LOL
Well, I've never run something published as it was written, and that's partially due to the sentiments you've aired.
Get a new DM.
The question is, does his sentiments echo what the rest of Savage Tide-players feel? I have only read the modules, not played in them. Still, railroading is actually defendable as long as the DM doesn't convey the feeling that the players are being railroaded.
And unless the players read the adventures themselves, they'll never know..
|
Published adventures tend to railroad, since they don't have much choice. Personally, I'm all for plot-driven adventures. I don't really see that anyone has the rights to say what the "spirit" of D&D is anyway. If you like rambling adventures where you can do what you want - fine. Personally, I don't really care for that too much. What does bother me, and led to me abandoning the SCAP (as opposed to the STAP) was the endless punch-ups and lack of roleplaying opportunity, especially towards the end. But I still reckon the SCAP is good, with lots of great ideas, just not so much fun for me as DM.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I know there were some complaints about, towards the end of STAP that Paladins were railroaded into getting screwed, but I've not played through the AP.
Just curious, how did you find D0 any more railroading than any module? The timeline was open, the ways the party gathered information was open ended and the directions they took the encounters was left to player discression. I mean if you look at railroading as "We have to go on this adventure" you and I have differing definitions of the term.
You had me right up until the personal attacks and acrimony.
I'd like to personally unofficially welcome you to the Paizo Messageboards; stay awile, contribute, or simply lurk at your pleasure.
But please, leave any douchebaggery on the other side of the keyboard.
|
|
Slightly off-topic I know, but i can actually hear the English language screaming in pain when you use "choiceful" to mean "varied/multifarious/full of options".
CHOICEFUL means FICKLE.
If we're worried about the spirit of things; it's definitely not in the spirit of the language to arbitrarily stick "-ful" on the end of words to mean "replete with".
It might be worth noting that so far Rise of the Runelords is pretty low on the railroading and so rich in hooks that the characters could easily go completely off-adventure if their consciences weren't pricking them to defend Sandpoint.
I now really want to read that AP...
|
Interesting take Haldefast.
I have not played through the STAP, but from reading the adventures there seems little if any more railroading than SC or AoW.
I agree that there is a degree of rail roading in all these APs, and probably in most published adventures that have some sort of storyline rather than just a dungeon with no plot - not that these cant be interesting too, but not what I'm looking for in a published adventure.
If you are feeling rail-roaded in these adventures, perhaps you need to take it up with your DM? I believe part of the DM's role is ensuring that the players do not feel rail-roaded (mostly), even if they often are. If you don't want any sort of rail roading, you can always not play a published adventure, or at least not one with a plot.
As for not capturing the spirit of D&D ... I would have to disagree, I think these adventures capture the spirit of D&D very well - IMO.
EDIT: Oh ... and maybe you missed some secret doors in those one room dungeons... Just saying
|
But the last three "adventures" consisted of strings of single encounters, which were totally scripted, unavoidable and thusly un-fun and insulting to our planning efforts and intellect.
Especially the One-Room-"Dungeons" rose our ire. Even more ridiculous was the "timely" arrival at Farshore right at the moment of being under attack. That totally blew any suspension of disbelief that might have existed.Okay, we are not allowed to decide which route we follow. But then, we are spoon-fed a single room "dungeon"?
Hello?
for those of you playing STAp I will spoiler off my whole post:
OK - So, you arn't happy about not controlling the route of the boat... ok I can see that. That and the crash landing I can see. everything else the DM could easily change to fit his group. the route to get o farshore is a suggestion from someone who knows the area, not a command. my group had demanded maps of the isle and the notes they had found in the safe before they took off, studying them nightly. they were all experts by the time they landed and they knew multiple ways to get to Fareshore. Here there be monsters states that you can use one of those ways if you would like, and gives creatures that may be met during those treks.
looking at the adventures you speak of - there is a 27 room and a 14 room 'dungeon' 2 adventures back - split by one-2 single encounters and some random events, A 10 room jaunt through ruins and a 1-6+ encounter event in the Sargasso last adventure again open ended events happening throughout the adventure. in the one you just finished there are 5 single encounters, a 7 room crawl, the mountain path (3 encounters and some open ended events), and a 16 room dungeon, all of this adventure can easily be skipped as I said above..
could it be the way that the DM is presenting the material? even the crash onto the Island can be made to feel like it is not railroading if need be, there are at least 3 threads on that specific topic on these boards.
