What AP would you like them to release after Skulls and Shackles?
My request:
Curse of the Crimson Throne
I think for story line, I'd like to see Carrion Crown, not to mention the cool monsters you could bring in with every expansion deck :)
But for truly interesting tweaks and mechanics, Kingmaker might make a truly interesting twist. There could be a wealth of locations for that one, and perhaps even turn some kingdom events into some interesting barriers...
Jade Regent might offer some exotic locales as well, as might Serpent's Skull.
Thanks for letting me shout out! :)
|
After Skull and Shackles, we'll still be missing most of the ACG classes, plus the Cavalier, the Inquisitor and the Summoner. (Note that 3 missing classes from the APG plus 8 missing classes from the ACG = 11 classes, exactly the same number as are in the current and planned base sets + character expansions. Coincidence? Maaaaaybe.) Cavalier, Inquisitor, Summoner, Arcanist, Bloodrager, Hunter, Investigator, Shaman, Investigator, Slayer, Brawler and Skald... I know you can't nail down the entire concept just from the classes they pick, but I think Council of Thieves would work especially well for that set.
Would you prefer to see some overlap in characters, lots of overlap in characters, or no overlap in characters? (I realize that there are dozens of shades of grey here; I'm personally curious about the first-thoughts answer as well as the discussion.)
I think no overlap would help keep the game fresh. (Especially since it seems they are intending characters from previous sets to work fine ported over to subsequent APs, so any repeat classes would be redundant for a probably not insignificant portion of the market).
After Skull and Shackles, we'll still be missing most of the ACG classes, plus the Cavalier, the Inquisitor and the Summoner. (Note that 3 missing classes from the APG plus 8 missing classes from the ACG = 11 classes, exactly the same number as are in the current and planned base sets + character expansions. Coincidence? Maaaaaybe.) Cavalier, Inquisitor, Summoner, Arcanist, Bloodrager, Hunter, Investigator, Shaman, Investigator, Slayer, Brawler and Skald... I know you can't nail down the entire concept just from the classes they pick, but I think Council of Thieves would work especially well for that set.
You left off the Ninja and the Samurai.
Oh yeah, and the Anti-Paladin.
Anyway, I'm not suggesting anything of import, just completing your list. Even we haven't decided where we're going next.
You left off the Ninja and the Samurai.
Oh yeah, and the Anti-Paladin.
Anyway, I'm not suggesting anything of import, just completing your list. Even we haven't decided where we're going next.
Right, so its confirmed - jade regent's at the top of the list.
Would you prefer to see some overlap in characters, lots of overlap in characters, or no overlap in characters? (I realize that there are dozens of shades of grey here; I'm personally curious about the first-thoughts answer as well as the discussion.)
I'd prefer no overlap until all classes are out. Trying out new characters has been a lot of fun so far and a big replay factor for me.
As for which Path after S&S? I'd like to see them done in chronological order, so Crimson Throne, though Second Darkness might be good too, drow are kinda popular, or so I hear. ;)
I would also prefer no overlap in characters.
I can already create valeros with different starting stats if I wanted to.
You can create all the iconics right now if you wanted to, so why include any new or old characters at all?
Oh yeah, and the Anti-Paladin.
Anyway, I'm not suggesting anything of import, just completing your list. Even we haven't decided where we're going next.
If the powers that be vote toward popular culture and mass marketing appeal, I'd suspect the eventual Pirates vs. Ninja meme.
Assuming it continues on the path it's currently on, my vote is for Wrath of the Righteous, which I am loving as an AP so far. Reign of Winter could also be pretty cool too.
Regarding classes, not too fussed whether we see new ones or repeats; as long as there is enough difference in attributes / mechanics to keep them fresh.
|
Would you prefer to see some overlap in characters, lots of overlap in characters, or no overlap in characters? (I realize that there are dozens of shades of grey here; I'm personally curious about the first-thoughts answer as well as the discussion.)
If all your bards are going to halflings with a d4 strength, and all your druids are going to be gnomes that focus on "animal ally" feats, and all of your wizards will have no blessings in their decks due to the story-background of the character being opposed to the gods...then I would say that little overlap in characters in desirable. I personally feel as if using only the iconic characters keeps you guys from exploring some of the broad possibilities available for each "profession."
I vote for Carrion Crown. A nice horror campaign would be great fun to play.
As for the characters, I'd like to see different ones not just the iconics, even if they have to be made up.
I too would love to see Carrion Crown. Graphically, it was very impressive and the horror theme would be fun.
