Howdy. As one of many poor sods not capable of attending Paizocon I thought I'd start a thread for any news rolling out of Paizocon people there are kind enough to share.
Thanks.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Things were eerily quiet this time last year, too. I think the Paizocon attendees enjoy keeping us in the dark.
Maybe we should make up some Paizocon news, instead?
Just Announced: The Adventure Path to follow Iron Gods will be a return to the classic modules of old, entitled, "Return to the Hidden Shrine on the Borderlands of the Slave Lords above the Vaults of the Giants in the Desert of the Lost Caverns."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They just announced Pathfinder Unchained with a new monk, rogue, barbarian, and summoner. I am looking forward to this.
As technotrooper posts, this is from Jason Bulmahn's twitter feed:
"Just announced, the spring 2015 release Pathfinder Unchained! The rules team tinkers with the game! New barbarian, monk, rogue and summoner!"
Sounds like an Unearthed Arcana for Pathfinder.
Also, this from Wolfgang Baur's twitter feed:
"Next up Pathfinder ACG with @mikeselinker talking about future Skull & Shackles path ."
Not sure what that means. Maybe a sequel or something to Skull and Shackles (featuring the Swashbuckler) or possibly the new pirate themed module that's coming up?
Apparently, "unchained" means unchained from backwards compatibility with 3.5.
More from Wolfgang:
"Other 2014 releases: Iron Gods AP, and then Giant Slayer AP! Straight up fantasy. More in an AP seminar tomorrow. #paizocon #"
Ah, the Skull and Shackles thing he was talking about is for the card game:
"S&S has ship cards and is a harder, different sort of challenger. More gunslingers. Theme: things that are very unstable and blow up!"
I'm guessing the Giant Slayer AP will be like I hypothesized about in another thread, with the Rune Giants taking control and leading the other giants against humanity (and possibly starting with pushing the orcs of Belkzen in early adventures?). Might also be a way to tie things in with more Runelord stuff as a result, possibly leading into the fall AP (which I'm assuming will have Runelord connections simply because issue #100 will fall in there, and they've gotta do something big for 100!)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Huh. New monk/rogue, eh? Here's hoping for an upgrade...
Huh. New monk/rogue, eh? Here's hoping for an upgrade...
Well, they would have to be insane to nerf them further, right?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you nerfed them further they might as well not exist. ;)
My one question is if these new versions of the aforementioned classes will be backwards-compatible with the old archetypes, and whether or not these new updates will be supported, or if they will simply be considered "alternate class variants" of the old ones.
Also, we need a better name than "Unchained". :P
Any word on future Pathfinder Battles sets beyond Lost Coast?
Any word on future Pathfinder Battles sets beyond Lost Coast?
Don't see anything yet, but there are more mini-mates coming:
"Mini mates figures including iconics and goblins. Parts interchangeable with other Mini Mates (batman?). Hmmm."
Any word on future Pathfinder Battles sets beyond Lost Coast?Don't see anything yet, but there are more mini-mates coming:
"Mini mates figures including iconics and goblins. Parts interchangeable with other Mini Mates (batman?). Hmmm."
Undecided yet on the mini-mates. They are intriguing at best for me right now. I guess I just don't see the practicality for them in my games. Yes, you can take them apart and mix and match, but that was things I did with my action figures as a kid. :)
I'll take a look at them at GenCon. Erik said there will be four of them available.
I was sitting right next to one of the screens. My wife took pictures of everything and I took notes. I plan on posting all of it. It'll take me a bit, but stuff is on the way. (-:
Ok, thanks Drogon. :)
This is FANTASTIC news. This should put to rest all those Pathfinder 2.0 threads/theories.
This is FANTASTIC news. This should put to rest all those Pathfinder 2.0 threads/theories.
Kinda suspect they're more likely to fan the flames of them, actually.
This is FANTASTIC news. This should put to rest all those Pathfinder 2.0 threads/theories.Kinda suspect they're more likely to fan the flames of them, actually.
I doubt it. If a new edition were gonna come out, it'd mean a new Core Rulebook, and such, and I don't see them doing that.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Logic and reason does not apply to fan-theories.
