't you tell he's a devil?
It's his business to spread lies and deceit wherever he can! Comes with the territory! ;)
You could do what everyone else did and cut Numeria out of the game.
Wow! Thanks, I hadn't realised I'd done that. Now I can sleep easy at night knowing I have a spokesperson with an insight into my game.
|
|
Unfortunately, some gamers feel that the "solution" is to rule that whatever the DM wants to use is legitimate.The problem with that is? The superior solutions are?
Why don't you just speak for yourself, rather than pretending to speak for everyone else? This is not a rhetorical question, it is a genuine inquiry.
You could do what everyone else did and cut Numeria out of the game.
I think W E Ray was refering to how the inclusion of Numeria killed the setting for me. But to me that is like ignoring the Elephant in the room.
The awesome thing about the setting though is the ability to remove what you don't like.
Don't like numeria? don't use it. Problem. Solved.
Don't like a country of gun toting weirdo's? snip snip. not there anymore.
Don't like X? want more of Y? cut this, paste that, presto!
THere's so much good stuff though that if you are interested in a campaign setting pre-fab you are probably going to like most of it and will only have to "trim the fat" that you don't like off the sides, and go from there.
Which is why its so awesome :)
For myself, as much as I love Golarion, I really miss Spelljammer and Dark-Sun.. the rest of the stuff were just generic (to me) campaigns that just dropped in diff NPC's.. those two were really unique, and hard to "drop into" an existing world.
(as odd as that sounds, Spell Jammer really lends itself to its own setting rather than dropping space ports and interplanary flight into the normal mix of things, at least to me)
-S
|
Creative Director
|
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
Numeria is certainly a polarizing element—not everyone likes having lasers and robots in their game. That's a big part of why we designed the Inner Sea region to be modular, such that beyond a region's border, they don't have a LOT of impact on the rest of the region. That does result in a certain level of non-realism, I realize, but it's worth it to us in order to make Golarion as widely usable as possible to as many people as possible. So... if you happen to not like Numeria, (or Irrisen with its eternal winter, or Andoran with its democracy, or Belkzen with all those orcs, or whatever) you can turn that region into a blank-slate (either an empty wilderness or a nation of your own design) without significantly impacting the rest of the setting.
Now... that said... Numeria is one of the top requests from folks for more information about it, and is often requested as the site for an Adventure Path. Reaction to Numeria elements we've put into other books has been mostly positive as well. Chances of us doing something big with Numeria at some point in the near future are pretty high as a result... at which point folks who hate Numeria will, I guess, get a chance to let their wallets catch their breath!
at which point folks who hate Numeria will, I guess, get a chance to let their wallets catch their breath!
Or they might discover that they love what you're doing with it.
For instance, I originally had no interest in Distant Worlds (as I thought it would be too far removed from "ordinary" fantasy), but after leafing through it I found myself loving everything I read! You Paizonians are simply incapable of writing poor world lore material :)
|
|
Numeria is certainly a polarizing element—not everyone likes having lasers and robots in their game. That's a big part of why we designed the Inner Sea region to be modular, such that beyond a region's border, they don't have a LOT of impact on the rest of the region. That does result in a certain level of non-realism, I realize, but it's worth it to us in order to make Golarion as widely usable as possible to as many people as possible. So... if you happen to not like Numeria, (or Irrisen with its eternal winter, or Andoran with its democracy, or Belkzen with all those orcs, or whatever) you can turn that region into a blank-slate (either an empty wilderness or a nation of your own design) without significantly impacting the rest of the setting.
Now... that said... Numeria is one of the top requests from folks for more information about it, and is often requested as the site for an Adventure Path. Reaction to Numeria elements we've put into other books has been mostly positive as well. Chances of us doing something big with Numeria at some point in the near future are pretty high as a result... at which point folks who hate Numeria will, I guess, get a chance to let their wallets catch their breath!
I actually don't think that's a positive aspect of the setting. I rather have areas be interacting with each other. For example Andoran could sponsor coup of a Chelxian pro government. Defend a caravan with silk goals from the Dragon Empire.
|
|
I actually don't think that's a positive aspect of the setting. I rather have areas be interacting with each other. For example Andoran could sponsor coup of a Chelxian pro government. Defend a caravan with silk goals from the Dragon Empire.
That's not what he means by "not interacting". They interact like that all the time in various books, but what they don't do is spill over into each other much thematically (countries next door to Numeria don't have Numerian super-tech floating about, places near Ustalav lack extra vampires and werewolves, etc.), which is, I believe, what he's talking about.
|
|
I actually don't think that's a positive aspect of the setting. I rather have areas be interacting with each other. For example Andoran could sponsor coup of a Chelxian pro government. Defend a caravan with silk goals from the Dragon Empire.That's not what he means by "not interacting". They interact like that all the time in various books, but what they don't do is spill over into each other much thematically (countries next door to Numeria don't have Numerian super-tech floating about, places near Ustalav lack extra vampires and werewolves, etc.), which is, I believe, what he's talking about.
Well I also think that's also stupid. If a town borders of an area where guns is prevalent than I expect to find guns in that area.
Chances of us doing something big with Numeria at some point in the near future are pretty high as a result...
Oh James you sexy, sexy man. Looking forward to adamantine wielding barbarian goodness.
