| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds somewhat cool, but there's NO WAY i'm ever going to get my player's to submit to any Princess for even one session. :)
What do they say if you tell them who they would probably be working for instead?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Petticoated swashbucklers get a free reroll per battle encounter.
| 15 people marked this as a favorite. |
The best part of an AP announcement is the overwrought denunciations of those declaiming in both sorrow and anger how Paizo has lost their way.
Um, you couldn't just have edited out the portion you are referring to, instead of removing my entire post which had two other parts which were not at all related to what you were removing? :-/
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Vigilantes should do very well. Interesting.I wonder if I can convince my group to do the all vigilante party for this one.
I only have a faint acquaintance with the class, but if it has access to adequate healing capabilities - or you're willing to modify the scripted treasure (or equivalent) if it does not - then I'd suggest giving it a solid effort.
If nothing else, perhaps the "Social Identity" becomes "Character #2" if the vigilantes' "vigilante identity" takes a collective dirt nap?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds cool. Interesting if they do allow different choices of moral paths, atop a conflict that isn't strongly defined in that regard.
I hope they expand on the eastern section of Taldor that abuts Kelesh Empire (but not Qadira), that part always intrigued me. Seems like fertile grounds for minor ethnicities, from Casmar, remnant of pre-Kelesh Osirioni speaking Qadirans, or new minor ethnicities (Pseudo-Armenia-Assyria?)
Of course, what would be REALLY cool would be discovering an ancient Taldan war machine ala Expeditions to Garund, and using it against traitors to Taldor (or vice versa, stopping bad people from using it). And maybe some hints of ancient Cyclopean ruins, that sort of thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd expect to start in Princess Demandypant's court in whichever city that is before trekking all over Taldor and perhaps dipping over the various borders. IIRC, Taldor in its heyday launched a series of Great Expeditions covering most of the 'known world'. How much that plays in to this AP, I dunno.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't care as much for the Golarion specific stuff as I do for this being adaptable for other settings, as I don't usually play/GM on Golarion.
For what we know, that is not much, it doesn't seem too difficult to adapt.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
You know what would be cool?
A Campaign Setting: "Inner Sea Dark", a "what if" book, which shows how the political and geographical landscape would look if the players had failed and the bad guys had won.
This would also be useful for people that play in a continuous Golarion universe.
Each chapter could have four pages, styled like the Inner Sea World Guide, with a half-page illustration & a half-page map and be based on the "What if the players loose" articles in the last parts of an AP.
Chapters could include:
-"Varisia after Karzoug's Rise",
-"Kazavon's Korvosa", etc. ;-)
Role-Playing Game of Thrones! Sounds awesome, can't wait!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The best part of an AP announcement is the overwrought denunciations of those declaiming in both sorrow and anger how Paizo has lost their way.
Well, what do you expect. To claim that just because Paizo does something you don't like, won't endear you to the fanbase (and the officials), especially when it isn't even true.
Now I'm firmly convinced that if someone critizises a product or a development as far as policy is concerned, you better listen and think about if this critizism might be at leat in part valid. I'm also firmly convinced that this is much easier if the the critics would stop to throw around hyperbole and offenses.
As far as the announcement is concerned, I like what I hear. I would probably love this AP even without any changes to the continuity as I think there's much more roleplaying opportunity in such an AP than in the average combat-focused APs so far, but as I'm a big fan of adynamic, developing, non-static settings, any continuity change to come would be appreciated by me. This said:
You know what would be cool?
A Campaign Setting: "Inner Sea Dark", a "what if" book, which shows how the political and geographical landscape would look if the players had failed and the bad guys had won.
This would also be useful for people that play in a continuous Golarion universe.
Each chapter could have four pages, styled like the Inner Sea World Guide, with a half-page illustration & a half-page map and be based on the "What if the players loose" articles in the last parts of an AP.
Chapters could include:-"Varisia after Karzoug's Rise",
-"Kazavon's Korvosa", etc. ;-)
I have no idea if there is a market for such a product, but I would love to see it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think that there's already a thread dealing with "What if the party fails at the very end of the AP?".
