| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hello,
Does anyone know if Paizo will be releasing an official 2e version of Rise of the Runelords? If so, any idea when?
Thanks in advance!
No one knows, no. Since it hasn't been announced, that means it definitely won't be happening this year. But also, it doesn't really sound like they're especially interested in doing more conversions- the Kingmaker one took a lot longer than initially expected, and it was a lot of work.
There are fan-made conversions available, of course!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hello,
Does anyone know if Paizo will be releasing an official 2e version of Rise of the Runelords? If so, any idea when?
Thanks in advance!
No one knows, no. Since it hasn't been announced, that means it definitely won't be happening this year. But also, it doesn't really sound like they're especially interested in doing more conversions- the Kingmaker one took a lot longer than initially expected, and it was a lot of work.
There are fan-made conversions available, of course!
Yeah, James Jacobs mentioned they didn't really have enough room to spare to do Kingmaker right. I don't expect them to do any others.
|
Nothing announced to that effect, so far as I'm aware, but I wouldn't expect an official 2e version of Rise of the Runelords any time soon regardless. Unless Paizo is okay releasing it via the OGL like the original - unlikely, in my opinion - it would inevitably need to be updated to fit the post-Remaster paradigm.
This would involve a lot of little changes (for example, swapping out OGL monsters for non-OGL ones, and possibly needing to retool encounters - or even entire plotlines - as a result) and at least some fairly huge ones: namely excising the classical D&D magic schools (transmutation, conjuration, etc.) from ancient Thassilonian magical tradition, and thus completely redefining the magic system the runelords operate under, without losing the bulk of their core characteristics and narrative in the process.
They'll need to do that eventually anyway if they ever want to touch on the runelords/Thassilon again in the future, but it's a much bigger job than it may look from the outside.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nothing announced to that effect, so far as I'm aware, but I wouldn't expect an official 2e version of Rise of the Runelords any time soon regardless. Unless Paizo is okay releasing it via the OGL like the original - unlikely, in my opinion - it would inevitably need to be updated to fit the post-Remaster paradigm.
This would involve a lot of little changes (for example, swapping out OGL monsters for non-OGL ones, and possibly needing to retool encounters - or even entire plotlines - as a result) and at least some fairly huge ones: namely excising the classical D&D magic schools (transmutation, conjuration, etc.) from ancient Thassilonian magical tradition, and thus completely redefining the magic system the runelords operate under, without losing the bulk of their core characteristics and narrative in the process.
They'll need to do that eventually anyway if they ever want to touch on the runelords/Thassilon again in the future, but it's a much bigger job than it may look from the outside.
Good point, Rise is OGL as hell. That said, said, I've run conversions of it I did myself and it actually worked pretty well. Since a homebrew conversion doesn't need to worry about ditching schools and what not, you're in a great position to do it. The stumbling blocks to be aware of for converting PF1 adventures are:
-Loot. Magic items drop less frequently in PF2 and the gold conversion rate isn't consistent across levels.
-Yhe haunts in book 2 feel wonky. Long term ability damage is less of a thing now. The rules for detecting haunts have always been hard for me to visualize in practice, and you actually want them to go off here because they deliver important exposition.
-Lots of encounters are easier, particularly those that relied on incapacitation effects like ghouls. This isn't necessarily bad-- most PF2 adventures are harder than they need to be, IMO.
- I never got to run Black Naga, but she'd probably be more dangerous in PF2.
Other than that, converting encounters, XP, and hazards are pretty easy.
Creative Director
|
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hello,
Does anyone know if Paizo will be releasing an official 2e version of Rise of the Runelords? If so, any idea when?
Thanks in advance!
No one knows, no. Since it hasn't been announced, that means it definitely won't be happening this year. But also, it doesn't really sound like they're especially interested in doing more conversions- the Kingmaker one took a lot longer than initially expected, and it was a lot of work.
There are fan-made conversions available, of course!
Yeah, James Jacobs mentioned they didn't really have enough room to spare to do Kingmaker right. I don't expect them to do any others.
