Whether spell cards are a good idea depends on whether they have the same proliferation of spells that PF1 did. If you have a dozen or more new spells coming out each month, a spell cards accessory will be hard pressed to keep up.
3PP should be able to do this too, right? With the exception of spells like "Abadar's Truthtelling", I think any publisher would be allowed to sell cards with all the content of the PF spells.
3PP should be able to do this too, right? With the exception of spells like "Abadar's Truthtelling", I think any publisher would be allowed to sell cards with all the content of the PF spells.
No. You can’t sell reprinted Paizo material as 3P, just reference it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
3PP should be able to do this too, right? With the exception of spells like "Abadar's Truthtelling", I think any publisher would be allowed to sell cards with all the content of the PF spells.No. You can’t sell reprinted Paizo material as 3P, just reference it.
You can print any Pathfindery thingy as long as it's covered by the Open Gaming License --ie not Product Identity. They would have to use their own artwork and stuffs, but the text is basically open source.
You could totally print and sell a Magic Missile card as a third party publisher, as long as it had it's own art.
If it involves the proper name or title of a god, person, or place in Golarion, that's Product Identity and banned. RumpinRufus's example of "Abadar's Truthtelling" up there is Product Identity because "Abadar" is one of the Golarion setting's gods. The spell would have to be renamed to like.. "Lawful Neutral God's Truthtelling" ~
Pathfinder itself only exists through the grace of the OGL. Magic Missile, Fireball, and Cure Light Wounds are all TSR thingies but were given to the community under the terms of the OGL.
btw that's why we have like "Crushing Hand" and "Mage's Magnificent Mansion" instead of "Bigby's Crushing Hand" and "Mordenkainen's magnificent Mansion". Bigby and Mordenkainen are Producty Identity to TSR/WotC and cannot be used by Paizo.
Our table won't even play a game unless it's OGL-compatible.
Oh, hmm. I stand corrected, then!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would rather see the Sandpoint box than spell cards, but I would like to see spell cards, if at least for the core spells
I don't think we are going to get a sandpoint box but we will be getting a Sandbox book!!
I hope they continue the numbering of the Adventure Path with an exterior cover that let the buyer instantly that it's the 2nd edition
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I want a Proteanomicon!
A big book of demiplanes.
A second, follow-up book to Distant Realms with more planar cities.
Just saying ;)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would love condition cards that only have one condition per card, same on both sides (or extra info on the back if necessary). The fact that the current sets have different conditions on each card (sometimes related, sometimes not) makes it impossible to just keep them in alphabetical order for quick access. If I can't find my card in only a few seconds the deck isn't doing it's job IMO.
I would love condition cards that only have one condition per card, same on both sides (or extra info on the back if necessary). The fact that the current sets have different conditions on each card (sometimes related, sometimes not) makes it impossible to just keep them in alphabetical order for quick access. If I can't find my card in only a few seconds the deck isn't doing it's job IMO.
^^^^^^^^^ THIS
... you do realize you could just buy two sets of condition cards, right? Isn't that basically equivalent to buying one set with twice as many cards?
... you do realize you could just buy two sets of condition cards, right? Isn't that basically equivalent to buying one set with twice as many cards?
And when I accidentally get cards flipped in the order (which is bound to happen), then I can't find the one on the other side without a bunch of searching.
And yes, you can just buy 2 sets. In fact, each set has multiples of each card as it is, so I could just turn one of the sets around and just effectively have half the cards. I just find it annoying - but I'm willing to accept I'm the exception rather than the norm.
If nothing else, I'll just scan them all and make my own sets on card stock. I'd rather not have to, though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Im the same as you. I sleeved mine to deliberately obscure one side. My deck is higher now, but it’s easier to keep it in alphabetical order.
You could also black out one side with a sharpie.
New content, not updates from 1e. Not to say they shouldn't update 1e stuff, but I don't want to see only older classes/archetypes/spells updated, I'd like to see new original stuff in each expansion to the rules (and in the CRB).
Book Jackets with alternative cover art. Nothing wrong with the current cover art, I just like book jackets and want more cover art.
A Black and White bestiaries. I like color pictures as much as the next guy, but I also like black-and-white art focused on shading a bit more as I am partially color blind.
