War for the Crown AP, Feb 2018


War for the Crown

101 to 150 of 398 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Cry Me A River wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
Nullpunkt wrote:

"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?!?!?!?

One is customer feedback and something most companies want to hear even when it's negative.

The other is smug condensation that is neither directed at the company nor adds to the conversation.

Figure out which is which and grow up.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Ckorik wrote:
Cry Me A River wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
Nullpunkt wrote:

"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?!?!?!?

One is customer feedback and something most companies want to hear even when it's negative.

The other is smug condensation that is neither directed at the company nor adds to the conversation.

Figure out which is which and grow up.

Seriously?

Is "I will stop buying Pathfinder's stuff FOREVER unless they do what I want" customer feedback now?

I get some people don't like the idea of the timeline advancing but we don't even know how that will happen. From James Jackobs' post one might infer what's going to happen is exactly what happened with RotRL, CotCT, JR etc.

Also my intention was not to offend anyone but to point out the way sometimes some people on these forums create new aliases just to mock (often in a funny and benevolent way) a certain post.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rogar Valertis wrote:


Seriously?

Is "I will stop buying Pathfinder's stuff FOREVER unless they do what I want" customer feedback now?

I get some people don't like the idea of the timeline advancing but we don't even know how that will happen. From James Jackobs' post one might infer what's going to happen is exactly what happened with RotRL, CotCT, JR etc.

Yes seriously.

You know what - I appreciate his willingness to state what he feels is wrong, and his intentions. I appreciate it more than I did a single person campaign against a system I enjoyed (Mythic Rules) that single handedly discouraged Paizo from using the rules forever more. Actually that second person made any discussion of how to run things and fix broken things so unpleasant that frankly I don't blame them. But I'd rather have someone be honest than start a crusade.

You know as a consumer - Paizo atm (IMO) has a bad reputation with stated promises. They were only going to make a single hardcover AP - not true. They were never going to use campaign stuff in the core line - not true. They were never going to do a non-lawful good paladin - not true. They were going to stop putting out new classes - not true. They were going to make the timeline on the campaign world static - not true. Honestly 90% of those decisions made me happy - but at the same time they are making things worse by constantly trying to have a company line and then crossing it due to market forces. Perhaps it's good business - but at the same time I don't frankly see how anyone can get bent out of shape for someone calling them on it.

Quote:


Also my intention was

Didn't work.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

how is a static timeline a company line when there never was a static timeline to begin with?

Silver Crusade

10 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Ckorik wrote:
You know as a consumer - Paizo atm (IMO) has a bad reputation with stated promises. They were only going to make a single hardcover AP - not true. They were never going to use campaign stuff in the core line - not true. They were never going to do a non-lawful good paladin - not true. They were going to stop putting out new classes - not true. They were going to make the timeline on the campaign world static - not true. Honestly 90% of those decisions made me happy - but at the same time they are making things worse by constantly trying to have a company line and then crossing it due to market forces. Perhaps it's good business - but at the same time I don't frankly see how anyone can get bent out of shape for someone calling them on it.

I don't think they've ever said they weren't ever going to do any of these things, just that they were unlikely at the time.

Ckorik wrote:
But I'd rather have someone be honest than start a crusade.

"Thanks for lying to us." Throwing stuff like that around sounds closer to someone starting a crusade than being honest.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:

]I don't think they've ever said they weren't ever going to do any of these things, just that they were unlikely at the time.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2j67g?Beyond-the-Core-Rulebook#23

Erik Mona wrote:

Just to make one thing clear, here, I'm talking about a PATHFINDER RPG line.

Like the Core Rulebook, the default assumption is that we are providing rules, and we may use some Golarion stuff as examples, but these ARE NOT Golarion sourcebooks.

This is relevant to the discussion here so I'll link it. Another one I forgot about was the (paraphrasing) "We won't do another Humble Bundle" they told all the FLGS's - which I know made many of them very upset.