I can see that if you like dungeon crawls than hollow's last hope isn't the style you prefer, as many of the locations were less than 3 encounters.
I think the OP's concern is a valid one. However, the way he goes about insulting both Paizo and its fanbase is not cool and seriously undermines his posts.
I do agree that Whispering Cairn is a tremendous adventure. That being said, tremendous dungeon crawls are few and far between, and for me, story-driven plots are preferrable to crawls, even if they are a little railroaded.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Hello, Haldefast, and well met.
As both a player and a DM, I'm a big fan of what are called "site-based" encounters, like Red Hand of Doom, that have a timetable of "this is what happens if the PC's do nothing", and a table of how the opponents will react to PC actions, some sites that have triggerable encounters, and maybe a collection of hooks for the DM.
The original module X1 was like that. (footnote one) (For that matter, so was another of Zeb Cook's AD&D adventures, I1, Dwellers of the Forgotten City.)
People here have said that it's hard, in general, to write adventures like that. I'd have to agree with you, that it's not hard, in general, but it is hard to write those kinds of anventures in a pre-programmed campaign arc, with a tight page count. The adventurers don't just need to explore the island, they need to encounter all the prerequisites for the next chapter, with no side quests that might give them some bauble that will throw a monkey wrench into the chapter two months' down the road.
Remember Modules A1 - A4, the Slavers series? The first three modules are pretty linear and "rail-roady". It's only the second half of the last module that really allows the characters elbow room to make their own plans. Neither X1, nor Red Hand of Doom had sequels.
And from what I remember of the Savage Tide authors' notes for the chapters on the Island of Dread, they ran hard against the page count limits. Those chapters are squozen in tight, and site-based encounters --where the PC's might not actually get to meet some things, and other reactions are supplementary, and there's contingencies for decisions that the players might not make-- eat space. There's a reason that Red Hand of Doom weighs in at 96 pages.
---
I'll echo another poster above, who suggests that it sounds like the problem here is a mis-match of player and DM styles, not the printed material the DM has to work with. You want to go "off the map" as it were, and the DM is sticking with the script, and pulling you back in-line.
But that's going to be a problem with a lot of adventures. I haven't sat at your table, so I can't know for sure, but your DM may be missing one of two little skills. A good DM can adapt a module to her players decisions. If you read through these messageboards, you can see DM's asking for advice when their players do something off the wall, like make friends with a villain or try to burn down a creepy dungeon instead of encounter the spooky stuff within.
Some general once said that "no plan survives the encounter with the enemy," and no module survives an encounter with a group of players. Your DM might need to be more flexible.
The other little skill is:acting (or, if you prefer, lying). The problem here isn't that you're being rail-roaded; it's that you realize you're being rail-roaded. When I DM, I try hard to avoid saying "You have to do X." Instead, I say, well, as you look at things, there's choixe W --which legend has it will carry you all to your doom--, choice X, choice Y --which is expensive and time-consuming-- or choice Z --which might violate your alignment. There's still rail-roading involved, of course.
You can help your DM out in each of these. If there's problems being flexible, don't surprise the DM. At the end of one session, say "we're planning on using teleportation magic to get back to Sasserine for resupplying, and to bypass the remote parts of the island." That gives your DM time in between sessions to analyze and accomodate your plans into the requirements of the written adventure.
And you can help the DM with the acting thing, by staying more in-character yourself. Objections to rail-roading are an out-of-character issue, and if you stay in-character, that'll help your DM stay there, too, and it'll probably help the other players enjoy the campaign.
---
(footnote one) I don't know what you mean when you say that Module X1 is "the real one". It's older, and it's informed a lot of people's impressions about the Isle of Dread, but it's no more "real" than the adventure in Dungeon #114, or the Savage Tide campaign. Zeb Cook and Tom Moldvay designed the island; they didn't go there! (Now, if you were just trying to be snide, I can understand that.)
I think I see where you'r comming from Haldefast. Although I haven't played, or run STAP and AoW (i'm still in SCAP), I have mined it for a lot of ideas. Both STAP and AoW involve a lot of scripting and railroading to keep the story going. As others have pointed out, this is not in itself a bad thing, as long as the players don't see the tracks.
