D&D 5E Is long-term support of the game important?

[Shemeska]

It's weird. Every time I mention this subject, someone feels the need to remind everyone it's available for free online. In fact, even if I say in a message it's available online, I've had people quote me, cut that part, and then repeat that it's available online! You didn't just do that...but you did state it just a few messages after it had already been said three times in the same thread.

We all get it - it's available for free online. If you have no issues at all with finding twelve outside sources online and printing it, or using an electronic device at your game table, cool. But for those who do have an issue with this inter-constructiveness in the APs, it remains a growing problem and Paizo appears to consider it a feature and not a bug, based on that post from Sean K. Reynolds talking about how they need to support all the cool new stuff (his words), and reprinting it in the adventure would just take up valuable space.

For me, I don't want to go hunt down TWELVE other sources of material, online or not, free or not. That's, to me, way too much stuff outside the adventure that should be right there in the friggen adventure I paid for. When I buy a hardcopy adventure intended for use at the game table, I expect it to contain everything I need to play that adventure aside from the core rules. If I have to go hunt it down online for free, I am more likely to buy from the company that supplies all that with the adventure itself.

I don't recall a single person saying "All that errata WOTC keeps putting out for 4e is awesome, because it's available for free online!" I remember a metric crapload of people complaining it was too much to keep up with, and absurd to think people could insert it in their hardcopy books, and the effect was to force everyone to the online version of the rules making their hardcopy books far less usable. I don't see this issue being that far off from the WOTC errata issue. Forcing people online to make a hardcopy book they bought usable is an issue for a fair number of people.

I don't seem to recall you once complaining when 4e heavily tied itself into their online subscription tools, but suddenly it's a huge, terribly intrusive problem if Paizo references something in an AP which if you don't own the book referenced oh no you have to look up the free online resource?

Additionally, in my experience there's an effort to try to restrict references to a smaller pool of hardcover books unless it's something that really truly makes the most sense to use and reference one of the softcover supplements.

As for the errata, that's again a different beast to offer errata for free versus providing whole swathes of content for free as open content. Errata kept randomly changing how lots of rules worked and worked in conjunction with one another for 4e, and thus people complained about a shifting rules base and printed books quickly being out of date so to speak. Changing something people paid for in print almost monthly versus providing them with free access to material that they otherwise would need to buy an extra book to use, those aren't even comparable.

 

[Jester David]

LOL come on man. In neither case did they "slip in". No books accidentally fell into adventures. This is a terrible excuse. No, sorry, two claims were made, both were wrong, it was not isolated incidences.

It is a terrible excuse. ButTSR was a terribly managed company whose standards varied wildly over time. It was a company that was around for twenty years and changed hands a couple times, so its policy might also have also shifted over time.
But I’ve only heard an employee refer to their policy on assuming books (or not) once, and he said they didn’t. So until I hear someone say otherwise I have to take Mister Winter on his word and accept everything else as an anomaly.

No, they do not, and they state outright they do not want to do that. Perhaps you should review Sean K. Reynolds' response here on the board to this very point.

Paizo is not following any stated hardcover/softcover divide for this sort of stuff, there are not reprinting stuff (intentionally), it's not just "slipping in" it's done with stated intent, and this is the same sort of stuff done all the way back to 1e with UA.

I don't really want to argue the point further, this stuff is not matters of opinion but of fact and justifying it with "slip in...all the friggen time" is not a good response.

I'm going to move past this point now, as I think everyone else can see both TSR and Pazio are doing this, and on a fairly routine basis. The only system that held to a strict "core" concept was 3e. And that was for licensing purposes more than anything else.

