| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It makes sense that with 2E in the works, 1E is gonna wind down a bit, as there's not much of a future for any system once its replacement is anounced. Nonetheless I think it would be smart for Paizo to release a book with new PF1E classes and features.
First I think a lot of hardcore players who don't like the new version of the game would actually shell out for the final hardcover book, especually if it's loaded with cool content and they plan on playing this game forever.
Secondly this book would be an excellent canary in the coal mine for any interesting class/rule ideas Paizo wants to try for 2E. Paizo might be able to look back on this book and say "Wow, that class that turns into a squid and uses ink magic was really lame but the arcane ranger with a magical brast companion was pretty cool."
As much as some of us would really like to see a new Bestiary and perhaps another class guide, they've pretty much flatly stated "Planar Adventures" is the last hardcover. At least according the most recent thing I've read.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's unfortunate.
I realize many people bemoaned the class/rules bloat of pathfinder but we never got options for a lot of cool character concepts.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, a LOT of folks start complaining about this bloat and that bloat, no matter which iteration of D&D comes along (and that's what Pathfinder is at its heart). And when PF2e rolls out and if it has a long life they'll complain about that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
that class that turns into a squid and uses ink magic
- given the good amount of tattoo-based magic, it might be interesting to investigate whether the material or form is more important
- Potential to work as the inverse to the oozemorph (i.e. becoming more fluid rather than less), which several people expressed an interest in
- More Invertebrate support!
Somebody, make this class!
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
there is no such thing as "bloat", only people who think that we have too many of "good things"
I for one love the strength that the diversity in all mechanics has given Golarion. ten years have made it a unique world, and while not as diverse as a "real world", it certainly got close.
there is no such thing as "bloat", only people who think that we have too many of "good things"
I for one love the strength that the diversity in all mechanics has given Golarion. ten years have made it a unique world, and while not as diverse as a "real world", it certainly got close.
Even though I'm on the side of wanting more classes and more content, I disagree with you somewhat.
For me bloat occurs when options are introduced that contaminate your world and vision of the game. Bloat is a tangible problem for me because when I started DMing pathfinder my instructions to players were "No bards!". Now I have to say "No bards, ninjas, samurai, gunslingers, skalds, weird robot riding alchemists or... or... Just tell me what you want to build and I'll tell you if I'm disgusted or not. "
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's a one-time-per-campaign issue that you'll have to do for any system anyway. Not really something to say "OK, throw it all out" about.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm lobbying for a Pathfinder Spell Compendium or something similar in this thread.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would like a book of compiled GM resources. There are all sorts of haunts, traps and hazards scattered around the adventure path volumes and modules. Having those in one handy place would be dandy. Maybe throw in the various little rule systems they've put into the APs too? *shrugs*
That's unfortunate.
I realize many people bemoaned the class/rules bloat of pathfinder but we never got options for a lot of cool character concepts.
That mindset... does not mesh well with rigid rules and interpretations thereof. There will always be more rigid structures they could make, but at the point where you want all character concepts covered, it makes more sense to go to a more open rule system that gives the rules for making new things, rather than one that releases new things until one happens to fit an idea.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That mindset... does not mesh well with rigid rules and interpretations thereof. There will always be more rigid structures they could make, but at the point where you want all character concepts covered, it makes more sense to go to a more open rule system that gives the rules for making new things, rather than one that releases new things until one happens to fit an idea.That's unfortunate.
I realize many people bemoaned the class/rules bloat of pathfinder but we never got options for a lot of cool character concepts.
Smart point, but you still haven't changed the fact that I would've liked to have seen more classes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
*Le shrug.*
There's tons of third party classes at least as well made as the Paizo stuff.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, most are. I've seen a few that were a little high on the power scale to work well with the other classes. But, except for those I've always loved the 3PP classes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would like a book of compiled GM resources. There are all sorts of haunts, traps and hazards scattered around the adventure path volumes and modules. Having those in one handy place would be dandy. Maybe throw in the various little rule systems they've put into the APs too? *shrugs*
Barring an actual book being published with those in it, I rely on these two websites (you may already be aware of them. But in case you're not...)
