Like I said above, what I would *love* to see is a note within the actual main adventure that says something like "This month's Set Piece would fit well right here".That's something we did in Pathfinder #16. We do so again in 17 and 18.
Yeah, this is something we can totally handle month to month. One of the other big things that it seems like folks don't like (and that makes the Set Pieces seem less good) is that they don't have plots for the most part. This does set them in pretty stark contrast against the APs which are UBERPLOTS. While the Adventure Hooks are meant to suggest a few ways to use the Set Pieces, most are pretty thin, half because of space, half because they're meant to be. One of the main reasons for starting to do Set Pieces (aside from using them as a training ground for authors) was to add more versatility and a sandbox element to Pathfinder. For Runelords and Curse, if you weren't running the AP, aside from the Bestiary, the volume isn't that useful to you. The thinking is if the PCs get off course, either in the AP or in your home game, you can just grab a Set Piece and make it work with little prior set up.
Now, it's the Adventure Hooks that I think might be space better used. So, to anyone who has run one of these, did you use the hooks or did you just come up with your own. It's my thinking that a new section talking about integrating the Set Piece into the AP (along with a note from the AP adventure pointing to the section) might prove more useful. Or would you rather see larger plots - it can never be much mind you with only 5,000 words - but something more.
Pathfinder isn't going to go back to adventures of that size.
I suppose, then, that the title of this thread, as far as I'm concerned, should be changed to, "I Am Very Opposed to Shortening 'Second Darkness' by 10 Pages." The replacement content is immaterial.
There is a notable lack of depth and story in these adventures, compared to RotRL (which I have run in its entirety) and CotCT (which I am running now). I have, in reading each of the first three adventures of Second Darkness, been caught "by surprise" by the end of the adventure. I expect more, but it's suddenly over. The stories just seem thin.
I know that many people have written wonderful things about Second Darkness, and I agree that the premise for the Path and the development of the drow are very well conceived and, for the most part, implemented. But the adventures themselves pale in comparison to the material you have released in the past. I humbly suggest that, rather than cutting the material, you find a way, some way, to return to the original adventure length without killing any editors in the process. Just to make me (and others like me, I suspect) happy. :)
O
Creative Director
|
Really? I was reading through my PDF copy of PF 16 but didn't see a note in the main AP section. What page is it on? That'd be awesome if it was already included.Like I said above, what I would *love* to see is a note within the actual main adventure that says something like "This month's Set Piece would fit well right here".That's something we did in Pathfinder #16. We do so again in 17 and 18.
Page 45, the end of the "Escaping the Darklands" section.
|
Creative Director
|
I know that many people have written wonderful things about Second Darkness, and I agree that the premise for the Path and the development of the drow are very well conceived and, for the most part, implemented. But the adventures themselves pale in comparison to the material you have released in the past. I humbly suggest that, rather than cutting the material, you find a way, some way, to return to the original adventure length without killing any editors in the process. Just to make me (and others like me, I suspect) happy. :)
Have you read any of the Dungeon adventure paths? Those installments were even shorter than what we're doing in Pathfinder; they generally ran 20,000 to 25,000 words in Dungeon. Did the adventures in Dungeon seem to lack depth and story?
In any event, the only way I can see doing longer adventures in Pathfinder now is to do one of the following:
1) Have the developer of the adventure just accept the fact that he'll be working 60+ hour weeks and move in to his cube.
2) Split the development of an adventure between multiple developers and editors. This WILL result in a lot of continuity errors. I guarantee.
3) Switch Pathfinder to a 6 week or even a 2 month release schedule. This would wreak havoc on Paizo's cash flow, of course, and would eventually result in cost-saving moves like layoffs, drops in quality, etc.
None of those three sound appealing to me, alas.
Have you read any of the Dungeon adventure paths? Those installments were even shorter than what we're doing in Pathfinder; they generally ran 20,000 to 25,000 words in Dungeon. Did the adventures in Dungeon seem to lack depth and story?