Let me repeat: Paizo assumes you have access to their hardcover books. Not the Core. I didn’t say the Core. I said the hardcovers.
I’ll elaborate. In addition to the Core Rulebook this means Advanced Player’s Guide, Advanced Race Guide, Ultimate Magic, Ultimate Combat, Ultimate Campaign, Gamemaster’s Guide, Bestiary 1-4, NPC Codex, and likely Mythic Adventures. And, for most APs, the Inner Sea World Guide.
Content from those are not repeated. It’s assumed you have those books or, failing that, have access to the PFRD.
The PDF on Pathfinder Society reiterates this, and also adds the PFS Field Guide to the list of assumed products. You’re not expected to have Halflings of Golarion or AP#42 to run or play a PFS scenario, but you are expected to have the APG and the NPC Codex.

The APs do often reference other books, but much of that is referencing lore. If something is coming from a non-standard source it is reprinted.
There were a number of nosferatu NPCs in the Carrion Crown Adventure Path, a monster featured in PF#8 or so. Their abilities were reprinted in full. But, since the monster is now in the Bestiary 4, future products will likely just reference the abilities and not elaborate.

 

[Jester David]

1) Paizo isn't doing that out of the kindness of their hearts. They have no choice, because they built PF off the OGL. If they weren't posting their stuff online, third parties would be (and were and continue to do so)

Not quite.
The OGL requires you to declare what is Open Content. They don't have to make anything Open, they could choose to declare their content "Closed Content" and part of their world like they did with their gods.

 

[Jester David]

Yep, this is exactly right. And I can't say I'm a fan of this approach, mostly since I just don't have most of these books, so the 'requirement' to have them makes the AP volumes less useful to me. (That said, I get them mostly just to read, so "less useful" is a pretty theoretical distinction.)

One key thing that can be said for Paizo, though, is that they do at least make all the relevant rules material freely available online. Which is obviously a fairly significant advantage.

What he doesn't copy is the paragraph right before that says:

This book refers to several other Pathfinder Roleplaying Game products using the following abbreviations, yet these additional supplements are not required to make use of this book. Readers interested in references to Pathfinder RPG hardcovers can find the complete rules of these books available on line for free at paizo.com/prd.​

Also, not all of these products are referred to mechanically. Some are just sources you can refer to for greater lore.

 

[am181d]

Not quite.
The OGL requires you to declare what is Open Content. They don't have to make anything Open, they could choose to declare their content "Closed Content" and part of their world like they did with their gods.

You can't declare content Closed if it's based on existing d20 content and virtually everything Pathfinder produces is. The Gods can be declared Closed, because that's all fluff.

 

[Mistwell]

I don't seem to recall you once complaining when 4e heavily tied itself into their online subscription tools

Then you missed me saying it bothered me. Repeatedly.

but suddenly it's a huge, terribly intrusive problem if Paizo references something in an AP which if you don't own the book referenced oh no you have to look up the free online resource?

It's neither huge, nor terribly intrusive. I am stating my preference only. As I said, my argument is this has been done, by all companies, since the beginning of D&D.

I'm not sure why people are not reading the thread and deciding my position is something different than it is...but it's getting annoying.

Additionally, in my experience there's an effort to try to restrict references to a smaller pool of hardcover books unless it's something that really truly makes the most sense to use and reference one of the softcover supplements.

I am not sure why they would reference anything unless "it's something that really truly makes the most sense to use". Are you saying they tie things to supplemental hardback books that they don't really need to be tying it to, just because? For me, 12 outside books referenced in one adventure path is way too many. I don't care what the quality of their covers are, it's just too much outside of the hardcopy adventure I bought. But, as demonstrated earlier, they don't appear to be making much distinction anyway, and Sean K. Reynolds did not state a distinction, and the actual practice historically doesn't appear to be following any sort of rule on that either.

As for the errata, that's again a different beast to offer errata for free versus providing whole swathes of content for free as open content.

My point had nothing at all to do with it being free. It was the nuisance of having to print all that crap out and put it in my hardcopy book, to the point where I was basically driven to use an online source whether I liked it or not.

