So this month paizo has released a new book, the "Adventurer's Guide" the problem is that it has a lot of reprinted content that has been drastically changed from their original source books. Is it at all possible to get the "reprinted" stuff as separate entries so that we can still use the original versions? Note that I don't believe the book says that these replace the originals but I wanted to ask anyway.
-
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
Concerns about the Adventurer's Guide
- Thread starter Laucian
- Start date
I'm sorry, but we try our best to keep Hero Lab up-to-date with the current version of the Pathfinder rules, which means that when content is updated, we update the way that item works in Hero Lab. Using old versions of a now-updated item would be a house rule that users can implement by using the editor to recreate those items.
There is currently a thread in Paizo's discussion forums asking if this is Paizo's policy and raising objections/questions if so.
I believe it is Paizo's policy that the latest published version of something is considered an update or replacement of the prior version. The issues with accidentally duplicating names complicates that a bit.
The thread is asking for an explicit statement that such is the policy.
I believe it is Paizo's policy that the latest published version of something is considered an update or replacement of the prior version. The issues with accidentally duplicating names complicates that a bit.
The thread is asking for an explicit statement that such is the policy.
If the case is that they are being replaced I would request that someone in LW copy them to a new .user file for the community to use. Since this will be a major change in how a lot of items work. Right now those objects are locked behind copy protection, and forcing the community to re-create them just seems like a jerk move.
The thing is that you guys have done this with other things. Off the top of my head the "Battle Cry" feat, the "Wild Caller" summoner archetype and the "Pact Wizard" wizard archetype all have two listings for the different sources they appear in. I understand having to update things because of errata, but this isn't errata and as such I think it should be considered a new thing that happens to have the same name as an existing thing.
That's for major differences, where a character built with the old version would not work correctly, or would need to alter their build, if it were automatically updated to the new version. For most differences, we replace the previous version.
But how do you decide if it's a major change or not? My Lore Warden character would need to be completely reworked or scrapped if he's forced to use the Adventurer's Guide listing. I apologize if my next statement is a bit too confrontational but I feel it needs to be said. Lone Wolfs job is to provide the content that appears in the books created by Paizo to use in HeroLab. It is not your job to decide what constitutes a "replacement for old content", unless stated by Paizo(as is the case with errata). If you change the old Lore Warden content from how it appears in the "Pathfinder Society Field Guide" should I get a refund for that book since you've removed content that I paid for?
Both "Wild Caller" and "Pact Wizard" are cases where the core RPG rules team and the Golarion team (composed of different people who do not compare notes of what they're working on) accidentally created different things with the same name. Both of these are referenced as such in the thread on the Paizo boards that I mentioned previously.
Battle Cry is one I don't know the origin of off the top of my head.
In at least one case, the change in the Adventurer's Guide is deliberate, as James Jacobs commented "I was finally able to fix that".
That's similar to a sentiment in the discussion at Paizo, but there's a difference.
When it comes to the book, people playing PFS will be told what changes they MUST make.
When it comes to home games, people can choose not to accept the changes.
BUT, there is only ONE version of the ability in HeroLab. HeroLab is like automatically getting errata applied (which doesn't happen to the physical book). When LWD updates that ONE version, the change is applied to all characters using that updated "thing".
I view it as part of the trade-off of the digital tools... the tools need to reflect the "official" version of the rules. When possible, it is a bonus feature when they can accommodate house-rules, but not every house-rule is going to be easy to implement. So if the program provides tools for customization, that's the route fits most naturally.
Most of the time, with electronic tools, "getting all updates automatically" is seen as a feature.
And James Jacobs is not a source of official rulings, his comments are meaningless.
If they're going to "replace" the original, I'm guessing that it's also going to replace it even if you only have the original source. Also I shouldn't have to not buy something to keep something I already bought.
Which is why there's a box in the settings you can tick to apply the PFS content restrictions.
And until Paizo states that the content in this book should replace the original versions the "official version" of the rules is that it should be treated as new content.
Most of the time, with electronic tools, "getting all updates automatically" is seen as a feature.
I agree, and it's one of the reasons I use HeroLab. However, again, until Paizo says otherwise this should be in addition to the existing content, it is not an "updated" version.
I can tell you from doing work on this book for HL that things that have significant differences between the old and AvG version a new version is made and the old version is labeled with the book it comes from. Otherwise, things get updated. There is a lot of discussion behind the scenes on this.