I like the company too - but I call my dad out when he lies about something I'm not going to be gentle to a company when they do the same.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Rysky wrote:
Ckorik wrote:
You know as a consumer - Paizo atm (IMO) has a bad reputation with stated promises. They were only going to make a single hardcover AP - not true. They were never going to use campaign stuff in the core line - not true. They were never going to do a non-lawful good paladin - not true. They were going to stop putting out new classes - not true. They were going to make the timeline on the campaign world static - not true. Honestly 90% of those decisions made me happy - but at the same time they are making things worse by constantly trying to have a company line and then crossing it due to market forces. Perhaps it's good business - but at the same time I don't frankly see how anyone can get bent out of shape for someone calling them on it.

I don't think they've ever said they weren't ever going to do any of these things, just that they were unlikely at the time.

Ckorik wrote:
But I'd rather have someone be honest than start a crusade.
"Thanks for lying to us." Throwing stuff like that around sounds closer to someone starting a crusade than being honest.

Excuse me! A crusade!

Shame on you.

I did feel lied to.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Ckorik wrote:
Rysky wrote:

I don't think they've ever said they weren't ever going to do any of these things, just that they were unlikely at the time.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2j67g?Beyond-the-Core-Rulebook#23

Erik Mona wrote:

Just to make one thing clear, here, I'm talking about a PATHFINDER RPG line.

Like the Core Rulebook, the default assumption is that we are providing rules, and we may use some Golarion stuff as examples, but these ARE NOT Golarion sourcebooks.

This is relevant to the discussion here so I'll link it.

<snip>

I like the company too - but I call my dad out when he lies about something I'm not going to be gentle to a company when they do the same.

That's exactly what I'm talking about too. Good example.

I think Erik is very clear there about the difference between the two product lines - at the time. I think it was an accurate and open statement about their approach back in early 2009.

I think it's misreading that to think he's implying "this approach will never change".

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Steve Geddes wrote:
Ckorik wrote:
Rysky wrote:

I don't think they've ever said they weren't ever going to do any of these things, just that they were unlikely at the time.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2j67g?Beyond-the-Core-Rulebook#23

Erik Mona wrote:

Just to make one thing clear, here, I'm talking about a PATHFINDER RPG line.

Like the Core Rulebook, the default assumption is that we are providing rules, and we may use some Golarion stuff as examples, but these ARE NOT Golarion sourcebooks.

This is relevant to the discussion here so I'll link it.

<snip>

I like the company too - but I call my dad out when he lies about something I'm not going to be gentle to a company when they do the same.

That's exactly what I'm talking about too. Good example.

I think Erik is very clear there about the difference between the two product lines - at the time. I think it was an accurate and open statement about their approach back in early 2009.

I think it's misreading that to think he's implying "this approach will never change".

*nods*

And just like the others the same with Humble Bundle I'm pretty sure they said not at this or likely, not that they would ever do one again.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
captain yesterday wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Ckorik wrote:
You know as a consumer - Paizo atm (IMO) has a bad reputation with stated promises. They were only going to make a single hardcover AP - not true. They were never going to use campaign stuff in the core line - not true. They were never going to do a non-lawful good paladin - not true. They were going to stop putting out new classes - not true. They were going to make the timeline on the campaign world static - not true. Honestly 90% of those decisions made me happy - but at the same time they are making things worse by constantly trying to have a company line and then crossing it due to market forces. Perhaps it's good business - but at the same time I don't frankly see how anyone can get bent out of shape for someone calling them on it.

I don't think they've ever said they weren't ever going to do any of these things, just that they were unlikely at the time.

Ckorik wrote:
But I'd rather have someone be honest than start a crusade.
"Thanks for lying to us." Throwing stuff like that around sounds closer to someone starting a crusade than being honest.

Excuse me! A crusade!

Shame on you.

I did feel lied to.

But you weren't lied to though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't think it's outside the bounds for people to take almost a decade of product policy as a commitment. I also can't imagine that they made the changes in an echo chamber thinking that it would be seen as sugar and spice by all customers.

I think calling them a liar straight out is harsh but not outside the realms of acceptable feedback, at the very least it shows the passion and strength of feelings that they engender in their fanbase. Others of us ganging up on someone who speaks out doesn't help anyone. Captain (who in general is usually the one trying to add levity to a discussion that gets strained) has a right to his feelings, even if we disagree with them.