Errata kept randomly changing how lots of rules worked and worked in conjunction with one another for 4e, and thus people complained about a shifting rules base and printed books quickly being out of date so to speak.

And the reason that's annoying, is a similar (not the same) reason for the annoyance with these adventure paths. Your book, which you bought from them in physical hardcopy, cannot really be used easily without having to reference a bunch of stuff online. And, I could fake it with the errata and just ignore it or work around it, much like I can do with the outside stuff from the Pathfinder APs. Or, I can go look it up and print it out and insert it where needed in my hardcopy. But the level of nuisance is roughly the same level.

Changing something people paid for in print

For free...which is only relevant because you next say...

...almost monthly versus providing them with free access to material

Which is a re-phrasing of the same friggen thing! The supplemental books come out every month (just like the errata), they are free online (just like the errata), they are needed to play with the book you already bought (just like the errata) or else you have to do a work-around or ignore it (just like the errata). On a nuisance level, the thing you do is the same thing...go online, print it out, insert it, or work-around/ignore it.

that they otherwise would need to buy an extra book to use, those aren't even comparable.

Except when you compare what you're actually doing, in which case they are very comparable.

 

[Mistwell]

If something is coming from a non-standard source it is reprinted.

No, it's not. Reynolds said they wouldn't, and they have not been. In the 12 sources I mentioned, you will find none of it is reprinted in the AP, but some of it is not the hardcover books you mentioned. Maybe they intended to make such a distinction, but they're not actually doing that.

 

[Jester David]

You can't declare content Closed if it's based on existing d20 content and virtually everything Pathfinder produces is. The Gods can be declared Closed, because that's all fluff.

Except for all those 3PP done under the OGL that declared "no portion of this book is Open Game Content" on their credit page.

Section 5 of the Open Game Licence Version 1.0a says:
Representation of Authority to Contribute: If You are contributing original material as Open Game Content, You represent that Your Contributions are Your original creation and/or You have sufficient rights to grant the rights conveyed by this License.
Section 8 Says: Identification: If you distribute Open Game Content You must clearly indicate which portions of the work that you are distributing are Open Game Content.

Unless I'm missing something. Feel free to provide a link.

 

[Jester David]

No, it's not. Reynolds said they wouldn't, and they have not been. In the 12 sources I mentioned, you will find none of it is reprinted in the AP, but some of it is not the hardcover books you mentioned. Maybe they intended to make such a distinction, but they're not actually doing that.

Okay then. Challenge accepted.

Lords of Chaos is referenced twice in City of the Locusts: page 24 and 58. In both cases the rules are in CotL.
Demons Revisited is referenced on pages 34 and 58. There are no special abilities described on page 34, but the referenced book affected the race not really providing any special abilities that needed to be described. Most of the NPC's special powers come from Mythic Adventures.
It mentions two APs, but these are just references, options a GM might want to include, and no mechanics are included.
I can't even find some of the other books that are supposedly referenced.

You're misreading. It seems like he's referring to the secondary hardcovers. The example he gives is a Bestiary 2 monster.

 

[Remathilis]

I don't think converting a 5th level wizard to 4e is particularly hard at all: stat up a 5th level artillery creature, label its at-will power "Magical bolt" and label its encounter powers "Fireball" and/or "Lightning bolt" as appropriate. (And add in one utility effect if desired: eg as a minor action give it Blindsight until E its NT 1x/enc", to replicate Detect Invis and/or ESP.)

That's all well in good, except...

1.) That works for an NPC. Not a PC.
2.) A 5th level mage in 1/2/3e can do things a 4e mage cannot: Fly. Create an illusionary door. Summon a monster. Charm a person. Read thoughts. (No idea if they got added in later books, but in PHB1, you couldn't do these things they have been able to in the others).

These two stickers allows me to make a magic-user in 1e, convert him to a mage in 2e, and a wizard in 3e and keep most things the same (adding some details along the way). 4e requires me to re-write the character from the ground up.