Take Wispering Cairn for instance. The entire adventure is a railroad in a way. The only choice the players have is the order in which they tackle the encounters. But to complete the adventure, they have to run through each and every one of them. Railroading? Of course! But the author and your GM hid the tracks well.
Admitedly, this is a lot trickier with the adventures "The Sea Wyverns Wake" and "Here there be Monsters". Both adventures are essentially wilderness treks and take you from one location to the next. Unless pc's have their own motivation to travel to the Isle of Dread, it is pretty hard not to see the tracks. I think this may be where you and the rest of your group got stuck in the first place. Why did they travel to the Isle in the first place? because Lavina asked them? Or for another reason?
Apart from that, I am not here to start a big flamefest, and I am not trying to convince anybody, that what he likes is bad.
I don't believe it was your intention to come over as hostile. However, I think what comments like the one below got some of the posters pretty riled up. And I don't blame them!
Do you think all players are stupid and lethargic?
Or boozed up?
I think this is valuable customer information.
And I was very concerned that there is so much praise, although there are some serious issues with the APs.
I agree that then AP's are far from perfect. I've been doing some heavy modifications for my own SCAP campaign. And I believe that running the APs out of the box is probably not the best idea. No-one hear will say the APs could be improved. However, the quality of the APs is top-notch. These are some of the best campaigns in a box you'll find.
Firstly - PLEASE LEARN TO TAG POSTS AS SPOILERS!!!!
you speak of players rights, but you're spoiling the adventure for players while you do it.
Secondly - I'm sorry, I don't know your DM, and frankly since my husband and I haven't decided which of us is going to be the player in the STAP, I haven't read the adventure. I am very familiar, however, with much of the rest of Paizo's work, and frankly you're overreacting and making personal attacks here, which is NOT appropriate for these boards (the folks who do that mostly hang out on the wizards boards).
On the other hand, as a DM for 27 years, I am going to say this clearly - if you are feeling railroaded this is both your fault and the DMs fault. The DM should recognize how you feel and adjust for it, either through arranging side treks or finding ways to make the adventure more flexible. You as players have an obligation to let the DM know you feel railroaded so that he CAN adjust for it.
I'm sorry, if he can't, then all your feelings aside, he is NOT a good DM, since that flexibility is the DM's job. Rather than make a post like this, why don't you ask your DM to come to these boards and post your concerns in constructive way. While I am not DMing this set of adventures, many others are, some of whom, I'm sure, have done that extra work your DM can't afford to take the time to do, and would be happy to share it with him/her. That seems to me to be a far better solution than the personal attacks on paizo and the authors (most of whom are freelancers, btw, not paizo employees).
- Ashavan
Nice thoughtful post Chris & Koldoon, great advice. Although, I think mwbeeler gave some great advice also.
I don't believe it was your intention to come over as hostile. However, I think what comments like the one below got some of the posters pretty riled up. And I don't blame them!
Do you think all players are stupid and lethargic?
Or boozed up?
Chef's Slaad is right. I'm new to Paizo, and I praise them a lot.. but many of my players are not new to their products. I run Runelords, and I run it fairly straight as written with room for personal role-playing in the setting.. and little bits of color here and there from ideas I've gotten here at the boards.
Based on that, my players tell me that they think Pathfinder is the best stuff they've ever seen from Paizo, and they certainly liked the previous AP's. But they are honest about them too.. I've often heard that Age of Worms was a meat grinder.
I think there's a place here for your comments, but dude, even as you're claiming not to want to flame, you're passive agressive to the hilt. You claim that you want to speak to the developers, so you call the rest of us fanboi's as if we're not entitled to our own opinions. You say you don't want to flame, but you then ask "do you think all players are lazy, stupid, or drunk?"
Stop and ask yourself, "Who the hell is going to actually dignify that with an answer?"
I wouldn't answer you if I was them, because you don't come across as actually wanting to engage the subject and state your case AND listen to a mature answer. You don't convince anybody that you're going to listen to anything when you make a bunch of passive aggressive remarks.
Go back and try again.
As a side note... you really should check out W1: Conquest of the Bloodsworn Vale. It is about the least railroady adventure you can get... proof, if you like, that not all Paizo adventures are the railroady events you claim them to be.
- Ashavan
Thanks, but it would have been more poignant had I spelled awhile with an "h." ;)
Honestly, I think you do have some valid points. I've just begun DM'ing Savage Tide, and I've found it to be a tad railroad-y. I just don't think they have the print space any more for open-ended adventures. I also agree that Age of Worms was downright incredible.