And I'd like to see Factions incorporated, either as part of an expansion deck, or written into the base set rules.
Reign of Winter and Legacy of FIRE!!! Let's get exotic.
|
I am not sure that I have a preference for which AP would be 3rd. My requirement would be to try to do the one that best expands the pool of cards that can be used to create custom content.
What I mean by this is thhat RotRL already covers a lot of goblins, undead and giants.What set would bring more classics like orcs, kobolds, drow, oozes, slimes, etc.
As far as clases are concerned, I think it is ok to duplicate them as long as they have a new flavor. Maybe the base card is different with different stats and powers? I would expect that the expanded character card would also be different opening two additional options to expand the character at "higher level".
I think folks might be disappointed if their favorite character does not get included in a new set. My wife was disappointed to hear that Seoni was not included in the newest AP. I told her that the character should be compatable with the new set but we would have to see.
Chief Technical Officer
|
You left off the Ninja and the Samurai.
Those are alt classes, wasn't sure if you'd count them. (Or for that matter, the anti-paladin...)
We do count the Ninja and Samurai as iconics, but not the Antipaladin. He's a villain, not a hero.
Anyway, I'm not suggesting anything of import, just completing your list. Even we haven't decided where we're going next.
*We* haven't, but *I* have three leading contenders.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We do count the Ninja and Samurai as iconics, but not the Antipaladin. He's a villain, not a hero.
Who says the characters need to be heroes? Playable villain, anyone?
We do count the Ninja and Samurai as iconics, but not the Antipaladin. He's a villain, not a hero.Who says the characters need to be heroes? Playable villain, anyone?
+1. THis sounds like an interesting idea, if the theme and mechanics could work.
As for the next AP, I say either Second Darkness or Shattered Star.
As for the question of classes, I'm okay with overlap but I would like to see some changes to the old ones. While I love the concept of the iconics I would love to see an elf ranger and a half-orc anything. Gnome wizard maybe?
Also, someone mentioned about the current characters being able to play in the new sets. Has anyone confirmed this as true or false? Just curious, thanks.
Also, someone mentioned about the current characters being able to play in the new sets. Has anyone confirmed this as true or false? Just curious, thanks.
Sorry, I just can't find the link right now. But, yes, it has been confirmed in another thread around here somewhere that the sets are compatible.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Who says the characters need to be heroes? Playable villain, anyone?
Who indeed. Let's just say we're leaving the paladin out of the pirate set for a reason.
Who says the characters need to be heroes? Playable villain, anyone?Who indeed. Let's just say we're leaving the paladin out of the pirate set for a reason.
Oooh, simulating the fall of the paladin.
My idea would be to have two personas in different scenarios or something like that...
I'd be really excited about Wrath of the Righteous, but that brings up the Mythic question... which is not automatically a dealbreaker (could give Mythic Paths in lieu of roles, maybe?) but is certainly something you'd have to take into account.
I said this in another thread, but I think it's a little more relevant to this discussion:
"It'd be awesome if there is eventually a Mythic expansion or two released. Expansions made with Adventure levels 7 through 12, playable as expansions to come directly after Rise of the Runelords, Skull & Shackles, and/or any other base sets that come out later. There can be new role cards that can be added to any character in addition to the role card gained after Adventure level 3, based off of the Mythic Paths from the Mythic Adventures book: Archmage, Champion, etc. Probably have two or three versions of each path for a total of 12 or 18 role options. In addition to new power feats, they could also add extra skill and card feats to characters. Just a thought. Might need some new high level Mythic adventure paths in the RPG to base them off of first, though."
So yeah, one option I'd like to see for the next main expansion would be a Mythic expansion. I don't follow Adventure Paths very closely (don't get to play Pathfinder RPG more than maybe once a week, and it's usually always a friends homebrew world that I play in), but I'm guessing Wrath of the Righteous might be a good set for the above concept?
Another option I would like to be considered is to actually NOT have a February 2015 base set! Well, I guess having a Mythic expansion also wouldn't really be a "base set" since it would theoretically continue after a base set, but this would be even less of a base set. I think it would be nice to give a little bit of a break from base sets and release a few Modules in ACG form instead. They would pretty much work like the $20 adventure packs, but there would only be one or two releases, depending on if it's one of the smaller or larger modules. They would have adventure numbers between 1 and 6 for each pack of cards and would instruct you to play it after a specific Adventure X of Rise of the Runelords or Skull & Shackles. Browsing the Modules, I think The Dragon's Demand and The Harrowing could both work nicely for this. Heck, you could even do We Be Goblins! as a stand-alone set! Complete with playable goblin characters.