www.d20pfsrd.com
and
archivesofnethys.com
Sorry for not providing a link. My format button doesn't work and I can't remember how to format a link, even though someone told me in another thread. Which I can't find now.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wouldn't say "most are". Sturgeon's Law applies to Pathfinder third party products as much as anything else. It's just that most of the really bad stuff never makes it anywhere, so we mostly notice the stuff with a good rep.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wish 1e could have lasted 5 more years. So many things that I would liked to have seen. But unfortunately Planar Adventures will be the last hardcover and at the slower rate of softcover releases the odds of getting much of interest is very low.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's sad, true. Fortunately, there are enough adventure paths, megadungeons, and modules out there that I'll probably never run out of stuff to do--to say nothing of homebrew, conversions, and so on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like somebody is going to become the default new publisher for PF1. Other people will still do it, but most of us look to X if we want new product.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's optimistic of you, but so far I don't see anybody stepping up to fill that role.
|
Secondly this book would be an excellent canary in the coal mine for any interesting class/rule ideas Paizo wants to try for 2E. Paizo might be able to look back on this book and say "Wow, that class that turns into a squid and uses ink magic was really lame but the arcane ranger with a magical beast companion was pretty cool."
On the one hand, a sort of 'Pathfinder Unchained 2' which introduced some new stuff, perhaps even some setting-agnostic stuff (like clerics of philosophies), could be neat.
On the other hand, it could be perceived by some as throwing a grenade in the room before leaving for 2nd edition, and blowing it all up by tossing out a bunch of unbalanced or off-theme stuff...
I feel like somebody is going to become the default new publisher for PF1. Other people will still do it, but most of us look to X if we want new product.
Is this actually possible?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
On the one hand, a sort of 'Pathfinder Unchained 2' which introduced some new stuff, perhaps even some setting-agnostic stuff (like clerics of philosophies), could be neat.
On the other hand, it could be perceived by some as throwing a grenade in the room before leaving for 2nd edition, and blowing it all up by tossing out a bunch of unbalanced or off-theme stuff...
Clerics of philosophies were already introduced to Pathfinder.
In the core rulebook.
In the entry for the Cleric class.
Kyra is literally pointing to the paragraph that says it.
As to the perception? Pathfinder has always been a highly unbalanced system, and off-theme material is a selling point for Pathfinder. There are space elves and laser beams and planet-hopping adventures and there are character classes for Dr. Jeckyll, Sherlock Holmes, Korra, and friggin' Batman. There's an archetype for going full-on mahou shojou, complete with glittery magic transformation sequence and cute animal mascot. Paizo gleefully throws everything into its kitchen sink fantasy while wearing its heart on its sleeve, and it is gloriously cheesy. So anyone who accuses a product of being unbalanced and off theme as if that's new really hasn't been paying attention for the last decade.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's optimistic of you, but so far I don't see anybody stepping up to fill that role.
I think we're all waiting to see what Paizo offers. Doing a PF v1.25 is a big undertaking and if everyone but Necromancer's of the Northwest (for example, not picking on you guys just pulled one out if the hat) falls in love with the new rules then they'll be the ones stepping up to do the revision.
We all do this for fun so if we love the new edition more we'll stick with that. If we prefer the old version then that's what we do.
I feel like somebody is going to become the default new publisher for PF1. Other people will still do it, but most of us look to X if we want new product.Is this actually possible?
Yes. There are constraints but Paizo have indicated the PF Compatibility license will continue.
Well, I don't think they'll have much choice now that all the game mechanics were released under an open license. If someone wants to keep putting out PF1 stuff they can. It is possible no 'official' leader comes out, but it seems like it will.
Maybe we will get a 1e product as a 5 year anniversary after 1e officially ends but even that would be unlikely.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So basically Pathfinder is an Open Gaming License just like 3.5? This is amazing. I could basically modify the game and release the tweaked rules?
If this is the case I'd be curious to see if I could find collaborators here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think Paizo picking up 3.5 and running with it to produce Pathfinder is a bit of a fluke that I am not sure any existing company could easily do, at least without it continuing to be as niche as existing third party products.
Also, 5E has peeled off some third party folks, narrowing the field even more.
So basically Pathfinder is an Open Gaming License just like 3.5? This is amazing. I could basically modify the game and release the tweaked rules?
If this is the case I'd be curious to see if I could find collaborators here.