My advice: track down the accompanying Dragon magazines that have the "Savage Tidings" articles. It's a shame we won't see the entire arc as a hardcover, because those articles really make the campaign. Plenty of background filler, nearby dungeon and wilderness adventures, extra magic items, even a themed Prestige Class that players would genuinely consider taking levels in.
LOL
Well, I've never run something published as it was written, and that's partially due to the sentiments you've aired.
Get a new DM.
Hmmm...maybe the DM needs new players.
|
Huh? I was trying to be aggressive aggressive, because James "Railroad" Jacobs and his Union Pacific co-workers are insulting me and my buddies. Nothing passive going on.
And you do realize, that My questions "What have you been thinking?!" are an attack, a rhetorical question, that needs not be answered.
Okay, I let off what bugged me, and I think there are more people like me, who just turn away and don´t speak out.
So that´s what I wanted to say, make out of that what you will.
Read this whole thread and it just reeks of trolling by a drama queen.
Huh? I was trying to be aggressive aggressive, because James "Railroad" Jacobs and his Union Pacific co-workers are insulting me and my buddies. Nothing passive going on.
OK, giving the author of Red Hand of Doom the nickname of "Railroad" must be like giving Michael Vick the nickname of "Animal lover".
Troll.
EDIT: I'm editing my post; I had put up some comments on how our group did feel that the Isle of Dread portions of Savage Tide were a little disappointing. But in light of reading the whole thread, I don't want to make it appear that I'm throwing in with the OP...
Pazio has consistenly put out adventures that rock; my group just started Pathfinder #2 last night, and it is very open ended. They had many different directions they could take with it, and as a DM I was very comfortable with the material allowing me to roll with whatever they chose. You want to see real railroading in action - play Living Greyhawk.
Well, my critique is pretty much targeted on the last three "adventures" we played through. And they were a mockery of all things good about the Isle of Dread and D&D.
And totally not in the spirit of D&D, neither of them.Again, I have not red the "adventures" I´m talking about the player perspective.
Nice you demand the designers to explain something you haven't read. Honestly any product could be bad or railroading depending on the DM. Maybe borrow the books from him and look. If you still fell there is no way to do anything but railroading your arguments would make more sense. Right now you don't even know if there were other options.
I havent played through that AP, but I found Falcons Hollow to allow a number of choices for the characters depending how they went about it.
Personally I found the first Pathfinder had a fair number of side quests and ideas. Heck one whole dungeon is the players choice. So my groups xp he's not the railroad king.
Personally I think if you haven't played through Savage Tide you probably shouldn't criticize this guy's post.
With that said, the Sea Wyvern's Wake and Here There Be Monsters probably are classic examples of a railroad.
However, I don't know how they could have fixed Sea Wyvern's Wake. The adventure needed to be much bigger, and instead of a single line to the island there should have been areas in the ocean with more encounters. With that said, if you look at Sea Wyvern's Wake as just one option and use supplements to allow players the option of choosing where to go, then the encounters in Sea Wyvern's Wake are very nice. And with that said, if the DM conveyed that he was using other supplements to his players, but really didn't, perhaps this player would be less angry.
Also, Here There Be Monsters works much better if you have all of the supplements and allow players to go in any direction in the Island.
But I think the player here is really complaining the quality of dungeons in Tides of Tread. I have to disagree with him on that, I liked them and so did my table.
|
|
I don't think anyone's criticizing the content of his post, merely the manner in which it was delivered. I think if he did so with even an iota of politeness he wouldn't have received the reception he did. I don't know about other boards, but usually at Paizo one doesn't have to fling flaming troll poo at the boards to elicit a response from the AP meisters.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Groxx,
Just wondering, not attackng.
Have you played the original X1? Or Undermountain or Myth Drannor (Pre-last Mythal)?
Isle of Dread always came across as a meat grinder to me. Lots of things to sink ships, lots of things to kill parties, little treasure, lots of death.
Undermountain, easy to get in, not so much to leave, with all the portals, societies and just plain mean monsters. Again, very leathal and unlikely to get back to rest and resupply anytime soon.
Myth Drannor? I paraphrase, but the boxed set basically says, "If the party is running for their lives, hurt, exhausted, low on resources and still being attacked, you're running it right."
