Can someone give me a cliff's notes versions on how it all hangs together in the brave new world?
We have four "old" APs.
Twenty seven class decks.
Five "expansion" decks.
An upcoming new-look core set
An upcoming AP
...anything else?
Are the expansions being written with an eye to the new core set?
Will the class decks be useful with the new core set?
(Will they be "okay, but not as good a fit as the 5 recent expansions"?)
Will old APs be playable with the new core set? With the new rules but old cards?
Anything else you think someone should know about the new structure?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Welcome back,
The new Core Set will have modular capabilities. Instead of each Adventure Path having their own big box, the Core set would have a big box, and the Adventure Paths would each add onto that core set, adding elements specific to that area, or theme.
Everything will be compatible with the others, from what we've heard. There will be minor rules changes, but nothing that will complete remove previously released characters or elements from being unplayable.
THe new set will have alot of short hand and key word use, even more than now. For instance, "Local" will mean character at your location. THis will reduce the amount of text needed on each card.
That's what I can recall of fthe top of my head while on break. I'm sure other sill fill in items too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What Jazz Hands said. Supposedly the new content will integrate into older sets and characters perfectly, though there will be some small rules changes to streamline the game and/or increase the benefits of players working together at one location.
There will be some changes that may render specific older characters or cards less powerful or helpful, but they should be few and far between, assuming they're not errata'd entirely. For example, in the playtests there wasn't really such a thing as "closed" locations hanging around - the locations were removed from the table and players at a closed location got a free move, or something like that. That would, for example, leave Class Deck Lini with a useless Role option (Menhir Savant), unless they work around that.
Though I assume that rule would only be for new APs, because old APs feature locations with effects whilst permanently closed. That could be re-ruled for "Display" effects, though, in some cases.
Cheers. Relying on errata is a nonstarter for me, unless they offer reprint-on-demand cards.
Do you think playing an old AP with the new rules is going to work? Do you think it would be a good idea? Or are they more thinking of preserving the value of class decks, rather than APs? (which can continue to be played “standalone”).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do you think playing an old AP with the new rules is going to work? Do you think it would be a good idea? Or are they more thinking of preserving the value of class decks, rather than APs? (which can continue to be played “standalone”).
Chief Technical Officer
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Class/Character/Ultimate Decks can all be used with the new stuff. This means we'll tell you everything you need to know to use existing characters and boons with the new products and rules. (To give you an example of the level of complexity we're talking about in this, just think about using Rise of the Runelords boons with Mummy's Mask today: you have to translate some game terms—like "before the encounter" to "before you act"—and you have to mentally remap things like the old recharge box. You should be able to do it without thinking much about it in no time.)
Using existing APs with the new rules won't be difficult either, but will occasionally require judgement on your part. For example, there's no such thing as a closed location under the new rules, so you'd have to decide what to do with locations like the General Store, which gives you something to do when it's closed. You could add rules to allow characters to stay at locations like that, or you could just ignore those effects, or you could substitute a different location.
Trying to add an existing AP to the new Base Set is not part of the plan, though. To make that work, you would need to bring in all the locations, villains, henchmen, loot, and AP-specific support cards from the old Base Set, and so on. It would be pretty much exactly like trying to play the Mummy's Mask AP with the Rise of the Runelords Base Set: You can't really do much more than swap out the monsters, barriers, and boons, leaving you with something that's neither RotR or MM. (You're welcome to do it, of course, and it may well be a lot of fun; you're just on your own to work out any kinks.)
Thanks very much for that, everyone. That's all very useful.
May I ask what the timeframe is (for both the subscriptions)? It seems to me that the expansions are stopping now for a time? Any idea when they will re-commence? Or when the new-improved base set will ship?
(I'm looking for an answer like "in the next twelve months" not "June 5th". Are we in position to know that yet?)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks very much for that, everyone. That's all very useful.
May I ask what the timeframe is (for both the subscriptions)? It seems to me that the expansions are stopping now for a time? Any idea when they will re-commence? Or when the new-improved base set will ship?
(I'm looking for an answer like "in the next twelve months" not "June 5th". Are we in position to know that yet?)
I was under the impression that "next year's Paizocon" would feature the release of the new AP and, along with it, the new Core Set. So less than 12 months from now(?)
I don't really know, but I would assume that there will be no other card-game merchandise, in terms of Class Decks and the like, released between now and then (or at least, not following Ultimate Wilderness). I suspect there may, however, potentially be new Organised Play/PFSACG scenarios, like AD6 of Faction's Favor, released in that time.
Thanks.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is going to be another Organized Play season, using the Skull and Shackles box, released beginning at GenCon this year. As far as I know, no other physical products between the release of Ultimate Wilderness this year and PaizoCon in May 2019.
Thanks, again.
I apologize if this is considered off topic.
What are the pros and cons of changing the new rules to make closed locations no longer a thing?
I assume there are a lot more pros. What is the main thinking behind this change?
I am in no way disputing it, I just truly would like to learn what the reasoning(s) is behind this decision.
Thanks!
I should first state that I have not participated in the playtest and a lot of what I understand about the rules is hearsay. I do not know what the rules currently look like, nor do I know how they'll change, so this is all guesswork.
