Recommend an Adventure Path for my wife, first-time player


Pathfinder Adventure Path General Discussion


As the topic says, can you recommend an adventure path with a lot of roleplaying, or one that is interesting enough for women.

I'm trying to convince my wife to play RPGs, and while I wanted a simpler system (like Dragon Age), I don't have a lot of time to play/prepare, so adventure paths seem like Heaven's gift for me :D

Of the already published ones, which one do you recommend? I don't know if my friend's wife would play, but at least mine will (probably hehe).

Thanks in advance!


the xiao wrote:

As the topic says, can you recommend an adventure path with a lot of roleplaying, or one that is interesting enough for women.

I'm trying to convince my wife to play RPGs, and while I wanted a simpler system (like Dragon Age), I don't have a lot of time to play/prepare, so adventure paths seem like Heaven's gift for me :D

Of the already published ones, which one do you recommend? I don't know if my friend's wife would play, but at least mine will (probably hehe).

Thanks in advance!

Kingmaker.

Especially if you have enough other people playing.
There is a lot of interaction just in the first AP of the series alone.

Plus Kingmaker is just plain fun. There's a lot of things going on to keep the older players interested while the new player(s) learn the ropes and get the feel for the game.

OR...

Carrion Crown.

The first module in the series is good detective stuff. I've found over the years that my female players tend to like these sorts of adventures.


Kingmaker is tedious. Exploration is just waiting for random encounters to happen, or not, and the 15 minute day. When you get to the second part, you'll get swamped by the city building stuff, unless you want to stick simply to one city, which... is possible, I suppose.

I would think Carrion Crown might be more interesting. It is investigative, so far as I know, and perhaps a little more story than mechanic driven. It seems to me a better choice for a first campaign.


Uhm. I'm not sure I could tell you which of the APs would be interesting enough for women. Women are mysterious creatures, you know. Plus, I think women can have different tastes, too! :P

Anyway, I think all the APs have their fair share of role playing. Of course, there's always a fair share of combat, too.

I think it comes down to what you wife likes/is interested in.

There's Kingmaker, where you carve out your own kingdom and defend it from all kinds of threads. However, that stuff can get technical (I personally use spreadsheets and MapTool to track everything about the kingdom and its cities). You don't have to include the kingdom creation stuff (they can remain the kingdom's champions) or take over most of the planning with the players just giving you advice and input, or maybe create an easier system for kingdom creation, but I guess that goes against your lack of preparation time.

The rest of Kingmaker is about exploring a wilderness, investigating mysterious disappearances, defending against warlike neighbours and the like.

Serpent's Skull is about finding a lost city deep in the jungle, and then exploring that city, and finally fighting an ancient threat beneath the city. Haven't yet got to play or run this one, but there are definite Indiana Jones vibes.

Council of Thieves takes place almost completely in a city. One part of it involves playing in a theatre play.

Carrion Crown is only recommended for horror fans. You'll have ghosts and haunted places, zombies, werewolves, vampires, and one part of the adventure has a strong Call of Cthulhu theme. Not for the faint of heart.

Jade Regent has only just started (with the first adventure available), so there's not too much info about it, though it does sound interesting. You basically join a caravan that travels from Varisia over the Crown of the World (basically the North Pole Continent) to Tian Xia (far Eastern continent inspired by Japan, China and other Eastern Asian countries) and get involved in the succession.

The first four APs (Rise of the Runelord, Curse of the Crimson Throne, Second Darkness, Legacy of Fire) were made for the 3.5 ruleset, so there might be some conversion necessary if you want to run one of them.


Hu5tru wrote:
Kingmaker is tedious. Exploration is just waiting for random encounters to happen, or not, and the 15 minute day.

It can turn into tedium, but a decent GM will either speed this up or fill the exploration part with life. Or both.

Speeding up means you fast forward over the "empty" squares (where the only thing that happens is the possible random encounter). Group tells GM where they want to go for the, say, week, and he rolls a batch of random encounter rolls (or just averages it and gives you one or two encounters). At least until you get to an area where a fixed encounter occurs.

Every once in a while, or when it is a fixed encounter area, the GM can explain the surroundings in a bit more detail.

And all the exploration is a great opportunity to roleplay group interaction

Hu5tru wrote:


When you get to the second part, you'll get swamped by the city building stuff, unless you want to stick simply to one city, which... is possible, I suppose.

We're halfway through Kingmaker, and we just got our second city. And that only because it's basically "treasure". They will soon annex another that has been established by independent explorers, but beyond that, Ardea is pretty much a city state.

We usually do Kingmaker in phases. We'll start with a year (or so) in kingdom phases, with all the dice rolling, all the arguing what to build next and where to put the next cathouse, and claiming lots of hexes previously explored. Then comes the exploration phase where new areas are explored and cleared. And then there's the adventure phase, where the major events from the AP happen. Exploration and adventure often go hand in hand.

But as I said: If the party isn't terribly interested in the city and kingdom building stuff, they can always let the GM handle it off-screen.


WARNING: I TALK/TYPE/WHATEVER MORE THAN ANY HUMAN SHOULD. SORRY.

the xiao wrote:

As the topic says, can you recommend an adventure path with a lot of roleplaying, or one that is interesting enough for women.

I'm trying to convince my wife to play RPGs, and while I wanted a simpler system (like Dragon Age), I don't have a lot of time to play/prepare, so adventure paths seem like Heaven's gift for me :D

Of the already published ones, which one do you recommend? I don't know if my friend's wife would play, but at least mine will (probably hehe).

Thanks in advance!

lordfeint wrote:

Kingmaker.

Especially if you have enough other people playing.
There is a lot of interaction just in the first AP of the series alone.