IDHSTAPIFOM, but as I recall, the encounters are few and far between, but overwhelming. In essence you should be battered and bloody, and grateful for reaching civilization.
EDIT: @overland adventures. There´s tons of old modules that do it without railroading. And they had a very low pagecount. If you don´t know how to design an open overland module, you better stop talking about the spirit of D&D. Isle of Dread is one example.
No, it's not.
X1 is just a bunch of stat blocks and a a couple of two scentence descriptions per encounter area. There is nothing stringing the encounters together other than a flimsy 'plot' which amounts to 'loot the black pearl, kill the monsters'.
With stat bloks that take up no more than 4 or 5 lines and a few sentences per encounter, it's no wonder that the module has a low pagecount.
Groxx,
Just wondering, not attackng.
Have you played the original X1? Or Undermountain or Myth Drannor (Pre-last Mythal)?
Isle of Dread always came across as a meat grinder to me. Lots of things to sink ships, lots of things to kill parties, little treasure, lots of death.
Undermountain, easy to get in, not so much to leave, with all the portals, societies and just plain mean monsters. Again, very leathal and unlikely to get back to rest and resupply anytime soon.
Myth Drannor? I paraphrase, but the boxed set basically says, "If the party is running for their lives, hurt, exhausted, low on resources and still being attacked, you're running it right."
IDHSTAPIFOM, but as I recall, the encounters are few and far between, but overwhelming. In essence you should be battered and bloody, and grateful for reaching civilization.
I've edited my post above, but yes, I have played X1 and so had many of our group. I think what got us was the "running for our lives" part. It just kind of felt a little to reactive, rather than active to us. We weren't going INTO danger (knowing the consequences), we were rather focused on running OUT OF danger. It felt a bit cowardly? Wimpy? Not heroic? I don't know.
I didn't take your post as a criticism, but I guess maybe I'm not explaining it well - its morning and I need more coffee :) In any case, I do not agree with the OP regarding railroading.
|
|
I remember a while back I was running a big campaign (my own) for the first time and decided to see how the guys at Paizo did it. I basically wanted to see how the plothooks ran together, so the different progressive scenarios were stitched together. So I looked at AoW. And to be honest, the links looked pretty spurious sometimes. It wouldn't necessarily be that obvious to a player, but it certainly was obvious when you looked at the scenarios one after another as a reader.
But in some cases there isn't much wrong with that. A lot of players, probably most, actually want to run through something fairly structured. It is difficult to run a plotted campaign without a certain element of railroading - if, as DM, you have a who plot you want to explore you want to point the PCs in that direction. And, specifically wrt Paizo, they often had to make massive adjustment to their orignal plotlines (I know the final AoW saw massive revision from the original version presented to WotC) to please the owners of the intellectual property - Wizards.
I don't think it is an insult to push the PCs in a certain direction - if it is the interesting direction.
On a sidenote, I'm running Pathfinder on these boards. It is pretty open-ended, and I'm making some moderate revisions to it (though most of those are to focus more on the plot and keep up the pace, as it is a PbP).
However, I will say that I think this complaint should be moved to the STAP forum, since it has nothing to do with Pathfinder.
Hear hear!
Since all AP's aren't strictly the same (some can be better than others), let us send this thread to forum he's specifically talking about. STAP.
This section is for the new Pathfinder products.
As a side note: What do I make of your intentional aggression, as a means to seek attention? I think you're an idiot. Your concern about the product and maybe even your complaint can be perfectly legit, but you're doing a disservice to it. And you're wholly responsible yourself if you never receive a reply from the company.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I've edited my post above, but yes, I have played X1 and so had many of our group. I think what got us was the "running for our lives" part. It just kind of felt a little to reactive, rather than active to us. We weren't going INTO danger (knowing the consequences), we were rather focused on running OUT OF danger. It felt a bit cowardly? Wimpy? Not heroic? I don't know.
I didn't take your post as a criticism, but I guess maybe I'm not explaining it well - its morning and I need more coffee :) In any case, I do not agree with the OP regarding railroading.
I wasn't lumping you in with the original poster, no fears. With the hostility in this thread through, I wanted to make sure it was clear I wasn't attacking. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be mowed down in the crossfire.
I understand now what you mean. Rather than the thrill of 'I shouldn't be alive.' it felt like "I'm getting sick of getting my aft kicked..."