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Idk, I guess for me the myth of the static timeline was debunked by the time the second AP set in Golarion came out. CotCT clearly referenced RotRL and events that happend in it. Especially
And every time a nation or area that already featured in an AP before got revisited, those links were there. Subtle, in most cases, but they existed.
And personally, I like that approach. Because as a GM you can decide to either put the spotlight on those links or ignore them and have the APs stand on their own.
And in the rare cases, when ignoring something came before didn't work, like in Shattered Star, which was developed as a sequel, the AP still worked without knowledge of the APs that preceded it. Those rare cases are rare enough, though.
So yes, the timline was always an advancing one. The speed of a glacier, but still not exactly static. Slow enough for those who don't like the concept of advancing timelines to ignore those bits and pieces that have advanced, but fast enough for those who like their game setting living and breathing to feel living and breathing.
And now the short description of War for the Crown reads like it will take a huge step in changing parts of the setting. It is a bold thing to do. But like with every other world changing event, as long as you don't play it with your group and as long as you and your group don't DECIDE that all the APs you play take place in the same continuity, it is like all those probably setting changing events before (WotR comes to mind) not a change you are forced to implement in your personal version of Golarion and almost certainly totally ignorable if you chose to ignore it.
Golarion, the Inner Sea, might feel a little bit more living and breathing. The status quo might not be same after that AP and personally I don't see that as a bad thing, because it took the world over 10 years for that particular big inhale-exhale circle
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As the political scene in the ancient kingdom of Taldor explodes into chaos, players take the roles of agents, advocates and saboteurs working for Princess Eutropia to help secure her claim to the throne and prevent the nation from collapsing into civil war. Along the way, the heroes must recover hidden secrets of Taldor's past -- many deliberately hidden -- and grow from relative nobodies to powerful politicians and spymasters in the deadliest political arena in the Inner Sea! ...
* Golarion's timeline thunders forward with a new destiny for Taldor in a thrilling campaign of espionage and intrigue that mixes James Bond with Game of Thrones! Your heroes decide the fate of the nation, and perhaps that of the whole Inner Sea Region!
Mixture of James Bond and political intrigue? Awesome!
My favorite APs have all either consistently done an unusual theme well (Skull and Shackles, Iron Gods) or have been ones in which non-combat aspects of the game play a significant role (Kingmaker, Hell's Rebels). And this sounds it wall fall solidly in the second category. So I'm psyched!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You know what would be cool?
A Campaign Setting: "Inner Sea Dark", a "what if" book, which shows how the political and geographical landscape would look if the players had failed and the bad guys had won.
This would also be useful for people that play in a continuous Golarion universe.
Each chapter could have four pages, styled like the Inner Sea World Guide, with a half-page illustration & a half-page map and be based on the "What if the players loose" articles in the last parts of an AP.
Chapters could include:-"Varisia after Karzoug's Rise",
-"Kazavon's Korvosa", etc. ;-)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is going to be amazing. I've been waiting for "the Taldor AP" since the original Gazetteer. :)
Color me interested, my group prefers intrigue, and active role playing over straight up combat scenarios. This sounds right up our alley.
I doubt, despite the wording in the preview, that the campaign setting will actually advance it's core timeline. That would require Paizo to do something they have been loathe to do since the inception of the APs, give canon endings to previous paths.
The only reason they did it with Starfinder is they came up with a way to completely zero the tables and start fresh. It's hard to know exactly what happens when no one in the universe remembers the last 10,000 years.
That being said I would be interested to see what may happen if they do go that route. Though I think to do it right it would have to ultimately lead to Pathfinder 2.0 which I both hope for and dread simultaneously.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
something they have been loathe to do since the inception of the APs, give canon endings to previous paths.
and yet, Xin-Shalast's location is known, the Storval Stairs are another archeological side that the Pathfinder Society activly examines and a handful of other stuff that I can't remember right now (and can't be bothered to look up) are now the status quo in the settimg that weren't at the beginning of RotRL.