Plus Kingmaker is just plain fun. There's a lot of things going on to keep the older players interested while the new player(s) learn the ropes and get the feel for the game.

Totally seconding King Maker. I'm not the GM of that group, but my wife LOVES to play that. Also, she just backed me up on this, so I'm editing in her suggestion for King Maker as well. My wife also points out one other potential benefit of King Maker as opposed to something like Carrion Crown: it's not dark. Especially if your wife has little background in fantasy gaming, King Maker can be a nice, refreshing high-relief style of thing, whereas Carrion Crown might be too grim or disturbing. Of course, your wife's tastes may vary. But if she likes Princess Bride, Stardust, or any other high-fantasy fun movies, Kingmaker can be like that, if you GM it right. Use a lot of descriptive and evocative words that highlight the magic of the fey and untouched wilderness.

You might also want to skew random encounters to lean more heavily toward non-fighting random encounters. Two of the most memorable encounters I had in the game, one non-random, the other random, were with fey. The first was

SPOILERED!:
with a fairy dragon and a grig. We made good friends and allies, and, though it took a while to win them over, my character had fun singing and dancing with the fey, something grigs loved. In fact, I eventually gave her the music box we got as treasure from somewhere - it's become her most prized possession - and later made the fairy-dragon my ambassador (though he was later replaced, much to his delight, since now he only has to relax and play with children and fairies and faerie dragons.

The second was with three random grigs that popped up. Because of the first encounter, we were able to talk to them, befriend them, and even get them traveling with us (although, of course, they never took part in battles), and when we established our kingdom, those three and the first set were part of our initial settlers! My character still goes to see them regularly, two adventures later, and has actually established a little fairy "hotel" (although the originals aren't charged, it's basically their home, and the "prices" are basically berries and other silly things little fey like, instead of actual coins) inside the wall of his Villa that borders the lake, just because I've been able to establish my kingdom as a friend to fey.

One other thing, regardless of what you play, as a GM, make sure to provide romance options. Not just one per person (to avoid apparent rail-roading), but several each person. I've found that women (of various kinds) respond well to the presence of romance options in a game. Doesn't need to be explicit, nor does it necessarily need to go anywhere - the fact that the option is there often helps make it fun for them. (And us guys, too, not that we'd often admit it!) It might be obvious advice, or it might not, but this is something I've learned. One other thing, though, unless she's into deep pathos and drama, don't make the break-ups when/if they occur too hard. It'll help all-round.

One thing I've done in APs for this is to make printed NPCs the various options (for anyone), and generally have them respond to appropriate or invested PCs in such a way as to leave the option open. That's not to say that every player I have gets a romance, just that the option is there. That way I don't need to create new characters just for my players to attach to.

For instance one player in my Serpent Skull campaign is currently courting two different people, both of who are aware of each other - successfully, I might add (diplomacy: it's a powerful thing) - neither of which I planned, but both of which existed in-game, so I was able to adapt them; meanwhile the one I did kind-of plan on (due to her RP) is still pining, but I haven't done anything. Meanwhile, the flirt character (a bard, of course) has had zero in the way of romantic dalliances, even though quite a number of options have presented themselves from the pre-printed PCs. If you're curious, more information is here about that campaign, although I don't know that you need it. In another (3.5) campaign I GM'd, one player - whose character was an enormous horn-dog - RP'd well that they'd found "the one" and, despite the temptations presented (and the characters' own inner struggles) managed to remain faithful. It was hard, and sometimes there were tears, but it was great and they loved every moment. Three very different play styles for three very different levels of interaction and pathos, but all with romantic elements.

One word of warning - if it's just you and you're wife, RP the daylights out of whatever romance you want to whatever your comfort limits. If, on the other hand, there are lots of others, RP the romance bits some, but its probably best to keep most of it for "private" gaming sessions without others.

Basically - have it available, don't force it, but use it when they players want.

One other word of warning: new players (especially first-time players) can get really wrapped up in their own characters and forget about other players at the table, kind of taking over the game for themselves. (I did, but I was, at the time, gaming with a most gracious husband-and-wife duo, who helped my n00b-ishness through its infancy.) If you have exceedingly gracious players (as I did) than it shouldn't be a problem. If, on the other hand, you have players who get (understandably) frustrated by such behavior, you'll need to discuss it with your wife privately. As with any issue in marriage: DON'T! USE! ANGRY! OR! ACCUSATORY! WORDS!. Instead talk calmly, sweetly, give good compliments for gaming and RP that she's done well at (both before and after the suggestions), and explain that she might want to improve even more by allowing others some time to shine as well. And, she might do great, allowing all their chance to shine. But, since it's a possibility (and even tendency) for first time players, I thought I'd throw that out there.

In any event, this is about having fun, not completing the AP in a certain way or making sure that everything happens exactly as written. Especially if you're experienced but have one or more first-time players, don't hit them with the heaviest of rules game: mostly hit them with a fun game that the rules facilitate.

ALSO, by the end of this, I was ninja'd by Hu5tru and KaeYoss. Basically, I back up what KaeYoss says, too.


See, your kingmaker sounds like fun. So far, I have played it with war and power gamers who could care less about the fey, or any romance angles, or anything story related. Which was compounded by group chatter in Norwegian (I was living in Norway with my husband at the time we started playing this game) so I felt isolated, and with an RP focus, completely alienated from the group, which may have been part of the problem why I now detest kingmaker.

To give an example, because our 25 point 5 member party was slaying everything in the books, my husband and GM created "the league of Evil" staring the quickling, tartug, and led by a Half-fiend satyr bard who took personal delight in torturing my cleric of sarenrae to break her and her paladin cohorts will to found a good and civilized nation in the stolen lands. His highlight of evil, sending nightmares to the paladin showing my cleric, then his fiance, sleeping with every dude she talked to in her commission of her duties as High Priestess and sometimes diplomat. So yeah, that ended up being a lot of dudes. Oh, and to make it worse, the paladin was Akiros Ismort, personally redeemed by her, atoned and what not, so his history of women betraying him made it an extremely stressful encounter.

