2) "Ezren Goes Insane And Sets Rovagug Free: Time to Buy New Books"
I dont know, but that makes me happy, not the buy books part but the insane part.
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 :)
I'm going to agree with this here. Currently I really strongly dislike the idea of Numeria. But I'm the sort of person who can be convinced otherwise by a good writer. If a adventure path in Numeria did come along, I'd certainly be at the least curious.
|
What I hope for in the future of Golarion (as a setting) would be demographics, politics, or the ethnicities of other non-standard races. I'd definitely get Kobolds of Golarion, and I'd read a novel about Galt's Red Revolution or a history of the Whispering Tyrant.
Also, I'm among the people who wants to read about Arcadia and Sarusan, mainly for the purpose of helping to make characters of the big, tough, clever, rural, Canadian/Australian stereo-archetypes (whether Aborigianl or not).
As for Numeria, that region has its own in-canon justification for being off-limits, so everyone can happily leave that place alone. Still, its hard-line policies on foreigners and exports also make for the juicy possibility of the Pathfinder Society trying to get a team of agents in to write butt-kissing reviews for the Chronicles. It could make for a fun PFS scenario, at least.
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.
Yeah, I would prefer if Golarion didn't end up like Forgotten Realms or Dragonlance in that regard.
Yeah, I would prefer if Golarion didn't end up like Forgotten Realms or Dragonlance in that regard.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.
I don't see the problem here. I don't have to buy or learn about any more of the setting than I'm using in my adventure. If I'm not running an adventure in the Shackles, I don't need the book about the Shackles. If I'm not running an adventure in Tian, I don't need the book about Tian. The location books look to be modular enough that I only want the ones that are relevant to what I'm running.
You just admitted that your options are limited by the books you have. I surely wouldn't want to be forced to buy extra books just to run adventures in certain locations. Then again, Pathfinder has a wiki of its own with plenty of information, and I can always conjure my own ideas for interesting adventures.
|
I surely wouldn't want to be forced to buy extra books just to run adventures in certain locations.
Who's going to force you? James Jacobs is going to bust your down and tell you to buy the books or else your hamster gets it? You don't need a Shackles book to run a Shackles adventure, using your logic you will not be able to run an adventure in place X until a book about place X is released, at which point you will complain that you were forced to buy the book ... wait, there's no logic in this :)
Apologies, I don't know what kind of process (if any) was going through my brain when I wrote that. I wonder if I should just delete that post, though. Either way, I did refer to the wiki as an alternative to those who lack the money to actually buy all the setting books.
Paizo has a good hand at detailing enough to create interest with out detailing to the point of naming the last bar wench and her 9 cousins. There are infinite adventure paths that can be written and many more modules. I personally would prefer less Earth-Golarion similarities with race and location. I would rather have more races, cultures and places with no similarities to Earth whatsoever, but I guess that's what a homebrewed setting is good for and it's only my opinion. I choose carefully what I allow for "common knowledge" in my campaigns and will not let players carry knowledge from one adventure path/module to the next. There is no form of rapid travel or communications. Everything learned is either by reading it or hearing it word of mouth...lots and lots of room for misinformation =) The world is only as small as you let it be. For me, keeping the fantastic and the unknown alive is very important to keeping the world from becoming "tired"
I think that Golarion is far from retirement
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.
Well, I think that's stupid.* If a town borders an area that doesn't have any guns, then I expect to find no guns in that area.
*I don't really find that stupid - just pointing out that it's a two-way (or even three-way street):
1> Guns from gun-nation bleed over the border into non-gun nation.
2> Attitudes and antithesis of guns from non-gun nation bleed over the border into gun nation.
3> Borders are respected, willingly or forcefully from any number of reasons.
4> Whatever else you can come up with in 3.5 seconds.