Echoing what has been said previously, I think there is a ton of life left in the setting. We have decent grasp on what Avistan feels like, as a broad whole. I've loved the setting books that have come out for the adventure paths. Take Kingmaker and River Kingdoms. River kingdoms have this nice little blurb in the campaign setting, but the book is awesome! Outsea! Daggermark! Mosswater! Nystra! Stolen Lands! That's one region, on one continent.
We have southern Garund. Arcadia. Sarusan. We know next to nothing about these areas. Casmoran? We know it's home to the two largest empires in the world, and Avistan only tastes the culture to be found in what the empire's citizen consider to be backwater areas of little importance. There is also a taste of what Ioboria is like, but this continent needs it's own campaign book. Dragon Empires? We have Gazetteer, that's it, barely enough information to keep PCs from eating with the wrong chopsticks!
I want to know this world.
Well I also think that's also stupid. If a town borders of an area where guns is prevalent than I expect to find guns in that area.I actually don't think that's a positive aspect of the setting. I rather have areas be interacting with each other. For example Andoran could sponsor coup of a Chelxian pro government. Defend a caravan with silk goals from the Dragon Empire.That's not what he means by "not interacting". They interact like that all the time in various books, but what they don't do is spill over into each other much thematically (countries next door to Numeria don't have Numerian super-tech floating about, places near Ustalav lack extra vampires and werewolves, etc.), which is, I believe, what he's talking about.
So put guns there. I've only played bits of a few adventure paths and already our, a collection of students who come and go, Golarion has its own unique quirks. Just think about how you envision the setting, and make it so.
Well I also think that's also stupid. If a town borders of an area where guns is prevalent than I expect to find guns in that area.I actually don't think that's a positive aspect of the setting. I rather have areas be interacting with each other. For example Andoran could sponsor coup of a Chelxian pro government. Defend a caravan with silk goals from the Dragon Empire.That's not what he means by "not interacting". They interact like that all the time in various books, but what they don't do is spill over into each other much thematically (countries next door to Numeria don't have Numerian super-tech floating about, places near Ustalav lack extra vampires and werewolves, etc.), which is, I believe, what he's talking about.
I don't think stupid is the right word - as James said:
"That does result in a certain level of non-realism, I realize, but it's worth it to us in order to make Golarion as widely usable as possible to as many people as possible."
so they're well aware of the problem, they just have to balance lots of things when deciding which way to go. For Paizo it's not just a matter of determining what makes the most sense or even (one would suspect) what they like the best. They have other factors to consider.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well I also think that's also stupid. If a town borders of an area where guns is prevalent than I expect to find guns in that area.I actually don't think that's a positive aspect of the setting. I rather have areas be interacting with each other. For example Andoran could sponsor coup of a Chelxian pro government. Defend a caravan with silk goals from the Dragon Empire.That's not what he means by "not interacting". They interact like that all the time in various books, but what they don't do is spill over into each other much thematically (countries next door to Numeria don't have Numerian super-tech floating about, places near Ustalav lack extra vampires and werewolves, etc.), which is, I believe, what he's talking about.
So do that...in your game.
There's nothing "stupid" about it. Rather Paizo should be applauded for not making choices for all groups.
|
|
Unfortunately, some gamers feel that the "solution" is to rule that whatever the DM wants to use is legitimate.
The problem with that is? The superior solutions are?
.
Well I don't know that there's some magical or superior solution -- but it is a problem that rears its head from time to time in some groups when one or more members of a group have spent money on products they like to use for gaming and then aren't allowed to for a variety of DM-reasons -- often legitimate reasons.
DMs should be sensitive to the fact that their Players want -- need -- to be able to use the products they've purchased for gaming. Though, of course a DM needs to be able to put limitations on resorces for his or her game.
I guess the "superior" solution is communication. And willingness on both sides to work together to find a good balance.
To me, lore bloat is about a few things:
1) Players who love setting info absolutely hate it when that info is ignored or even worse contradicted.
2) As a DM it is much harder to build a consistent world through improvisation, published adventures (especially non-setting based), and houserules when there are reams of material to negate or contradict your efforts.
Also:
3) The publisher starts scraping the bottom of the barrel when it comes to topics for new setting books (e.g. "Half-Fiendish Invisible Stalkers of Golarion").
|
|
To me, lore bloat is about a few things:
1) Players who love setting info absolutely hate it when that info is ignored or even worse contradicted.
2) As a DM it is much harder to build a consistent world through improvisation, published adventures (especially non-setting based), and houserules when there are reams of material to negate or contradict your efforts.
Also:
3) The publisher starts scraping the bottom of the barrel when it comes to topics for new setting books (e.g. "Half-Fiendish Invisible Stalkers of Golarion").
Or along those lines, two even worse possibilities:
1) "Dark Markets Revisited: A Bigger Guide to Katapesh"
2) "Ezren Goes Insane And Sets Rovagug Free: Time to Buy New Books"
I really don't see the last two in Paizo's future. Actually, my last suggestion sounds kind of neat...
I don't see where Next is going to have much influence at all over Paizo's business or publishing decisions, except that they probably don't want to launch anything major within a month of Next's release date.
As far as leaving Golarion behind... to do what? What could they want to do with the Pathfinder rules, that they cannot already do on or around Golarion?