Indeed, I ran Age of Worms in its entirety and own (and have read most of) Savage Tide. Of course the difference there is that each Dungeon path contained 12 adventures (240,000 words, minimum), versus the 6 (180,000) in the current APs. Although each individual adventure in Dungeon was less developed, the overall product was well worth it.
The real complaint, of course, is the relative value, not the absolute. RotRL and CotCT are so good that Second Darkness comes across as disappointing, a fact that I have realized is due to the comparative length of each adventure, and, thus, the Path in toto.
I suppose if I were somehow able to choose, I would go with option 2, with a heavier burden on the writer himself to avoid, as much as possible, errors in continuity, typos, etc.
I'm not trying to belabor a point, here. Simply trying to offer feedback on the product for which I happily shell out my hard-earned $$.
Thanks for listening/reading.
O
|
Awesome! I guess I just missed that sentence in my initial skim.
On another question...is there really a significant amount of people that bought Pathfinder but didn't want the AP? I don't mean people who just buy it to read Pathfinder and enjoy it, I can understand that. What I mean is it sounds like one of the reasons these Set Pieces were made was to cater to guys that picked up the Pathfinder *Adventure Path* and went "Hey, this is all one big AP, I just wanted a smaller adventure!" It's like Pathfinder was selling this one big delicious cake and then someone went 'hey, I bought this chocolate cake thinking one piece would be vanilla!' and now we have mis-matched cakes. Sure, there are a few of us who can enjoy both pieces at the same time, but it'd be nice if everything meshed better.
|
|
Indeed, I ran Age of Worms in its entirety and own (and have read most of) Savage Tide. Of course the difference there is that each Dungeon path contained 12 adventures (240,000 words, minimum), versus the 6 (180,000) in the current APs. Although each individual adventure in Dungeon was less developed, the overall product was well worth it.Have you read any of the Dungeon adventure paths? Those installments were even shorter than what we're doing in Pathfinder; they generally ran 20,000 to 25,000 words in Dungeon. Did the adventures in Dungeon seem to lack depth and story?
To be fair, the Dungeon APs went from (at least, Age of Worms did) 1-20, wheras the Pathfinder ones are just 1-15. Those last 5 levels can easily account for the extra words, especially being later levels (the first 3 Pathfinder adventures usually going from 1-10, the last 3 from 10-15).
Have you read any of the Dungeon adventure paths? Those installments were even shorter than what we're doing in Pathfinder; they generally ran 20,000 to 25,000 words in Dungeon. Did the adventures in Dungeon seem to lack depth and story?
In any event, the only way I can see doing longer adventures in Pathfinder now is to do one of the following:
1) Have the developer of the adventure just accept the fact that he'll be working 60+ hour weeks and move in to his cube.
2) Split the development of an adventure between multiple developers and editors. This WILL result in a lot of continuity errors. I guarantee.
3) Switch Pathfinder to a 6 week or even a 2 month release schedule. This would wreak havoc on Paizo's cash flow, of course, and would eventually result in cost-saving moves like layoffs, drops in quality, etc.
None of those three sound appealing to me, alas.
It sounds like you are complaining about too much work. Maybe you need to hire an assistant.
What about
4) Raise the price of Pathfinder by US$2.95, hire some help, and return to the good old 1-12 days?
Since the objective is to support upcoming talent I guess I'm reluctantly on board. I'm not a huge fan of reducing the main story but it would seem thats just how it has to be.
That said the quality of the recent set pieces have left something to be desired in most cases. Dungeon could do it in part because there was a huge rejection pile. A 10,000 word adventure is a heck of a lot harder to write then a 50,000 word adventure and I don't think just drawing on good talent is enough to make such an adventure stand out. The side treks in Dungeon, IIRC, were not even, usually, done by talented authors. They were just some flash of inspiration that struck a DM from the blue while perusing some source book. The DM involved had suddenly realized that if you mixed creature or item X with creature/item/environment Y the result would make a completely cool and utterly unique encounter (or small series of encounters). Struck by this epiphany the authour scribble off a proposal to Dungeon. In short they are the D&D equivalent of one hit wonders - any DM anywhere could be struck by this flash of insight since actual writing talent was not what was really being utilized just some ones one off brilliant idea.