Not quite what I said or meant—Kingmaker had, if anything TOO much room to do right. It's hundreds of pages longer than it would have been had we done this one in the same way we did Rise of the Runelords, but since it was a crowd funded project, it grew in scope. The problem with creating the 2E Kingmaker was that we didn't increase the number of employees working on it to match that increased scope, tried to pull it off at the same time we were launching a new edition of the game (which is the main reason it lacked the employee count—most folks were working on 2E and couldn't really help on the Adventure Path side), and then the Pandemic hit right in the middle of development. Sort of a perfect storm.
We'll keep doing compilations. We just need to be more responsible and realistic about how much work they take.
Yeah, what I really wanted to say was "manpower" there but I couldn't come up with a gender neutral substitute. Sorry for mischaracterizing you.
Edit: Also, do you expect to keep doing conversions as well? I don't think compilations were really what the OP was looking for.
|
Creative Director
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Edit: Also, do you expect to keep doing conversions as well? I don't think compilations were really what the OP was looking for.
Yeah, we'll do conversions as the time and resources and demand and interest suggests.
But those conversions are about more than just swapping out rules. Fundamental changes in how XP works between editions means that content amount needs to shift and adjust. Things that customers and fans have pointed out as errors or missed opportunities need to be fixed or seized upon. And adding a new adventure or two to a conversion helps to keep a much older product fresh and new and enticing to purchase. On top of that, most of those older 1st edition or 3.5 Adventure Paths didn't go to 20th level, and I feel very strongly that they should. 2nd edition's XP rate was designed to make it possible to do a 1st to 20th campaign in a six part Adventure Path, something that 1st edition wasn't about since it didn't make big changes from 3.5.
So when we convert 3.5 or 1st edition Adventure Paths, we have to rebuild things for that too. All of which makes for a LOT more work, and not just something we can responsibly throw onto a schedule that's already full and expect to happen without problem.
Those big conversions will need to be handled as "new products" for our schedule, as a result, and not add to the big books of the year but replace them. And... well... as fun as conversions are and as much as some folks want them, replacing a book with lots of new lore or lots of new player options that'll sell to all players with a converted Adventure Path that only a subset of GMs will by isn't something we can do often.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, what I really wanted to say was "manpower" there but I couldn't come up with a gender neutral substitute. Sorry for mischaracterizing you.
Edit: Also, do you expect to keep doing conversions as well? I don't think compilations were really what the OP was looking for.
Staffing, maybe? Or work hours
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting. For two reasons:
Firstly, I’m now really interested in knowing/understanding how to…understand Runelords and their “schools” via the Remaster’s new magic interpretation.
Secondly, I find, somewhat surprisingly, I’d actually be interested in a “fresh take” on Rise. Quite apart from inbred ogres and other more touchy stuff which I’m personally happy to keep/add back in, I’d really like to see a more nuanced and matured* (in the sense that the company, staff and direction has grown) approach to a seminal AP. In the same way I understand Crown of the Kobold King was re-appraised, and re-approached to hold together differently, I’d love to see the same thing happen with Rise of the Runelords.
* Just to clarify, I don’t mean “matured” in the sense of moving on from juvenilia etc, but more in the way folx talk about a fine wine maturing. There are things you learn from experience, as writers, as developers and as companies, and all of that can be drawn from to create essentially a new product. I think folks see a hardcover compilation and don’t always understand that it is almost as much as if not more work than the original.
Hello,
Does anyone know if Paizo will be releasing an official 2e version of Rise of the Runelords? If so, any idea when?
Thanks in advance!
No one knows, no. Since it hasn't been announced, that means it definitely won't be happening this year. But also, it doesn't really sound like they're especially interested in doing more conversions- the Kingmaker one took a lot longer than initially expected, and it was a lot of work.
There are fan-made conversions available, of course!
Yeah, James Jacobs mentioned they didn't really have enough room to spare to do Kingmaker right. I don't expect them to do any others.
Not quite what I said or meant—Kingmaker had, if anything TOO much room to do right. It's hundreds of pages longer than it would have been had we done this one in the same way we did Rise of the Runelords, but since it was a crowd funded project, it grew in scope. The problem with creating the 2E Kingmaker was that we didn't increase the number of employees working on it to match that increased scope, tried to pull it off at the same time we were launching a new edition of the game (which is the main reason it lacked the employee count—most folks were working on 2E and couldn't really help on the Adventure Path side), and then the Pandemic hit right in the middle of development. Sort of a perfect storm.