Started on the boards with another group, and the GM has modified it to make it darker by adding more political elements than are really needed, and my character has already died in the line of service, slain by some oracle multiclass build that was over 4 levels higher than her he just placed there for poos and giggles.

I would love to play in a noble bright, romantic Kingmaker game.


Tacticslion wrote:
One word of warning - if it's just you and you're wife, RP the daylights out of whatever romance you want to whatever your comfort limits. If, on the other hand, there are lots of others, RP the romance bits some, but its probably best to keep most of it for "private" gaming sessions without others.

Wrong sort of roleplaying. Well, not wrong as in not right, but more like "not the kind of roleplaying these boards are all about". At least, I hope so, because if they are, there have been some weird and deeply confusing things going on around here.

Tacticslion wrote:


One other word of warning: new players (especially first-time players) can get really wrapped up in their own characters and forget about other players at the table, kind of taking over the game for themselves.

Depends. Some might do that, some you will need to threaten with physical violence to roleplay.

Scarab Sages

My wife and I played through Curse of the Crimson Throne just the two of us, and she describes it as one of the best (RPG-style) roleplaying experiences she's ever had. Mostly because the two characters we were running just hit it off so well. (We've tried doing other APs one-on-one, but the characters just haven't clicked as well.)

If your wife is anything like mine, it's going to be the interaction between her character and any others that really make the game for her. (Though, I'm sure a good storyline wouldn't hurt.)


KaeYoss wrote:
Wrong sort of roleplaying. Well, not wrong as in not right, but more like "not the kind of roleplaying these boards are all about". At least, I hope so, because if they are, there have been some weird and deeply confusing things going on around here.

Hahahah! Well, not exactly the way I intended it, but yes, that, too, should most definitely be kept "private"! Mostly, I just meant that there are certain levels of depth that can be done one-on-one that probably aren't appropriate at the table. The kind that can be done with people who you aren't married too, either. Hm. That also didn't sound appropriate for the boards. Bother, chaos, look at what you've wrought! Ah well, whatever.

KaeYoss wrote:
Depends. Some might do that, some you will need to threaten with physical violence to roleplay.

Wait, I thought we weren't talking about that kind of thing on these forums...?

(Sorry, sorry! I couldn't resist! My apologies to all people who read this comment and their potentially scarred psyches.)
(EDIT: this joke is terrible, and I feel terrible.)
(EDIT 2: NOT terrible enough to remove it, however. :P)

Arazyr wrote:

... she describes it as one of the best (RPG-style) roleplaying experiences she's ever had. Mostly because the two characters we were running just hit it off so well. ...

If your wife is anything like mine, it's going to be the interaction between her character and any others that really make the game for her. (Though, I'm sure a good storyline wouldn't hurt.)

Basically this. Arazyr hit the nail on the head. That's one reason I am encouraging you to allow for multiple romantic options: so that she can look through and find someone to "click" with, as my wife puts it. Regardless of who you play (unless you work hard at it) NPCs will have some elements of your personality, and your wife will have elements of her personality in her PC. But finding the right combination between those elements and the "added" ones can be tricky. With multiple options on the table (and slight adaptations from NPCs as written) you can more readily find what she's looking for.

Hu5tru, I'm sorry.:
Hu5tru wrote:

See, your kingmaker sounds like fun. So far, I have played it with stupid, stupid people, who do stupid things, which may have been part of the problem why I now detest kingmaker.

To give an example, some stupid mixed with stupid placed upon stupid wrapped with stupid and topped with stupid happened.

I would love to play in a noble bright, romantic Kingmaker game.

I am so sorry for your loss. Honestly, I can't think of another way to put it, as that's... sad. That said, if the GM is your husband (or one of the players is your husband) don't hate on him - we do stupid things sometimes. I won't tell you about the one time I, as a GM, drove my wife to real (not cathartic) tears (completely on accident) by something I thought was a great story idea at the time...

Seriously I'm not going to tell you anything about that.
I've learned a good lesson, though! And it hasn't happened again. So, you know, give us time, we'll come around.
There are times for dark games, and even my wife (who much prefers the not-so-dark-stuff) has liked one that I did (very carefully), but yeah, it shouldn't be too heavy, unless all the players agree to it and are game in advance. And if some players are off their rockers, while some (even one!) is really working hard, there are ways to punish the dumb without hammering the nice. Anyhoo, I'm rambling...


Well, my wife says she doesn't want anything high fantasy, like LotR or H arry Potter, but she enjoys scary stuff, so she's telling me to play the carrion crown. Thanks!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Well, I just dropped the Kingmaker campaign I was GM'ing, because for a commercial AP it involved way to much prep time and not enough interesting story and NPC's.

Carrion Crown and Jade Regent both look very good in regards to roleplaying opportunities and story.

If you are willing to do the extra work of looking up 3.5 to Pathfinder conversions ( which are available on the sub-forum ), I can heartily recommend Curse of the Crimson Throne, which I GM'ed from start to finish with great relish. Very interesting NPC's, a great story and a very interesting location, the city of Korvosa.

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

Since you don't have much time for prep, I'd say Rise of the Runelords, or even Shackled City. The older stuff has been played and discussed more. And the start to RotR has a detailed town with plenty of NPCs detailed. I also get the sense that you could try out RotR #1, and if she's not feeling it, you could give up on the project the easiest.

For newbie friendliness, I think all of the first adventures in the 3.5 Edition APs have some good RP possibilities, so check them out and see which one's closest to the sort of fantasy she likes.