Just an observation... Given the kitchen-sink nature of Golarion's countries and regions, you STILL get a split customer base. Sure, people generally interested in Golarion might buy a country companion, but with each such book comes new rules, new history and new conflicts, which defines that part of the setting. I know we're not talking about Spelljammer vs Planescape here, but it's still an issue. Splitting out some parts of the setting would give Golarion a tighter focus and allow for more exotic things in another setting.
I know you guys are awesome at this, but you aren't going to completely avoid the problem.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just an observation... Given the kitchen-sink nature of Golarion's countries and regions, you STILL get a split customer base. Sure, people generally interested in Golarion might buy a country companion, but with each such book comes new rules, new history and new conflicts, which defines that part of the setting. I know we're not talking about Spelljammer vs Planescape here, but it's still an issue. Splitting out some parts of the setting would give Golarion a tighter focus and allow for more exotic things in another setting.
I know you guys are awesome at this, but you aren't going to completely avoid the problem.
Can they avoid different people being interested in different setting elements? No. If you're not interested in Gothic Horror, you probably wouldn't buy a Ravenloft book or an Ustalav book.
But they can avoid artificially splitting the player base by having multiple settings.
For example, in 2nd Edition there was a supplement for Ravenloft called the Nightmare Lands. I never see myself playing Ravenloft, but I have used the ideas from that supplement in several "standard" D&D games.
So instead of saying "only buy this if you like Ravenloft" on the cover and having information on how it integrates into the Demiplane of Dread, why can't it say "for everyone who likes Pathfinder" and have information on how it fits into Golarion?
Cheers!
Landon
You just admitted that your options are limited by the books you have. I surely wouldn't want to be forced to buy extra books just to run adventures in certain locations. Then again, Pathfinder has a wiki of its own with plenty of information, and I can always conjure my own ideas for interesting adventures.
I choose to limit my options to the books I have partly because I lack experience as a world builder and partly because I would want to build in a region that interests me, so if available and affordable, I buy settings books in regions that interest me. If I'm not interested, then I won't buy. From what I've seen the settings books aren't necessary to run any of the APs or modules. Do you really feel under any compulsion to buy them?
Up to a point most of us are probably limiting ourselves to the books we have. How many people are waiting for a book on Vudra or Southern Garund before running adventures there? But there's nothing stopping anyone making up their own regions and reconciling them with Pathfinder if and when they do get there.
I think the point I was originally trying to make was that, whatever attracted someone to Golarion as a setting they would presumably want to start an adventure in a specific location, decide if they wanted the ISWG and/or relevant setting book (if available) and build from there as desired. No compulsion to buy anything specific at all.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Golarion has something for everyone. I just don't understand why the presence of something I like makes the whole thing worthless for someone else who doesn't like it.
I echo the opinion of the others that Golarion will remain as Pathfinder's (and Paizo's) main campaign for the foreseeable future. I don't think Next (or 5e) is going to influence the company to the point where they feel they need to start publishing stuff for it and further divide they customer base. Unless it is EXTREMELY good and completely dominates the market like 3e did and even then I think it's more likely that they do a Golarion 5e sourcebook than another setting.
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.
I disagree. Rules bloat was a major part of 3e as general, and to my perception, the myriad options the system offers today is one of its strenghts. If you want to play a big burly strong guy that fights with a two-handed sword you can be a barbarian, fighter, ranger, bard, paladin, etc. and still perform greatly. 2 bards at one table will have really different abilities.
We have 595 traits as per the Traits Database at PFSRD. 390 feats. When a new sourcebook comes out, my players smell it from miles away and pick its bones clean for new player options. Each new book from Paizo features dozens of new threads discussing new mechanics and builds arising from it. I think it's safe to say the Pathfinder customer base likes new rules.
|
|
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.I disagree. Rules bloat was a major part of 3e as general, and to my perception, the myriad options the system offers today is one of its strenghts. If you want to play a big burly strong guy that fights with a two-handed sword you can be a barbarian, fighter, ranger, bard, paladin, etc. and still perform greatly. 2 bards at one table will have really different abilities.