I think at the end of the day if you feel it was out of bounds reporting the post and moving on is the way to handle it - Paizo didn't remove the post (and the mod's have been in this thread). I'll go with it's their sandbox they can clean it if they want to - we don't need to throw stuff at each other to make our points.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

There was some miscommunication around the humble bundle, I believe. A Paizo person gave one specific FLGS the impression that the first was a one off. Personally, I consider that an error not a lie, but either way it was definitely a misstep.

I don't think their policy on humble bundles was ever really articulated on the boards.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Hey I have an idea why don't we talk about the product, and move this time line advancement sky falling stuff to another thread so those of us who want to talk about this AP can do so.

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Can I at this point point out the fact that campaign settings books HAVE advanced the timeline before?

For example, RotR starts in year 4707(aka 2007 irl years), 5 years after 4702 when the thing happened, right? Well, Numeria's campaign setting books lists events for 4709 and 4711 and year 4714 as "Present year"(which was also Iron Gods'/campaign setting book's released year)

So yeaaaaah, they have been doing that all the time in campaign setting books for years by now. Its not just PFS that advances timeline.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Ckorik wrote:

I don't think it's outside the bounds for people to take almost a decade of product policy as a commitment. I also can't imagine that they made the changes in an echo chamber thinking that it would be seen as sugar and spice by all customers.

I think calling them a liar straight out is harsh but not outside the realms of acceptable feedback, at the very least it shows the passion and strength of feelings that they engender in their fanbase. Others of us ganging up on someone who speaks out doesn't help anyone. Captain (who in general is usually the one trying to add levity to a discussion that gets strained) has a right to his feelings, even if we disagree with them.

I think at the end of the day if you feel it was out of bounds reporting the post and moving on is the way to handle it - Paizo didn't remove the post (and the mod's have been in this thread). I'll go with it's their sandbox they can clean it if they want to - we don't need to throw stuff at each other to make our points.

But they've been advancing timelines in different products since almost day one, Curse of the Crimson Throne has ties to Rise of the Runelords.

And it's not voicing displeasure that I don't like, it's the s%$$ slinging. Accusing someone of lying just because you don't like what they said rather than because they lied, which they haven't, really pisses me off.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Ckorik wrote:

I don't think it's outside the bounds for people to take almost a decade of product policy as a commitment. I also can't imagine that they made the changes in an echo chamber thinking that it would be seen as sugar and spice by all customers.

I think calling them a liar straight out is harsh but not outside the realms of acceptable feedback, at the very least it shows the passion and strength of feelings that they engender in their fanbase. Others of us ganging up on someone who speaks out doesn't help anyone. Captain (who in general is usually the one trying to add levity to a discussion that gets strained) has a right to his feelings, even if we disagree with them.

I think at the end of the day if you feel it was out of bounds reporting the post and moving on is the way to handle it - Paizo didn't remove the post (and the mod's have been in this thread). I'll go with it's their sandbox they can clean it if they want to - we don't need to throw stuff at each other to make our points.

I totally agree with that (I haven't replied to Captain Yesterday's posts at all in this thread for precisely that reason - he sees it as he sees it and I'm not challenging his right to express his feelings. Nor have I flagged any posts). I'm responding to you, not him. :)

My feelings are that it isn't a lie to change your mind, unless you say you're never going to. The reason I care is that I don't want Paizo to abandon their policy of openness about philosophy and approach. Consider what happens if stating their philosophy and sticking to it over a period of time becomes seen as a guarantee that they'll never change. Suddenly the incentive is to just keep quiet (so as to avoid being called liars). Nothing really changes product wise - we just don't get to see the behind the scenes thinking.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

They've said they wouldn't assume APs that were just released have happened. The Adventurers Guide proved that to be a lie.

They said they wouldn't reprint a lot of stuff from previous books in the campaign setting to invalidate them. Bestiary 6 reprinting heavily from Inner Sea Bestiary and Occult Bestiary as well as the upcoming Book Of The Damned, and The Adventurers Guide proved that to be a lie.