There are limits (you can't advertise it as Compatibile with Pathfinder, for example as the PF Compatibility License precludes the production of a standalone game). PF managed to get around that with "compatible with the 3.5 edition of the oldest RPG" so I suspect there are similar approaches one could take.
You'd also need to check the source of all the various rules elements you wanted to use - from time to time there are things listed as Product Identity (though I see that more with 3PP than with Paizo, when it comes to rules elements).
So basically Pathfinder is an Open Gaming License just like 3.5? This is amazing. I could basically modify the game and release the tweaked rules?
If this is the case I'd be curious to see if I could find collaborators here.
There are limits (you can't advertise it as Compatibile with Pathfinder, for example as the PF Compatibility License precludes the production of a standalone game). PF managed to get around that with "compatible with the 3.5 edition of the oldest RPG" so I suspect there are similar approaches one could take.
You'd also need to check the source of all the various rules elements you wanted to use - from time to time there are things listed as Product Identity (though I see that more with 3PP than with Paizo, when it comes to rules elements).
What a minefield
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you're legitimately trying to put a product out on the market, Zolanoteph, go get more reliable legal advice than strangers on a message board, or contact Paizo directly. They've dealt with new third party developers before.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hah, already sounds like more effort than it's worth. Pathfinder 1st Edition is pretty brilliant anyway, I could probably see myself playing it forever.
I might stitch some kind of rules system together from scratch, that's hard but doesn't come with the issue of trying to fugure out what is and isn't protected by the OGL, because it's all original. I'll probably fail after 15 minutes of deep thought.
There is also an issue of 'does anyone care enough to stop me?' You might break an OGL (NOT advising this) and if your sales aren't good or you sell on a site they owned you might just get overlooked.
There is also an issue of 'does anyone care enough to stop me?' You might break an OGL (NOT advising this) and if your sales aren't good or you sell on a site they owned you might just get overlooked.
Nah. Not interested, haha
Although I would back any company that legitimately carried on the 3.X legacy.
Call me naive, but I think it might happen. There was something very special about DnD 3.5. Pathfinder improved upon it and kept it current, and someone else can do the same.
It's kind of a defeatist way to approach a new venture:
"I'm going to do this sloppily and with any luck it'll be a dismal failure. If it achieves runaway success, I guess I'll have to pull it."
Tolkien never had an open license. I'm no legal expert, I'm just saying if the OGL rules got broken it isn't an instant someone will care. So it might be more, "I'm going to do this as best as I can and if I have any luck followed by bad I'll have to cut someone in."
So basically Pathfinder is an Open Gaming License just like 3.5? This is amazing. I could basically modify the game and release the tweaked rules?
If this is the case I'd be curious to see if I could find collaborators here.
There are limits (you can't advertise it as Compatibile with Pathfinder, for example as the PF Compatibility License precludes the production of a standalone game). PF managed to get around that with "compatible with the 3.5 edition of the oldest RPG" so I suspect there are similar approaches one could take.
You'd also need to check the source of all the various rules elements you wanted to use - from time to time there are things listed as Product Identity (though I see that more with 3PP than with Paizo, when it comes to rules elements).
I've seen some 3PP products advertised as "OGL 3.75" as code for "Pathfinder rules" that doesn't break the Pathfinder Compatibility License.
It's also explicitly stated on at least one or two official pages on this website that the abbreviation "PFRPG" is not considered product identity.
The Book of Many Things kickstarter is as good a last hurrah as any. Check it out, if you haven't already.
There are already PF ports to new games like Monster Hunters out there- look at what they did basing off the PF (and 3.5) rules set but doing something completely different.
Just make sure you read and comply with the license and cite every source appropriately.
Art costs are the reason not to do this type of thing- if you can't get enough and good art, it won't sell, and most of us aren't independently wealthy enough to buy enough comissions on our own.
Art costs are the reason not to do this type of thing- if you can't get enough and good art, it won't sell, and most of us aren't independently wealthy enough to buy enough comissions on our own.
For one of the projects I've been working on (no idea when it will be finished), I found a couple of free art packs on DriveThruRPG (I particularly like this one) and have been working on filling in the gaps (wherever possible) with artwork from the public domain (and one piece so far that's under CC-BY). So you don't need to commission the artwork yourself, really. Sometimes it can be a bit difficult to find suitable artwork this way though.