Has anyone else noticed the content for We Be Goblins seems a little sparse? In one section it actually references an overland map that doesn't exist. The topics for the Marsh and the Village only contain like 2 snippets each. Admittedly, I have not had a chance to read the .pdf fully but from just a quick overview I k is the map is missing and it seems the two topics i mentioned are a bit light. I downloaded and installed twice just to make sure I didn't have a corrupt install and I did get a strange message that generated a log on both installs, I'll post the text when I get home.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
-
Please note: In an effort to ensure that all of our users feel welcome on our forums, we’ve updated our forum rules. You can review the updated rules here: http://forums.wolflair.com/showthread.php?t=5528.
If a fellow Community member is not following the forum rules, please report the post by clicking the Report button (the red yield sign on the left) located on every post. This will notify the moderators directly. If you have any questions about these new rules, please contact support@wolflair.com.
- The Lone Wolf Development Team
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
We Be Goblins Issues
- Thread starter Galymyr
- Start date
MNBlockHead
Well-known member
Try looking at the Story Board. Put it in the navigation pane. I find the content to be more than complete with overland and battlemaps. Not sure what else would be expected.
There will be hiccups and transcription issues while the community and the companies settle on a standard(s) that works.
I think it is fairly obvious that Isle of Kandril and We Be Goblins were both entered into RW by people who have not used RW very much or at the very least have very different ideas on how content will be organized from most people who have shared their content.
I think it is fairly obvious that Isle of Kandril and We Be Goblins were both entered into RW by people who have not used RW very much or at the very least have very different ideas on how content will be organized from most people who have shared their content.
We Be Goblins was a small module produced for Free RPG Day a couple of years ago. It is meant to be a short introduction to RPGs for new players in order to grow the hobby.
The PDF and print product is 20 pages, including front and back covers. There are 4 pages of pre-generated characters, the exterior covers, and the inside back cover, cutting 7 pages out of the 20. The inside of the front cover contains the maps for the adventure site (tactical maps). That leaves 12 pages for the actual adventure text, one of which is partially used for the Adventure Summary and the Adventure Background.
We Be Goblins was received well-enough that the Paizo adventures for the following Free RPG Day in the next few years included We Be Goblins Too, We Be Goblins Free, and We B4 Goblins.
The mention of the larger world is immaterial.. it only matters if you plan to use We Be Goblins as part of a campaign in that world, and sets the context. In the end, We Be Goblins is an advertisement for Paizo's paid content.. so a lead from one to the other should be expected.
The PDF and print product is 20 pages, including front and back covers. There are 4 pages of pre-generated characters, the exterior covers, and the inside back cover, cutting 7 pages out of the 20. The inside of the front cover contains the maps for the adventure site (tactical maps). That leaves 12 pages for the actual adventure text, one of which is partially used for the Adventure Summary and the Adventure Background.
We Be Goblins was received well-enough that the Paizo adventures for the following Free RPG Day in the next few years included We Be Goblins Too, We Be Goblins Free, and We B4 Goblins.
The mention of the larger world is immaterial.. it only matters if you plan to use We Be Goblins as part of a campaign in that world, and sets the context. In the end, We Be Goblins is an advertisement for Paizo's paid content.. so a lead from one to the other should be expected.
MNBlockHead
Well-known member
There will be hiccups and transcription issues while the community and the companies settle on a standard(s) that works.
I think it is fairly obvious that Isle of Kandril and We Be Goblins were both entered into RW by people who have not used RW very much or at the very least have very different ideas on how content will be organized from most people who have shared their content.
I haven't looked at Isle of Kandril that closely, but We Be Goblins seems perfectly serviceable to me. I would expect that the RW development team at least reviewed the material as well as give instructions on how the material should be entered, so to say it was was entered by people who have not used RW very much seems unlikely.
How should it be organized differently? I don't have the print version and even though I've stated in another thread that I would generally want to have a book or PDF to read over material, I found that for a smaller module like WBG it was easy to read it over and understand how to run it.
I guess I just had a very different first impression. I really liked it and it made me much more bullish about the Content Market.
Not that I expect anyone to spend their time doing this, but it would be interesting to see WBG content entered by someone else to compare approaches.
That map Galmyr couldn't find to start with should have been in the Marsh topic or somewhere else really obvious not half way down the storyline.
Second I would have created NPC topics for the chief and his minion rather than simply making them alternate names of a scene and having a bunch of links point to that scene when they really point to those NPC's. I might have even created a topic for the exiled goblin wizard that found the fireworks in the first place.
In my PoV stub topics give you something to build on if you want or need to and in this showcases where the scenario could be expanded.
Compare to Pixies where, I think, all the characters get their own topic and the town could easily be expanded into a party's home base for some early adventures.
Second I would have created NPC topics for the chief and his minion rather than simply making them alternate names of a scene and having a bunch of links point to that scene when they really point to those NPC's. I might have even created a topic for the exiled goblin wizard that found the fireworks in the first place.
