How Hard Should it Be? Adventure Card Game Power Curves

Tuesday, June 9, 2015

Now that Wrath of the Righteous is finally in players' hands, I'd like to talk with you all about the thematic and mechanical motivations behind the different difficulty of each Adventure Path. In order to do this, I'm going to talk about each set while trying not to spoil anything, just in case some of you haven't started one of the sets.

Let's talk about what it's like to work on a game that's always changing and yet always somewhat the same. We explicitly design each PACG Adventure Path to be compatible with all of the others. This means that once you know how to play the game, you can easily jump into any set... and if you really like a particular character from a particular set, you can bring it into a different AP. Our default example of this is Lirianne, the iconic Gunslinger character in Skull & Shackles. If you decide that you'd really like to play Lirianne in Rise of the Runelords, Wrath of the Righteous, or in our upcoming release, Mummy's Mask, you can do so, and she'll work just fine. For Lirianne, we recommend that you also bring along some of the firearms from S&S, but that's up to you—she works either way.

At the same time, we also spend a lot of time, effort, and brainpower to make each Aventure Path a new and interesting experience. We use a wide variety of techniques to do this, including new characters, new mechanics, and of course, a brand-new story with each one. One important technique we use that might not be obvious to everyone is the power curve. This is a technical term we use to roughly mean, "How hard is it to get through the adventure at different points along the path?" If you've ever studied writing and film—and especially if you've ever GM'd a long campaign—you've gone through at least some of this process yourself. How strong are the characters at the start? When things get tough (as they usually do), when does it happen, and how often? Do the characters have the resources they need to protect themselves? Do they use them wisely, or do they have to scramble to get where they need to be? As the plot unfolds, are they ahead of the game, behind the eight ball, or both... and do they know it?

In our first AP, Rise of the Runelords, the adventurers start out in the small coastal city of Sandpoint. As the adventure begins, the town is attacked! A few minutes later, the typical adventuring party is moving from location to location, finding goblins with torches and kicking them in their oh-so-many teeth.

Mechanically speaking, the characters start off in a position of relative strength, but also ignorance. Unless they are risky or get unlucky, the typical character can go toe-to-toe with the typical goblin and expect to come out on top most of the time, especially if there's some help available. In the story, though, it's unclear why these torch-toting goblins would trouble the town. Figuring out that secret is the step that takes Rise of the Runelords from a one-shot "defend the town" session to an epic campaign against an ancient evil of the first order. As the story progresses, the characters grow in both knowledge and power, facing and overcoming increasingly dangerous threats on their way (both figuratively and literally) to the top.

In Rise of the Runelords, the character power progression is more or less linear over time, while the difficulty of challenges is a curve that dips and then rises. Character power starts very slightly behind the power curve in Adventure B. Then the difficulty curve dips beneath the power curve through the middle of the Adventure Path, rising over time until, very near the end, the two lines approach.

In story terms, this represents the change in difficulty as...

Rise of the Runelords spoilers
... you discover the stone giants behind the ogres, the rune giants behind the stone giants, and eventually the ancient Azlanti behind it all.

In Skull & Shackles, the doughty adventurers are press-ganged into service on a vessel most piratical. You start off by learning to handle life at sea, including learning to crew a vessel (and learning to hate geese) and learning how to get along with the rest of the crew, be they friendly or otherwise.

Here the characters start the campaign off-kilter—they're quickly tossed into a situation that's unlike what they're used to facing. Whether you played Rise of the Runelords or not, you probably recognized at some gut level that Valeros could fight his way free of his captors, but he would be alone on a boat in the middle of an unfamiliar sea. From both a narrative and a mechanical perspective, Skull & Shackles was a bit more difficult than Rise of the Runelords because we forced you to learn to do new things. You could still focus on being the strongest fighter, awesomest bard, or stabbiest rogue, but unless you could also handle yourself underwater, navigate a ship, and manage a crew, you were very likely to run into serious trouble. In game terms, we forced you to spread out your resources. Most characters can't afford to dedicate every card and feat to a single, focused goal.

In Skull & Shackles, the difficulty is much closer to linear—the difficulty increases mostly steadily over time—but the character power progression follows a parabolic curve. In the very beginning scenarios, character power is somewhat above the difficulty line, but it dips down below the line quickly in AD1, and then rises above the line for much of the AP. Near the end, the character power curve levels out, and it comes very close to the difficulty line by the end.

In story terms, this...