And since all that has happend, something must have caused the change. And everything points to a group of adventurers that tried to stop a Runelord from rising. (and since he's not around, I guess they were successful)That's a pretty canon ending to an AP right there. Right at the start of the AP line, right at the start of Pathfinder. Everything since then aknowledges and indicates that the very first AP in the setting was succesfully finished by someone.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Color me interested, my group prefers intrigue, and active role playing over straight up combat scenarios. This sounds right up our alley.
Is there info yet summing up what to expect? IME, many of the APs start out this way, but eventually devolve into dungeon crawls and it would be nice to avoid that at some point.
|
|
Everything since then aknowledges and indicates that the very first AP in the setting was succesfully finished by someone.
And all that has been thoroughly discussed before and it basically only is the Varisian part of Golarion that has been advanced a bit. It's really not like in the old realms where the timeline would be continually advanced by new products.
So yeah, Shattered Star assumes that the other Varisia APs did happen before. Apart from that, the setting is basically still the same we find in the campaign setting book even after all those other APs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
something they have been loathe to do since the inception of the APs, give canon endings to previous paths.and yet, Xin-Shalast's location is known, the Storval Stairs are another archeological side that the Pathfinder Society activly examines and a handful of other stuff that I can't remember right now (and can't be bothered to look up) are now the status quo in the settimg that weren't at the beginning of RotRL.
And since all that has happend, something must have caused the change. And everything points to a group of adventurers that tried to stop a Runelord from rising. (and since he's not around, I guess they were successful)
That's a pretty canon ending to an AP right there. Right at the start of the AP line, right at the start of Pathfinder. Everything since then aknowledges and indicates that the very first AP in the setting was succesfully finished by someone.
It's a bit more nebulous I think,
Now that's not to say that they can't advance the timeline and completely ignore those paths, since I don't think any of them have a set start date in universe. It would just seem odd to have all these worldshaking events that don't offically occur then have one that does. But I suppose that's just how I see it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's a bit more nebulous I think,** spoiler omitted **
the thing is, how do we know? almost no areas affected by changes through the outcome of APs were revisited since then, afaik. At least not in other APs. (and I fully admit I have no idea what's going on in PFS). Those who were (Westcrown, Varisia) both assume that the events of earlier APs in that area already happend (as for example clearly stated in the HV players guide)
We haven't been to Kintargo since HR, we haven't been in the Shackles since S&S so we have no way of telling if the status quo changed*. Yet. If another AP revisits those places, then I guess there will be the same or a similar disclaimer that graced the pages of the products that already revisited places from earlier APs: That the product assume the former AP has already happend and that the succesful outcome is therefore canon.
And yes, WotR is the big elephant in the room here. The one exception to that approach, where the (world changing) outcome of the AP is ignored ever since. But every other AP? Data suggests they might have happend, we just haven't been told yet.
*And that's by design, it seems and a very wise decision. No one wants to buy updated game setting books on a yearly basis
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I dunno, Hell's Vengeance assumes Westcrown is still as it was prior to Council of Thieves...
Shattered Star presumes Rise of the Runelords and Curse of the Crimson Throne have already gone down, but it's very much an exception- and while the drow are no longer the uber-secret they were in Second Darkness... it could be argued that those first three APs sort of established Golarion as a place with a status quo to begin with.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I dunno, Hell's Vengeance assumes Westcrown is still as it was prior to Council of Thieves...
In addition, Hell’s Vengeance assumes that the events of the Council of Thieves Adventure Path have already occurred.
Hell’s Vengeance assumes that the events of Council of Thieves have already occurred. This means that [redacted] no longer roam the streets of Westcrown; [redacted]is long gone; the campaign’s villains, [redacted], are likely dead; and the [redacted] itself has been disbanded.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Huh, and I even DMed the damn thing! :D
I stand vigorously corrected!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm unsure what benefit they get out of it (meaning Paizo) - because frankly they have so many untouched areas that could use an AP and don't rely on the 'advancement' - that I don't understand why they are doing this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm unsure what benefit they get out of it (meaning Paizo) - because frankly they have so many untouched areas that could use an AP and don't rely on the 'advancement' - that I don't understand why they are doing this.
