| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| The Sage |
Posted - 05 Aug 2010 : 02:40:38
Would you, as a resident Candlekeep scribe, welcome the opportunity to discuss PATHFINDER novels in the Book Club?
...
Wooly raised this point earlier, and it's something I've been thinking about as well. See, we're curious about the potential and reception for Book Club scrolls dedicated to the new line of PATHFINDER novels now being published by Paizo.
It's both my and Wooly's thinking, that since there are a fair degree of Realms contributing authors working with the new novel line, as well as the fact that we already allow discussions based on other PATHFINDER products here at Candlekeep, that chatting about the novels should also have a place as well.
So, we're putting it to the vote. And, if we receive enough positive feedback, I'll open the scrolls for discussing Prince of Wolves, just as soon as my copy arrives.
So start voting!  |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Kerrigan |
Posted - 12 Jun 2011 : 23:08:28
I read "Prince of wolves" by Dave Gross, one of the recently published Pathfinder novels. It was a really good read, everything fit: The quest, the atmosphere, and what was made out of the setting.
The only thing I didn't like was how the plot was revealed at the end of the book - the evil antagonist explained everything, which was a bit annoying. Also the final battle was a bit over the edge (Radovan's transformation and all).
I highly recommend it to anything who's interested in a down-to-earth novel and a remote and mysterious setting. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 19 Dec 2010 : 11:09:47
I was, actually, going to open these scrolls in the coming week. Now that my copy of Winter Witch has finally arrived, I've got everything I need to ensure the proper operation of these potential discussions scrolls.
As for where they'll be located... given that the site upgrade, and the unveiling of Candlekeep 2 is now moving along, I think it would be best to simply leave the PATHFINDER Book Club discussion scrolls in our regular Book Club, and prepare a new shelf solely for them, later on Candlekeep 2.
|
| Tremaine |
Posted - 19 Dec 2010 : 10:44:54
so what was the decision on this? I might give pathfinder fiction a try |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 03 Oct 2010 : 05:04:09
quote:
Originally posted by dennis
I agree that the setting is an essential ingredient of the story. But how much do you dislike the setting? Is your dislike with it too Brobdingnagian that it sweeps away your favor with the amazing characters of the story? If the answer is yes, then it's a sad thing indeed. All elements are supposed to work and mesh to bring about an excellent, unforgettable story. However, if some elements fail, we can focus on those that work well.
I've liked the characters, but for me, the feel of the setting has changed dramatically. In my opinion, the Realms of 4E has much of the same dark and dystopian feel of Shadowrun -- without the cool cyberpunk elements or the intriguing backstory. This contrasts so strongly with what the setting was that I am continuously aware of it. And this awareness keeps me from being immersed in the story, because I'm constantly reminded of the setting. It's like doing a favored activity while nauseated or experiencing a bad headache -- no matter how much you enjoy what you're doing, you can't get past how you're feeling. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 02 Oct 2010 : 17:09:21
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by dennis
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by dennis
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
I don't read the realms books anymore because they all take place post spellplague.
Even the ones by Ed? Hmm, I think you should give it a try. There are several books in 4E that have received quite LOUD, positive reviews.
I've tried a couple of them myself, and what was done to the setting kept getting in the way of my enjoyment of the story.
Besides, several Realms books from previous eras have gotten loud positive reviews, and I still couldn't stand them.
You're painting a dreary picture, my friend. Perhaps I can splash some bright hues on it?
I think, as I always mention whenever a seemingly unbridgeable difference/clash of interests in reading certain books occurs, it does come down to one thing: preference. One of my best(crazy)friends have long been pestering me to try reading more, if not all, of Piers Anthony's novels. But I couldn't stand them. Though my bestfriend and I usually have the same taste in books, Piers is absolutely one of the very rare exceptions. Same applies to some Realms novels. Most books where the cockroach Manshoon and the (lousy) Zhents are featured I doggedly avoid. And regardless of editions, most books by PSK, EG, and RLB I devour.
There are some books that elicit a mixture of fascination and dislike from the reader. We simply have to focus on the good and try to forget that the bad exists at all. An example is Red Magic. While I really detest the Harpers featured in that book, I like how Thay was described; how Maligor worked his arse to fulfill his ambitions; and how Szass Tam enacted his schemes behind the scenes.