Skull & Shackles spoilers
... represents the narrative progression of the characters as they start out as "fish out of water" and then come to master their new environment, as they escape from captivity, gain their own ship, then make their mark in the Shackles as part of the Pirate Council. Eventually, they discover an invasion plot and move from freebooting around the islands to confronting the Chelish fleet and taking the fight directly to the Hurricane King.

In our current Adventure Path, Wrath of the Righteous, you're in the city of Kenabres to celebrate a famous past battle against the demonic invasion into the Worldwound. Just when the festivities are about to officially start, something very bad happens. This time, though, it's not goblins with torches or pirates with whips. It's demons... lots of demons. Again, I don't want to spoil too much, but the title of the first scenario in Adventure 1 is "The Fall of Kenabres." (I can assure you that it's not the follow-up to "The Summer of Kenabres.")

This is our third set, and we have once again changed things while keeping the game the same. In this case, the characters start out "behind the curve," both in knowledge and in raw power level. The demons you face right from the get-go are tougher, more numerous, and just meaner than you've seen before. On the other hand, you have a bunch of new tools to even the score. In particular, Wrath of the Righteous adds both cohorts and mythic power. Cohorts are a new card type in this Adventure Path, representing important, named characters that will help you in your struggles against the demonic hordes.

Cohorts are bonus cards given to the party at the start of scenarios. They make you a little bit tougher, and in the right hands, they have some potent powers. Additionally, we've brought you mythic path cards, representing the unlocked potential for mythic power possessed by each of the characters in this set. Paul talked about these already, but the way they're added to the AP is important here: mythic paths are unlocked by a specific event that happens in the story. When you're playing Wrath of the Righteous, you get a chance to play a number of scenarios before you pick a mythic path card, which helps with your understanding of the card and the narrative arc of the story. On the one hand, you now have some experience with the character, and you can make a better choice of which path will be the most fun. On the other hand, it lets us level up the characters in a new way. This helps us create the feeling of being slightly overwhelmed and in trouble at the start of the AP, but it then gives you a dramatic moment where you start climbing out of the pit, bringing yourself up to the level of—and even potentially ahead of—the mass of terrible, evil banes we've assembled for you.

In Wrath of the Righteous, both the character power level and the difficulties they face are curved. Difficulty starts high, but dips quickly below the character power level before rising again. At the same time, character power level starts off relatively linear, rising as the characters recover their footing.

In story terms...

Wrath of the Righteous spoilers
... the characters start off behind the curve as the initial troubles with the Worldwound are overbearing. You don't start with the feeling that you can solve the problems of the Worldwound so much as you hope that you can withstand them. As those that survive the initial onslaught unlock their mythic potential, the character power curve catches up and exceeds the difficulty curve. These things are tricky, though, and only time (and more Adventure Deck releases!) will reveal what the future holds for your valiant crusaders!

The use of the d20 in mythic paths is the final piece in the puzzle here. While it increases the top end of your checks, it doesn't help with everything. It also doesn't change the bottom end at all. As many discovered while demoing and playing WotR at the recent Origins Game Fair, d20s roll 1s just like every other die. In a set like Skull & Shackles, the d20 would be "too swingy" to use often, but in Wrath of the Righteous, it's a great fit. You each have within you the potential to do truly amazing things, but so do your opponents. The results are far from certain... which is kinda what we were going for.

Since we released Wrath of the Righteous, we've heard from some people that the start of the Adventure Path— especially the scenarios in Adventure B—are tougher than they expected. Hopefully, you now have a better idea what we were trying to accomplish with this set and how did it. On the other hand, if you are finding that the start of WotR is so hard that you're not having enough fun, there are a number of options available.

First and foremost, remember that the B Adventure is optional for the Adventure Path. It's recommended, but it's not required. If you would prefer to start with Adventure Deck 1: The Worldwound Incursion, that's perfectly fine. Also, if you'd like to play a little bit of AD1 and then go back and complete the B Adventure, you should feel free to do so. In a more extreme variation, you might even choose to finish all of AD1 before completing the B scenarios, but be aware that you will be significantly stronger at that point. In the end, any way that you find to have fun is a great way to play.

Chad Brown
Adventure Card Game Lead Developer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Adventure Card Game
201 to 214 of 214 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

Borissimo wrote:
It's true that the B scenarios of RotR are more distinctly memorable than the ones in S&S. However, to generalize from this that 3 scenarios are better than 5 is an exercise in flawed logic.

