|
2 years ago ::
Feb 18, 2011 - 6:22PM
#461
|
Date Joined:
Sep 25, 2010
|
Yeah, my sister has the 'Kingmaker' AP, which I looked over the first part of the other day. From what I can tell the scheme is that each AP is divided up into roughly 6 chunks. So I assumed that was one a month for 6 months. It isn't a bad deal at all. Stolen Lands is 48 pages. It certainly has plenty of material for a level 1-3 adventure.
48 pages is the adventure only, all the book is 96 pages. All six of them. For 14$ I think is a good deal (more if you consider the pdf and the free player's guide.)
What I would like from WoTC to take fro Paizo is how they do pdf. I mean they are all hyperlinked inside the text so if you have to go through the core rulebook finding everything is just a matter of few clicks.
I'm not english native, so forgive me for spelling errors and poor grammar 
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 19, 2011 - 6:16AM
#462
|
|
|
We are going to switch to Paizo and start with the New Carrion Crown Adventure Path and are all Excited!
The Inner Sea Campaign Book and Rule of Fear for the Area Ustalav are coming out the same month!
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 19, 2011 - 8:38AM
#463
|
Date Joined:
May 16, 2004
|
I think the reason why the question whether Paizo should take over the DnD liscense comes up is that a lot of people think they would do a better job.
And since there are a lot of 4E players on these boards here, that does not have to do with the fact that these people dislike the 4E rules or desperately want to play Pathfinder/3.x. Well, some might, but I am guessing not the majority.
What Paizo seems to get right is customer relations and adventures, which people seem to like.
And looking back at the times when the DnD magazines were in print and Paizo was publishing them (by the way: in hindsight a BIG mistake by WotC to let them do that), the quality of adventures were very good overall.
And to get back the trust, I think Paizo needs to up the quality of the magazines. They need to produce Adventures Paths, just like Paizo did back then and is doing now. And I think it should be easy to support the different campaigns in the magazines, too. Why not make a 3 or 4 part story arc in Dark Sun and Eberron with hints and ideas on how to convert this to FR? Why not publish a 6 part AP with background articles in Dragon magazine?
Because it's not that Paizo is a better company. As many people in this thread have stated correctly, there are many things WotC is simpy better at. But WotC needs to improve their reputation.
If they did, nobody would ask the question if Paizo really should take over DnD.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 19, 2011 - 9:07AM
#464
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2008
|
I agree with the idea of using Dungeon Mag to release more Adventure Paths (especially campaign specific ones). While they have given us tons of good adventures, they are all isolated. This is great for DMs needing a one time thing when they didn't have the time to plan something, but not as good for those DMs looking for a complete campaign. Considering all the adventure path quests say right at the start that you can use them as a stand alone adventure as part of your own campaign, I think this would be better for everyone.
Their stated reason for cutting back on published adventures was that there isn't a high demand, and I have to trust them. If there was a high demand, why would they stop producing them?
But packaged with Dungeon means any DDI subscriber gets them.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 19, 2011 - 11:35AM
#465
|
Date Joined:
Feb 11, 2011
|
Their stated reason for cutting back on published adventures was that there isn't a high demand, and I have to trust them. If there was a high demand, why would they stop producing them?
But packaged with Dungeon means any DDI subscriber gets them.
But it would seem there is money to be made. If not Paizo wouldn't be at it's 6th or 7th AP.
Maybe it wasn't enough for WotC. APs demande a lot of money in salaries and playtesting.
Unless APs are just a way to support the rest of the books. To entice people to by the PHB and others because that is where the money is.
Resident Pervert, Funny Man and Martyr
Please excuse my writen errors, English is my second language
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 19, 2011 - 12:16PM
#466
|
Date Joined:
Mar 27, 2004
|
The D&D(tm) franchise went with a default setting that isn't fleshed and goes about with generalities. The whole of Pathfinder is centered around a very detailed world envolving political intrigue, various lands that have very different philosiphies and a good background to use. Instead of having each adventure module be something to wedge into the DM's fold or such, it is a further telling of the story of this setting that Pathfinder is in. The D&D modules are dungeon crawls.
Despite the hold over of the 3.5 system, the Pathfinder setting is a very interesting setting.
One thing that Wizards can do to support the other settings is to release some books about various locals and areas. I hope that the Neverwinter book is more than a mere tie in to a Cryptic video game.