The problem is that setting is a very important part of a story. My dislike for what was done to the Realms means that I can't read stories in that new setting without that dislike intruding. The problem is not the stories themselves; the problem is that setting and story are intertwined elements, and dislike of one keeps me from enjoying the other.
I've had the same problem with some movies: I thought the way the story was told was very clever and creative, but my dislike of the story keeps me from enjoying it. I couldn't stand "Shakespeare in Love" because I hate the tale of Romeo and Juliet. I thought it was a very creative way to tell the story, perhaps even brilliant -- but I still hate the story itself. "Sliding Doors" was inflicted on me once... Great idea with the intertwined, parallel stories -- but both stories failed to interest me.
A better example: the story of the farm boy who yearns for adventure, finds out he's the heir to some legacy, gathers some companions and defeats some great evil. It's a story that's been told countless times, in countless ways. You could set it in ancient China or any number of fantasy worlds... The story remains good and enjoyable. But start that tale with the sweeping music of John Williams and a battle over the skies of Tatooine, and you've got something new and remarkable. The farmboy, the grinning rogue, the attractive noblewoman, the mystic swordsman... All standard tropes, but they were set apart and made more noteworthy by the setting. The movie version of "Eragon" is the exact same story (I've not read the book, and have no opinion on it), but the setting didn't wow everyone, so we don't have an entire empire (pardon the pun!) built from that tale.
Characters are important. Story is important. Setting is important. If two of those elements are good, the third can make the difference between good, meh, awful or remarkable.
I say it also depends on the intensity of your dislike as opposed to what you like in a book. If the good elements overshadow the bad, then I can continue reading; but if 'tis otherwise, then there's no way I will bother to continue. Much like Crown of Fire. I think I'd expressed it countless times (that is, if anyone bothers to count them) how much I love the Realms' ultimate cockroach. I almost gave up the book when I reached the middle, but Shan and El's exploits are too much to miss. So I went on.
I agree that the setting is an essential ingredient of the story. But how much do you dislike the setting? Is your dislike with it too Brobdingnagian that it sweeps away your favor with the amazing characters of the story? If the answer is yes, then it's a sad thing indeed. All elements are supposed to work and mesh to bring about an excellent, unforgettable story. However, if some elements fail, we can focus on those that work well. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 02 Oct 2010 : 16:00:03
quote:
Originally posted by dennis
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by dennis
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
I don't read the realms books anymore because they all take place post spellplague.
Even the ones by Ed? Hmm, I think you should give it a try. There are several books in 4E that have received quite LOUD, positive reviews.
I've tried a couple of them myself, and what was done to the setting kept getting in the way of my enjoyment of the story.
Besides, several Realms books from previous eras have gotten loud positive reviews, and I still couldn't stand them.
You're painting a dreary picture, my friend. Perhaps I can splash some bright hues on it?
I think, as I always mention whenever a seemingly unbridgeable difference/clash of interests in reading certain books occurs, it does come down to one thing: preference. One of my best(crazy)friends have long been pestering me to try reading more, if not all, of Piers Anthony's novels. But I couldn't stand them. Though my bestfriend and I usually have the same taste in books, Piers is absolutely one of the very rare exceptions. Same applies to some Realms novels. Most books where the cockroach Manshoon and the (lousy) Zhents are featured I doggedly avoid. And regardless of editions, most books by PSK, EG, and RLB I devour.
There are some books that elicit a mixture of fascination and dislike from the reader. We simply have to focus on the good and try to forget that the bad exists at all. An example is Red Magic. While I really detest the Harpers featured in that book, I like how Thay was described; how Maligor worked his arse to fulfill his ambitions; and how Szass Tam enacted his schemes behind the scenes.
The problem is that setting is a very important part of a story. My dislike for what was done to the Realms means that I can't read stories in that new setting without that dislike intruding. The problem is not the stories themselves; the problem is that setting and story are intertwined elements, and dislike of one keeps me from enjoying the other.
I've had the same problem with some movies: I thought the way the story was told was very clever and creative, but my dislike of the story keeps me from enjoying it. I couldn't stand "Shakespeare in Love" because I hate the tale of Romeo and Juliet. I thought it was a very creative way to tell the story, perhaps even brilliant -- but I still hate the story itself. "Sliding Doors" was inflicted on me once... Great idea with the intertwined, parallel stories -- but both stories failed to interest me.