In my PoV stub topics give you something to build on if you want or need to and in this showcases where the scenario could be expanded.
Compare to Pixies where, I think, all the characters get their own topic and the town could easily be expanded into a party's home base for some early adventures.
I was expecting the free content to set the standard for organizing modules. That is why I was disappointed that someone had to even ask the question where a map was located. Well-presented material shouldn't leave that level of confusion. I haven't had time though to look at it myself (I have been looking at Kandril and, so far, have few complaints there [so far the dragon that the magic item is based upon should have a topic but does not]).
Remember that Paizo views Realm Works content as an extension of the PDF.. and so expects you to already have the PDF for a read-through. We Be Goblins was planned and prepared before that policy was set, though, through a separate arrangement with LWD, so it is somewhat "grandfathered" in that respect.
I have no idea what other publishers may be telling the people working on their content. I know at least some users have mentioned that they are working on material for other publishers, and their layouts and methods may well be very different.
With regard to kbs666's comments... early on, advice given to users was along the lines of "create only what you need" and "don't over-create". This could well be part of why We Be Goblins is laid out as it is.
My push for additional icons in the Features Request thread comes from my own desire to be more specific than the LWD guidelines (and the LWD Pathfinder structure) have laid out.. I want MORE Categories than there are in the standard Pathfinder structure, and more specific identification of similar-but-related things. Hence, my style is more like what kbs666 suggests.. more Individuals, Places, and Incidents even if they're only name-dropped, and so on.
I have no idea what other publishers may be telling the people working on their content. I know at least some users have mentioned that they are working on material for other publishers, and their layouts and methods may well be very different.
With regard to kbs666's comments... early on, advice given to users was along the lines of "create only what you need" and "don't over-create". This could well be part of why We Be Goblins is laid out as it is.
My push for additional icons in the Features Request thread comes from my own desire to be more specific than the LWD guidelines (and the LWD Pathfinder structure) have laid out.. I want MORE Categories than there are in the standard Pathfinder structure, and more specific identification of similar-but-related things. Hence, my style is more like what kbs666 suggests.. more Individuals, Places, and Incidents even if they're only name-dropped, and so on.
That map Galmyr couldn't find to start with should have been in the Marsh topic or somewhere else really obvious not half way down the storyline.
Second I would have created NPC topics for the chief and his minion rather than simply making them alternate names of a scene and having a bunch of links point to that scene when they really point to those NPC's. I might have even created a topic for the exiled goblin wizard that found the fireworks in the first place.
In my PoV stub topics give you something to build on if you want or need to and in this showcases where the scenario could be expanded.
Compare to Pixies where, I think, all the characters get their own topic and the town could easily be expanded into a party's home base for some early adventures.
This right here. I did find it, but it was not in an intuitive location and was not linked from the topic that referenced it which is why o was confused.
Mystic Lemur
Well-known member
The NPCs didn't need their own topics, because everything you need to know about them to run the adventure is detailed as part of the location/scene where you meet them. No reason to have another tab open for such scant information. Tying non-vital NPCs to their location was mentioned as a best practice some time ago.
In some ways, it is a meta thing.
If the players are actually using Realm Works, and the creator only made Individual-type Topics for significant NPCs, then they know a) anyone with such a topic is hardly the "bystander" you may have told them s/he is, and b) anyone without such a topic is nowhere near as important as you may have made him/her sound.
So, I too make any NPC worthy of a link into its own Topic.
If the players are actually using Realm Works, and the creator only made Individual-type Topics for significant NPCs, then they know a) anyone with such a topic is hardly the "bystander" you may have told them s/he is, and b) anyone without such a topic is nowhere near as important as you may have made him/her sound.
So, I too make any NPC worthy of a link into its own Topic.
MNBlockHead
Well-known member
lots of food for thought. i can understand the pov of giving every npc a topic, but in game, I would not like having to open a new tab for every npc in an encounter. if the creator takes this approach, I would hope that they would also include the statblock (herolab snippet) and basic description in the Encounter/Location topic itself. Duplicates information somewhat but makes running a gam easier while still allowing you to reveal npcs and to better use npcs in multiple topics.
Of course if they would let you make links to snippets instead of just topics, the problem would go away because you could place a less significant NPC into, say, the place that he lives and then link to the snippet in another place he might show up, like say the tavern, or the magic shop he runs.
This would be analogous to how you can set a target on a web page and link straight to that part of the web page rather than the top of the web page.
This would be analogous to how you can set a target on a web page and link straight to that part of the web page rather than the top of the web page.
Remember that Paizo views Realm Works content as an extension of the PDF.. and so expects you to already have the PDF for a read-through. We Be Goblins was planned and prepared before that policy was set, though, through a separate arrangement with LWD, so it is somewhat "grandfathered" in that respect.
I agree that use of Realm Works is best if you have the book or .pdf to read ahead of time. However, once I've done my read through I shouldn't have to pick that book/.pdf up again as every last bit of info I need to run the adventure should be in Realm Works. Is this not in line with how Paizo thinks I should use their products?