Pathfinder 1E Is Pathfinder going to slow down?

[thundershot]

If I'm a DM running an adventure module, I think one if the most annoying things is not having the monster stats IN THE ADVENTURE BOOK. I don't want to need other books laying around, or even a laptop or my ipad. Those are distractions.

 

[Echohawk]

As a note of comparison, Forgotten Realms has about 105 different source material for it spanning 4 editions of D&D (excluding adventures and novels) (source: http://worldsofdnd.wordpress.com/product-lists/forgotten-realms/forgotten-realms-products/). According to Paizo (http://paizo.com/pathfinder/campaignSetting/pathfinderRPG) they have 54 books (excluding the APs) covering Golarion. They are about half-way to Forgotten Realms.

BTW Feel free to clarify my numbers for the setting books as I likely messed them up in my research.

Those numbers are much more interesting if you don't exclude adventures. Including adventures, I count 185 gaming products released for the Forgotten Realms and 282 for Golarion. Based on that, Golarion overtook the Realms as the setting for which the most game products has been produced at the end of 2011!

 

[N'raac]

That's a good plan. I end up doing something similar, but haven't thought it completely through as a process. I find, somewhat unintuitively, that I end up spending more time prepping published scenarios than not.

I think my post spells out a much better process than I follow consistently.

I've actually started reworking enemy's stats pretty substantially so they run faster at the table during what would be your second pass. I'm always tempted to skip the third, but invariably regret it when I do.

I find I make notes like the total bonus for a specific tactic, a "power attack chart", etc. I find spells are where I make the most changes. Often, the issue is that the author's approach just doesn't fit my style for running such a character in combat. eg. high level wizard/lich working alone who carries a typical PC spell load is not acting like he has an INT above 6. PC's have Fighters. Solo arcanists need to be able to get away from the PC's and put things between them and the metal clad cuisinarts. Having their battle plan written down forces me to get a handle on their abilities. It also gives me a reminder in play of just how badly the battle has to go before they change tactics, down to "surrender" or "flee".

The third read is the easiest to fall by the wayside, and often consists of skimming over the materials, including notes from pass 2. How long ago pass 2 was matters as well.

Heh, yeah. I feel like my spellcasters' mom sometimes.

"What does this do?" "I don't know, what does it do?"

I wonder what would happen if the answer was "Not much, really. I was kind of surprised you chose it, but I guess you just pick at random, since you obviously didn't bother to read it first."

If I'm a DM running an adventure module, I think one if the most annoying things is not having the monster stats IN THE ADVENTURE BOOK. I don't want to need other books laying around, or even a laptop or my ipad. Those are distractions.

For me, I like being able to have various pages in front of me at the same time, and I don't like paying to have the monster info reprinted in the adventure book when that could have been more content, a diagram of a confusing area, etc. Paper clips and a GM screen are wonderful tools if you print a relevant page like that common monster. IOW, this is a question of style, and any choice made is going to displease someone.

Those numbers are much more interesting if you don't exclude adventures. Including adventures, I count 185 gaming products released for the Forgotten Realms and 282 for Golarion. Based on that, Golarion overtook the Realms as the setting for which the most game products has been produced at the end of 2011!

That is very interesting info, especially as many Golarian adventures are AP's that also commonly include setting material in the back.

 

[JeffB]

If I'm a DM running an adventure module, I think one if the most annoying things is not having the monster stats IN THE ADVENTURE BOOK. I don't want to need other books laying around, or even a laptop or my ipad. Those are distractions.

I am with ya here. I understand WHY companies like Paizo do it, but I absolutely hate the "see page X in Y book" references. Nice thing about lighter versions of D&D and clones and inspired by-s, is the compact stat blocks that are easily woven into text.

If I have to reference more than one rulebook and the module during play, I will not run the system anymore.

 

[Kinak]

I think one interesting point about the amount of setting material is how modular Golarion is. Most campaigns, even most APs, can be run worrying about anything beyond the bounds of a single country.

If you're running a game in Ustalav, for example, you'll want the Ustalav book to break down the country and the details in the Ustalav book about it's relation to its neighbors. Maybe if you're feeling really gung-ho, you read up on them on the wiki.

Some areas are more detailed than others, of course. You could get a half-dozen books on Varisia or a couple pages in the world guide on Isger.

So, the number of books you "need" to stay within canon on any individual campaign is generally quite small. In a lot of ways, it's more like having thirty settings with roads instead of, say, Sigil or spelljammers connecting them all.

I think my post spells out a much better process than I follow consistently.

Sorry, I probably should have unpacked that more. I use a very similar process to you, just hadn't really thought about it in stages.

The comparison, though, is to my normal (non-AP) prep time. That tops out at about ten minutes, usually less. So even a very streamlined AP prep bumps over that.

I still think, and my players still think, it gives them better games, though. So there's that

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[an_idol_mind]

I think I disagree (perhaps uneducatedly) with the premise of the original article. I don't necessarily think that gamers as a whole look for off-ramps. Their tastes do change, and some gamers do want to keep hopping from system to system, but I think a lot of people are content to settle into the game they see as their niche.