And now a "big jump in the time line"

How exactly do you expect me to feel.

Do you want to give me a refund for books that are no longer relevant that they said they wouldn't make irrelevant.

Cause I'm done.

I'll just wait for them to reprint it in the next hardcover.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
CorvusMask wrote:

Can I at this point point out the fact that campaign settings books HAVE advanced the timeline before?

For example, RotR starts in year 4707(aka 2007 irl years), 5 years after 4702 when the thing happened, right? Well, Numeria's campaign setting books lists events for 4709 and 4711 and year 4714 as "Present year"(which was also Iron Gods'/campaign setting book's released year)

So yeaaaaah, they have been doing that all the time in campaign setting books for years by now. Its not just PFS that advances timeline.

*nods*

We don't have the Times of Troubles or Spellplague (thank the various gods and goddesses above and below) but the world of Golarion has been on a gradual advancement since the very beginning. Slow, but gradual.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
captain yesterday wrote:
Do you want to give me a refund

Maybe. What do you think you've lost? (PM me if you like).

My way of thinking is that a book including reprints doesn't invalidate old books, it's just less value per page than a book with entirely new material (unless, like me, you put value on the compilation aspect).

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
captain yesterday wrote:

They've said they wouldn't assume APs that were just released have happened. The Adventurers Guide proved that to be a lie.

They said they wouldn't reprint a lot of stuff from previous books in the campaign setting to invalidate them. Bestiary 6 reprinting heavily from Inner Sea Bestiary and Occult Bestiary as well as the upcoming Book Of The Damned, and The Adventurers Guide proved that to be a lie.

And now a "big jump in the time line"

How exactly do you expect me to feel.

Do you want to give me a refund for books that are no longer relevant that they said they wouldn't make irrelevant.

Cause I'm done.

I'll just wait for them to reprint it in the next hardcover.

The second AP ever was running on the assumption that the first happened, or at least parts of it.

And every bestiary has reprints in it, a good 1/3 of them are reprints from all the other lines, this isn't a new development.

The Book of the Damned is a collection and updating of the previous 3 books, that's exactly what it's been advertised as and exactly what people have been asking for for a long time.

And "thunders into the future" is at this point just a tagline, but I HIGHLY doubt a single AP is going to rocket forward the entirety of Golarion, that would be reserved for a Hardcover.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

That wasn't for you. :-)

Unless you're and employee of Paizo addressing my concerns, it doesn't concern you. :-)


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber

As far as I'm concerned I'm REALLY happy for this AP finally happening. Based on what was revealed until now I believe everything was spot on. My only concern is how well the system can cope with a intrigue heavy campaign. Characters with huge Sense Motive checks. Divination spells. Psychic magic... unless carefully handled even low level characters have a lot of tools to trivialize even the best and most complicated of plots. I believe the way the AP takes into account these game aspects will make or break it

Silver Crusade

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
captain yesterday wrote:

That wasn't for you. :-)

Unless you're and employee of Paizo addressing my concerns, it doesn't concern you. :-)

Yes it does, when someone I look up to starts publicly throwing shade at someone else I look up to it does concern me.

If you didn't want other people commenting you should have emailed or called Paizo about it, rather than posting on a public forum.


Rysky wrote:
The second AP ever was running on the assumption that the first happened, or at least parts of it.

You keep saying this - but it doesn't. I just checked my AV copy and it says the same thing I remember the original saying - two references to RotRL in the entire thing and both are just notes about events that happened prior to both of the adventures happening.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Another time when I was directly lied to.

James Jacobs said they had no plans of releasing Curse Of The Crimson Throne. So I bought the last two books. Not even two weeks later as I'm literally opening up my package they announce the reprint.

He knew they were doing it, he just sent it off to the printer for Pete's sake. He didn't have to say anything at all, yet here he was telling people "nope, no plans"

So, whatever, defend them if you want, just get off my back.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Ckorik wrote:
Rysky wrote:
The second AP ever was running on the assumption that the first happened, or at least parts of it.
You keep saying this - but it doesn't. I just checked my AV copy and it says the same thing I remember the original saying - two references to RotRL in the entire thing and both are just notes about events that happened prior to both of the adventures happening.