Assuming that she's curious to try out RPGs, instead of being something she's doing for you, you could take the blurb summaries of the adventures, explain they're a story summary of the sorts of stuff her character might get up to, and ask her which sounds most interesting.


the xiao wrote:
Well, my wife says she doesn't want anything high fantasy, like LotR or H arry Potter, but she enjoys scary stuff, so she's telling me to play the carrion crown. Thanks!

You're welcome, and I'm glad you know what you want to do! I wouldn't compare Kingmaker to either Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter, however! They just don't seem similar (or to each other for that matter). Still, I'm glad you found one she might like! Also, keep the general advice applies, regardless of which campaign you follow! Enjoy!


Tacticslion wrote:
I just meant that there are certain levels of depth that can be done one-on-one that probably aren't appropriate at the table. The kind that can be done with people who you aren't married too, either. Hm. That also didn't sound appropriate for the boards. Bother, chaos, look at what you've wrought! Ah well, whatever.

Ah, good, you spotted it yourself. I was about to ask you if you're one of those really devoted religious guys if the idea of extramarital roleplaying hadn't occurred to you.

Tacticslion wrote:


KaeYoss wrote:
Depends. Some might do that, some you will need to threaten with physical violence to roleplay.

Wait, I thought we weren't talking about that kind of thing on these forums...?

(Sorry, sorry! I couldn't resist! My apologies to all people who read this comment and their potentially scarred psyches.)
(EDIT: this joke is terrible, and I feel terrible.)
(EDIT 2: NOT terrible enough to remove it, however. :P)

Okay, I stepped right into that one.

To clarify for everyone: While some people might take over the table until you put them in their place, other people are in a shell that would make Ulunat go green with envy. You all but have to beat them up to make them play a character instead of sitting there until they're told to roll some dice.

Oh, and if you won't tell us how you made your wife cry, we'll assume the worst.

In fact, we'll start speculating openly about it }>


Tacticslion wrote:


You're welcome, and I'm glad you know what you want to do! I wouldn't compare Kingmaker to either Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter, however!

It all depends on the group, I'd say.


Tacticslion wrote:


You're welcome, and I'm glad you know what you want to do! I wouldn't compare Kingmaker to either Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter, however!
KaeYoss wrote:
It all depends on the group, I'd say.

Granted! I can, now, see the similarities to the former - there is, after all, a journey (of sorts) involved, a "fellowship" (party), probably a wizard of some kind or another (in fact, at least two), and armies will be clashing (I'm presuming, based on the "mass combat rules")... so, yeah, I can see that, after a fashion.

On the other hand, Harry Potter? While you can build a magical tower and academy (more than once!), I can't really see the comparisons over the adventure so far. But I digress: it does, indeed, depend on the group.

Also: I'm TOTALLY one of those really devoted religious guys. But you know, we get to channel positive energy, so I'd say it's a fair trade off! (Also, it heavily depends on which religion: Calistria has her own ideas of "totally devoted religious guys"...)
;)

KaeYoss wrote:
Okay, I stepped right into that one.

Oh no. You ran. Like your house was set on fire.

(Apologies in advance, if you don't read that comic.)
(Also: heh, I do that aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaall the time. See above, for an example. :D)


Tacticslion wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:


You're welcome, and I'm glad you know what you want to do! I wouldn't compare Kingmaker to either Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter, however!
KaeYoss wrote:
It all depends on the group, I'd say.

Granted! I can, now, see the similarities to the former - there is, after all, a journey (of sorts) involved, a "fellowship" (party), probably a wizard of some kind or another (in fact, at least two), and armies will be clashing (I'm presuming, based on the "mass combat rules")... so, yeah, I can see that, after a fashion.

On the other hand, Harry Potter? While you can build a magical tower and academy (more than once!), I can't really see the comparisons over the adventure so far. But I digress: it does, indeed, depend on the group.

Dude, didn't you see that Hogwarts is one of the buildings you can build? Allows your marshal to use his int bonus instead of the usual stuff to add to stability, because you can now have a Defence Against the Dark Arts Lecture.

But yes, we're drifting. I hear for some people, Kingmaker is all about murdering everything that moves and isn't pretty enough to be raped, and other groups have kings sleeping in the dog house for indecent proposals involving watch-related activities, and they'll only kill things that can't be made an ally (because allies raise economy and stability with taxes and defence pacts) or that can feed hundreds of people apiece in a big barbecue.

Tacticslion wrote:


KaeYoss wrote:
Okay, I stepped right into that one.

Oh no. You ran. Like your house was set on fire.

(Apologies in advance, if you don't read that comic.)
(Also: heh, I do that aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaall the time. See above, for an example. :D)

Oh, 8-Bit Theatre. Does rock. I hear it has been finished, I haven't read it for a long time. I'll have to finish it up one of these days.


Tacticslion wrote:
the xiao wrote:
Well, my wife says she doesn't want anything high fantasy, like LotR or H arry Potter, but she enjoys scary stuff, so she's telling me to play the carrion crown. Thanks!
You're welcome, and I'm glad you know what you want to do! I wouldn't compare Kingmaker to either Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter, however! They just don't seem similar (or to each other for that matter).

She says that things with wizards and knights and dragons doesn't appeal to her, even when I explained that, well, the game is Dungeons and Dragons! She asked me something with mystery and horror, and I told her that the beauty of D&D is that it combines all of that plus a lot more! But if she gets a good impresion the first time, she may try more ;)

I love LotR and hate HP, and I KNOW they are not very similar, I just wanted to share two sides of a spectrum where she doesn't want to play. I may include things like Conan and even historical like Ben Hur (her hating of those last two is because of my father-in-law but... thats another story).


KaeYoss wrote:
In fact, we'll start speculating openly about it }>

Yeah, that's probably for the best, really.