Terms you should know... Spoiler:
Show
Kit Build - A class build that is self sustaining and has mechanical differences than the normal scale. Started in Essentials. Most are call their own terms, though the Base Class should be said in front of their own terms (Like Assassin/Executioner)
Power Points - A mechanic that was wedged into the PHB3 classes (with the exception of the Monk) from the previous editions. This time, they are used to augment At Wills to be Encounters, thus eliminating the need to choose powers past 4th level.
Mage Builds - Kit builds that are schools of magic for the Wizard. A call back to the previous editions powering up of the wizard. (Wizard/Necromancer, for example) Unlike the previous kit builds, Wizards simply lose their Scribe Rituals feature and most likely still can choose powers from any build, unlike the Kit Builds.
Parcel System - A treasure distribution method that keeps adventurers poor while forcing/advising the DM to get wish lists from players. The version 2.0 rolls for treasure instead of making a list, and is incomplete because of the lack of clarity about magic item rarity.
ha ha
Show
They will Essentialize the Essentials classes, otherwise known as Essentials2.
The new sub-sub-classes will be:
* Magician. A subsubclass of Mage, the magician has two implements, wand and hat, one familiar (rabbit) and series of basic tricks.
* Crook. A subsubclass of Thief, the Crook can only use a shiv, which allows him to use his only power... Shank.
* Angry Vicar, a subsubclass of warpriest, the angry vicar has two attacks -- Shame and Lecture.
* Hitter. A subsubclass of Slayer, the Hitter hits things.
* Gatherer. A subsubclass of Hunter, it doesn't actually do anything, but pick up the stuff other players might leave behind.
Future Essentials2 classes include the Security Guard (Sentinel2), the Hexknife (Hexblade2), the Webelos (Scout2), the Gallant (Cavalier2) and the Goofus (Knight2).
These will all be detailed in the box set called Heroes of the Futile Marketing.
(Though what they should really release tomorrow is the Essentialized version of the Witchalok!)
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 19, 2011 - 12:29PM
#467
|
Date Joined:
Oct 17, 2007
|
Their stated reason for cutting back on published adventures was that there isn't a high demand, and I have to trust them. If there was a high demand, why would they stop producing them?
But packaged with Dungeon means any DDI subscriber gets them.
1) But it would seem there is money to be made. If not Paizo wouldn't be at it's 6th or 7th AP.
So it would seem. Then again, Dragon Magazine as a physical product seemed to make money from the outside, given its 360 issue run, yet neither WotC nor Paizo do magazines anymore. I think that the Adventure Path supplements is so integral to the Paizo brand that, to not publish it, would foment anger and worry as great as that which came from the cancellation of Dragon and Dungeon's physical magazines.
2) Maybe it wasn't enough for WotC. APs demande a lot of money in salaries and playtesting.
I can't imagine that Paizo pays their writers much better than the contributors for Dungeon Magazine. And, although I'm not positive, I don't believe that many adventures (by either Wotc or Paizo) get playtested to the degree that crunch does. I've read some posts by the Paizo writers which imply some frantic hours in front of the PC and not a lot of playtesting.
3) Unless APs are just a way to support the rest of the books. To entice people to by the PHB and others because that is where the money is.
They are closely linked. I would guess that the crunch supports the adventures in Paizo's case.
'I have had players complain about having extra rares in a pack. I’ve had players complain about getting free things. I have had players complain because they liked something “too much”.' - Mark Rosewater's Twitter, May 7th, 2013
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 19, 2011 - 12:40PM
#468
|
Date Joined:
Aug 29, 2007
|
I think the reason why the question whether Paizo should take over the DnD liscense comes up is that a lot of people think they would do a better job.
And since there are a lot of 4E players on these boards here, that does not have to do with the fact that these people dislike the 4E rules or desperately want to play Pathfinder/3.x. Well, some might, but I am guessing not the majority.
What Paizo seems to get right is customer relations and adventures, which people seem to like.
And looking back at the times when the DnD magazines were in print and Paizo was publishing them (by the way: in hindsight a BIG mistake by WotC to let them do that), the quality of adventures were very good overall.
And to get back the trust, I think Paizo needs to up the quality of the magazines. They need to produce Adventures Paths, just like Paizo did back then and is doing now. And I think it should be easy to support the different campaigns in the magazines, too. Why not make a 3 or 4 part story arc in Dark Sun and Eberron with hints and ideas on how to convert this to FR? Why not publish a 6 part AP with background articles in Dragon magazine?