Maybe another three adventure paths set in Cheliax dealing with the aftermath of the three previous adventure paths set in Cheliax.
You can never have too much Cheliax!
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm unsure what benefit they get out of it (meaning Paizo) - because frankly they have so many untouched areas that could use an AP and don't rely on the 'advancement' - that I don't understand why they are doing this.
Well, we're talking hypotheticals here because so far (except from those examples named), Paizo (or at least James Jacobs) has taken a very anti-advancement approach, and now we're discussing one phrase in a blurb that basically could mean anything (or simply be badly phrased). And even in the examples brought up it it isn't to hard to ignore the timeline, so it isn't as if you couldn't run the named APs in a different order with only a little bit of work.
But possible benefits could be that at least part of the fanbase actually likes this approach better than the static approach. So by advancing the timeline in some regions would allow Paizo to deliver to both groups what they want.
Apart from that there's the simple fact that some regions of Golarion are way more popular as other ones. So even when there are regions that haven't been touched so far, Paizo still might want to run APs in Varisia and Cheliax and that's where they run into the question how to handle all the stuff they already published. I mean you can't simply assume that a lot of at least possibly Varisia-shaking events happen all simultaneously and while there are different approaches to solve this problem, the one that probably makes the most sense is to have them happen in a set timeline.
And then there's what the captain said. It could be quite interesting to deal with the outcome of a given AP in a follow-up AP. For example I would be much more interested in a future Cheliax AP dealing with the consequences of the fall of House Thrune than in having just another Cheliax AP basically ignoring all the other ones. Just an example of course.
But in the end, the question is if they could get any financial benefit out of it. So far the base assumption seems to be that the static approach serves them better than a dynamic world approach, so at this point I don't actually think that that will change with the Takdor AP.
Though I would be very happy if proven wrong (especially combined with the idea of that being the prelude to Pathfinder 2nd edition :D)
I was not saying it would be interesting.
Creative Director
|
| 26 people marked this as a favorite. |
James Jacobs is not "anti-advancement."
Every one of the Adventure Paths we've published advance the world's story in some way or another. Some in minor ways, but some in SIGNIFICANT ones. Whether or not these stories advance things in your world is up to you, and should be informed by how your table's specific story played out when you played the AP, but when we do an Adventure Path or product that overlaps with a previously covered region, we generally do make assumptions about what happened there previously if the end results were significant.
AKA: For Jade Regent, we assume Rise of the Runelords took place.
For Shattered Star, we assumed Rise of the Runelords, Curse of the Crimson Throne, and Second Darkness took place..
For Hell's Rebels and Hell's Vengeance, we assume they take place simultaneously, and by extension both take place after Council of Thieves.
So far, no other APs have significantly overlapped regions. Carrion Crown and Strange Aeons, for example, both take place in Ustalav, but neither takes place DIRECTLY in areas they share, as is the case for the previous ones (which have portions that take place in shared city locations, like Magnimar, Sandpoint, and Westcrown).
We've never set an AP in Taldor in a significant way (there's a LITTLE of Taldor in Strange Aeons, but not enough to really matter), so the events of War for the Crown don't directly interact with other AP events. If we set an AP in Taldor in the future in a significant way, we WILL assume that things in War for the Crown have taken place.
We don't randomly choose our AP locations and plots, in other words. We plan them out years in advance, and sometimes, those plans include timing things so that subsequent APs will be able to build on prior ones. This was the case for Jade Regent and Shattered Star. It will happen again in the future.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was not saying it would be interesting.
Yeah you're right. It was just me ignoring your sarcasm, because without it, you've made a great point why such an advancement should take place.
James Jacobs is not "anti-advancement".