KaeYoss wrote:
Oh, 8-Bit Theatre. Does rock. I hear it has been finished, I haven't read it for a long time. I'll have to finish it up one of these days.

Yes it is and you should.

the xiao wrote:

She says that things with wizards and knights and dragons doesn't appeal to her, even when I explained that, well, the game is Dungeons and Dragons! She asked me something with mystery and horror, and I told her that the beauty of D&D is that it combines all of that plus a lot more! But if she gets a good impresion the first time, she may try more ;)

I love LotR and hate HP, and I KNOW they are not very similar, I just wanted to share two sides of a spectrum where she doesn't want to play. I may include things like Conan and even historical like Ben Hur (her hating of those last two is because of my father-in-law but... thats another story).

I hear and understand completely! Just wanted to ensure that clarity was achieved! I'm actually loo0king at running a 1-on-1 Carrion Crown w/ my own wife and getting her to replace one of the four iconics shown in the adventure. Just curious if write-ups/stats were provided for them somewhere - CC seems to be the first AP without a write-up for them! ... an unfortunate coincidence, if I don't gain other players for it. Nonetheless, that'll be a little bit.

ALSO: Jade Regent provides interesting relationship/romance rules. While specific to that path, they can easily be adapted for any AP. Check out the player guide! It's awesome! (This will almost certainly be the next one we get... eventually!)
(apologies if I'm missing responding, spelling, or typing - I've got an two-week-old in my arms (so's mah wife can sleep!), it's past 2AM, and life is WONDERFUL. Er, I mean, I'm tired. Yes. That. :D)

Also: have fun!


Tacticslion wrote:
Check out the player guide! It's awesome!

I did not say this (distracted as I was/am by lack of sleep and the fore-mentioned baby), but the Player's Guide is completely free from Paizo! There's also a great one for Carrion Crown... also for free! Get them both! Especially useful are the campaign traits in Carrion Crown to tie the PCs into the game. REALLY useful, in fact. Almost necessary. Interestingly, the same, it seems, with Jade Regent. Funny, Serpent Skull and Kingmaker seems more able to do without them, but those two look like they seriously lack some of the drive without it.

Also: babies - they're awesome. (Who needs sleep?!)


Tacticslion wrote:
KaeYoss wrote:
In fact, we'll start speculating openly about it }>
Yeah, that's probably for the best, really.

Alright. You asked for it. You really did.

You tried to cheat on her with her identical twin sister. But it was actually her, and you said the wrong name. And then you confused the two of them in the different way, and your wife walked in on you.

Or she has this childhood dream of getting a specific piece of jewellery, some really moving story full of tragedy, maybe it's a lost hairloom. And then you got a replica made, and destroyed it in front of her eyes, and laughed and laughed.

Or she gave you a gift, and you took the wrapped gift and shook it vigorously to find out what it is, and it was fragile and you broke it, and she did it herself over the course of a year of a half.

....man, you're a right bastard! ;-P

Tacticslion wrote:


I hear and understand completely! Just wanted to ensure that clarity was achieved! I'm actually loo0king at running a 1-on-1 Carrion Crown w/ my own wife and getting her to replace one of the four iconics shown in the adventure. Just curious if write-ups/stats were provided for them somewhere - CC seems to be the first AP without a write-up for them! ... an unfortunate coincidence, if I don't gain other players for it. Nonetheless, that'll be a little bit.

Yes, starting with Carrion Crown, they stopped providing these pre-made characters. They're not exactly brand new characters, though, so you could hunt down their stats in the older APs. Or just make up something by yourself.

Tacticslion wrote:


ALSO: Jade Regent provides interesting relationship/romance rules. While specific to that path, they can easily be adapted for any AP.

Not quite. In Jade Regent, those characters will be around the whole time. In CC, there are no characters scheduled to accompany the party, since they'll be off saving the world (or parts thereof) in short order.

You can always invent NPCs and use the rules for those, of course, but not every AP has NPCs you can use without modifying the story.


KaeYoss wrote:
....man, you're a right bastard! ;-P

I know, and I'm ashamed! QQ

KaeYoss wrote:
Yes, starting with Carrion Crown, they stopped providing these pre-made characters. They're not exactly brand new characters, though, so you could hunt down their stats in the older APs. Or just make up something by yourself.

Bah! You act like I shouldn't be lazy!

EDIT PART AGAIN: also, I was under the impression that Seoni didn't have stats, and the witch (whose name I don't currently recall) was never statted (spelling?) up. One oddity: while almost all the pictures show the same four, there's one image of the cleric whose name I don't recall right now in the first book. Funny, that.

KaeYoss wrote:

Not quite. In Jade Regent, those characters will be around the whole time. In CC, there are no characters scheduled to accompany the party, since they'll be off saving the world (or parts thereof) in short order.

You can always invent NPCs and You can always invent NPCs and use the rules for those, of course, but not every AP has NPCs you can use without modifying the story.

Sorry, yes. While there are

spoilers in this sentence:
NPCs in CC that go with you for more than one adventure, and there are a few cases where it looks ambiguous enough that they could be convinced to continue with you,
it seems that the Jade Regent NPCs are basically with you the entire campaign.

What I meant, however, was that with some (minor) adaptation, it could be done. One way to do so, would be to have letter-writing (instead of face-to-face time/conversations: long distance relationships, while hard, can work), or perhaps have NPCs that follow after the initial problems are done (to "visit" a PC after their latest victory). This could even be done with rivals, insulting each other and boasting about their latest conquest. This could even be a factor in the

it's spoiler!:
Trust Mechanic,
as the rival could undermine the good name of the PCs in various towns.