We have 595 traits as per the Traits Database at PFSRD. 390 feats. When a new sourcebook comes out, my players smell it from miles away and pick its bones clean for new player options. Each new book from Paizo features dozens of new threads discussing new mechanics and builds arising from it. I think it's safe to say the Pathfinder customer base likes new rules.
I think you are both partially right. There are a ton of traits feats etc. However, you don't have splat book after splat book of prestige classes, many simular to the ones in the last book. Also there are 20 classes, however archtypes make them very customnizable and at lower levels.
I think basically there is more 'meat' to the pathfinders rules and less fat in comparision to 3.5.
I think Golarion is pretty safe from world bloat for the foreseeable future. I was reading a post a couple of months back where someone asked what the default assumption was for the ending of CotCT. James Jacobs answered that if players hadn't run CotCT King Eodred was the ruler of Korvosa and in ill health. That shows Paizos plan for avoiding setting bloat. The key to Golarion is that PCs are the major characters in the setting. There aren't a lot of other heroes running around saving the world and causing major events. There are a couple of NPCs that almost break this rule (I'm looking at you Ameiko Kaijitsu), but by and large PCs are the stars.
Prior to Golarion my favorite setting was FR. I never had a problem with lore bloat because I only used source books and adventures in my game. If I tried to keep up with the latest novels and major events the setting would have been unusable. Paizo seems to be avoiding that trap. They can put out new source books and adventures for years to come using their current formula.
Golarion has something for everyone. I just don't understand why the presence of something I like makes the whole thing worthless for someone else who doesn't like it.
I dont know who think it's worthless, but it may well be the hodgepodge "kitchen sink" style that some people dont like.
A setting is partly defined by what isnt there as well as what is - having a preference about that isnt an attack on anyone else's preference. (I'd rather there were no guns, but by saying that I'm not suggesting people who want them are wrong, merely that it's not quite my perfect setting).
A setting is partly defined by what isnt there as well as what is - having a preference about that isnt an attack on anyone else's preference. (I'd rather there were no guns, but by saying that I'm not suggesting people who want them are wrong, merely that it's not quite my perfect setting).
I'm as OCD as the next completionist, but I don't understand people who can't just ignore a factor of a setting and focus on the rest. Someone earlier in this thread said the setting died for them when Numeria was defined. What's wrong with just ignoring Numeria? It makes no sense to me.
A setting is partly defined by what isnt there as well as what is - having a preference about that isnt an attack on anyone else's preference. (I'd rather there were no guns, but by saying that I'm not suggesting people who want them are wrong, merely that it's not quite my perfect setting).I'm as OCD as the next completionist, but I don't understand people who can't just ignore a factor of a setting and focus on the rest. Someone earlier in this thread said the setting died for them when Numeria was defined. What's wrong with just ignoring Numeria? It makes no sense to me.
Heh - you're not quite as OCD as the next guy then, clearly. :p
FWIW, I dont think it's strictly rational and I dont think I should be treated as anything other than one data point out of many. Nonetheless, the existence of gunslingers reduces the appeal of Golarion for me to some degree (it hasnt 'died' in my case, but I'd definitely be happier if there were no such thing).
Granted I am a mildly OCD completionist, but I dont think that's the cause: I suspect it's partly because I buy RPG books for the pleasure of reading them as well as to use them - as such, the existence of stuff I dont like implies that stuff I would have liked better now doesnt exist or is delayed.
The folks at Paizo really know what they're doing. They have no intention to ditch Golarion, as they know that one of the reasons TSR and later Wizards had so much trouble is they split the fanbase by constantly releasing new settings. It is better for them to have a single setting and an undivided fanbase. Their model really is brilliant, and designed to take advantage of how the RPG industry actually functions.
Wizards of the Coast doesn't need to factor into their plans at all.