A better example: the story of the farm boy who yearns for adventure, finds out he's the heir to some legacy, gathers some companions and defeats some great evil. It's a story that's been told countless times, in countless ways. You could set it in ancient China or any number of fantasy worlds... The story remains good and enjoyable. But start that tale with the sweeping music of John Williams and a battle over the skies of Tatooine, and you've got something new and remarkable. The farmboy, the grinning rogue, the attractive noblewoman, the mystic swordsman... All standard tropes, but they were set apart and made more noteworthy by the setting. The movie version of "Eragon" is the exact same story (I've not read the book, and have no opinion on it), but the setting didn't wow everyone, so we don't have an entire empire (pardon the pun!) built from that tale.
Characters are important. Story is important. Setting is important. If two of those elements are good, the third can make the difference between good, meh, awful or remarkable. |
| Lord of Bones |
Posted - 02 Oct 2010 : 15:42:04
My vote is yes. I love the Forgotten Realms, but I also love Pathfinder. I say we have the best of both worlds. |
| Elfinblade |
Posted - 02 Oct 2010 : 15:13:20
So it basically comes down to personal preference. I like some of the new post spellplague books, others might like all of them, and then again some might not enjoy them at all. My advice; read it and make up your own mind. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 02 Oct 2010 : 14:57:21
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by dennis
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
I don't read the realms books anymore because they all take place post spellplague.
Even the ones by Ed? Hmm, I think you should give it a try. There are several books in 4E that have received quite LOUD, positive reviews.
I've tried a couple of them myself, and what was done to the setting kept getting in the way of my enjoyment of the story.
Besides, several Realms books from previous eras have gotten loud positive reviews, and I still couldn't stand them.
You're painting a dreary picture, my friend. Perhaps I can splash some bright hues on it?
I think, as I always mention whenever a seemingly unbridgeable difference/clash of interests in reading certain books occurs, it does come down to one thing: preference. One of my best(crazy)friends have long been pestering me to try reading more, if not all, of Piers Anthony's novels. But I couldn't stand them. Though my bestfriend and I usually have the same taste in books, Piers is absolutely one of the very rare exceptions. Same applies to some Realms novels. Most books where the cockroach Manshoon and the (lousy) Zhents are featured I doggedly avoid. And regardless of editions, most books by PSK, EG, and RLB I devour.
There are some books that elicit a mixture of fascination and dislike from the reader. We simply have to focus on the good and try to forget that the bad exists at all. An example is Red Magic. While I really detest the Harpers featured in that book, I like how Thay was described; how Maligor worked his arse to fulfill his ambitions; and how Szass Tam enacted his schemes behind the scenes. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 02 Oct 2010 : 14:14:54
quote:
Originally posted by dennis
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
I don't read the realms books anymore because they all take place post spellplague.
Even the ones by Ed? Hmm, I think you should give it a try. There are several books in 4E that have received quite LOUD, positive reviews.
I've tried a couple of them myself, and what was done to the setting kept getting in the way of my enjoyment of the story.
Besides, several Realms books from previous eras have gotten loud positive reviews, and I still couldn't stand them. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 02 Oct 2010 : 13:07:24
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
I don't read the realms books anymore because they all take place post spellplague.
Even the ones by Ed? Hmm, I think you should give it a try. There are several books in 4E that have received quite LOUD, positive reviews. |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 02 Oct 2010 : 05:45:13
I would love this. I don't read the realms books anymore because they all take place post spellplague. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 01 Oct 2010 : 19:49:48
quote:
Originally posted by Brian R. James
Quite a few present and former FR authors write Star War novels as well, but that doesn't mean I want to discuss them here at Candlekeep. I admit, I don't frequent these halls as much as I used to, but I'd hate to see this site stray from its Realms focus. The fact that the question is even being asked is telling in of itself.
Agreed. My vote is no.
|
| The Sage |
Posted - 27 Aug 2010 : 04:40:42
Much thanks Wooly. Book Club scrolls opening soon.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 27 Aug 2010 : 04:36:40
Prologue, 27 chapters, no epilogue. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 27 Aug 2010 : 04:13:30
quote:
Originally posted by HawkinstheDM
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
No, I'm just waiting for my copy to arrive. It's been delayed. Again. 