Would you prefer to see some overlap in characters, lots of overlap in characters, or no overlap in characters? (I realize that there are dozens of shades of grey here; I'm personally curious about the first-thoughts answer as well as the discussion.)
Hmmmm, I might be in the minority here, but depending on how they're handled, I think having four or so re-made characters per big set (AP) would be fine. I'd wait until we start the playtest and see how the Skull & Shackles returners work out first to really make my mind up, though. I would think the characters would be best handled with leaving their skill and card feats the same but giving them (almost) entirely new sets of powers and roles.
As for the characters, I'd like to see different ones not just the iconics, even if they have to be made up.
Non-iconics could be nice, too. Maybe base them off of NPCs or Archetype/Prestige class "iconic" artwork. This way we might get some non-halfling bards, non-gnome druids and wizards with blessings as Calthaer mentioned. More variety, basically.
And I also don't think that skill and card feats should be completely untouched. for example I would like to see a Lini actually starting with a weapon (if it's her traditional sickle that's bonus point) and maybe a light armor, a Seoni with more spells (most likely matching her new powers), or a Sajan who is not completely reliant on blessings, just to give some examples.
I think a change in powers could warrant skill and card feat changes for other characters too.
True. I was kind of surprised when I saw the low number of spells that Seoni has. I though, but sorcerers get to cast more spells per day than wizards! Why does Ezren have so many more spells than her?? But I figure the number of spell cards are to represent spells known and Seoni's auto-recharge is meant to represent her being able to cast those few spells many times.
Anyway, that's a tangent. I do agree that some light adjustments to card feats could be fine, but don't really think skills should be changed, unless new specialized skills are created in future sets. Then I'd be okay with one of those being added to some characters.
I've only played the "Rise of the Runelords" and "Jade Reagent" Adventure Paths. So after "Skulls and Shackles," my vote would be for "Jade Reagent." Which would be perfect for the Ninja and Samurai classes!
Not sure if it is still up for debate by the powers that be or not, but after Skull and Shackles I'd like to see a return to a more traditional (sans-guns) setting for the next adventure path. I've not played any pathfinder RPG, so I'm not sure which one that would be. I've got nothing against the pirates and I'm planning on buying Skull and Shackles and all the decks because I'm sure it will be a great game. And I get that with two APs a year, sprinkling diversity into the theme will be an excellent marketing technique allowing you to capitalize on interests non-PACG players might have to bring them into the game.
But I personally just love the feel of the more traditional sword and sorcery setting. I'd be all for one traditional sword and sorcery release each year and one less traditional each year as well.
Like maybe (this is based on what I can glean about the APs from the website, so maybe I'm wrong on how I understand some of these):
- Rise of the Runelords (traditional)
- Skull and Shackles (pirates)
- Second Darkness (traditional)
- Jade Regent (ninjas)
- Curse of the Crimson Throne (traditional)
- Serpent's Skull (pirates)
- Kingmaker (traditional)
- Legacy of Fire (desert/Arabian)
- Shattered Star (traditional)
- Carrion Crown (horror)
Again, I don't know anything about each of those other than what is on the paizo website for adventure paths, so maybe my assumptions about them are wrong. And I'm not saying it has to be that particular order,m just the idea of switching from traditional to non-traditional every six months. But I hope I get my idea across.
Regardless, I plan on buying every box you make for this game. At first I was dejected by the fact you were switching to monthly releases because I didn't feel I'd want to pay that much per year. But having started deck 3 I've realized I can burn through a deck in about 2 weeks and the wait of 2 months for the next one will be brutal. So I'll just have to find the money for the monthly cost.
And you've almost made a subscriber out of me. I've been going with Amazon because I already have prime membership and if I pre-order the releases I can lock in the lowest price between pre-order and release, sometimes getting the decks down below $15. I'm on the east coast, so shipping coast from Paizo to me more than eats up the subscriber discount and puts the cost back above $20. But if you keep up the awesomeness, you might just get me there.
Though if we ever did Jade Regent, I would not rule out some kickass fireworks.
Don't forget with Jade Regent you get Vikings, too! And Yetis!
That's cool. And I don't mind all the stuff in some of the sets. I just would prefer not to have too many sets in a row that stray from the "core" fantasy genre.
Jade Regent would be my favorite.
Follow that with Wrath of the Righteous. I'd love to see how Mythic would work in the card game.
Kingmaker with a parallel kingdom building game/mechanic would be cool at some point.