In other APs, it doesn't need much adaptation at all. King Maker has a ton of people (monsters and otherwise) who're with you for enough of the campaign that you can easily make a case for a romance (especially with the times involved in that game), while Serpent's Skull

has spoilers here:
practically thrusts NPCs in your lap! NPCs that, if you play your cards right, will likely end up with you for the whole game.
Also, there are, I think, actual presumptions of
spoilers, maybe, from Legacy of Fire, though it might not be:
romances as character options, and even, if my friend is correct, the possibility of accidentally (or purposefully) ending up owner of "pleasure slaves"
in Legacy of Fire, although I could be wrong about that.

That said, I do understand that different games are different. The rules (as written in the JR player guide), however, can be easily adapted (to CC). I've already got several ideas on how.


Tacticslion wrote:


EDIT PART AGAIN: also, I was under the impression that Seoni didn't have stats

She doesn't have "official stats", i.e. the stats she is considered to have in the campaign setting, the way Shork the Orc Warlord, leader of the Bad Mofo Orc Tribe is said in All Bout Orcs and how Badass They Are to be an orc barbarian 14 (all names are made up).

However, she was one of the "sample" characters in several APs, and so there are stats for her as pre-generated character. She was one of the heroes of Rise of the Runelords and Council of Thieves.

Tacticslion wrote:


One oddity: while almost all the pictures show the same four, there's one image of the cleric whose name I don't recall right now in the first book. Funny, that.

I guess that since they did away with the pre-gens, they don't feel quite beholden to using only those 4 characters in the art. And I'm not completely sure they always stuck to it before.

Tacticslion wrote:
One way to do so, would be to have letter-writing (instead of face-to-face time/conversations: long distance relationships, while hard, can work)

I heard repeatedly that it usually doesn't. And that was from people living in today's world, where people tend to live in one place for an extended amount of time, and have national and international postal services, as well as email, and mobile phones, and even regular phones, and so on.

Having regular written conversation between an NPC staying at home and an adventurer who routinely moves somewhere else, including into some dangerous and/or remote locations, is even worse.

All in all, if you're going to incorporate romance into the APs, it should not be limited to love-letters.

I'm not saying it can't work at all, I'm just saying that out of the box, not every AP has suitable NPCs, especially when you want to allow each character in a party of 5 (or more) the chance to get a romantic interest.


KaeYoss wrote:
However, she was one of the "sample" characters in several APs, and so there are stats for her as pre-generated character. She was one of the heroes of Rise of the Runelords and Council of Thieves.

Ah, see, this is what I was referring to. I didn't know if this existed. Thanks! Do you know if Feiya (I believe that's the witch's name?) was ever set up that way, or was she too far on the end of the curve?

KaeYoss wrote:
I guess that since they did away with the pre-gens, they don't feel quite beholden to using only those 4 characters in the art. And I'm not completely sure they always stuck to it before.

Upon closer inspection: you're right! But the funny thing is they're actually more consistent about it in CC than in the other two I've seen, save for that one moment (so far), making it stand out all the more. Huh.

Tacticslion wrote:
One way to do so, would be to have letter-writing (instead of face-to-face time/conversations: long distance relationships, while hard, can work)
KaeYoss wrote:

I heard repeatedly that it usually doesn't. And that was from people living in today's world, where people tend to live in one place for an extended amount of time, and have national and international postal services, as well as email, and mobile phones, and even regular phones, and so on.

Having regular written conversation between an NPC staying at home and an adventurer who routinely moves somewhere else, including into some dangerous and/or remote locations, is even worse.

All in all, if you're going to incorporate romance into the APs, it should not be limited to love-letters.

I'm not saying it can't work at all, I'm just saying that out of the box, not every AP has suitable NPCs, especially when you want to allow each character in a party of 5 (or more) the chance to get a romantic interest.

Heh, you can tell that to me and my wife (more-than-two year engagement while I finished college three states away) and my wife's parents (who were engaged for more than two years while he was in the navy... all letters for them!)! That said, I'm not disagreeing that it'd take at least some work. I guess, if I had to amend, I'd say "easily adapted for any AP, pre-Carrion Crown" (and apparently post-Carrion Crown with Jade Regent) - since there are pre-generated NPCs, you could simply adapt them as NPCs that go along with the PCs for various reasons of their own. :) But yeah, it would totally depend on play style as to whether or not this would work.


EDIT tolateafterthelastpostsoI'mdoubleposting,yay

KaeYoss wrote:
I'm not saying it can't work at all, I'm just saying that out of the box, not every AP has suitable NPCs, especially when you want to allow each character in a [b]party of 5 (or more)[b] the chance to get a romantic interest.

Uh, no, not really, you'd be correct there. A party of four is far more doable. Parties of five are doable, but more complicated for something like that, while parties of six (or more) and you're pretty much just selectively offering romance, or spam the board and see what happens. I had one group that consisted of a rotating set of twelve (12!) players in a 3.5 campaign (most of us worked at Barnes and Noble but our hours would shift, slightly, from time to time). I managed to have hooks for all, although only about three took the bite, one of those was just kind of "a romance, ergo I'm roleplaying, yay"; one was like "wait... I'm a guy... the GM's a guy... uh, that's kind of uncomfortable, but I guess... huh"; and one player was like "Romance: YAY!". The rest kind of ignored it as they were too busy doing the adventure thing.

EDIT: Hint: DON'T EVER HAVE A SINGLE GROUP OF TWELVE ROTATING PLAYERS, IT'S JUST SUCH A PAIN, OH, MAN, YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW. IF YOU THINK GETTING ALL (FIVE TO SEVEN OF) THE PLAYERS AT THE TABLE TO DO THE SAME THING, YOU CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE HOW HARD IT IS NOT TO HAVE EVERY SESSION TURN INTO "Road trip!" JUST BECAUSE, OH, SHEESH. I still loved that campaign (and those players), though.