Exactly it references it, so it acknowledges it happens, and the Blood Veil is a big one.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
captain yesterday wrote:

Another time when I was directly lied to.

James Jacobs said they had no plans of releasing Curse Of The Crimson Throne. So I bought the last two books. Not even two weeks later as I'm literally opening up my package they announce the reprint.

He knew they were doing it, he just sent it off to the printer for Pete's sake. He didn't have to say anything at all, yet here he was telling people "nope, no plans"

So, whatever, defend them if you want, just get off my back.

Do you have a link to this post?

Silver Crusade

10 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
captain yesterday wrote:

Another time when I was directly lied to.

James Jacobs said they had no plans of releasing Curse Of The Crimson Throne. So I bought the last two books. Not even two weeks later as I'm literally opening up my package they announce the reprint.

He knew they were doing it, he just sent it off to the printer for Pete's sake. He didn't have to say anything at all, yet here he was telling people "nope, no plans"

So, whatever, defend them if you want, just get off my back.

I'm sorry, but I just took a look at your post history and I can't seem to find you asking James about the revised AP. Heck, I've found several posts where you are apparently super happy about the hardcover, joyful that it's being shipped and generally all is well and no vitriolic salt is being spit around.

So if you can direct me to the point where the supposed lie happened, I'd be obliged. Granted, I'm not sure if the search engine goes through aliases, which is kind of a factor in this case.


Damn, I may have to run this too. A module designed for intrigue, my second favorite thing to explore in an AP.

Paizo Employee Starfinder Society Developer

14 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm excited (and utterly terrified) that Crystal trusted me to jump-start this AP with volume 1. I know, especially from my involvement in Organized Play, that a LOT of player have wanted to see follow-up on Taldor and Princess Eutropia.

The moment I finished the outline, I knew I had to be part of this project. It's something that Crystal did a phenomenal job on, and I think fans will be talking about for years to come...

*Gets back to work*

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Thurston Hillman wrote:

I'm excited (and utterly terrified) that Crystal trusted me to jump-start this AP with volume 1. I know, especially from my involvement in Organized Play, that a LOT of player have wanted to see follow-up on Taldor and Princess Eutropia.

The moment I finished the outline, I knew I had to be part of this project. It's something that Crystal did a phenomenal job on, and I think fans will be talking about for years to come...

*Gets back to work*

Ooooo...


Rysky wrote:
Ckorik wrote:
Rysky wrote:
The second AP ever was running on the assumption that the first happened, or at least parts of it.
You keep saying this - but it doesn't. I just checked my AV copy and it says the same thing I remember the original saying - two references to RotRL in the entire thing and both are just notes about events that happened prior to both of the adventures happening.
Exactly it references it, so it acknowledges it happens, and the Blood Veil is a big one.

You know, there are timelines of RotRL that can be found on the internet, that state that

Spoiler:
Aldern farmed the diseased rats
months before the Swallowtail Festival (contrary to Skinsaw Murders, pg. 11 [3.5 edition] and RotRL AE, pg. 70 where it is clearly written that this only began AFTER the start of RotRL)

So if you base your information on wrong timelines on the internet, then yes, those are just

Ckorik wrote:
notes about events that happened prior to both of the adventures happening.

, which I assume might have happened here.


Steve Geddes wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
Do you want to give me a refund

Maybe. What do you think you've lost? (PM me if you like).

My way of thinking is that a book including reprints doesn't invalidate old books, it's just less value per page than a book with entirely new material (unless, like me, you put value on the compilation aspect).

Exactly, so a book should be valued less because of the reprint material. So a hardback with 1/3 parts reprint material should cost less the a hardback with no reprint material.

Boy, I'm looking forward to them shaving 7.5-10 bucks off the price of a new hardback.

Or they instituted an turn-in program, where you could send your "old" splat-books in, for a discount on a new product with re-print material. Even though I live on the other side of the pond, so that wouldn't really be that feasible to me.