Haldefast, I'm insulted that you're insulted.
I also don't see how you thought you wouldn't start a flame war by making some of the statements you've made or what the point of posting was if you didn't think that the result would be some flames being tossed around. I thought you were just trolling when I read your first post. Though I'm still inclined to think that way, some of your later comments make me re-think that opinion somewhat.
I find it amusing that when one of the adventures or an entire AP is lambasted by the players that played through it, it's always the designers' fault. Somehow it has nothing to do with your DM and his skills (or often, I suspect, lack thereof) at running the published material in a way that his players will enjoy it.
Adventures are not scripts that your DM is forced to read to you word for word or a series of events that he/she MUST strictly adhere to when running the adventure. Read aloud text in adventures usually starts with "Read or paraphrase the following:" That means, "Change it up as suits you or improvise so it works best for your game." If you and the rest of the players in your group were unhappy with the series of adventures, did you bother to tell your DM? If you did, what the hell did he do to make it funner for you? The responsibility for making this AP enjoyable for you and your friends is squarely in the DM's lap, not us designers and publishers. We write material that will work for a broad array of groups and leave the actual execution of those adventures up to your DM.
How about crumming on your DM? How about asking him, "Hey, why didn't you tailor these adventures to our gaming preferences? Why'd you cop out and put so little work in to running this campaign so that we'd all enjoy it?" Let me guess, he blamed it on the adventure writers and publisher, right?
It's too bad you haven't enjoyed STAP, but maybe you should take that up with your friggin' DM. Not the publisher.
BTW, how the hell can you even judge the adventures fairly if you haven't read them? That's like saying, "Well, my buddy says chocolate ice cream is awful, so I think it's awful, too." You get a players view of the adventure as spoon fed to you by your DM (who you say is great, but I seriously doubt it and I doubt you have many to even compare him to) and think you have any credibiity to flame it and us writers/publishers. How about you read them for yourself and then come back and we'll discuss it.
Steve raises a great point. The funny thing is I agree with your point that the AP are too linear. Guess what though, as a DM, I am going to change that. No campaign arc, or even single adventure should/could be dropped straight into a campaign without the DM at least considering the ramifications.
I would suggest you get together with your other players and talk to your DM. Don't yell or argue, just ask your DM what the deal is. It sounds like your DM might be running the AP even more Railroaded than is printed as well. Sure there is not a lot to do on the Isle of Dread. Your on a wilderness Island, don't be suprised there is no city. There is plenty to do there in printed materials and plenty more if the DM take a little time to think about it.
Mr. Greer, while I don't agree with the original posters attitude or opinion (see my comments above) as a DM and subscriber to adventure modules I am shocked at your attitude and demeanor.
Do you believe that some modules can have short, unexciting encounters that give players few if any options? Do you believe modules can be written that have dungeons with variety of choices and outcomes? Do you believe the writer and publisher can ever be at fault?
It wouldn't sound that way from reading your last post. Seriously, publishers and writers are not AT ALL responsible for how fun their modules are ran? Are you kidding me? I agree that the DM has the majority of the blame, but that's no cop out for the writer and publisher. If you want to debate the quality of these modules that's one thing, but to shift ALL of the blame to the DM is ridiculous.
(It should also be noted that Mr. Greer is the author of Tides of Dread, the source of the OP's complaints.)
Mr. Greer, while I don't agree with the original posters attitude or opinion (see my comments above) as a DM and subscriber to adventure modules I am shocked at your attitude and demeanor.
Why? I've said far worse than this before with much more venom. ;)
Do you believe that some modules can have short, unexciting encounters that give players few if any options? Do you believe modules can be written that have dungeons with variety of choices and outcomes? Do you believe the writer and publisher can ever be at fault?
Abosolutely. Most of the stuff I write is aimed at that. With solicitation, you don't always get that luxury, though.
It wouldn't sound that way from reading your last post. Seriously, publishers and writers are not AT ALL responsible for how fun their modules are ran? Are you kidding me? I agree that the DM has the majority of the blame, but that's no cop out for the writer and publisher. If you want to debate the quality of these modules that's one thing, but to shift ALL of the blame to the DM is ridiculous.
