Which APs don't have bizarre experimental rules and sub-systems?


Pathfinder Adventure Path General Discussion

1 to 50 of 57 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

My group is currently playing (and very much enjoying) Rise of the Runelords, and I've started thinking ahead about which AP we may want to tackle next. Problem is, I keep hearing about all these APs like Jade Regent, Iron Gods and Kingmaker which had bizarre experimental rules and sub-systems (caravan, kingdom building, technology) and all the complaints about these rules not working.

Which APs DON'T introduce crazy new rules? Of these, which would you recommend for pure awesomeness (of course I understand that "awesomeness" is purely subjective), and what makes your recommendation awesome? No spoilers please!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

I don't know if there is any AP that doesn't have some sort of sub-system, but the ones you mention are significantly integral to the whole AP, as opposed to restricted to one act of a single book.

I'm quite fond of Carrion Crown, but it has its detractors, it comes down to horror tropes. If you like them, you will like CC, and if you don't you won't. It uses the Haunt mechanics periodically, which are just spooky traps.

Giantslayer seems pretty vanilla too, there is something in the first book, but it amounts to counting successes, and influencing later encounters.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In fairness, the caravan part of Jade Regent can be flat-out ignored if you don't want to do it, so you can just play the game and assume the caravan works as intended. So it may be crazy, but it's optional crazy. Also, Jade Regent is a pretty good sequel to Runelords, for... reasons. XD Shattered Star also works.

Frankly, it really depends on what kind of game your group enjoys playing. I'd look at the summaries for each AP, then find the one that sounds like the most interesting for your group.


Hmmm... I guess a better question would be: which APs have sub-systems and experimental rules that work well and don't cause problems?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The technology in Iron Gods is actually well balanced:-)


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I've discovered that if one surfs these forums enough, one can find complaints about every single aspect to the game ever created. We live in the midst of the Whine Generation and it doesn't seem to be ending any time soon.

I'd recommended just running the AP that interests you the most and IF there is a subsystem present that you don't feel like you have a grasp on, then come to the forums and ask for help making it work.

The idea of choosing to run an entire AP based on what's NOT in it can result in unintended consequences, such as being bored with the whole thing. Find one that excites you and ignore the naysayers. They are always out there. Waiting. Watching. Getting ready to post. . .

#Better gaming through better GM'ing for Prez 2016.


Brother Fen wrote:

I've discovered that if one surfs these forums enough, one can find complaints about every single aspect to the game ever created. We live in the midst of the Whine Generation and it doesn't seem to be ending any time soon.

I'd recommended just running the AP that interests you the most and IF there is a subsystem present that you don't feel like you have a grasp on, then come to the forums and ask for help making it work.

The idea of choosing to run an entire AP based on what's NOT in it can result in unintended consequences, such as being bored with the whole thing. Find one that excites you and ignore the naysayers. They are always out there. Waiting. Watching. Getting ready to post. . .

#Better gaming through better GM'ing for Prez 2016.

That sounds like pretty solid advice actually. I'll figure out what the group wants to play and we'll make it work.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Yes, of course, ignore the advice of people who actually have experienced the problems those untested sub-systems caused in their campaigns, because "whining". Great idea. You ignore traffic rules, too, because other people "whined" that running a red light is a bad idea?

Carrion Crown is a solid AP, with an uninspired ending. The first five modules have a mix of investigation and combat, while the sixth module is combat from start to finish.

Reign of Winter is a travel AP where you visit ever increasingly exotic locations. Its modules therefore are pretty much disconnected from each other and modules three and four were not my cup of tea when I read them. Module six also is not that super interesting. Module five, however, is the single best AP module published by Paizo.

Shattered Star is a very solid dungeon-heavy AP, which tried to show that dungeons can also have things like diplomacy and roleplaying. It's on my list of AP's I want to GM one day.

I can't talk about Giantslayer, since I've only skimmed through the artwork, but apparently it also doesn't have any additional new mechanics.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
HeHateMe wrote:
Brother Fen wrote:

I've discovered that if one surfs these forums enough, one can find complaints about every single aspect to the game ever created. We live in the midst of the Whine Generation and it doesn't seem to be ending any time soon.

I'd recommended just running the AP that interests you the most and IF there is a subsystem present that you don't feel like you have a grasp on, then come to the forums and ask for help making it work.