I'm sorry, Sage, that is sad that your copy hasn't arrived yet. 
No worries. I'm almost at the point where I might just purchase the PDF *because* I can't wait any longer. 
...
As an aside, can any faithful reader provide me with the chapter breakdowns for the book, and whether it has a prologue/epilogue? Then I can open the Book Club scrolls. |
| Hawkins |
Posted - 27 Aug 2010 : 04:04:56
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
No, I'm just waiting for my copy to arrive. It's been delayed. Again.
I'm sorry, Sage, that is sad that your copy hasn't arrived yet. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 27 Aug 2010 : 01:58:13
quote:
Originally posted by HawkinstheDM
@Sage - I hope the decision on this is not on your to-do list, or we will never not what it is. =)
No, I'm just waiting for my copy to arrive. It's been delayed. Again. |
| Hawkins |
Posted - 26 Aug 2010 : 20:44:27
@Sage - I hope the decision on this is not on your to-do list, or we will never not what it is. =) |
| Ayunken-vanzan |
Posted - 25 Aug 2010 : 06:03:20
And if you look in the Golarion scroll, starting on page 5 there is an overview and review of the campaign setting by Kuje continuing on the following pages. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 24 Aug 2010 : 13:45:30
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
<snip>
Cool!
How about a cliff notes on Golarion?
Wiki is the new Cliff Notes
|
| The Red Walker |
Posted - 24 Aug 2010 : 13:43:34
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
Can somebody give me a quick "what is Pathfinder"...suited for someone who knows nothing about the setting as I do?
Here's the general story:
Paizo began publishing Dragon and Dungeon magazine for Wizards of the Coast in 2002, so WotC/Hasbro could focus more on the game instead of the magazines (although the canonization of articles in the magazines remained the same). Beginning in 2003, Paizo began publishing "Adventure Paths" in Dungeon. These were a series of connected adventures that, when ran together, would take the adventuring party from 1st through epic levels. The three paths (Shackled City, Age of Worms and Savage Tide) were extremely popular with the fans, with Shackled City even being sold as a collected hardback book.
When WotC decided they were going to move forward with 4th Edition, they decided to pull the license from Paizo in order to bring the magazines back in house (and make them 100% digital). When this was decided, Eric Mona (publisher for Paizo) and Lisa Stevens (CEO of Paizo) weren't sure whether or not they were going to stay in the business. Paizo decided to begin publishing Adventure Paths directly using the d20 OGL and set in their own campaign world of Golarion. The first AP, Rise of the Runelords was debuted in August of 2007 -- the same time WotC officially announced they were going to be releasing 4th edition in 2008.
Now, Paizo had another conundrum. They had already published the first part in a six-part Adventure Path, and WotC had just announced that the OGL rules would be unsupported within a year. Over the next few months, Paizo tried to find out more about the new rules to and what a third-party publisher would need to sell materials using the newest edition. Unfortunately for WotC (but fortunately for us Pathfinder fans), WotC decided to not release any details for the newest edition to third party companies AND released in the press that third party vendors would get the information the same time as gamers buying the book in the stores. In effect, that meant that if third party publishers wanted to release material for 4th Edition, they would (in most cases) NOT be able to release that material in time for GenCon, and miss out on sales at the convention (meaning WotC would have a monopoly for the convention on 4th Edition material).
With a lot of fan support and the backing that the 3rd Edition OGL was not going to lapse with the release of 4th Edition, Paizo decided to take another tact: They were going to develop and publish an entire rules system based on 3rd Edition, but with enough changes to be able to call it their own. The first step in their mad plan was to open the entire thing up to an epic playtest, the likes of which have never been seen in the gaming industry.
Jason Bulmahn began the process, taking and breaking down the 3.5 rules and determining where they were broken, where they needed tweaking and where they were fine. He went to the fans themselves, offering free PDFs of the game for them to download, use, destroy and rebuild; then come onto the Paizo forums and discuss the problems, offer suggestions and work out what was needed. With over 50,000 downloads of the beta rules, then the alpha playtest rules, and almost an entire year of playtesting, they finally released the Pathfinder Rules at GenCon 2009.