One way you might consider in order to up the quality is divorcing the set pieces from the pathfinder issue it runs in and instead focus on just lining up good adventures. If you build up a slush pile of good adventures and adventure proposals (created by rejecting lots of the not so compelling submissions) you'd have more chance of coming up with enticing adventures I would think.
A good place aspiring authours might look for inspiration might be the story ideas and little mystery's that dot Golarion source books. Also developing threads from past APs that never were really fleshed out could provide some compelling material. APs by their nature leave lots of loose threads that might inspire excellent material. One might even use scenes from the short fiction as a place to mine for ideas. The long stair case up a cliff that traversed through an actual dungeon in one of the short fiction pieces was a pretty inspired local. I'd be interested in a set piece that focused on that for example.
I'd hope that the unhappiness with the short adventures would become much more muted if they were brilliant and I think it might be asking to much to simply assign even a talented authour to a set piece and say "do something brilliant in this style and this location in 10,000 words". I just have a hard time imagining authours being able to pull this off with any kind of consistency under such brutal restrictions.
|
I really liked the set pieces in both 14 and 15, and on of my favourite things about them is the fact that the GM can put them into their adventures when they like. If a session in Children of the Void is running slowly as they approach the island, I can throw in a pirate attack, or if they've had enough, I can just put the ship their for the PCs to investigate as they will.
Same for Armageddon Echo, I feel the set piece, along with its article, makes Celwynvian come alive, with variety and more than just encounters with Drow. I like that if my players feel like taking a break from the main path, I've got a ready-made side trek for them, because I just don't have the time to create my own these days.
I'm loving the set pieces, and I do hope they stay!
Slightly off-topic: How does everyone pronounce Celwynvian? Part of me wants to say 'kel-win-vee-an', but because it's an Elven name, it makes me thing it should have a soft 'c' sound, like 'sell-win-vee-an'. I'm just curious what everyone prefers.
Slightly off-topic: How does everyone pronounce Celwynvian? Part of me wants to say 'kel-win-vee-an', but because it's an Elven name, it makes me thing it should have a soft 'c' sound, like 'sell-win-vee-an'. I'm just curious what everyone prefers.
I've been hearing it in my head as I read it as 'kel-win-vee-an' also.
'sell-win-vee-an'.
Correct!
Slightly off-topic: How does everyone pronounce Celwynvian? Part of me wants to say 'kel-win-vee-an', but because it's an Elven name, it makes me thing it should have a soft 'c' sound, like 'sell-win-vee-an'. I'm just curious what everyone prefers.
We go with the latter. With the "C" sound.
UPDATE: HA! Can you tell this thread has folks here "keenly interested"?
|
Creative Director
|
It's also worth keeping in mind that we're not done with Second Darkness yet. Of course an incomplete adventure path will feel "less" than a final one. Reminds me of the complaint that someone had about Savage Tide about halfway through its run; "I prefer Age of Worms because by the end of that AP, we had a LOT of big names and famous characters butting heads; I'm not getting that with Savage Tide." And then, of course, by the end of Savage Tide we've arguably got more big names than Age of Worms.
|
Creative Director
|
It sounds like you are complaining about too much work. Maybe you need to hire an assistant.
I am. You'll note elsewhere on this very website that we're looking for an intern. Way ahead of you.
4) Raise the price of Pathfinder by US$2.95, hire some help, and return to the good old 1-12 days?
Doing a 12 part Adventure Path isn't beyond the realm of possibility... but the problem there is that in every one of our 12-part adventure paths, we saw a relatively significant dropoff in sales in the last half, either because folk got tired of the adventure or because they weren't as interested in high level play or whatever. The point is... with Patfhinder, we were taking a HUGE gamble and we wanted to focus on the strengths of an Adventure path. That meant focusing on the six months of the 12-month arc that had the strongest sales, and as it works out, that's the first six months of that arc.