Pathfinder Unchained!? Sounds interesting but why the Barbarian, I have no problems with it as is.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is FANTASTIC news. This should put to rest all those Pathfinder 2.0 threads/theories.
Yes, but just wait until the cries of "But it's optional, therefore useless to my PFS/Home Game!!! DOOOOM!" :D
Very interesting to see the Unchained designs for the Barbarian, Monk, Rogue and especially the Summoner….
S@*#. Got a lot of characters that are going to need reconstructing...
I sure hope their concepts and core mechanics hold together. I'd hate to lose good characters.
I doubt it. If a new edition were gonna come out, it'd mean a new Core Rulebook, and such, and I don't see them doing that.This is FANTASTIC news. This should put to rest all those Pathfinder 2.0 threads/theories.Kinda suspect they're more likely to fan the flames of them, actually.
Unless they remember the end of 3.0, where WotC playtested some newer rules that were part of 3.5...
C'mon RD - you know the character is not too dependent upon mechanics. Though given the 400+ favorites you have on your thread and the possibly hundreds of characters you have in your stack, I understand the concern!!! :)
I'm counting well over 20 characters.
I'm sure whatever changes they make to those classes will be great, promoting balance and fun, but man is it going to stir up trouble. I sure hope they've put a lot of thought into how they intend to handle it. It will likely upset a number of popular builds (while simultaneously creating new, awesome ones).
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
I was sitting right next to one of the screens. My wife took pictures of everything and I took notes. I plan on posting all of it. It'll take me a bit, but stuff is on the way. (-:
Rather than double post I'm linking to where I've been posting to the PFS Paizocon blog:
Umm if I'm not mistaken wont the only change be that the new classes will be "Unleashed Rogue" as opposed to "Rogue." Paizo hasn't stated that the new book will make the old book unuseable.
Also maybe he mityped "fighter" as "Barbarian"
Umm if I'm not mistaken wont the only change be that the new classes will be "Unleashed Rogue" as opposed to "Rogue." Paizo hasn't stated that the new book will make the old book unuseable.
Also maybe he mityped "fighter" as "Barbarian"
According to Drogon's link above "...it is described as the book that the developers got to write without being chained down by something like backwards compatibility. So, a more powerful rogue, a monk with full BAB, a summoner that isn't broken beyond belief. These are the kinds of optional rules they plan to introduce, allowing GMs to swap out pieces of existing rules that they don't like."
I am excited to see what they've done with the rogue.
Yay! Even better! That means that we have an insurance policy on the barb and summoner!
Rogue and Monk needed assistance.
Barb has some exeedingly powerful options, but I don't think the class needed rewriting
Summoner is too strong, but I am afraid of Paizo overnerfing.
I feel the same way Insain Dragoon.
This is FANTASTIC news. This should put to rest all those Pathfinder 2.0 threads/theories.Kinda suspect they're more likely to fan the flames of them, actually.
Yeah, it's more that they are testing the waters for their ideas for PF 2.0. Sorry, Fnipernackle, but it's coming sooner or later. Maybe a bit later with this release, but it's coming.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
Okay, notes are all posted at the link I provided above.
Also, you can find pictures of everything they showed here: LINK to Paizocon photos.
I apologize that the book pages didn't come out. I gave up after realizing they weren't going to be readable and just stuck to art.
Also, to answer Ravingdork and Insain Dragoon: no, they weren't talking about Pathfinder Unchained replacing anything. They were talking about it being something that they could uphold as what they COULD do if they didn't have to worry about little things like backward compatibility with the 3.5 rules. So, totally new concepts. I'm unsure how they would plug into existing rules, as that was not talked about. But it was mentioned as a set of largely optional rules systems, much like Ultimate Campaign.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, it's more that they are testing the waters for their ideas for PF 2.0. Sorry, Fnipernackle, but it's coming sooner or later. Maybe a bit later with this release, but it's coming.This is FANTASTIC news. This should put to rest all those Pathfinder 2.0 threads/theories.Kinda suspect they're more likely to fan the flames of them, actually.
Perhaps. However, this sounds much more like an evolution/refinement of a game (you know, what almost every RPG means when they use the word "edition") rather than the major rules re-write every edition that we get with D&D.