The Campaign Setting of Golarion shared an almost equally dazzling history. Beginning with Sandpoint in Rise of the Runelords, players were first introduced to the setting with the ruin-choked wilderness of Varisia. In the next adventure path, Curse of the Crimson Throne, PCs adventured in the city of Korvosa. With two APs under their belt and a third one on the way (Second Darkness, detailing the Drow in Golarion and set in the Underdark), Paizo released their Campaign Setting hardcover under the OGL in August of 2008, the same time WotC released the Forgotten Realms sourcebooks.
The Campaign Setting is, in my ever-so-humble opinion, one of those setting books you get that is perfect in every way. Using freelance talent from all over (including our illustrious resident rock-star Mr. Greenwood, plus Keith Baker, Wolfgang Baur, Jeff Grubb, Erik Mona, Sean K. Reynolds, and a host of others), it gave enough detail on the numerous different regions of Golarion to pique your interest, but not too much that you didn't have a lot of wiggle room. With everything from devil-worshipping Cheliax, to freedom-fighting Andoran; from oriental-based Tian Xia to land of super-science Numeria; a DM and his players can spend decades exploring the world and not be found wanting (and if you do find yourself wanting, there's brief blurbs on the OTHER 11 planets of the sphere/solar system).
Which, I think, is why it's become such a hit with Forgotten Realms fans, because it seems to be Abeir-Toril's planetary sister.
Cool!
How about a cliff notes on Golarion? |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 24 Aug 2010 : 00:52:01
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
Can somebody give me a quick "what is Pathfinder"...suited for someone who knows nothing about the setting as I do?
Here's the general story:
Paizo began publishing Dragon and Dungeon magazine for Wizards of the Coast in 2002, so WotC/Hasbro could focus more on the game instead of the magazines (although the canonization of articles in the magazines remained the same). Beginning in 2003, Paizo began publishing "Adventure Paths" in Dungeon. These were a series of connected adventures that, when ran together, would take the adventuring party from 1st through epic levels. The three paths (Shackled City, Age of Worms and Savage Tide) were extremely popular with the fans, with Shackled City even being sold as a collected hardback book.
When WotC decided they were going to move forward with 4th Edition, they decided to pull the license from Paizo in order to bring the magazines back in house (and make them 100% digital). When this was decided, Eric Mona (publisher for Paizo) and Lisa Stevens (CEO of Paizo) weren't sure whether or not they were going to stay in the business. Paizo decided to begin publishing Adventure Paths directly using the d20 OGL and set in their own campaign world of Golarion. The first AP, Rise of the Runelords was debuted in August of 2007 -- the same time WotC officially announced they were going to be releasing 4th edition in 2008.
Now, Paizo had another conundrum. They had already published the first part in a six-part Adventure Path, and WotC had just announced that the OGL rules would be unsupported within a year. Over the next few months, Paizo tried to find out more about the new rules to and what a third-party publisher would need to sell materials using the newest edition. Unfortunately for WotC (but fortunately for us Pathfinder fans), WotC decided to not release any details for the newest edition to third party companies AND released in the press that third party vendors would get the information the same time as gamers buying the book in the stores. In effect, that meant that if third party publishers wanted to release material for 4th Edition, they would (in most cases) NOT be able to release that material in time for GenCon, and miss out on sales at the convention (meaning WotC would have a monopoly for the convention on 4th Edition material).
With a lot of fan support and the backing that the 3rd Edition OGL was not going to lapse with the release of 4th Edition, Paizo decided to take another tact: They were going to develop and publish an entire rules system based on 3rd Edition, but with enough changes to be able to call it their own. The first step in their mad plan was to open the entire thing up to an epic playtest, the likes of which have never been seen in the gaming industry.
Jason Bulmahn began the process, taking and breaking down the 3.5 rules and determining where they were broken, where they needed tweaking and where they were fine. He went to the fans themselves, offering free PDFs of the game for them to download, use, destroy and rebuild; then come onto the Paizo forums and discuss the problems, offer suggestions and work out what was needed. With over 50,000 downloads of the beta rules, then the alpha playtest rules, and almost an entire year of playtesting, they finally released the Pathfinder Rules at GenCon 2009.