Pathfinder is now doing pretty well, of course (much to my delight), and now that it's established maybe we SHOULD consider switching back to doing a 12-part adventure. I'm still a little nervous, of course, since it's the flaghsip product we produce; it's the big moneymaker. It's working VERY well right now, and as a result I'm wary about taking risks with it. It's certainly on my mind though.
|
|
It's also worth keeping in mind that we're not done with Second Darkness yet. Of course an incomplete adventure path will feel "less" than a final one. Reminds me of the complaint that someone had about Savage Tide about halfway through its run; "I prefer Age of Worms because by the end of that AP, we had a LOT of big names and famous characters butting heads; I'm not getting that with Savage Tide." And then, of course, by the end of Savage Tide we've arguably got more big names than Age of Worms.
Right. It's unfair to judge an AP as a whole until you have the entire thing! It seems like common sense. So far, I'm getting exactly what I was hoping for with this AP (which is copious amounts of drow).
Also, thanks for the amazingly quick response. You guys are awesome!
|
I'd pronounce it with a soft 'C'.
To get on topic: I'm perfectly fine with the direction of the current AP. To me, it doesn't feel like something's missing or that the adventure feels cut off or too short or whatever others complained about. To me, some of the first adventures felt too long , especially #5! I would've loved it being a liitle shorter with a bit more diversity. A set piece would've been great for it.
I wasn't that pleased with the first set pieces, because I feel that they don't add to the AP; they're just side treks and I guess that's what they're meant to be in the first place. But I really like the concept and I have high hopes that they'll turn out better, when editors and contributors get used to the concept and learn how to make the most out of it. I guess the thoughts Wesley mentioned are leading into the right direction. Keep the set pieces optional but please give advice on how to add these into the AP in a way that the main story benefits from it. One idea would be, to somehow loosely tie the several set pieces of an AP together so that can they form an optional second story line into the main AP. Of course, this would've to be done in a way, that each one could be used as a stand-alone set piece.
Well, these are my 2 (european) cents... Please forgive the bad english. :-)
|
|
Doing a 12 part Adventure Path isn't beyond the realm of possibility... but the problem there is that in every one of our 12-part adventure paths, we saw a relatively significant dropoff in sales in the last half, either because folk got tired of the adventure or because they weren't as interested in high level play or whatever.
I wonder what the real cause was. It'd be interesting if you tried making a 12-part AP using the Slow XP progression from the Pathfinder RPG to find out whether sales would drop in the later installments, even though they wouldn't be as high level as the last chapters of the Dungeon APs were.
I suggest attempting this in the name of SCIENCE!
Pathfinder is now doing pretty well, of course (much to my delight), and now that it's established maybe we SHOULD consider switching back to doing a 12-part adventure. I'm still a little nervous, of course, since it's the flaghsip product we produce; it's the big moneymaker. It's working VERY well right now, and as a result I'm wary about taking risks with it. It's certainly on my mind though.
I didn't really think through the top end of the series. I do definitely remember you guys pointing out that the high level adventures didn't sell as well.
I am glad the APs are a big moneymaker for Paizo. You guys are almost single-handedly showing the entire RPG world that modules don't have to be thin black and white booklets filled with bad art and printed on bad paper.
|
Creative Director
|
James, just how much of your time is spent on other things than the AP adventures, especially since AP 11?James, you missed my question. Maybe I need to get an avatar :-(
I didn't miss your question. I just spent 40 minutes or so writing up a response, then realizing that nailing down everything I do here at Paizo as editor-in-chief takes almost as much time as it does to just DO it, and got depressed and frustrated about it all. The short version:
- Attending meetings about the Pathfinder RPG's progress, updates on what's on schedule and what's behind, and other meetings relating to the business of running and managing an RPG line.
- Talking with contributors and licensers about upcoming products via email, phone, or in person.
- Managing the editorial department.
- Posting on the boards here, answering questions and chatting about the game and Paizo stuff, attending the weekly chat
- Selecting topics for the blog and sometimes writing them
- Developing new products, be they coming up with new stuff, writing outlines for books, or whatever.
- Various other last-minute emergencies that always pop up.
The bulk of my work here is developing and orchestrating the Adventure Path, though. If the adventure paths were a movie, my credit would probably be "Director" as a result. For those who are curious; a sample of what being an Adventure Path developer entails:
- Coming up with the plot of an Adventure Path, along with its title, the titles of the adventures, and assigning those adventures to the right authors.