The idea of choosing to run an entire AP based on what's NOT in it can result in unintended consequences, such as being bored with the whole thing. Find one that excites you and ignore the naysayers. They are always out there. Waiting. Watching. Getting ready to post. . .

#Better gaming through better GM'ing for Prez 2016.

That sounds like pretty solid advice actually. I'll figure out what the group wants to play and we'll make it work.

How about we save the good people at Paizo some server space by answering these problems for the APs you listed in the OP.

Kingmaker? It has advice in Book 2 for people who don't want to tackle Kingdom Building. It also has advice for people who don't want to do Massed Combat. That advice more or less comes down to "slice it out and play it by DM fiat."

Iron Gods? Why are you going into a campaign about technology if you don't want technology? The rules are fairly solid, and the whole campaign feels quite soulless without them. Don't bother with Iron Gods if you don't want to bother with Technology rules.

Jade Regent? Slice out Caravan Rules entirely. Same with the Relationship mechanic, which felt truly dreadful and struck me as something that should be done entirely through RP between the DM and players. After all, isn't that what we're here for? You will be happy, your players will be happy, and the players who didn't dump points into Charisma or Diplomacy will be VERY happy.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Yeah about the only campaign that you need to use the subsystem is Wrath of the Righteous, which was a cool story hurt badly by high level play problems compounded with a (sadly) broken rule set if you gain 3 or more mythic ranks.

I rejiggered Kingdom Building and Caravan Combat and my groups are having a blast in Kingmaker and Jade Regent.

Silver Crusade Contributor

DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

Yeah about the only campaign that you need to use the subsystem is Wrath of the Righteous, which was a cool story hurt badly by high level play problems compounded with a (sadly) broken rule set if you gain 3 or more mythic ranks.

I rejiggered Kingdom Building and Caravan Combat and my groups are having a blast in Kingmaker and Jade Regent.

Based on my WotR experience, a decently-optimized party (like, forum-baseline optimization) could handle Wrath without Mythic.

Book 3 of Wrath is rough, especially, since it takes the already-nova-prone Kingmaker structure and adds Mythic to it. It's been hard to deal with.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Brother Fen wrote:
I'd recommended just running the AP that interests you the most and IF there is a subsystem present that you don't feel like you have a grasp on, then come to the forums and ask for help making it work.
magnuskn wrote:
Yes, of course, ignore the advice of people who actually have experienced the problems those untested sub-systems caused in their campaigns, because "whining".

Maybe a bit over the top as a response?

I'd say: you can run whatever interests you the most if you're willing to do a lot of work to fix the problems that are likely to arise. If you want to avoid the work, check the forums in advance to see which APs need least tinkering.

Jade Regent has bad subsystems that are fairly easy to remove (plus some monotonous sections that might be worth swapping out for 3PP alternative content, and a structure that requires the players to buy into the concept and not complain about railroading, and NPCs who don't really do anything most of the time unless the GM makes new content for them...)

Kingmaker's problems are more intrinsic - complicated kingdom-building rules that aren't particularly well balanced, plus 'fight one monster a week' exploration that rewards 'nova' PC builds. If you're willing to work hard to create your own party-specific content, you can have a lot of fun with it.

Silver Crusade Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Matthew Downie wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Yes, of course, ignore the advice of people who actually have experienced the problems those untested sub-systems caused in their campaigns, because "whining".
Maybe a bit over the top as a response?

Please, let's not fight. He has his reasons to feel so strongly about the topic.


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

Namely mythic rules.


'systems' in APs - well

The worst I think are:

Wrath of the Righteous - mass combat and mythic feature very heavy - if you ignore mass combat you take out a decent chunk of two books, mythic is a special child that I won't get into here.

Skull & Shackles - Ship combat isn't used much (or at all) in most of the AP - but it's featured pretty heavy in one of them (5th book IIRC) - if you want to ignore it you'll need rework.

Mummies Mask - The 'panic level' mechanic in book two and 'research mechanic' in book 3 are both integral to how things work. The good news is the panic level (while confusing to understand) works decently and really is a rough outline for the GM to determine the overall city mood, and the research mechanic is fantastic for what it does and really should be incorporated into any 'library' type location for players to use. I think you could ignore the first, but the second would take quite a bit of re-work so it's higher on the list.