Picture/Flavor only bestiaries, with no/lite rules. Can you tell I like pictures?
More with Proteans and Inevitables. More of them, more information on them, just more in general. We have a ton on devils and demons and the fight of good v evil, but I feel law v chaos is a lot less prevalent.
A Black and White bestiaries.
What about something like the image on the left that is black on parchment? And before anyone asks, no I'm not talking about text on parchment, just the image.
|
3PP should be able to do this too, right? With the exception of spells like "Abadar's Truthtelling", I think any publisher would be allowed to sell cards with all the content of the PF spells.No. You can’t sell reprinted Paizo material as 3P, just reference it.
The entire basis of Pathfinder as a system is Paizo reprinting the v3.5 rules with some integrated house rules.
The entire basis of Pathfinder as a system is Paizo reprinting the v3.5 rules with some integrated house rules.3PP should be able to do this too, right? With the exception of spells like "Abadar's Truthtelling", I think any publisher would be allowed to sell cards with all the content of the PF spells.No. You can’t sell reprinted Paizo material as 3P, just reference it.
Oh, hmm. I stand corrected, then!
Nope, the only thing you can use is the information covered by WotC Open Gaming License (which is what PF1 was based on) and the Community Use Guidelines. Community Use is for non-commercial publishing.
If you want to sell things as a commercial publisher, you have to have explicit permission from Paizo to use their intellectual property by using the Pathfinder Compatibility License. They even have a dedicated email address for licensing requests
licensing@paizo.com
The OGL is controlled by Wizards of the Coast, not Paizo
|
I look at what gf9 have done with the dnd cards, albeit little more than an improved copy of what paizo originally did anyway, and i know id like to see this for pf2. A deck for spells of each class, a feat deck, skill deck, rules reference deck.
Paizo produced many pf these in their cards range, pf2 is an oportunity to improve on these - the condition and reference decks alone were very well recieved.
|
|
Nope, the only thing you can use is the information covered by WotC Open Gaming License (which is what PF1 was based on) and the Community Use Guidelines. Community Use is for non-commercial publishing.
If you want to sell things as a commercial publisher, you have to have explicit permission from Paizo to use their intellectual property by using the Pathfinder Compatibility License. They even have a dedicated email address for licensing requests
licensing@paizo.com
The OGL is controlled by Wizards of the Coast, not Paizo
Everything on the PRD is also open. As such, a 3PP could make spell cards for any of the spells from the PRD. The only spells that count as Paizo's IP are those that are NOT included in the PRD...ie some of the spells from various Adventure Path, Module, Player Companion, or Campaign Setting supplements, that haven't been reprinted in a PRD rulebook.
There is a slight grey area with those books from the rule book like that Paizo hasn't bothered to add the PRD as of yet (and probably never will). However, I believe the actual books themselves have the language necessary in them to make their contents open.
You know, I've never really had an interest in merch, but I just realized that a compass would make some very fitting merchandise for a Pathfinder.
That is, if you can navigate dealing with a compass manufacturer.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A Black and White bestiaries.What about something like the image on the left that is black on parchment? And before anyone asks, no I'm not talking about text on parchment, just the image.
Exactly like the one on the left.
The OGL is not "controlled" by anybody except theoretically the courts
To be more accurate (IANAL, so I still not might not be 100% accurate), Wizards does control the OGL.
Updating the License: Wizards or its designated Agents may publish updated versions of this License.
However, even then it is completely in the user's favor,
You may use any authorized version of this License to copy, modify and distribute any Open Game Content originally distributed under any version of this License.
So even if Wizards (or someone Wizards' designated) published a new version of the OGL and released 5e Modern under it (a new version with more control under it), you could use that information under OGL version 1.0a that we all know and love.
So they do control the OGL, but they can't control what people do with it or what you release under it.
Having said all this, what else would people like to see for a new version of Pathfinder.
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's a fair amount of not-quite-correct information about the OGL in this thread. Here's the real story:
When it comes to the Pathfinder or Starfinder, our intellectual property generally falls into two categories: Open Game Content (generally game mechanics) and Product Identity (generally setting material, trademarks, artwork, and other non-mechanical stuff).