We'll keep doing compilations. We just need to be more responsible and realistic about how much work they take.
Thanks for stepping in, as I had misunderstood or misremembered the exact nature of the problems it ran into.
E
Yeah, we'll do conversions as the time and resources and demand and interest suggests.But those conversions are about more than just swapping out rules. Fundamental changes in how XP works between editions means that content amount needs to shift and adjust. Things that customers and fans have pointed out as errors or missed opportunities need to be fixed or seized upon. And adding a new adventure or two to a conversion helps to keep a much older product fresh and new and enticing to purchase. On top of that, most of those older 1st edition or 3.5 Adventure Paths didn't go to 20th level, and I feel very strongly that they should. 2nd edition's XP rate was designed to make it possible to do a 1st to 20th campaign in a six part Adventure Path, something that 1st edition wasn't about since it didn't make big changes from 3.5.
So when we convert 3.5 or 1st edition Adventure Paths, we have to rebuild things for that too. All of which makes for a LOT more work, and not just something we can responsibly throw onto a schedule that's already full and expect to happen without problem.
Those big conversions will need to be handled as "new products" for our schedule, as a result, and not add to the big books of the year but replace them. And... well... as fun as conversions are and as much as some folks want them, replacing a book with lots of new lore or lots of new player options that'll sell to all players with a converted Adventure Path that only a subset of GMs will by isn't something we can do often.
As someone who is trying to run Second Darkness for 2nd edition I can attest to this. Its pretty common starting in the 3rd book to need to completely scrap or redesign entire encounters to work with P2E experience rules.
That's odd, I found XP worked just about right. I wasn't going to level 20, though, just where the adventure wound up.
Rise of the Runelords update and [i]Wrath of the Righteous[/b] with playable mythic rules would get my money.
Rise of the Runelords update and Wrath of the Righteous with playable mythic rules would get my money.
Emphasis on "playable". ^^
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Keeping my fingers crossed for the PF2 version of Mythic Rules that will arrive soon.Rise of the Runelords update and Wrath of the Righteous with playable mythic rules would get my money.Emphasis on "playable". ^^
Hard to believe we’re a bit less than 6 months from having those in hand.
I've always felt that if Paizo are going to do a conversion/compilation of RotR, they should also do the other two APs in JJ's trilogy.
You inflict Tired on Creative Director. It's Super-Effective! ;-PRise of the Runelords update and Wrath of the Righteous with playable mythic rules would get my money.Emphasis on "playable". ^^
We should add a Second Darkness PF 2E update to your list of projects! :D
Jokes aside... I actually think Second Darkness would benefit from a revision more than most of the APs, insofar as it shows its age on the conceptual and setting detail front far more than most APs.
But we like our Directorsaur and want him to get enough sleep, so...
|
Jokes aside... I actually think Second Darkness would benefit from a revision more than most of the APs, insofar as it shows its age on the conceptual and setting detail front far more than most APs.
But we like our Directorsaur and want him to get enough sleep, so...
In-between two APs, I decided a drow the PCs rescued got retconned into having been Sekmin. So the players will probably do some double-takes before they realize what happened.
That'll have to be done to the whole AP, which might take less work than I estimate. Then again, I don't know how much that'd be.
You inflict Tired on Creative Director. It's Super-Effective! ;-PRise of the Runelords update and Wrath of the Righteous with playable mythic rules would get my money.Emphasis on "playable". ^^
Didn't expect a Kaguya-sama reference here. :)
For what its worth, I'm much more confident that you'll do it right this time, given that 2E has turned out so well balanced.
Jokes aside... I actually think Second Darkness would benefit from a revision more than most of the APs, insofar as it shows its age on the conceptual and setting detail front far more than most APs.
I think Second Darkness would benefit more from a spiritual sequel than an actual remake. Like whenever they want to do a Darklands AP again, they can make a note of revisiting some of the themes of Second Darkness where appropriate.
|
Creative Director
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Jokes aside... I actually think Second Darkness would benefit from a revision more than most of the APs, insofar as it shows its age on the conceptual and setting detail front far more than most APs.
But we like our Directorsaur and want him to get enough sleep, so...