I have simply answered the OP in the same spirit that he has voiced his complaints. He claims he wants an "official" response and then later claims it's all rhetorical. Rubbish. His game isn't fun and he needs to blame someone. The DM is probably a good buddy, so he isn't going to blame him/her. No, he comes here and starts flaming Paizo and the freelancers and specifically insults my work as well.
If he doesn't like the stuff and wants some constructive comments and suggestions, I'm all for helping out. I've chimed in with suggestions more times than I can count. But, with the attitude this d00d has, that's all he's going to get from me.
Out of all of the adventures in STAP, ironically, he picks the one that is probably the most non-linear aside from the end in the entire series. I mean, you show up and stop a bunch of pirates, find out more are coming in a couple months, and then BANG! you do whatever the hell you want! Seriously. You can do WHATEVER - YOU - WANT. Don't want to defend Farshore, then don't. Just want to go exploring? Go for it! I mean, the first two pages are nothing but short adventure hooks for the DM to improvise the hell out of the adventure if he wants. Is there space in the magazine to develop all of that stuff? No. But the seeds are there for GOOD DMs to work with and play "outside the lines".
If the OP doesn't like the adventure I wrote or anyone else's on the STAP team, that's fine. I can handle it. Not everything I write is great or appeals to everyone. If he comes here with a polite, respectful demeanor and really wants to get some help to make things more enjoyable, I'll be among the first to offer my help.
But this guy is just laying one thread crap after another and people have been far more polite than this troll deserves.
Steve, I have to say that the Isle of Dread parts of Savage Tide were my favorite, because of the choices and open-ended nature.
And the OP should actually read the adventure to see how there were tons of options to do what you wanted, when you wanted.
Or just read this thread
PS. And you need to railroad in published products, at least to some extent. Paizo, WotC, Necromancer, etc aren't actually at your house, playing the games with you. Therefore, they can't customize the hooks and plot for the specific players and PCs. That is the DM's job I'm pretty sure we have had threads on this before, that didn't start out with personal attacks, and actually had intelligent discussion,
Mr Greer, Sir, I must say that I've not had the chance to see any of the STAP or the SCAP. I am, however, currently playing in the AoWAP and running the Pathfinder AP, which are wonderful. That aside, all I'm really here to say is kudos to you. I'm very glad to see that someone has the ioun stones to step up and defend their work. It's refreshing, and frankly heartening, to see someone verbally fight back as you did.
As I said, I haven't had a chance to look over the STAP, but from what I saw in the Savage Tidings in Dragon, it looked very well done. I believe I may need to save up and start getting some Dungeon back issues now. To all you guys and gals at Paizo, keep up the great work. I've offically decided that if I'm going to buy a module or adventure, it'll be a Paizo product as opposed to WotC. As long as you guys don't start making crap, you've got a lifetime subscriber, and maybe a bit of a "fanboi".
And for the record, Diplomacy checks be damned. You far exceeded the Rant check DC.
I agree with you Mr. Greer. I also did a double take when he said 3 adventures. Sea Wyvern and Here There Be Monsters are very linear, but Tides of Dread is exactly what I promised my players in May of 2006 when we were driving home from a convention. We were in the middle of Age of Worms, and although it was linear the group was happy building their characters, following the story and finding challenges in the adventure. That said, it was still linear. I told them that the next adventure path was basically "here's a map of an island, go explore!" It took several adventures to get to that point, but of all of the modules in all of the APs, I think this one was the most like it.
Now that said, from what I can read in his post it seems like he was looking for more dungeons and more loot. I think an adventure with the scope of Tides of Dread probably would have pleased him more as an entire issue of Pathfinder rather than a single module in Dungeon. I can understand that there's only so much that you can do with the space allotted, but then again there could be room for criticism in trying to tackle an adventure like that with what you had to work with. You won't see it from me though, we enjoyed it.
I cannot defend the linearity of Sea Wyvern's Wake and Here There Be Monsters, on the other hand. I also enjoyed them, but they are what they are.
These last few comments remind me of my teaching.
I tell my students at the beginning of a course, I have the job to teach them (~write adventures) and they have the job to learn (~DM make the game fun). If I do a bad job (~write bad adventures) that doesn't remove their responsibility to learn (~run a fun game). I tell them they have all of the resources they need to be successful without me, books, the internet, each other, etc (~PHB, MM, DMG, online discussion boards, etc).