Heck I would probably pay full price, if they gave that 10 bucks to an American charity.

But right now as I'm sitting here, I can't really help to find it slightly galling, that I might be paying "full price" for, what could amount to an errata to serveral classes or background material.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Now while I do agree that if you post something in public message board, other posters have right to comment on our post whether they agree or disagree, but I have to say I don't think he has to "prove" you guys by linking you guys old posts he is talking about :P This ain't exactly a court or something

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ckorik wrote:
Rysky wrote:

]I don't think they've ever said they weren't ever going to do any of these things, just that they were unlikely at the time.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2j67g?Beyond-the-Core-Rulebook#23

Erik Mona wrote:

Just to make one thing clear, here, I'm talking about a PATHFINDER RPG line.

Like the Core Rulebook, the default assumption is that we are providing rules, and we may use some Golarion stuff as examples, but these ARE NOT Golarion sourcebooks.

This is relevant to the discussion here so I'll link it. Another one I forgot about was the (paraphrasing) "We won't do another Humble Bundle" they told all the FLGS's - which I know made many of them very upset.

I like the company too - but I call my dad out when he lies about something I'm not going to be gentle to a company when they do the same.

The problem is that they told the FLGSs "We won't do another Humble Bundle [b]like that[b]." (Bolding Mine) People chose to read that as "We won't ever do another Humble Bundle" words that Paizo employees never spoke. They have never done another Humble Bundle like that one they did another one later that included much fewer books from the Core Rulebook line and fewer books period if I remember correctly.

Paizo does not have this problem of lying. They have a problem of getting misinterpretted and then held to the standard they never promised.


Hythlodeus wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Ckorik wrote:
Rysky wrote:
The second AP ever was running on the assumption that the first happened, or at least parts of it.
You keep saying this - but it doesn't. I just checked my AV copy and it says the same thing I remember the original saying - two references to RotRL in the entire thing and both are just notes about events that happened prior to both of the adventures happening.
Exactly it references it, so it acknowledges it happens, and the Blood Veil is a big one.

You know, there are timelines of RotRL that can be found on the internet, that state that ** spoiler omitted ** months before the Swallowtail Festival (contrary to Skinsaw Murders, pg. 11 [3.5 edition] and RotRL AE, pg. 70 where it is clearly written that this only began AFTER the start of RotRL)

So if you base your information on wrong timelines on the internet, then yes, those are just

Ckorik wrote:
notes about events that happened prior to both of the adventures happening.
, which I assume might have happened here.

No - I based it off of what CotCT wrote about the plauge and the other reference to the RotRL. There is no official timeline in either AP that makes one dependant on the other. The fact that they happen in the same world and have ties to each other doesn't make them canonically in order - and none of the information invalidates CotCT happening prior to RotRL that I can find.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Plausible Pseudonym wrote:
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, if the people who made things I liked would stop making new things that were either identical to the original thing I liked or different in any way from that original thing, I wouldn't have to go on the Internet and complain...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alakhest wrote:


The problem is that they told the FLGSs "We won't do another Humble Bundle [b]like that[b]." (Bolding Mine) People chose to read that as "We won't ever do another Humble Bundle" words that Paizo employees never spoke. They have never done another Humble Bundle like that one they did another one later that included much fewer books from the Core Rulebook line and fewer books period if I remember correctly.

Paizo does not have this problem of lying. They have a problem of getting misinterpretted and then held to the standard they never promised.

Yeah - I have no idea how many followed through on it but the uproar was impossible to miss and it wasn't a single or even just a couple of voices.

You can dance around words all you want but real life isn't a rulebook and people don't care about being cute with words - people in general tend to add meaning you didn't perhaps intend and when you make statements of impact to their lives (in the case of the FLGS) they tend to take them rather strongly.