(By "people" in this post, I mean, "my guess at a majority of customers," not "everybody.")

Stuff like 13th Age and Numenera isn't something that many gamers look for because they're fatigued with the current system, but rather they represent systems that offer something that their fanbases wanted out of a previous game but never got. In other words, I don't think people who switch from Pathfinder to 13th Age are looking for a new game, but rather have been folks who wanted something out of their games that Pathfinder wasn't offering. They might be thinking, "Man, I wish magic were less mundane in Pathfinder," then along comes 13th Age that gives them that and much more.

I think one of the reasons that D&D has lost momentum in recent years is less because people are consciously looking for something new and more because WotC was never really satisfied with the game they've presented, and it shows. Maybe this is a result of turnover in staff or new creative directions, but they've been constantly overhauling the system. We had 3rd edition, which then quickly gave way to 3.5. 3.5 products were constantly trying to patch the game or change its subsystems with things like Tome of Battle. 4th edition was a major change, and that too got a bunch of patches in the form of Essentials. Now 5th edition is on its way and is another radical change from what came before. I think WotC has failed to really grab and hold onto a singular vision for D&D, which has led to a lot of changes and also a lot of gamers looking for new games.

While Pathfinder will certainly plateau and even decline eventually, I think it is probably benefiting from a clearer plan put forth by Paizo. There's been errata and a few large-scale changes (such as the Stealth skill), but not the major system changes that WotC has made to the different versions of D&D. They've also been pretty up-front with the style of game they want to produce, and their adventures and other products all feed into that feel/style. Overall, I think they have a stronger clarity of vision with what they want out of Pathfinder that is serving them well and which will possibly extend the life of the game beyond what many people expect.

 

[Keldin]

Those numbers are much more interesting if you don't exclude adventures. Including adventures, I count 185 gaming products released for the Forgotten Realms and 282 for Golarion. Based on that, Golarion overtook the Realms as the setting for which the most game products has been produced at the end of 2011!

If you're going to count adventures, you need to consider Dungeon magazine (and issues of Dragon from before Dungeon started coming out). I don't know the numbers, but there were close to, what, 200 issues of Dungeon before it went online exclusively? Even if there was only one Forgotten Realms adventure (as opposed to ones that could be put anywhere) every other issue... well, the point is relatively obvious.

 

[delericho]

I don't know the numbers, but there were close to, what, 200 issues of Dungeon before it went online exclusively?

150.

Even if there was only one Forgotten Realms adventure (as opposed to ones that could be put anywhere) every other issue... well, the point is relatively obvious.

There were far fewer than that, at least in the 3e era. (I didn't get Dungeon before then.)

 

[an_idol_mind]

Comparing Golarion support with Forgotten Realms support isn't really indicative of how accessible each world is. One of the things about Golarion is that while there is a ton of lore for the setting, it's pretty canon light. It took five years to even establish a canon ending to the first adventure path, and even then it's couched with, "If this isn't what happened in your game, here are some alternatives."

The Realms, for good or ill, is much more of a living, constantly changing thing. A super-adventure in the Forgotten Realms gets immediately incorporated into the canon, while in Golarion it tends to be one of many possibilities.

For example, the death of Halaster in Expedition to Undermountain is a thing that definitely happened in the Realms. If you want to bring somebody new into the canon 1375 DR Realms and they've picked up the 3rd edition setting book, you then have to explain that Halaster is dead among other changes. In Golarion, the end of the current adventure path (Wrath of the Righteous) will presumably result in the death of a demon lord, but that won't be immediately incorporated into the canon or likely mentioned at all. It remains one possibility that doesn't become a thing until you say, "In my campaign, that demon lord is dead."

While Golarion has a lot of stuff, it's mostly background material that builds on but doesn't contradict the setting book. If somebody wants to get into the setting, they can still read the Inner Sea World Guide and be 99% up to speed. The Realms is only like that when a new edition comes out and you're given a snapshot of how things are right at this point in time - it's tougher for newbies to catch up because the novels and adventures are constantly changing the setting. (It should be noted that this is a perk, not a flaw, for many Realms fans.)

 

[Echohawk]

If you're going to count adventures, you need to consider Dungeon magazine (and issues of Dragon from before Dungeon started coming out). I don't know the numbers, but there were close to, what, 200 issues of Dungeon before it went online exclusively? Even if there was only one Forgotten Realms adventure (as opposed to ones that could be put anywhere) every other issue... well, the point is relatively obvious.

Fortunately, some kind soul has compiled this useful list of Dungeon magazines with Forgotten Realms content. I count 66 issues, so that could (arguably) bring the total up to 251 Forgotten Realms "products" vs. Golarion's 282.

I'm not convinced that that's a fair count though. The amount of Golarion material in each AP installment is definitely higher than the amount of Forgotten Realms material in almost any issue of Dungeon. Besides, if we're counting issues of Dungeon with FR content, then we should be consistent and count the hundred of issues of Dragon that also have a column or two of Realms content. Ultimately, a simple product count only gives us a very imprecise estimate of the relative amount of campaign setting information. A page count might be fairer, but I don't have the fortitude to attempt an estimate of that!