Jade Regent - The caravan mechanic apparently everyone hated - however no one seemed to have issues ignoring/removing it from the game either.

Iron Gods - Technology - it's not a 'gimmick' or 'unique' mechanic (much like Mythic from Wrath) however it's hard to find threads claiming that the technology stuff is OP, broken, or has issues. As such it is all over the entire adventure - you can't remove the tech from Iron Gods without making it a pretty bland adventure, but it all works so much like 'magic item X but call it a laser instead of a want of lightning bolt' that it doesn't disrupt the rules or the players much.

AP's without a mechanic:

* Curse of the Crimson Throne
* Shattered Star
* Second Darkness
* Legacy of Fire
* Giantslayer
* Reign of Winter
* Rise of the Runelords

I haven't read through Carrion Crown, Serpents Skull, or Council of Thieves so I can't comment on those :(

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I wouldn't discount magnuskn's experiences, mythic rules do kind of bubble up if used by a group of optimizers. A casual group might get a kick out of it, but more crunch-oriented players will quickly exploit the system.

Yes magunskn, that was me agreeing with you. You can stop cleaning your monitor right now.

However, mythic works perfectly as means of powering up monsters to present surprising challenges to non-mythic groups.

On the topic, Skulls'n'Shackles has the whole ship development and naval combat thing, but I ditched it quickly and run the AP without them. Nobody complains.


I'm glad to hear that the wonky subsystems on some of these APs can be removed or altered if necessary. I'm trying not to ignore anyone and definitely don't want anyone to be labeled as a "whiner".

Switching gears, and I understand this is very subjective, but which APs have consistently been praised by the community and which have received worse reviews?


12 people marked this as a favorite.
HeHateMe wrote:

I'm glad to hear that the wonky subsystems on some of these APs can be removed or altered if necessary. I'm trying not to ignore anyone and definitely don't want anyone to be labeled as a "whiner".

Switching gears, and I understand this is very subjective, but which APs have consistently been praised by the community and which have received worse reviews?

Top praise:

Rise of the Runelords
Kingmaker
Curse of the Crimson Throne

Middle of the road:
Mummies Mask
Skull and Shackles
Reign of Winter
Legacy of Fire
Carrion Crown
Shattered Star

Love it or Hate it (i.e. very polarised)
Wrath of the Righteous
Jade Reagent
Iron Gods

Too Soon to tell:
Giantslayer

Generally Panned (for various reasons):
Second Darkness
Serpents Skull
Council of Thieves

That's my general take on it - if you want to get a better idea of the most loved take a look at the 'which AP should be made into a hardcover' threads.

I will note that the polarizing AP's tend to be so because of overwhelming love or hate of specific themes and elements the AP uses throughout the entire story (i.e. travel/oriental, mythic, tech) and people who enjoy and or really like these elements have rated them in the 'top tier' category - so it comes down to your preferences. The 'generally panned' seem to have some serious clunks in them that take either a very skilled GM to make work, or quite a bit of rework to 'work around'.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ckorik wrote:
*snips out excellent list*

This list is worth more than just a "marked as a favorite".

I have minor quibbles, but not worth distracting from an overall excellent categorization.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Gorbacz wrote:

I wouldn't discount magnuskn's experiences, mythic rules do kind of bubble up if used by a group of optimizers. A casual group might get a kick out of it, but more crunch-oriented players will quickly exploit the system.

Yes magunskn, that was me agreeing with you. You can stop cleaning your monitor right now.

However, mythic works perfectly as means of powering up monsters to present surprising challenges to non-mythic groups.

If mythic is used sparingly in a homebrewn campaign by the GM, it does exactly what Gorbacz said and is indeed a good tool to spice up encounters.

Mythic as used in Wrath of the Righteous is a disaster and not only for groups which optimize. The system would need significant nerfs to become playable.

Anyway, the good AP's:

Rise of the Runelords (revised) is, IMO, the best AP. It has a very decent mix of roleplaying and combat, an interesting story and keeps the party motivated throughout the entire AP.

Curse of the Crimson Throne is also an excellent AP, keeping the party in a single city throughout 2/3's of the AP. The trip outside the city could have been better and shorter, but it still works quite well.