Apologies if I mischaracterized what I remember you saying regarding this topic. So far my impression was that not to advance the Golarion timeline was a very conscious decision on your part, so that the examples we named so far were more like exceptions from the rule. So thanks for the clarification.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We've never set an AP in Taldor in a significant way (there's a LITTLE of Taldor in Strange Aeons, but not enough to really matter),
Also, Reign of Winter starts in Taldor, but shifts location pretty quickly and doesn't really require that Heldren be in Taldor (as the "Why Taldor?" sidebar explains).
In the Wrath of the Righteous two their were two outcomes. If the players were successful they won a major victory for the good guys. If they lost the Worldwound expanded quite significantly.
At the same time we keep hearing that Taldor is a kingdom on the decline. It's only a matter before the whole house of cards topples. With other kingdoms waiting for it to happen. It only makes sense that eventual Taldor either falls and recovers or falls never to recover. As well no one is forced to use any material. Don't like the timeline moving forward don't use it.
FYI and off topic I also suggest not buying the new Torg rpg if that is the case. One of the things West End Games did when they owned the rights. Is build new material around what happened in home games. Some modules actually had a form one could fill out and send by mail detailing the progress of the party in the modules and what they did. If for example a important npc to the setting was defeated and they received enough feedback from fans that their players defeated the main npc. Offically that npc was defeated. With the internet and how many fans liked actually sending feedback with the previous edition of Torg. I don't see it being different for the new version.
|
|
James Jacobs is not "anti-advancement."
Every one of the Adventure Paths we've published advance the world's story in some way or another. Some in minor ways, but some in SIGNIFICANT ones. Whether or not these stories advance things in your world is up to you, and should be informed by how your table's specific story played out when you played the AP, but when we do an Adventure Path or product that overlaps with a previously covered region, we generally do make assumptions about what happened there previously if the end results were significant.
AKA: For Jade Regent, we assume Rise of the Runelords took place.
For Shattered Star, we assumed Rise of the Runelords, Curse of the Crimson Throne, and Second Darkness took place..
For Hell's Rebels and Hell's Vengeance, we assume they take place simultaneously, and by extension both take place after Council of Thieves.
So far, no other APs have significantly overlapped regions. Carrion Crown and Strange Aeons, for example, both take place in Ustalav, but neither takes place DIRECTLY in areas they share, as is the case for the previous ones (which have portions that take place in shared city locations, like Magnimar, Sandpoint, and Westcrown).
We've never set an AP in Taldor in a significant way (there's a LITTLE of Taldor in Strange Aeons, but not enough to really matter), so the events of War for the Crown don't directly interact with other AP events. If we set an AP in Taldor in the future in a significant way, we WILL assume that things in War for the Crown have taken place.
We don't randomly choose our AP locations and plots, in other words. We plan them out years in advance, and sometimes, those plans include timing things so that subsequent APs will be able to build on prior ones. This was the case for Jade Regent and Shattered Star. It will happen again in the future.
I think the real concern is less with APs (they only advance my Golarion if I play/run them) and more with the Companion and Setting lines.
If this indicates that their timelines might begin to advance then many, many books which I have bought from Paizo will become incompatible and messes/confusion will be created.It would also run the risk of invalidating *my* Golarion.
I would rather not have to scrap my rather major investment in 'out-dated' setting materials. That would feel pretty horrible.
I think that's why people worry about advancing timelines.
APs and Modules inevitably change the setting, but only if you play them.
So far, Paizo have done a good job of allowing setting material to work before/after APs for those who run them, mostly by assuming pre-AP in the setting material. APs always run individually, especially with outcomes, so even if the AP has been played, a post-AP piece of setting may invalidate *my* game.
I.e. if Paizo invented rulers who had completed Kingmaker, what does that mean for my PCs who completed Kingmaker...
Paizo have done this pretty well so far, but it's easy to worry about hundreds and hundreds of dollars of books being invalidated. And about home campaigns being disrupted.