- Writing short descriptions of each Pathfinder for use in solicitations.
- Working with the authors on building outlines for the adventures, approving those outlines, and then providing the authors with comments and revision requests.
- Styling the final draft of the author's manuscript into the correct format for our layout folks.
- Figuring out what to illustrate in the volume, and then writing the art order (this is 99% Wes Schneider these days, thank God).
- Developing the adventure. This is the big ticket; the part of the job that takes the most time. This includes making sure that the stat blocks are right, making sure that the adventure's spelling and language are correct, making sure that the adventure is fun, making sure the adventure meshes with established Golarion canon, making sure the adventure meshes with the other adventures in the path, making sure the adventure meshes with the support articles, and making sure that the adventure's plot is logical. This generally requires some amount of rewriting, in fact. In some cases, a LOT of rewriting, in the case of authors who don't seem willing or able to write adventures that follow Pathfinder's style of presenting information (you might be surprised, for example, at how many authors forget to include read-aloud text, or by how many forget to give us stat blocks for important characters, or who forget to or neglect to provide adventure summaries, conclusions, or other important elements—usually, I try to get these taken care of in the revision stage, but invariably a bunch sneak through to the final draft.)
- Gathering up all the author's map turnovers and sending them to our cartographer, along with notes to the cartographer on how the maps should look. Often, this requires me to redraw the map turnovers in cases where an otherwise great author simply lacks the skill to do a legible map. Sometimes, it requires me to draw maps from scratch since the author neglected to provide the map.
- Placing notes in the text to inform the art director where art and maps should appear in the adventure.
- Coordinating the editing phases of the adventure, including making sure the maps make sense.
- Doing a final approval look-over of the adventure before it's sent to the printer.
- Preparing the PDF version of the adventure with all the proper bookmarks for its PDF release.
That's pretty much my involvement with the adventures in Pathfinder, and that whole block of work generally takes 2 to 3 weeks to accomplish for a 30,000 word adventure.
We appreciate what you do for us, James. Now Cosmo... He is a different matter entirely! ~grins and runs~
That's pretty much my involvement with the adventures in Pathfinder, and that whole block of work generally takes 2 to 3 weeks to accomplish for a 30,000 word adventure.
Clearly this is why you make the big bucks! :)
Honestly... if the big complaint about things here is "We want more!" then I'm inclined to take that as a compliment that what we're doing is pretty good. And trust me, a big part of Working At Paizo is figuring out how to give folks 4 cookies when they were only expecting 3.
~shrugs and smiles~ Well, I can honestly say that I could never do what you do. I am just NOT that good. It takes a lot of work to do all that, plus the stress level is huge. Thank you for doing such a good job!
Oh, James! I actually want SIX cookies instead of 3 or 4! ~RUNS for my life~
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
I think I'm one of those people the set pieces are designed for. I can't possibly run a full adventure path. I'd love to but my wife would divorce me and my kids would become hooligans. They barely see me enough as it is.
I buy Pathfinder because Paizo is building the game world I want to play in ... and imagine myself in during the morning commute to work etc. The set pieces are a big perk for me. I may be able to squeeze those in here or there.
Oh, James! I actually want SIX cookies! ~RUNS for my life~
Cookie monster!!
Oh, James! I actually want SIX cookies! ~RUNS for my life~Cookie monster!!
Hells yes!
Did someone say cookies? *stops by the thread with an armful*
I dashed it off before having dinner, and couldn’t edit it just now. Sorry if I riled or upset you! :-)
Dude, what time is it where you are? Who was eating dinner an hour ago? Aside from my Grandma. ^_~
It was about 9 PM; it's now 11 PM.
Alllllllright, we'll allow it. I hope you had a delicious meal. :P
Pathfinder is now doing pretty well, of course (much to my delight), and now that it's established maybe we SHOULD consider switching back to doing a 12-part adventure. I'm still a little nervous, of course, since it's the flaghsip product we produce; it's the big moneymaker. It's working VERY well right now, and as a result I'm wary about taking risks with it. It's certainly on my mind though.