Now that doesn't mean that if I do a crappy job as a teacher that I am excused from that responsibility. I still have to meet my obligations as well. And if I fail in doing so, the students have every right to complain about me work. Likewise if a company produces an inferior product, just because a DM should be able to make the game fun, doesn't remove the company's responsibility for doing poor work.
As a professional I take all of the comments about my teaching made by students into consideration, especially the rude and abusive ones. I fight the urge to just defensively dismiss their comments, because there may be some truth in them, maybe a lot or maybe just a grain. I am the professional in that setting they are not, my behaviour should be better than their's. In other settings, I am not the professional and so my behaviour may be more "immature" or "rude" or whatever, but I do expect those that are professionals related to those settings to act as professional.
Note: I am not claiming that the particular adventures being discussed here specifically are poorly designed or not. The OPer could be totally wrong, I can't say. I am just discussing how the conversation "feels" at this point.
I thought Steve's comments were on target.
The OP has no profile and this is the extent of the OP's postings. The OP posts a topic in the incorrect spot and references anyone who *should* enjoy Paizo products as stupid drunks. I don't even think this kind of trolling belongs on this site, period.
I would raise the questions to any unhappy player: have you read the adventure for yourself, and have you discussed the unhappiness with the DM? Is the DM literally saying, "Sorry, players, this adventure path tells me to tell you nothing you do works, and you must all behave until the train stops at these locations?" If they're travelling, why not put in a random encounter? True, any canned adventure will have a premise, a goal, and an epilogue, but I've so far been very impressed with their plot hooks, suggestions to scale the adventure, and suggestions to follow should the PC's do this instead of that. The DM has the liberty to modify the adventure to better suit the group. The whole point of playing any canned adventure is that a group agrees to play the story suggested in the synopsis. The DM needs to then read the adventure, tailor it to the group, and not treat the game like a straightjacket of mirthless uncreativity. In the OP's example of how they couldn't do anything on the boat, I noticed that nothing was mentioned as to what the group tried to do. When you're on a boat, sans some sort of travelling spell, you're pretty much stuck there until it encounters something. If nothing interesting was happening on the ship, and there was nothing *to* happen on the ship, the DM should have easily have bypassed actual game time of seeing the players twiddle thumbs and playing video games and cut to the chase: boom, ship landed. If your group adores random encounters, your DM should have rolled up some sea baddies. If none of your characters wanted to go to the destination, none of you should have gone aboard, or you should have hyjacked the crew and prompted your DM to adjust accordingly. (Although if you didn't want to go to the destination, and if it was critical to the adventure, why play in the first place?)
As far as Pathfinder, as other DM's have mentioned here and elsewhere, this AP is full of open-ended material, and all of the Paizo staff have been extraordinary in their swift advice for questions and suggestions on a wide array of topics. Opposed to, say, the WOTC forums, these forums have been engaging, polite, and interactive with some of the best people on this planet. I think if you had not come in with your flamethrower blazing, took the time to read some of these threads first, perused the actual discussions of the relevant adventure first, and kept your initial post there in a polite way, I wouldn't have my Halloween morning soured.
Creative Director
|
First of all... remember that it's not cool to engage in personal attacks on threads here, so please keep the posts civil.
An adventure has to present a storyline. If it doesn't, it's not an adventrue, in my opinion; it's a sourcebook. By this reasoning, the original Isle of Dread is a sourcebook. If your group prefers to set their own course and build their own plot, and rankles at the idea of following a pre-determined storyline, then you should probably avoid running adventures. You should run games using sourcebooks. You can, of course, use adventures AS source books; taking the four adventures set on the Isle of Dread as an overall presentation of the region, you can use it as the background for any number of adventures there. You don't HAVE to follow the script implied by the adventures. Tides of Dread, by the way, is probably the LAST adventure in Savage Tide that I'd call a railroad. Variety is important, and that's why some adventures in an Adventure Path have strict rails (like Sea Wyvern) and others are more like sandboxes (like Tides, Scuttlecove, or Enemies of my Enemy).
But it sounds like the OP's mind is pretty made up, so I guess I don't have much more to say apart from repeating my advice that you probably shouldn't play an adventure if you're not having fun playing it.
Carry on, and again, be kind to each other!
Good post Mr. Jacobs. I'm curious, however, to know if you would call a traditional dungeon crawl an adventure or a sourcebook? A large dungeon does not need to be linear at all, yet I would hardly call it a sourcebook.