For example, the Steel Falcon prestige class is significantly different between the AvG and the original Andoran book, so there will be two versions. The old version being renamed Steel Falcon (Andoran).
Something similar is done withe the Aldori Swordlord prestige class (in this book) vs. the archetype which has been around since the primer.
Most of the updates are tweaks to the language of abilities and done really affect their in game effect significantly.
For example, the Steel Falcon prestige class is significantly different between the AvG and the original Andoran book, so there will be two versions. The old version being renamed Steel Falcon (Andoran).
Something similar is done withe the Aldori Swordlord prestige class (in this book) vs. the archetype which has been around since the primer.
Most of the updates are tweaks to the language of abilities and done really affect their in game effect significantly.
Normally, I'd be one to point out that Mr. Jacobs has asked people NOT to look to him for rules adjudication support... both because his answers can change depending on the circumstances and his feeling of "that would be cool", and because he has, himself. pointed out that the Pathfinder Development Team is a separate group from his team, where he is the Creative Director.
However, this book is "experimental" ... putting out a book in the RPG-line (normally world-neutral) that draws on Golarion-specific content. As such, and as James Jacobs it the "Lead Developer" of the book, his opinion this time could very well be the final word.
I'd again argue that it's not up to you guys to decide what is significant or not, but I understand the decision has already been made. I do appreciate the quick responses from the team, not a whole lot of companies have such a great forum presence.
With things like this we have to strike a balance between keeping things the same for people using "old versions" of the content, and making things more complicated for users. If we end up with multiple versions of something in Hero Lab, it's confusing to users who may not know which one to pick, and it's more work for us to maintain - for example, if a bug is discovered, it may need to be fixed in both versions.
It's better in 99% of cases if we just integrate minor changes to an ability's text into a single version of the ability. If your gaming group wants to keep using the older version, you're free to use the text from the PRD or PDF instead, and just ignore the changes in Hero Lab.
As Frumple said, for a few of the new classes / archetypes in the AG, the changes were major enough that we created new versions of the class / archetype for them. If we followed that path everywhere, the data files would take longer to download and be more confusing to use, so we try to avoid it unless the changes pass a reasonable threshold.
ShadowChemosh
Well-known member
That has been my concern the whole time when this came up. The biggest being for many players that don't live on the Paizo forums having multiple versions of the same class is going to be confusing.
My take is, just like in 3.5 days, the latest printing of the rules is the version that should be used. WotC did this and now Paizo does also. It seems like a common method for small game companies to fix issues.
The thread I mentioned on the Paizo forums is asking for a definitive statement whether or not this is the policy Paizo is following. I believe it is, based on past comments about various products, but I don't have a particular quote to point people at to say "yes, this is indeed Paizo's policy".
Overall, I can see LWD is in a tougher position, though. They have an official license, and that pretty much means they have to conform to what Paizo decides is the official version of these things. At the same time, they have their own paying customers to consider, and avoiding causing them inconvenience is also necessary.
ShadowChemosh
Well-known member
I am totally lost what your point is? I am very sorry but you seem to just be "summing" up information.
Can you be very clear to your point?
My main point is I DO NOT WANT multiple classes with the same name in HL. This will cause ridiculous levels of confusion to my players. Most HL users I deal with now refuse to even read a book or have a bood with the rules and only go by HL. So having "two" classes to pick from is going to confuse them. They will have NO WAY to know which version to use as most can't/don't track which book just came out or when.
Now lets add to the issue that from the past changes d20pfsrd will simply "update" the class text to the latest printing. This leads to more confusion if the text from d20pfsrd does not match HL. If the text abilities don't match they will complain to me to put in a bug report(s). Then I have to try and explain about books and versions and UG all I will get is a blank look of dear in headlights.
My main point is I DO NOT WANT multiple classes with the same name in HL. This will cause ridiculous levels of confusion to my players. Most HL users I deal with now refuse to even read a book or have a bood with the rules and only go by HL. So having "two" classes to pick from is going to confuse them. They will have NO WAY to know which version to use as most can't/don't track which book just came out or when.
Now lets add to the issue that from the past changes d20pfsrd will simply "update" the class text to the latest printing. This leads to more confusion if the text from d20pfsrd does not match HL. If the text abilities don't match they will complain to me to put in a bug report(s). Then I have to try and explain about books and versions and UG all I will get is a blank look of dear in headlights.
That's a problem with your players, not something that should affect the program.