Thanks by the way for continuing to spend time with us customer types. It's REALLY appreciated.
My feedback on this... no, thank you. A six month AP release cycle is perfect. Having materials released over a calendar year was less optimal. For one thing, if there's an AP that we're not interested in, we have to wait a year to get on board with a new one.
Please stick to six. Even if it means keeping the adventures shortened, which as I've stated earlier in this thread, I don't like.
It's also worth keeping in mind that we're not done with Second Darkness yet. Of course an incomplete adventure path will feel "less" than a final one. Reminds me of the complaint that someone had about Savage Tide about halfway through its run; "I prefer Age of Worms because by the end of that AP, we had a LOT of big names and famous characters butting heads; I'm not getting that with Savage Tide." And then, of course, by the end of Savage Tide we've arguably got more big names than Age of Worms.
Just so I'm clear, I'm not comparing Adventure Path to Adventure Path. I'm not suggesting that Second Darkness is better or worse than CotCT, because, as you say, it's too early to say.
I AM saying, though, that the individual adventures in Second Darkness don't stack up against adventures from other Paths.
Armageddon Echo, for example, (which is probably the worst of the lot, in this regard) consists of 3 small mini-missions, 2-5 encounter areas long, a mini-"dungeon", the Academy, and a single "dungeon," in which we meet the BBEG of the adventure. Heck, the set piece in Armageddon Echo has as many encounter areas described as the main "dungeon" in the adventure. This doesn't even come close to adventures like Burnt Offerings or Skeletons of Scarwall. Admittedly, Armageddon Echo suffers from swollen stat blocks (e.g., the BBEG covers an entire page), but I feel the quality of individual adventures has declined over the course of the third AP.
O
I feel the quality of individual adventures has declined over the course of the third AP.
Aside from length, how so?
Adventures declining in quality....
I AM saying, though, that the individual adventures in Second Darkness don't stack up against adventures from other Paths.
^^^ This
I must say that although the Second darkness path isn't bad, so far I don't think on an issue per issue basis, it's as good as Crimson Throne, which in turn wasn't as good as Rise of the Runelords.
Generally, so far I've enjoyed what Paizo are producing (and the 6-issue format incidentally) , but for a subscriber, thats a bit of a worrying trend.
On the subject of the set pieces - I don't mind those so much. I find the fiction a waste of space though... but as long as the adventures are up to scratch I can put up with it.
I shall await the fourth path with interest... but I'm strongly hoping its doesn't continue the trend....
However, not to sound too negative - so far PF is a pretty darn good subscription. I guess I'm just saying - you've set a pretty high bar here, I'm a little concerned you may have set expectations too high and may not be able to consistently reach that level...
|
Creative Director
|
I need to echo Wes here.
WHY do you feel the adventures are declining in quality? If it's just the length, that's fine. If there's other reasons, we need to know. Trust me; the quality of the adventures is VERY important to me, and if we hear something like "Author X's adventures are boring" or "Too many dungeons" or "Not Enough Dungeons" or "Content is too adult oriented" or "Content is too tame and kid-friendly" or "There's not enough traps," or whatever... we'll take those comments to heart.
But just posting "The adventures are getting worse!" and not telling us why only depresses us, because all we hear is that we're sucking more but don't know what to do to fix it.
So by all means please PLEASE keep the comments coming. But get detailed if something strikes you as particularly lame or cool! Something like "Fiction's a waste of space" is solid feedback. But it's not feedback about the adventure (unless it's a way of saying the adventures are too short).
As for complaints about short adventures... folk'll be happy to know that I've okayed the first adventure of Legacy of Fire to be 35,000 words instead of 30,000, and after seeing so many complaints about shorter adventures, I'm pretty strongly considering making 35,000 the way it goes from there on out (which means that some back matter will get canned and some authors might not get paid and some articles might never see the light of day... but I gotta do what's best for Pathfinder as a whole, and if shorter adventures are hurting it... it's a no brainer.)
|
|
Adventures declining in quality....