Because it's not that Paizo is a better company. As many people in this thread have stated correctly, there are many things WotC is simpy better at. But WotC needs to improve their reputation.
If they did, nobody would ask the question if Paizo really should take over DnD.
I think Pazio has a good reputation for writing fluff, on the other hand they really suck at designing game mechanics. Looking over the mechanics of PF it really looks like the entire design staff read the 3E rules in 2000, and then never paid attention to any developments in the rest of 3E's run or in game design in general.
Many pages ago I posted the link to the PF SRD to demonstrate how lame their "revised" fighter is. Their designs skills seem even more feeble when you consider WOTC fixed the fighter themselves back in 2006, with Tome of Battle. Pazio got the benefit of getting to look at the entire run of 3E as well as the first year of 4E, and they still could not come close to matching what 3E was doing in 2006 let alone what they have done since then.
Not liking the new forums.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 19, 2011 - 12:55PM
#469
|
Date Joined:
May 16, 2004
|
Their stated reason for cutting back on published adventures was that there isn't a high demand, and I have to trust them. If there was a high demand, why would they stop producing them?
But packaged with Dungeon means any DDI subscriber gets them.
That is very interesting. I did not know that they said there isn't a high demand for published adventures. Was that in the times when the magazines were still in print? Because now the costs for the magazines must be considerably lower since they are saving the printing costs.
Paizo publishes 2 APs every year. From lvl. 1 to say 15 each. You need much more than half a year to go from lvl. 1 to lvl. 15. And I am playing almost every week. So I would guess not every subscriber plays all the APs. But still: 2 APs every year. And that must mean there is a demand out there for APs, at least for smaller ones with 3-6 adventures per AP or APs for, say, one tier only.
There is one other reason in my opinion why they have to produce a more coherent mass of adventures in the magazines (with background information for players in Dragon for example): By letting Paizo publish the magazines during 3rd edition, they effectively gave Paizo the brand of DnD. The people who bought the magazines thought: DnD is done by WotC and Paizo. And people really liked the quality. With that Paizo made their reputation. And WotC lost theirs somewhat when they took the magazines online.
I have said this before, but I think that in order to get that rep back they need to focus on the content of the magazines. Because this is a major part of DDi. If the quality is good, people will talk about it and the ones who are dissatisfied will start looking at the magazine content again. I think the magazines can pull people back in. That, and the other "promised" online tools of course.
Isn't this what the VTT is about? Will we be able to play the Dungeon magazine encounters with the VTT because WotC will provide the battlemaps together with the magazine? That would be awesome and very innovative.
And this would be one more reason why Paizo should not have the 4E liscense. I am not convinced they can do stuff like that.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 19, 2011 - 3:22PM
#470
|
Date Joined:
Jun 16, 2004
|
I think Pazio has a good reputation for writing fluff, on the other hand they really suck at designing game mechanics. Looking over the mechanics of PF it really looks like the entire design staff read the 3E rules in 2000, and then never paid attention to any developments in the rest of 3E's run or in game design in general.
Many pages ago I posted the link to the PF SRD to demonstrate how lame their "revised" fighter is. Their designs skills seem even more feeble when you consider WOTC fixed the fighter themselves back in 2006, with Tome of Battle. Pazio got the benefit of getting to look at the entire run of 3E as well as the first year of 4E, and they still could not come close to matching what 3E was doing in 2006 let alone what they have done since then.
Well said.
Also, concerning Paizo sucking at mechanics, I have to wonder how many broken/idiotic feats came out of Dragon or Dungeon in the days when Paizo was making it....any ideas, anybody? Or do the Dragon and Dungeon content just get mixed in with the steaming, bloated unbalanced mass that is 3.x?
Gold is for the mistress, silver for the maid Copper for the craftsman, cunning at his trade." "Good!" said the Baron, sitting in his hall, "But Iron -- Cold Iron -- is master of them all." -Kipling Defenders: We ARE the wall! I've replaced the previous Edition Warring line in my sig with this one, because honestly, everybody needs to work together to make the D&D they like without trampling on somebody else's D&D. Miss d20 Modern? Take a look at Dias Ex Machina Game's UltraModern 4e! I am a hero, not a chump.
|
|
|