Jade Regent is an excellent AP. It starts in Avistan and then progresses to Tian Xia. The middle modules are a bit weak, in that the third module is an interminable trip over the north pole (a feeling which seems to be intentional by the writer) and the fourth module has an excellent start, but the second half is a way too long dungeon with underpowered opposition (which can be remedied by replacing it with the Ruby Phoenix Tournament adventure, which many have done), but the last two modules make up for it. I would be very interested to see what Paizo would do with an AP all set in Tian Xia.

While I haven't run Shattered Star yet, I am very much looking forward to it, since the entire AP looks to be excellently done from my reading.

And, as I said before, Carrion Crown is a very competently written AP, brought down only by a too combat heavy last module and also that the main villain is a non-entity until the very last fight (which can be remedied by introducing him much earlier. I personally had him appear in the very first module and constantly mentioned him during the entire AP, although he only revealed himself as the bad guy at the end of module five).

People also say good things about Legacy of Fire, although you'd have to ask others about details.


In Brandon's defense, Shadows of Gallowspire was his first AP adventure and he was kind of boxed in as far as adversaries go and locations.

That said I bet if he redid it today, using everything he's learned since you would get a phenomenally creepy adventure :-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
captain yesterday wrote:

In Brandon's defense, Shadows of Gallowspire was his first AP adventure and he was kind of boxed in as far as adversaries go and locations.

That said I bet if he redid it today, using everything he's learned since you would get a phenomenally creepy adventure :-)

Oh, hell yeah. Brandon did supremely good work on Shattered Star 6 and Reign of Winter 5. I'd wish he would write more adventure path modules. But I guess after writing the best single module Paizo has ever published, he wanted to go out on a high note. ;)


Out on a high note, Nope he's just getting started i hope:-)

granted it's not an AP but anything Hodge related will find a way in one of them:-)


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

Well, I was talking specifically about AP's, because I know that Brandon is working on other stuff with Paizo. :)

Hrm, that adventure is a bit too low level to replace part four of Curse of the Crimson Throne, dammit. If I ever GM that AP again, I want the party to spend more time in the city, instead of outside of it.


My hope is that the adventure is merely ramping up into something creepy and occultish in the AP line in the future (I guess I'd like to see something more gothic occult then eastern occult)


Giantslayer has a few boost feats for giants (e.g. make them immune to charm PERSON), but that should be it. At least they have nothing else in the first two books and it doesn't feel like that's going to change.

If you are patient enough, you can dig out the AP specific mechanics here:

http://www.archivesofnethys.com/Sources.aspx?ProductLine=AdventurePath

Scarab Sages

Carrion Crown actually *does* have subsytems in it beyond introducing Haunts to the game (which have stuck around ever since). Book 1 had a trust subsystem with Ravengro that was as gamey and lacking as the Panic system in Mummy's Mask 2. Book 4 introduces a sanity component, but I'm pretty sure its billed as optional.


Haunts have been around since the beginning, at least since The Skinsaw Murders (AP#2)


archmagi1 wrote:
Carrion Crown actually *does* have subsytems in it beyond introducing Haunts to the game (which have stuck around ever since). Book 1 had a trust subsystem with Ravengro that was as gamey and lacking as the Panic system in Mummy's Mask 2. Book 4 introduces a sanity component, but I'm pretty sure its billed as optional.

But CC has other issues. While itt is much praised I can't discourage playing it enough. While the first book might be OK as a stand alone module the first three parts combined sucked hard. No connection evident for the PCs, what was important in part 1 was forgotten in part 2 where you were "forced" to do something completely different first, then something mind boggling after as if the important things from book 1 were forgotten etc.

Then some "dungeon" without loot unless you ransack someones private property.

I left the game as I accumulated ingame reasons to do something else while lacking ANY ingame reason to keep on.

And the so called horror was nowhere to be seen. Hack-slashing monsters left and right isn't horror even if those monsters happen to be undead.

addon: First part sucks for martials because you have to fight incorporeal undead before you have magic weapons. Have fun watching the fights.

Scarab Sages

Oh I don't go very far recommending it either. We got bored after book 2 and kinda meh'd our way through book 3 before giving up on it.

Community & Digital Content Director

Removed a post and response. Knock it off.