In-between two APs, I decided a drow the PCs rescued got retconned into having been Sekmin. So the players will probably do some double-takes before they realize what happened.
That'll have to be done to the whole AP, which might take less work than I estimate. Then again, I don't know how much that'd be.
I've long wanted to update Second Darkness, but it's one of the most complicated ones to do. At this point, it would need:
2) Adjusted to focus on something other than drow but at the same time keeping as much of the original story intact as possible, which would also be a big lift.
3) The 5th adventure would need some significant expansion and reorganization to present the elves in a more accurate-to-Golarion format.
4) An all new adventure that wraps up the Riddleport section and transitions more elegantly into the 3rd book would need to be created from scratch (we originally tried an intentional experiment here—we skipped a level to give GMs the flexibility of inserting an adventure of their own choosing and design into the story, and that was NOT as popular a choice as we expected it to be).
5) All of the above would help us set it up for a true 1st to 20th level experience, but there would need to be a lot of new material throughout to make sure all that happened elegantly.
With the extra complication introduced by the OGL issues, at this point Second Darkness is probably the MOST complicated one to update. Which, combined with the unfortunate fact that it's far from the most popular Adventure Path makes it very unlikely to get this special treatment... especially given that this would likely require us to replace a Rulebook or Lost Omens book that year to account for the additional edit and art and development resources required.
I suspect that if you met the five goals you specify in your spoiler, the revised Second Darkness would be much more popular than the original.
|
Creative Director
|
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
I suspect that if you met the five goals you specify in your spoiler, the revised Second Darkness would be much more popular than the original.
Perhaps. But that's the goal with any compilation product.
ALSO Please don't take my posts here as any sort of indication about upcoming plans for any product lines. I kind of got swept up in the "what if" of the topic, since Adventure Path compilations are near and dear to my heart. Sometimes I lose sight of the fact that as a creative director at Paizo that it's not responsible for me to give the impression of something like this being in the works when it's not.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's silly to think James talking about ROTRL or Second Darkness means those APs are bound for conversions. Everyone knows if you play James's posts backwards, he's chanting "Has learnt to walk what ought to crawl. The Age of Worms conversion is coming. It shall be ours."
It's silly to think James talking about ROTRL or Second Darkness means those APs are bound for conversions. Everyone knows if you play James's posts backwards, he's chanting "Has learnt to walk what ought to crawl. The Age of Worms conversion is coming. It shall be ours."
I think it might have more to do with delirium due to extended overwork.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I suspect that if you met the five goals you specify in your spoiler, the revised Second Darkness would be much more popular than the original.Perhaps. But that's the goal with any compilation product.
ALSO Please don't take my posts here as any sort of indication about upcoming plans for any product lines. I kind of got swept up in the "what if" of the topic, since Adventure Path compilations are near and dear to my heart. Sometimes I lose sight of the fact that as a creative director at Paizo that it's not responsible for me to give the impression of something like this being in the works when it's not.
We love that you get to be a human being and fan of the setting you have worked so hard to develop here. These insights are wonderful and fun for us to think about too! Thank you
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The text just needs to be changed to "Creative Director, Please Don't Read Into What He Says About Second Darkness."
In all seriousness, I'm pretty sure we really already have Paizo-owned Age of Worms, and it's called Tyrant's Grasp. But Age of Worms is my personal little obsession, and I like to haunt the Paizo devs and designers with it. I genuinely think it's a really, really impressive creation and one of the most thematically and narratively cohesive adventure paths of its era.
No, but yeah, Rise of the Runelords. I'd love to see what Paizo does to dial back the "goblins are pure evil" lore, and I've had lots of fun speculating about that recently for my home game. I feel like I would be impossible to satisfy, though. Like, what I really want is for it to keep all of its edge (at least, the edge that ages well) but also provide more guidance. Like, the Lust section of Book Five? The Shopkeeper's Daughter in Book One? There's elements you could maybe tone down a little, but I think a lot of it ought to be left intact. Just with, you know, a little more space dedicated to GM handholding.
Basically, I want RotRL to be simultaneously more comfortable with its R-rating and more cautious about helping GMs navigate that rating for their groups. I feel like a collection might just opt to do away with a lot of the spice.