Anything we've declared as Open Game Content in our products is available for use under the Open Game License; anything we've declared as Product Identity is not available under the OGL. In most of our products, you'll find the statements of OGC and PI on the title or credits page at the front of the book. Note that these statements occasionally vary from product to product, so you'll need to check the individual statements in each product you wish to draw from.
If you are a noncommercial user, you may be able to use some of our PI by way of our Community Use Policy, which you can find at paizo.com/community/communityuse. If you are a commercial user, our PI is not available for your use without a specific license.
To use Open Game Content in your own projects, you need to use the OGL, which you can find in any OGL product. The OGL itself tells you how to use it. Please note that the OGL is Wizards of the Coast's license, not Paizo's, and so I can't provide any advice about its suitability for your use. You may wish to consider speaking with an intellectual properties legal specialist.
Note that the OGL specifically restricts you from using "any ... trademark or registered trademark clearly identified as Product Identity by the owner of the Product Identity", or from "indicat[ing] compatibility or co-adaptability with any Trademark or Registered Trademark in conjunction with a work containing Open Game Content except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of such Trademark or Registered Trademark." So to indicate that your OGL project is compatible with the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, you'll need to follow our free Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License, which you can find at paizo.com/pathfinder/rpg/compatibility; the equivalent license for the Starfinder RPG is at paizo.com/starfinder/compatibility. Note that these Compatibility Licenses are applicable only to books, electronic books, and freely available websites. You can still use Open Game Content in a OGL product that's not a book, ebook, or free website, but you can't say it's compatible with the Pathfinder RPG or the Starfinder RPG or use trademarks like Pathfinder, Starfinder, or Paizo in any way; you may, however, use the non-trademarked terms “PFRPG” or “SFRPG.”
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, we have been contemplating the concept of spell cards since we were making game aids for 3.5, but we've never found a good solution for the problem that some spells take up more than half a page in the rulebook, and so just can't be made to fit on a card. Since the point of having these is to avoid having to reference the rulebook, as soon as you have to make a card that says "See Core Rulebook p. 331," you've defeated the purpose.
Also, we have been contemplating the concept of spell cards since we were making game aids for 3.5, but we've never found a good solution for the problem that some spells take up more than half a page in the rulebook, and so just can't be made to fit on a card. Since the point of having these is to avoid having to reference the rulebook, as soon as you have to make a card that says "See Core Rulebook p. 331," you've defeated the purpose.
I’m seeing some accordion pamphlet cards...
But yeah, that makes sense!
|
Also, we have been contemplating the concept of spell cards since we were making game aids for 3.5, but we've never found a good solution for the problem that some spells take up more than half a page in the rulebook, and so just can't be made to fit on a card. Since the point of having these is to avoid having to reference the rulebook, as soon as you have to make a card that says "See Core Rulebook p. 331," you've defeated the purpose.
That's the same problem I hit when trying to make mines. I could only make ones just for me, as I would need to resume them so much that only me would be able to read them. :3
|
Also, we have been contemplating the concept of spell cards since we were making game aids for 3.5, but we've never found a good solution for the problem that some spells take up more than half a page in the rulebook, and so just can't be made to fit on a card. Since the point of having these is to avoid having to reference the rulebook, as soon as you have to make a card that says "See Core Rulebook p. 331," you've defeated the purpose.WotC made it work in 5e.
Yeah, well, but they own the license, they aren't going to sue themselves.
I think TiwazBlackhand meant they got around the "not all spells fit on a card" issue.
They essentially just accepted the issue (well technically it was Gale Force Nine who printed the spellcards). Most spells have all the mechanics on them but some direct you to the Player Handbook.
|
|
I think TiwazBlackhand meant they got around the "not all spells fit on a card" issue.
They essentially just accepted the issue (well technically it was Gale Force Nine who printed the spellcards). Most spells have all the mechanics on them but some direct you to the Player Handbook.
Ah! I would be perfectly fine with spell cards that contain abbreviated rules, just like HeroLab does with spell summaries.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, the D&D spellcards from GF9 are great. The page references are useful enough. 99% of the time, I don't need anything which isn't on the card during my turn.
Especially for prepared spellcasters - this stack is my spellbook, these are the one I have prepared. The physical need to sort through them at the start of each session has greatly reduced the incidence of "Oh! I haven't changed my spells since last time. OBVIOUSLY, I would have prepared this...."