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

Eh, I liked Carrion Crown well enough. The lack of connection between modules [b]is[/i] an issue, however. And I forgot about the trust system in module one. The sanity rules have such laughably low saves in module four that my group failed five... combined between all characters.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
captain yesterday wrote:

In Brandon's defense, Shadows of Gallowspire was his first AP adventure and he was kind of boxed in as far as adversaries go and locations.

That said I bet if he redid it today, using everything he's learned since you would get a phenomenally creepy adventure :-)

For us the biggest issue with Shadows was no emotional attachment to either the villain or the GitR. There is a long thread, in which Brandon participates, where the community innovated a better way of making book 6 engage the players. It could have used a little more non-combat, but it was a satisfying conclusion.

Dark Archive

I am very new and am GMing my first AP. I am running Jade Regent. So far everyone is loving it. The caravan stuff is fairly cumbersome but there is a very clear option in the player's guide to not use it if desired. We opted to remove it and haven't had any problems so far. Keep in mind though that everyone else here has more experience at this than me so I may be too new to see an issue but again ours is running very well without the caravan addition.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Almost all of the Paizo APs have some sort of the tertiary subsystem. I haven’t been super fond of most of them but you can usually gut them and the campaign will be no worse for it.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

When we ran KS we probably enjoyed the exploration mechanism a lot more than the running a kingdom mechanism. We eventually just stopped and enjoyed the story, the GM remove the risk and reward of most of the kingdom stuff but I think we kept the events. Kind of blurry, but it was fun.


Kingmaker's kingdom building got an update in Ultimate Campaign, but I never really had a problem with the initial kingdom rules? You don't really need to use them to make the game work, you can easily just have the PCs choose where to make their cities and such and call it a day.


Council of Thieves has a Fame Point system in place which might work if the characters would not have act clandestinely for most of the AP.

Editor, Jon Brazer Enterprises

Just a Guess wrote:
archmagi1 wrote:
Carrion Crown actually *does* have subsytems in it beyond introducing Haunts to the game (which have stuck around ever since). Book 1 had a trust subsystem with Ravengro that was as gamey and lacking as the Panic system in Mummy's Mask 2. Book 4 introduces a sanity component, but I'm pretty sure its billed as optional.

But CC has other issues. While itt is much praised I can't discourage playing it enough. While the first book might be OK as a stand alone module the first three parts combined sucked hard. No connection evident for the PCs, what was important in part 1 was forgotten in part 2 where you were "forced" to do something completely different first, then something mind boggling after as if the important things from book 1 were forgotten etc.

Then some "dungeon" without loot unless you ransack someones private property.

I left the game as I accumulated ingame reasons to do something else while lacking ANY ingame reason to keep on.

And the so called horror was nowhere to be seen. Hack-slashing monsters left and right isn't horror even if those monsters happen to be undead.

addon: First part sucks for martials because you have to fight incorporeal undead before you have magic weapons. Have fun watching the fights.

Having ran the first 4.5 of 6 parts of Carrion Crown, I agree that the Trust and Sanity mechanics are a bit lackluster. (I did have one player contract a permanent mental illness during Book 4, but as soon as a divine caster gets access to greater restoration, it'll be gone.)

Were I to do it over again, I'd drop the Trust mechanic entirely and just have folks make Diplomacy checks with the assumption that everyone in Ravengro is Hostile, with minor +2/-2 adjustments for doing good or bad things for or to the villagers.

I'd also have incorporated the Sanity rules from the beginning of the campaign and not just in Book 4--there's a suspension of disbelief required on the players' part that ghosts, werewolves, and vampires don't mentally disturb them but creepy-crawlies from beyond do.

The treasure lag after the climax of Book 2 is definitely a problem for exactly the reason Just A Guess mentions; I plugged this gap with extra random encounters and story awards from NPCs to get the PCs on par with WBL.

I don't understand the critique JaG is offering in his second sentence, however. Perhaps he can clarify so that GMs and players can offer a rebuttal?

The incorporeal monsters weren't that big of a barrier to martials in my group when they played through Harrowstone Prison, but spells like ghostbane dirge or alchemical ghost salt help, as do some of the items in the treasure caches that can be found early in Book 1.

As to hack n' slash not being horrific: You're right. Which is why a good GM running this campaign will take extra care to describe the monsters in as unsettling a fashion as possible, and play them monstrously, intelligently, and mercilessly. Alternate builds of common creature types like the vampires of Caliphas help out a lot here--look at the GM threads for Ashes At Dawn for some great fan-created examples of that.