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
It would also run the risk of invalidating *my* Golarion.
Okay I'm sorry but that is patently ridiculous! I am so tired of this line it angers me every time I see it anymore. It's right up there with, "Elminster ruined my campaign."
Look "your" Golarion is yours only you can invalidate it. Paizo is not going to come to your house and beat you up because the gameworld you are running in does not 100% match their version of the campaign setting.
Everytime a setting book comes out about a section they have not covered in depth, anybody who has run in that section of the world is going to have stuff that they put in place that doesn't exist in the "Official" version of Golarion and possibly can not coexist with the "Official" version. If I've been running a campaign in my ethnically insensitive version of Arcadia, when the Arcadia book that Paizo will eventually publish comes out, my entire campaign will not fit within the "Official" Golarion. That won't invalidate my campaign. The "Paizo Police" won't come to my house, burn all of my prep materials and take away my players character sheets. My campaign will continue unabated, and if my players start complaining that my world does not match the "Official" world I will simply remind them that this is my campaign and that in my version this is how it works.
I would never intentionally run and ethnically insensitive campaign, I was simply using an example of something that could not match up with something that Paizo would write.
This is no different if they publish something that advances the timeline in a section of the world. If you don't like the new version just keep running in the old version. Just be up front with your players about the differences between your setting and the published one.
I love Shadowrun, and when 4th edition came out I fell in love with the setting all over again. Things happened, seriously BS things that should not have happened, and I now HATE the current incarnation of Catalyst games, the company that currently publishes Shadowrun. So much in fact that I refuse to give them another penny of my money. Does this mean I can not run Shadowrun any more? No, I continue to run Shadowrun in the 4th edition version of the world. Even if I were willing to purchase and use the new 5th edition of the rules, if I hated the changes to the setting I could just run in the old setting. In fact, people do exactly that all the time. There are several Shadowrun Actual Play Podcasts that run using 5th ed rules in the 2nd ed setting.
If you don't like how a company advances a section of their world don't use that advancement. It doesn't invalidate the rest of what they put out for your use and it definitely does not invalidate your campaign world.
I think the real concern is less with APs (they only advance my Golarion if I play/run them) and more with the Companion and Setting
...
This.
I don't have an issue with AP's 'assuming this or that happened' - however the 'good guys' winning an AP usually resulted in mostly the status staying the same - as the AP's have grown so have the ramifications they have at the end good or bad - Magnimar being flooded by a Tusnami is kind of a big deal.
At the same time - I kind of do have an issue with this for the same reason I said above - look through the 'what AP do you want to see next thread' and it's always about areas we've not heard much about other than the Inner Sea world guide. And then we get another Varisia/Cheliax AP. Ok I give some leeway here because sometimes you want to tell the story - but at the same time I see James up above talking about how far these are planned out and this will happen again and I have to groan - honestly at this point I have to say I would rather never see another AP hit the same area we've been to ever again if it means fresh areas. That's with fact that I've enjoyed almost everything put out so far.
Back to the Talador AP - I'm nervous about if they can pull it off - because a game of thrones style AP to me has 90% less combat than a typical AP - and I've seen comments before about how they can't abandon the 'combat = xp' formula because of massive negative feedback. I will give them the benefit of the doubt and see how it turns out before I condemn it but I've never been unsure they can pull off a concept before now.
I am happy those who have wanted a Talador AP are getting it - I hope it lives up to the teaser, if it does it may become my favorite AP.
All *that* said the line about advancing the timeline. I don't use Forgotten Realms anymore. Not because it's made by another company - lord knows I've got a ton of TSR and WoC crap. The reason is because every time I blinked the damn world changed in radically different ways. I just got rid of two banker boxes full of books mostly related last year (and managed to pick up most of the original Curse of the Crimson Throne at the same time - I thought it a good trade myself).
This I guess is just the nudge I needed to move onto another setting.
James Jacobs is not "anti-advancement."