But yes, once you hit five players things become more difficult giving equal-time options for all. Even the Jade Regent path presumes a base of four, and is built to accommodate that. There is, by the way, nothing wrong with larger groups... I just somehow failed to realize the size you were coming from and projected the standard four-person-party in my blanket statement.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
Ah, see, this is what I was referring to. I didn't know if this existed. Thanks! Do you know if Feiya (I believe that's the witch's name?) was ever set up that way, or was she too far on the end of the curve?

Unless I'm missing something big here, the APs never had any but the 12 "core" iconics as pre-gens. And if Seltyiel was part of it, it was in his "old job" as iconic multi-classed character and iconic prestige class character (nowadays he's the iconic magus, and as before, he's the iconic evil character).

There are pregenerated stats for the six new iconics in Master of the Fallen Fortress (which is free, at least as PDF).

Feiya is CG, worships Desna, hails from Irrisen, and her stats are Str 8, Dex 14, Con 12, Int 17, Wis 10, Cha 13.

Tacticslion wrote:


Heh, you can tell that to me and my wife (more-than-two year engagement while I finished college three states away) and my wife's parents (who were engaged for more than two years while he was in the navy... all letters for them!)!

Okay.

Hey, Tac, Tac's wife, and Tac's in-laws: Long-distant relationships don't have a terribly good chance of working. So you did make it. Stop bragging! :P

(Plus, I think that the engagement part had something to do with it: You guys already had a significant connection before your long-distance part began, at least from how it sounds. That helps.)

Tacticslion wrote:


That said, I'm not disagreeing that it'd take at least some work. I guess, if I had to amend, I'd say "easily adapted for any AP, pre-Carrion Crown"

I don't know. Many involve some wandering around, some involve significant detours for some time, and at least one AP has a part where you won't be able to write each other for weeks.

Some are harder than others.

But enough bickering over fine print.


Tacticslion wrote:


Uh, no, not really, you'd be correct there. A party of four is far more doable.

I'm not quite sure where I got the 5 from.

Anyway, the more people you have, and especially the more would be interested, the more difficult it will get.

I'd say that 4 is already quite hard, assuming they all want some romance.


KaeYoss wrote:
stuff about Feiya and other (new-ish) iconics, too

Eeeeeexcellent. You, sir, are a scholar and a gentlema-... well, actually, you're just a scholar. But a nice and right clever one! Thank you, that's one down. I've already got Merisiel, and I think I can find Seelah on my own (I'm not positive, but I might have it around somewhere). That only leaves Seoni. Yeah, it's interesting that Seltiyel is the evil iconic... and the only one to go through a class change, which is interesting. The new APG iconics were, as I thought, too "new", and thus never published as sample characters for the APs - I doubt Seltiyel ever was, either, although they might have, simply being a multiclass character as he was.

KaeYoss wrote:
Okay. *proceeds to tell them*

Good job!

KaeYoss wrote:
But enough bickering over fine print.

But... but... but... bickering is what I'm good at online!

KaeYoss wrote:
Many good and helpful things - with a great sense of humor, too!

Anyway, thanks, Chaos*, for all your help!

*Alternatively: "... thanks, Xaos...", or "... thanks, Khay-hoss...", or "... thanks, chey-awse...", or "... thanks, alakjwtl;hel;rhb1p[]...}, take your pick!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
KaeYoss wrote:
stuff about Feiya and other (new-ish) iconics, too
Eeeeeexcellent. You, sir, are a scholar and a gentlema-... well, actually, you're just a scholar.

One out of two isn't so bad. Plus, gentlemen are usually despicable - they tend to have all the virtues I loath and none of the vices I admire!

Tacticslion wrote:


I think I can find Seelah on my own (I'm not positive, but I might have it around somewhere).

Without looking, I know for sure she's in Council of Thieves, and I think she was in Kingmaker, too.

Tacticslion wrote:

Yeah, it's interesting that Seltiyel is the evil iconic... and the only one to go through a class change, which is interesting. The new APG iconics were, as I thought, too "new", and thus never published as sample characters for the APs - I doubt Seltiyel ever was, either, although they might have, simply being a multiclass character as he was.

Well, at first, they made Seltyiel because they probably thought that not all of the iconics should fit too neatly into these nice little boxes the classes represent. After all, Pathfinder isn't all about these boxes (they are a strong theme, but not nearly as restricting as a "pure" class-based system). So they made one who had not one class, but several, including, eventually, a prestige class.

They also thought (I think) that while most characters will be either good or neutral, there can be evil heroes sometimes. And they can even fit into a party of non-evil heroes and go on adventures just like everyone else and not just go on a 24/7 crime spree.

And let's not forget that the warrior arcanist (call it the Elric or the Gish or the Gandalf from the Films or whatever) is a popular concept, and the 11 core classes just can't pull it off properly.

Oh, and they needed 12 iconics, since they put them onto the first 12 AP covers, and didn't want to put something else onto number 12.

And the class redo made perfect sense, too: Seltyiel is the iconic gish. The gish concept is one that has often been attempted but never quite mastered. Even the eldritch knight fails the concept in one important regard: While an eldritch knight is a fighter/wizard on paper, at any given time, he only ever acts as a fighter or a wizard.

Then Paizo decided to have a shot at a good representation of the concept, calling it the magus. (Personally, I think they did very well). It was only logical that instead of having another iconic flaunt his stuff in Sel's face, he would be the iconic magus. He basically already was. The character is still basically the same (a warrior-mage who blends the two disciplines into one art), only the game mechanics changed as they became better at realising that character.