The Campaign Setting of Golarion shared an almost equally dazzling history. Beginning with Sandpoint in Rise of the Runelords, players were first introduced to the setting with the ruin-choked wilderness of Varisia. In the next adventure path, Curse of the Crimson Throne, PCs adventured in the city of Korvosa. With two APs under their belt and a third one on the way (Second Darkness, detailing the Drow in Golarion and set in the Underdark), Paizo released their Campaign Setting hardcover under the OGL in August of 2008, the same time WotC released the Forgotten Realms sourcebooks.
The Campaign Setting is, in my ever-so-humble opinion, one of those setting books you get that is perfect in every way. Using freelance talent from all over (including our illustrious resident rock-star Mr. Greenwood, plus Keith Baker, Wolfgang Baur, Jeff Grubb, Erik Mona, Sean K. Reynolds, and a host of others), it gave enough detail on the numerous different regions of Golarion to pique your interest, but not too much that you didn't have a lot of wiggle room. With everything from devil-worshipping Cheliax, to freedom-fighting Andoran; from oriental-based Tian Xia to land of super-science Numeria; a DM and his players can spend decades exploring the world and not be found wanting (and if you do find yourself wanting, there's brief blurbs on the OTHER 11 planets of the sphere/solar system).
Which, I think, is why it's become such a hit with Forgotten Realms fans, because it seems to be Abeir-Toril's planetary sister. |
| Hooch9 |
Posted - 23 Aug 2010 : 21:53:18
I've played Pathfinder a few times. I like it a bit more than traditional D&D 3/3.5. It feels a bit more balanced in some aspects, but not all. It feels like more of a mod for D&D. Some differences include assassins that don't cast magic, and Paladins that use lay on hands can add bonuses to that ability as they level up (restore fatigue, cure poison, etc.). Also, just about any class (regular or prestige) in the original D&D can be integrated into Pathfinder (though certain changes that are specific to Pathfinder will have to be applied).
Having only played the game a few times, I don't know much about the lore of Pathfinder. However, I'd be in favor of the Pathfinder book club just for the fact that I'd like to learn more about the lore. |
| The Red Walker |
Posted - 23 Aug 2010 : 20:54:01
Can somebody give me a quick "what is Pathfinder"...suited for someone who knows nothing about the setting as I do? |
| The Red Walker |
Posted - 16 Aug 2010 : 13:30:00
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I also want to clarify that I'm not wanting this site to become a forum dedicated to both Golarion and the Realms equally... Mainly, I'm wanting to give Golarion the same treatment we give to D&D Core stuff -- and that's a section of the forums we've had for a long time.
I would be ok with that, put the Pathfinder Book blub in the D&D core scroll or anyplace of it's own....just dont lump them in with our current book club...I am totally against that. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 14 Aug 2010 : 16:39:54
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I also want to clarify that I'm not wanting this site to become a forum dedicated to both Golarion and the Realms equally... Mainly, I'm wanting to give Golarion the same treatment we give to D&D Core stuff -- and that's a section of the forums we've had for a long time.
Exactly.
Since PATHFINDER was largely founded on the basis of 3.5e, and it's still largely a valid rules-set, it has a place for discussion here, like all elements based on the OGL of 3e. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 14 Aug 2010 : 16:38:12
quote:
Originally posted by Lady Kazandra
I'm all for it. Just as soon as I can pry Prince of Wolves from the Sage's book shelf.
See, it's the whole 'dog ears versus bookmarker' debate again. Sage doesn't believe that 'dog-earring' a page is acceptable for his novels. 
I'm sorry, but I've just never encountered any positive benefits when it comes to your "dog-earring" policy. And with your trend of only reading a few pages a day... my books tend to fare not-so-well. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 14 Aug 2010 : 15:53:34
I also want to clarify that I'm not wanting this site to become a forum dedicated to both Golarion and the Realms equally... Mainly, I'm wanting to give Golarion the same treatment we give to D&D Core stuff -- and that's a section of the forums we've had for a long time.
|
| Lady Kazandra |
Posted - 14 Aug 2010 : 08:14:33
I'm all for it. Just as soon as I can pry Prince of Wolves from the Sage's book shelf.
See, it's the whole 'dog ears versus bookmarker' debate again. Sage doesn't believe that 'dog-earring' a page is acceptable for his novels. |
|
|