End point - outside of the rules forum no one cares that 'like that' is in the statement.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
CorvusMask wrote:
Now while I do agree that if you post something in public message board, other posters have right to comment on our post whether they agree or disagree, but I have to say I don't think he has to "prove" you guys by linking you guys old posts he is talking about :P This ain't exactly a court or something

No he doesn't have to prove anything. However, people who have up until this point liked, trusted, and generally agreed with him are asking him to provide backup to what he is claiming because the viewpoint he is espousing is not backed up by anything they can find.

EDIT: wrong alias... :(

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Ckorik wrote:
Alakhest wrote:


The problem is that they told the FLGSs "We won't do another Humble Bundle [b]like that[b]." (Bolding Mine) People chose to read that as "We won't ever do another Humble Bundle" words that Paizo employees never spoke. They have never done another Humble Bundle like that one they did another one later that included much fewer books from the Core Rulebook line and fewer books period if I remember correctly.

Paizo does not have this problem of lying. They have a problem of getting misinterpretted and then held to the standard they never promised.

Yeah - I have no idea how many followed through on it but the uproar was impossible to miss and it wasn't a single or even just a couple of voices.

You can dance around words all you want but real life isn't a rulebook and people don't care about being cute with words - people in general tend to add meaning you didn't perhaps intend and when you make statements of impact to their lives (in the case of the FLGS) they tend to take them rather strongly.

End point - outside of the rules forum no one cares that 'like that' is in the statement.

Everyone should pay attention to all the words used whenever ANYONE speaks. They all have meaning. When you ignore part of what someone says and take the remainder as gospel you inevitably miss the point of what they are trying to say.

EDIT: wrong alias... :(


Ckorik wrote:
Hythlodeus wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Ckorik wrote:
Rysky wrote:
The second AP ever was running on the assumption that the first happened, or at least parts of it.
You keep saying this - but it doesn't. I just checked my AV copy and it says the same thing I remember the original saying - two references to RotRL in the entire thing and both are just notes about events that happened prior to both of the adventures happening.
Exactly it references it, so it acknowledges it happens, and the Blood Veil is a big one.

You know, there are timelines of RotRL that can be found on the internet, that state that ** spoiler omitted ** months before the Swallowtail Festival (contrary to Skinsaw Murders, pg. 11 [3.5 edition] and RotRL AE, pg. 70 where it is clearly written that this only began AFTER the start of RotRL)

So if you base your information on wrong timelines on the internet, then yes, those are just

Ckorik wrote:
notes about events that happened prior to both of the adventures happening.
, which I assume might have happened here.

No - I based it off of what CotCT wrote about the plauge and the other reference to the RotRL. There is no official timeline in either AP that makes one dependant on the other. The fact that they happen in the same world and have ties to each other doesn't make them canonically in order - and none of the information invalidates CotCT happening prior to RotRL that I can find.

but those are two very different things:

a) the depency you are talking about (as in: there is only one order to play the APs), which no one ever stated existed
and
2) the logic of linear time progressing (as in: the source of the plague has to be farmed and weaponized before it can be used as a weapon)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alakhest wrote:

Everyone should pay attention to all the words used whenever ANYONE speaks. They all have meaning. When you ignore part of what someone says and take the remainder as gospel you inevitably miss the point of what they are trying to say.

50% of the people have an IQ less than 110 - it is imperative that the speaker - speak to the audience and not at them, and assume half of what was said wasn't understood in the first place.

That's before you get into native language issues.


Hythlodeus wrote:

but those are two very different things:
a) the depency you are talking about (as in: there is only one order to play the APs), which no one ever stated existed
and
2) the logic of linear time progressing (as in: the source of the plague has to be farmed and weaponized before it can be used as a weapon)

#2 - according to RotRL this happened prior to the start of the entire AP.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ckorik wrote:


50% of the people have an IQ less than 110 - it is imperative that the speaker - speak to the audience and not at them, and assume half of what was said wasn't understood in the first place.

and that's the mindset that gets us politicians that have the best words. like "convfefe"


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ckorik wrote:
Hythlodeus wrote:

but those are two very different things:
a) the depency you are talking about (as in: there is only one order to play the APs), which no one ever stated existed
and
2) the logic of linear time progressing (as in: the source of the plague has to be farmed and weaponized before it can be used as a weapon)