Way better than dropping an anvil on Sel's head and then coming up with a new iconic magus, especially sine he would probably have been a "lightborn" planetouched from the positive energy plane or some other nonsense race ;-)

Tacticslion wrote:


KaeYoss wrote:
Okay. *proceeds to tell them*
Good job!

Nailed it!

Tacticslion wrote:


KaeYoss wrote:
Many good and helpful things - with a great sense of humor, too!
Anyway, thanks, Chaos*, for all your help!

Nah, that's not me. Had my name legally changed after too many mistaken identities. People kept asking me about "my theory". And I didn't manage to get any loyalties from those who wrote about them, so one day I just couldn't be bothered again.*

Not completely made up: Back in the day of Team Fortress or Team Fortress Classic, Counter-Strike alpha or early beta, and other games like this, I did use Chaos as nickname for a short while, but after the 5th or 6th time I played of servers of 20 with Chaos, Chaos(1), Chaos(2) (along, of course, with several variations of Assassin and Neo, with more or less 1337 added), I decided to do something crazy with the name to avoid that. And since I didn't like the @ss@ssins and other haXor-wannabes with their abuse of the old "secret language" even back then, I opted for Kae'Yoss.

And now I'm stuck with it.


KaeYoss wrote:


One out of two isn't so bad. Plus, gentlemen are usually despicable - they tend to have all the virtues I loath and none of the vices I admire!

I thought you'd see it for the compliment it was!

KaeYoss wrote:
Without looking, I know for sure she's in Council of Thieves, and I think she was in Kingmaker, too.

Segueing to an earlier conversation about iconics in books, yeah she's shown there in the art several times (with Merisiel, oddly enough!), but only Harsk, Ezren, Lini, and barbarian-chick whose name I don't recall and who is also apparently the 'ruler' by the concept-art (Ami?) is in KM.

KaeYoss wrote:
Seltyiel stuff

I basically agree. It's a nice thing they did.

KaeYoss wrote:
Nailed it!

That you did, buddy, that you did. :)

KaeYoss wrote:
Names.

Heh, you know, I'm one of the few people with "Neo" as a legitimate nick-name, as I got it (and it stuck) before the Matrix came out. Most of my college friends call me that, actually. Also, I don't know kung fu. But I've got Karate! And am working on Krav Maga! Monk-class gestalt, here I come! Anyway [/my silly aside]!

(I think it funny, and entirely pleasant, that apparently the all others have abandoned this thread. That said, it would be entirely pleasant if anyone else wanted to break in as well! :D)
EDIT: if you like 8-bit, join nuklearforums. Less game-stuff there (obviously), but I try to carry it when I can. Good people there, and lots of fun. Normal internet warnings apply, however.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I have to totally disagree with the Kingmaker suggestion. I'm running Kingmaker now and with both men and women in the party and this just doesn't have enough story to hold the women's interest. I've added quite a bit of the Tales of the Old Margreve and other bits from here and there to keep my players going.

Legacy of Fire would be very appealing if you move the plot along once you get into the 4th book. Surprisingly, the women in my group loved Second Darkness.


Mama Loufing wrote:
...this just doesn't have enough story to hold the women's interest. ...

In our group (the one I play in), the women actually love King Maker, especially the story, as it's what fascinates them the most. So, really, YMMV - it really depends on the group and their personalities. I know mine, at least in part, make the story into something special*, and feel the freedom to do so with the sand-box style campaign. Plus, we love us some good NPCs and there are lots to choose from, especially since we're not all kill-heavy (or if we are, we usually raise 'em later as goody-good-goods).

But I can see what you mean. Some groups like more rails, KM doesn't have many of them, but instead plot-events and similar. It could be hard to hold a cohesive story that way.

*This and a few others have revealed how much that's true.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
Heh, you know, I'm one of the few people with "Neo" as a legitimate nick-name, as I got it (and it stuck) before the Matrix came out.

And I like to think that I used Chaos back when it was a synonym to badass evil (see Chaos Space Marines to get the general idea) and before people used to explain how butterflies hold the world ransom with their hurricane-inducing wings (though that is awesome, too).

Tacticslion wrote:


I don't know kung fu. But I've got Karate! And am working on Krav Maga!

Bah. I know Kung Fu, Karate, Judo, Krav Maga, Ninjutsu, Kenjutsu, Iaijutsu, Tae Kwon Do, and over 50 other very dangerous words!

Tacticslion wrote:


(I think it funny, and entirely pleasant, that apparently the all others have abandoned this thread.)

What is this about again, anyway? ;-)


Wow. I wrote a completely confusing sentence. I suppose it's not that hard when you write a sentence without a clearly defined subject. Whoops. What I meant to say was...

Tacticslion wrote:
*This thread and a few others like it have revealed how much that's true.

Anyway...

KaeYoss wrote:
And I like to think that I used Chaos back when it was a synonym to badass evil (see Chaos Space Marines to get the general idea) and before people used to explain how butterflies hold the world ransom with their hurricane-inducing wings (though that is awesome, too).

Nice!

KaeYoss wrote:
Bah. I know Kung Fu, Karate, Judo, Krav Maga, Ninjutsu, Kenjutsu, Iaijutsu, Tae Kwon Do, and over 50 other very dangerous words!

Clever! Keep on expanding the ol' lexicon, there, buddy! :D

Also, I know, like, one judo maneuver, and forgot all about my (long-distant) green belt in Tae Kwon Do. Truly, I am a paragon of the martial arts!

KaeYoss wrote:
What is this about again, anyway? ;-)

I dunno. I'm guessing it originally had to do with pastries*. I like pastries and that would be something that would have attracted me. So, yeah, I'll go with that.

*Note: actually, they're only okay, to me, over-all. I do like pastries, but I'd much prefer the main course in most cases.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Path / General Discussion / Recommend an Adventure Path for my wife, first-time player All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.