To address the OP directly: Carrion Crown has very few subsystems in play, and the ones that are used can easily be ignored or worked around if that's not your cup of tea.

Scarab Sages

Richard Moore wrote:
I don't understand the critique JaG is offering in his second sentence, however. Perhaps he can clarify so that GMs and players can offer a rebuttal?

I think he was referring to Schloss Caromarc. Although kinda ruled by the mad doctor's experiments now, the place is still his property, and if you bring him safely out of the iron maiden at the end, you're kind of carrying around all of his personal property. I'm sure that Beast would be more than happy to give up the things that don't mean anything to him, but the Count (whose life is basically "lose everything, always") may not be so generous to his saviors.

Editor, Jon Brazer Enterprises

Oh, I got that part, and I agree with what he's saying about the treasure in Schloss Caromarc. I was confused by this:

JustaGuess wrote:
No connection evident for the PCs, what was important in part 1 was forgotten in part 2 where you were "forced" to do something completely different first, then something mind boggling after as if the important things from book 1 were forgotten etc.


CC spoilers:
]In the first part you fight the whispering way. Then you bring some books to another place. There we should have gotten some reward for doing so but the Judge told us that we only getr the reward if we help with some problem (might have been the GMs idea). So now instead of looking for the whisperring way we help some intelligent construct without having any reason to do it while the whispering way keeps on doing their sinister stuff.
After being chased around to find out the truth and to prove the beast's innicense you have a rebellion at hand without spells and being fatigued because the the timing doesn't let you sleep.
Despite having much below wbl we had to invest in a scroll of nap stack.

The mop that is attacking the prison and wants to lynch the beast must not be harmed (why?) permanently so half the party has to stand by and do nothing and/or risk their own life rather than the mob's (totally silly in a fantsy world).
After that was finally over we get our reward and when we assume we are now allowed to go back to hunting the whispering way but no, we have to go to some idiot's castle, find out it's overrun by monsters. And still, we don't go back to doing something useful, no we decide to clear the damn castle whithout having any real reason to do it while still, the necromancers run rampant, planning to free the whispering tyrant.

During the beginning of the castle clearance we had something between level 2-3 wbl, during the castle we were reduced further by a rust monster. The complete part 2 was utter trash.

When the only party member my PC had any connection to was killed my pc left the castle to bring the corpse to some temple and I left the game.


Richard Moore wrote:
The incorporeal monsters weren't that big of a barrier to martials in my group when they played through Harrowstone Prison, but spells like ghostbane dirge or alchemical ghost salt help, as do some of the items in the treasure caches that can be found early in Book 1.

We found 1 magic weapon early on. But not much else. No ghost salt or anything else that would have helped. Of the 4 or 5 big bads in part 1 there have been 3 incorporeals. That resulted in 3 fights I had to sit by and watch because I was not the one to get the one magic weapon.

We did not have the money to buy consumables ourselves.

Martials can't cast magic weapon, ghostbane dirge etc. Sure the casters could have done that. But a better adventure design would not leaave the martials at the caster's beck and call.

derail:
I do not want to derail this thread but this clearly shows the main problem of the caster/martial disparity. It is seldom so obvious at so low levels but the adventure is designed in a way that only casters can solve it.


Just a Guess wrote:
** spoiler omitted **

Possible worth noting: the problems you're told to solve in CC Book 2 are all caused by the plans of the main campaign villains. Unfortunately you're not really told this until you get to the end of the book, and most of what you do in that book is only peripherally related to thwarting those plans.


That is totally irrelevant.
From an in-game perspective there is really no reason for the PCs to solve the problems in part 2 and abandon their goal of stopping the WW. And because that is the case it is a bad adventure.
And that is the reason I can only recommend staying away from it.


Oh boo hoo!

Someone's GM sucks at doing courtroom drama and corresponding mystery and can't change things themselves, doesn't mean the whole thing is rubbish. Maybe if your GM wasn't a jerk about rewards and handing out even less treasure then the path already does you wouldn't have had such a bad time :-)

1 to 50 of 57 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Path / General Discussion / Which APs don't have bizarre experimental rules and sub-systems? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.