I'm all for tweaks & refinements. However, I'm done with the "blow up the game & start over" approach to editions. If PF 2.0 (whenever it happens) is a shift on par with 3e -> 4e -> 5e, I'm done.
Yeah, it's more that they are testing the waters for their ideas for PF 2.0. Sorry, Fnipernackle, but it's coming sooner or later. Maybe a bit later with this release, but it's coming.This is FANTASTIC news. This should put to rest all those Pathfinder 2.0 threads/theories.Kinda suspect they're more likely to fan the flames of them, actually.Perhaps. However, this sounds much more like an evolution/refinement of a game (you know, what almost every RPG means when they use the word "edition") rather than the major rules re-write every edition that we get with D&D.
I'm all for tweaks & refinements. However, I'm done with the "blow up the game & start over" approach to editions. If PF 2.0 (whenever it happens) is a shift on par with 3e -> 4e -> 5e, I'm done.
My wallet also ain't happy about the idea, but OTOH they maybe, maybe could fix their high-level game with a new edition. If they listen to the people who actually play there, for once.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I apologize that the book pages didn't come out. I gave up after realizing they weren't going to be readable and just stuck to art.
I'm a graphic designer. I will be working to improve your photos' legibility. Coming soon.
Umm if I'm not mistaken wont the only change be that the new classes will be "Unleashed Rogue" as opposed to "Rogue." Paizo hasn't stated that the new book will make the old book unuseable.
Also maybe he mityped "fighter" as "Barbarian"
According to Drogon's link above "...it is described as the book that the developers got to write without being chained down by something like backwards compatibility. So, a more powerful rogue, a monk with full BAB, a summoner that isn't broken beyond belief. These are the kinds of optional rules they plan to introduce, allowing GMs to swap out pieces of existing rules that they don't like."
I am excited to see what they've done with the rogue.
I am absolutely giddy at the voice of the mechanics driven side of the forums being heard.
Much excitement.
As a fellow who tries to be positively critical of generally most things, Paizo does a damn good job keeping folks interested.
I agree. However this turns out, I am absolutely ecstatic that Paizo goes so out of their way to show that they ARE listening to our feedback.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
I apologize that the book pages didn't come out. I gave up after realizing they weren't going to be readable and just stuck to art.I'm a graphic designer. I will be working to improve your photos' legibility. Coming soon.
Then I'm sorry I didn't take more pictures of book pages. I'll know better for next time. (-:
Thanks dragon. Much appreciated.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry. There was much wine and beer involved. d-;
Your posts and pics are much less blurry and in focus than my view from New Zealand ;-)
The monk and Rogue getting alternate versions sounds interesting.
Still think the Barbarian is fine the way it is.
I don't like the idea of a nerfed summoner.
I kind of wish the sorcerer got a revamp as well just to see what they would do with it.
Rogue and Barbarian doesn't need anything. I don't know Summoner enough to say one way or the other.
I won't disagree that Monk needs tweaking but that's what archetypes are for. As with any class, Monk does (or should) do some things really well, other things so-so, and a few things not well at all. If Paizo's idea of how the Monk is supposed to work differs from this, then they should make a whole new class that does those things instead of trying to "fix" the monk and thereby invalidate all the Monk archetypes that are hooked into the class's existing abilities.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Unchained book sounds very interesting. It actually sounds like their version of a 'rules fix/update' on some of the needed areas. And I like hearing about not feeling 'chained' to 3.5 backwards compatibility as we fully play PF rules in our campaigns, anyways.
I wonder why the Barbarian made the list. Maybe they just really love Barbarians.
I kind of wonder if Pathfinder Unchained might be a glimpse from Pathfinder into Pathfinder 2.0 kind of like Tome of Battle seemed like a glimpse from 3.5 into 4e. The groups I play with were initially excited about ToB but then banned it for various reasons and never adopted 4e. Hopefully Pathfinder Unchained will work out better.
Anyhow, the pictures are interesting though I couldn't make out much besides that there will be a "Grabbing Master" feat. Maybe that means there could be a system to augment or replace the current grappling rules. They're certainly a spot in the rules which could use a little improvement and clarification.