With that said, I would imagine the pros include the following.
- Because old locations are cleared off the table, it's less to keep track of.
- Because the table is effectively shrinking as you approach the end of the game, it may do a lot to make players feel like they're approaching the end, that they're closing in on the villain.
- Because when a character closes a location, they get to move somewhere else, it means they can be in helpful positions or move with their team to help support them (there's going to be a LOT more cards that can only benefit characters at your own location), making them feel like they're being more useful for more of the game even when it's not their turn, rather than being left in a useless spot.
In my opinion, cons might include the following.
- Cards and powers that allow you to move your character are weaker, because one of their uses has always been to move away from closed locations.
- Some character powers that refer to closed locations are rendered entirely nonfunctional (Class Deck Lini's "Menhir Savant" role is hit harder than any other). Some cards, like Planar Tuning Fork, will also be rendered nonfunctional.
- This rule will be difficult to apply to older Adventure Paths... or have to be outright ignored. Not only do locations that have permanent effects when closed (or keep certain cards in play when closed) have issues, but virtually any card that says "shuffle this into a random location" or "display this next to a random location" have functionally changed a lot.
- A good example is Lightning Storm from Mummy's Mask, a barrier which you often deal with by rolling the dice a few times until it moves to a location you've already closed; that barrier would be a brutal, significantly harder barrier when there's no closed locations to move to. Some scenario rules are designed to get easier - or harder as there are more closed locations, and they may be interfered with heavily as well.
- It somewhat shrinks design space. There can't really be powers or cards that refer to closed locations any more. Whilst closed locations could still have effects (just say "Display next to the scenario card"), it seems less likely they'll have more complex effects regarding the possibility of being re-opened, or having cards remain in the deck.
- Auto-moving characters from closed locations make infinite-exploration combos (or things that are close to it) more powerful than they already are. A lot of those are limited to clearing one location a turn, whereas presumably now they can just end the entire scenario in one turn due to the auto-movement.
- If a character wants to remain safe from area-of-effect attacks ("all characters at your location take 1d4 Fire Damage") and choose not to explore and stay at a closed location so they won't die (say, they have no cards left in their deck and there's no healing cards left), then they no longer have that option. If there's only 1 location left open, I assume they have to sit there and risk death, even if they explicitly do not want to explore or risk anything.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because when a character closes a location, they get to move somewhere else, it means they can be in helpful positions or move with their team to help support them (there's going to be a LOT more cards that can only benefit characters at your own location), making them feel like they're being more useful for more of the game even when it's not their turn, rather than being left in a useless spot.[/list]
While this is true, this is, in fact, in no way related to having to banish locations - the post-close move can just be a new rule and there is no inherent connection to the continued existence -or lack thereof- of the closed location.
This remains the only change I have heard of from the new Pathfinder which I do not like the sound of. Everything else seems quite positive except for this particular element, and I don't fully understand the rationale. I look forward to the changes being brought as a whole, but I just do not see the same advantages to this rule as I see in every other change that has been mentioned. I mostly see a smaller design space and a pretty radical unbalance of a very large amount of pre-existing powers.
^ QFT, that one. I don't usually resort to memes, but when I do - "I don't even..."
The following two are perhaps the more egregious CONs against this mind-boggling change:
This rule will be difficult to apply to older Adventure Paths... or have to be outright ignored. Not only do locations that have permanent effects when closed (or keep certain cards in play when closed) have issues, but virtually any card that says "shuffle this into a random location" or "display this next to a random location" have functionally changed a lot. If a character wants to remain safe from area-of-effect attacks ("all characters at your location take 1d4 Fire Damage") and choose not to explore and stay at a closed location so they won't die (say, they have no cards left in their deck and there's no healing cards left), then they no longer have that option. If there's only 1 location left open, I assume they have to sit there and risk death, even if they explicitly do not want to explore or risk anything.
Anyway, I hope I am not opening a can of worms here as this is all speculation and I would always give the designers the benefit of the doubt that they won't break anything and have good reason to do a change.
(Emphasis added)
You're entirely right, of course. Despite my immediate reaction being negative... and my continued analysis of it also being negative, it is something I haven't actually seen in progress yet. Of particular note, it's likely that the design of cards and powers will change over time, and they'll become more in line with the new ruleset, of course. In particular, this particular rule may allow for something entirely new and creative to take its place; I'm just not quite sure what.
I'm absolutely, unreservedly, look forward to the upcoming Adventure Path and Core Set. A lot of my negativity comes from confusion, but it's largely restrained because of my trust in the designers, and my lack of hands-on experience. I'd love to have the pros I haven't noticed pointed out to me, because I'm certain they exist... though they may be tied into other mechanics and rules we've yet to see.
Yep. In Many games there has been players with no cards left in the deck, so it has been safer to leave them to closed locatin that to come a location that causes one damage or where there is attack to everyone... but maybe more character dying is good to the game?
Intersting to see how this will be handled!
I'll just note that Lone Shark tested this concept (or at least its close equivalent) in Apocrypha, and they feel it was received well.
True, but the Apocrypha base set is considered to be pretty easy in terms of difficulty. If it were as difficult as Wrath of the Righteous, people might think differently about disappearing locations/nexuses. :)