I AM saying, though, that the individual adventures in Second Darkness don't stack up against adventures from other Paths.^^^ This
I must say that although the Second darkness path isn't bad, so far I don't think on an issue per issue basis, it's as good as Crimson Throne, which in turn wasn't as good as Rise of the Runelords.
Ironic thing is I think the adventure paths have gotten better as they progress. If I had any suggestion it would be more Iconic art (But that's more because I like the art and probably is not going to happen) Or maybe for future Journal entries make it ones from the Iconics perspectives?
I think the new adventure path is ruddy marvellous.
These fine fellows have to appeal to their core audience whilst bringing ongoing originality - no easy trick to master, but they are doing a fine job.
Rich
Ok, to sum up why I feel the quality has declined:
I'm a sucker for campaigns rather than stand alone adventures, and like to see consistent and reasonably logical/believable (in context of course) links between scenarios. I also think that the sign of a good quality scenario is to have the expected reactions of the players to be fairly natural without them having to go "well, I guess we ought to do this to continue the scenario".
I feel that the links between encounters are of a weaker quality in Second Darkness, particularly the first part which I beleive strongly relies on the players have the "well, if we want to continue the scenario..." feel.
The individual encounters within the scenarios are just that- individual encounters - and the links feel stilted, not something that naturally flowed.Having recently read part 4 on PDF I must add the flaw seems to rear its head again there during the ..ah..."servants" phase.<trying to avoid spoilers for those who havent read it...>
I suspect it may be down to the "difficult second album" syndrome ? Where perhaps you haven't had as much time to think/edit/iron out wrinkles quite to the same level due to time constraints ?
However, I would add (before you get too depressed !!) that I have very high opinions of the earlier adventure paths, so although I think the quality has declined, Pathfinder is still a top-notch product that I'd recommend to friends (and do ) ....
On other fronts : Don't mind the fiction but could happily do without. Set piece adventures= not particularly fussed about either way. Mature content = personally don't want the 18+ content to be in my face, but a recognition of mature themes is welcome. (For Example: Don't want to have a rape directly part of a plot, but a recognition that it occurs is fine...I roleplay to escape from some of the nastier elements of the real world !)
I just love the new short adventures. As someone who probably won't run very many APs they are the perfect ingredient to keep me buying. And may I add that I like the maturity. No PG suits me fine.
I think the new adventure path is ruddy marvellous.
These fine fellows have to appeal to their core audience whilst bringing ongoing originality - no easy trick to master, but they are doing a fine job.
Rich
Bow your heads!
I must say that although the Second darkness path isn't bad, so far I don't think on an issue per issue basis, it's as good as Crimson Throne, which in turn wasn't as good as Rise of the Runelords.
Wow, see I felt the opposite about Crimson Throne and Rise of the Runelords. While I loved RotR, I felt Crimson Throne was bloody brilliant.
I will admit that I'm not as into Second Darkness as I was the first two but I don't blame the quality of the product, only my own lack of interest/burn-out on the drow. There are things that pique my interest of course, and I'm excited on learning how the drow exist in Golarion. I'm more excited about Legacy of Fire, as genie's are one of my favorite three "monsters" (the other two being giants and lycanthropes).
The only time I notice that the adventure is shorter is when I look down at the page number in the middle of an accompanying article and realize that I've still got 25 pages to go before the end of the book. The set pieces, I'm very happy with, I'm hoping to run my 10 year old nephew through a few of these in the next month or so, and will make a nice addition to the AP when I get around to running that.
I think I speak for everybody here though, when I state that I (we) really appreciate the hard work you folks at Paizo do. All that I (and possibly only me) ask, is that you find the time to do an AP with were-creatures in the future (something cooler than were-rats anyway) and another AP with giants... I can never have enough giants.
Bow your heads!I think the new adventure path is ruddy marvellous.
These fine fellows have to appeal to their core audience whilst bringing ongoing originality - no easy trick to master, but they are doing a fine job.
Rich
Patience sweet one, we have not spoken for many moons, but soon the time will come for our plan to reach fruition.
Tell no one that we have the Logue in our cellar.
Patience, patience...