Every one of the Adventure Paths we've published advance the world's story in some way or another. Some in minor ways, but some in SIGNIFICANT ones. Whether or not these stories advance things in your world is up to you, and should be informed by how your table's specific story played out when you played the AP, but when we do an Adventure Path or product that overlaps with a previously covered region, we generally do make assumptions about what happened there previously if the end results were significant.
AKA: For Jade Regent, we assume Rise of the Runelords took place.
For Shattered Star, we assumed Rise of the Runelords, Curse of the Crimson Throne, and Second Darkness took place..
For Hell's Rebels and Hell's Vengeance, we assume they take place simultaneously, and by extension both take place after Council of Thieves.
So far, no other APs have significantly overlapped regions. Carrion Crown and Strange Aeons, for example, both take place in Ustalav, but neither takes place DIRECTLY in areas they share, as is the case for the previous ones (which have portions that take place in shared city locations, like Magnimar, Sandpoint, and Westcrown).
We've never set an AP in Taldor in a significant way (there's a LITTLE of Taldor in Strange Aeons, but not enough to really matter), so the events of War for the Crown don't directly interact with other AP events. If we set an AP in Taldor in the future in a significant way, we WILL assume that things in War for the Crown have taken place.
We don't randomly choose our AP locations and plots, in other words. We plan them out years in advance, and sometimes, those plans include timing things so that subsequent APs will be able to build on prior ones. This was the case for Jade Regent and Shattered Star. It will happen again in the future.
Then what about the Adventurers Guide. It seems like that book assumes EVERY adventure path it touches has happened.
|
Then what about the Adventurers Guide. It seems like that book assumes EVERY adventure path it touches has happened.James Jacobs is not "anti-advancement."
Every one of the Adventure Paths we've published advance the world's story in some way or another. Some in minor ways, but some in SIGNIFICANT ones. Whether or not these stories advance things in your world is up to you, and should be informed by how your table's specific story played out when you played the AP, but when we do an Adventure Path or product that overlaps with a previously covered region, we generally do make assumptions about what happened there previously if the end results were significant.
AKA: For Jade Regent, we assume Rise of the Runelords took place.
For Shattered Star, we assumed Rise of the Runelords, Curse of the Crimson Throne, and Second Darkness took place..
For Hell's Rebels and Hell's Vengeance, we assume they take place simultaneously, and by extension both take place after Council of Thieves.
So far, no other APs have significantly overlapped regions. Carrion Crown and Strange Aeons, for example, both take place in Ustalav, but neither takes place DIRECTLY in areas they share, as is the case for the previous ones (which have portions that take place in shared city locations, like Magnimar, Sandpoint, and Westcrown).
We've never set an AP in Taldor in a significant way (there's a LITTLE of Taldor in Strange Aeons, but not enough to really matter), so the events of War for the Crown don't directly interact with other AP events. If we set an AP in Taldor in the future in a significant way, we WILL assume that things in War for the Crown have taken place.
We don't randomly choose our AP locations and plots, in other words. We plan them out years in advance, and sometimes, those plans include timing things so that subsequent APs will be able to build on prior ones. This was the case for Jade Regent and Shattered Star. It will happen again in the future.
There's 4 groups out of 18. Of those Curse of the Crimson Throne (Gray Maidens) and Second Darkness (Lantern Bearers) came out almost a decade and have been referenced in other products and have had a sequel (Shattered Star), while Hell's Rebels (Silver Ravens) is the newest Council of Thieves (The eponymous group) was the very first AP to use the Pathfinder system and both have a sequel in Hell's Vengeance.
That's kind of my point. If they're going to invalidate an AP that came out a little over a year ago when does it stop.
No thank you.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Golarion's timeline thunders forward [...]"
Does that mean this AP will actually advance the timeline of the setting? I've never heard them use that sort of language to describe any other adventure path.
I'm completely done with buying pathfinder if that's the case.
So much for them "having stories to tell for years without advancing the time line"
Thanks for lying to us.
Whuaaaaaaaaah!!!!
...
...
...
I know... Right?!?!?!?