#2 - according to RotRL this happened prior to the start of the entire AP.

that's simply not true. as stated above in an earlier post of mine on the very same page.

but, especially for you:
RotRL AE, pg. 68 wrote:
Xanesha suspected that the caverns below a local manor built by a founder ofthe Brothers of the Seven might hold just such a disease that she can sell to the Red Mantis, and in so doing make a tidy profit for herself. And when a desperate noble named Aldern Foxglove approached her, the lamia matriarch saw a chance to satisfy two goals at once.
RotRL AE, pg. 70 wrote:

It was a simple task, really-return to Foxglove Manor, catch one of the diseased rats that plagued the cellars, and return with it to Xanesha for her to study.

Eager to finally be free of his debt, but nervous about returning to the scene of his crime, Aldern swore off the flayleaf, cleaned himself up, and headed north. He lacked the courage to go directly to Foxglove Manor, though, and instead continued on to Sandpoint, where he attended the Swallowtail Festival.

to summarize that quotes: Aldern farmed the diseased rats AFTER the Swallowtail Festival, AFTER he met the PC's of RotRL for the first time, AFTER the first AP started.

And NOT PRIOR to the the start of RotRL

[edit] the original version of RotRL uses the exact same information on pgs. 9-11 of Skinsaw Murders. (just to avoid dscussions about changes made between editions)

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ckorik wrote:
Alakhest wrote:

Everyone should pay attention to all the words used whenever ANYONE speaks. They all have meaning. When you ignore part of what someone says and take the remainder as gospel you inevitably miss the point of what they are trying to say.

50% of the people have an IQ less than 110 - it is imperative that the speaker - speak to the audience and not at them, and assume half of what was said wasn't understood in the first place.

That's before you get into native language issues.

We are not talking about big words here if "like that" is too much for somebody how do they manage to keep a store running? If as the customer at that store I order a case of Magic: the Gathering and the store orders a case of Mage: the Ascension, is that my fault or theirs? If I advertise "Buy One Get One Half-Off" am I responsible for every customer who came in, read "Buy One Get One..." and assumed the last part was Free? Every word has meaning if you don't understand it, GOOGLE IT. If you can't be bothered to read or listen to all of them I can't be bothered to feel sorry for you.


Hythlodeus wrote:


[edit] the original version of RotRL uses the exact same information on pgs. 9-11 of Skinsaw Murders. (just to avoid dscussions about changes made between editions)

Spoiler:
The ledger also indicates that Ironbriar has received

payment from the Red Mantis for delivery of "Vorel's
Legacy." This refers to the deadly fungus harvested from
area 837 of Foxglove Manor, sent to a sinister group of
assas sins based in Mediogalti.

Given the distance to Mediogalti - the info in part 1 can't be true - thus the disagreement we have here - if it said 'local contacts' or something I'd be on board - but as read it sets up having sent it off way before.

Which goes on to explain the them being involved in this entire mess long before Aldern got involved - I always figured they told Aldern that to get him out of the city and hope he got infected or eaten.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
graywulfe wrote:


We are not talking about big words here if "like that" is too much for somebody how do they manage to keep a store running? If as the customer at that store I order a case of Magic: the Gathering and the store orders a case of Mage: the Ascension, is that my fault or theirs? If I advertise "Buy One Get One Half-Off" am I responsible for every customer who came in, read "Buy One Get One..." and assumed the last part was Free? Every word has meaning if you don't understand it, GOOGLE IT. If you can't be bothered to read or listen to all of them I can't be bothered to feel sorry for you.

like that could mean a million things - in the context it was brought forward (complaints about humble bundle to begin with) it's not unreasonable to assume they meant another bundle of game PDF's.

But go on and victim blame here - it's always fun to pile on because it didn't affect you personally.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

BTW, there has been material that spoils aps before, so thats not new thing either .-. Like Lost Cities' Xin-Shalast article(which I'm sad they haven't done more of post ap setting details)

101 to 150 of 398 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Path / War for the Crown / War for the Crown AP, Feb 2018 All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.