Sorry, probably my post got a bit lost in translation and I didn't really explain myself very well. I wasn't arguing we have 3 scenarios based solely on the fact that 'I remember the RotRL scenarios more so than S&S so 3 is better than 5' - I think what I was sort of trying to say (in my opinion) is that only having 3 scenarios for RotRL didn't hurt the experience and for me personally, may have enhanced it in some ways by pushing players into the AD1 experience sooner, but also giving them a little 'tutorial' feel too.

I was just responding to the debate about the purpose of the B scenarios and what they should contain, with my suggestion that perhaps reducing the number might allow the developers to keep them more focused as tutorials.

I wasn't stating that the "memorability" of scenarios was the main reason for this suggestion (that was a by product of my argument really), but at the same time perhaps there is an argument at times that 'less is more'.

But I also agree that the core sets are a massive outlay of cash, and value for money is paramount. Although again, never hurt my experience of RotRL to have just 3 B scenarios.


Oh, I see! Sorry for my misunderstanding. I'd still prefer there to be 5 scenarios even if their main purpose is introductory, but I can see where you're coming from.


Chad Brown wrote:
Greyhawke115 wrote:
Using the B scenarios for the opportunity to introduce new and returning players is exactly what I am hoping for.

We certainly want to do this with some of the B scenarios. I'm curious if people think that this should be the main function of all 5 B scenarios, or not?

Alternatives include:

  • making some of the B scenarios optional, without cutting out the feat rewards.
  • Using some of the B scenarios to introduce the story of the AP.
  • Using some of the B scenarios to "level up" the characters.
  • Using some the B scenarios to introduce the background/setting of the AP.
  • Designing some of the B scenarios to be "full speed, full difficulty, fully-replayable" scenarios.

These obviously aren't mutually exclusive, and to some degree we try to do all of them (and other things) with the B scenarios. My questions on this topic are mostly about trying to figure out what's the best balance for future sets.

Thanks again for playing, and thanks for all the feedback!

I alwasy thought the B scenarios were the starting point for introducing the setting of the AP and getting especially new players started/familiar with the game system. I had no idea, that they could be something else than an intro.


Add me to the camp that thinks more content is better. I prefer 5 base scenarios to 3.

I think of the base scenarios as a testing ground for new characters, as well as an opportunity to become familiar with the new mechanics of the set.

The base scenarios should have a reward, such as a single feat, so that you do get something for playing them (besides upgrades), but not so much that you feel you've missed a great deal if you skip them. They should be optional.

For this reason, I don't think the base scenarios should introduce the storyline of the main adventure path. The base scenarios should introduce the general environment of the main adventure path, not the story.


To be clear, I am not advocating downgrading to 3 scenarios and done. I am advocating moving to 3 base scenarios PLUS two optional challenge scenarios, as optional additions to AD1. Same content, more variety, and making it into the AD1 set a bit sooner.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My team jumped straight into adventure B.... Here's some live commentary :

Wtf....?
S%!& just got real...
Medic..... Mediccc...!!
What sorcery is this....?!?

Long story short it was AWESOME! Everyone was so close to death at one time or a other... We can up with a set of house "rules" to survive WotR (kinda like zombieland).. A side running bet when the mage would actually die (as he was playing a bit reckless..). We really had to pull together as a team and we made it to ap2-5.

This was really what we wanted in WotR as we found RotR rather too easy at the end. Now we are carefully eyeing the enemy scaling effect (add 2x ap number to difficulty) of the banes vs our combat capability. we're stronger now but there's that lingering feeling of fear despite powering up our char. The mage still gets minor coronary whenever a carrion golem reveals... Everyone's very worried about death of righteousness barrier... Thought we could farm redeem corrupted stuff in 2-5 and found how the hand recharge and Constitution check f***s things up...

Thanks paizo! :)


Just as another data point, I've pretty much lost interest in buying any future Pathfinder products because of the design choices in Wrath of the Righteous. I soloed through the first 3 B scenarios with Alain, Kyra and Seoni. Seoni encountered the Carrion Golem twice. I don't understand how this card survived playtesting, it is neither fun nor interesting. It may as well say "If you are a cloth caster, you die."

Arboreal Blight is also just bizarre, making everyone fight a monster that's worse than most of the villains in AD1 in the previous 2 games *and* possibly summoning another monster to fight on top of that.


Solo is difficult for some char and may be impossible for others. It's really a team work game.. Rulebook says to remove some cards you can't handle on page 18.. :)


By soloed I mean I played by myself. I used 3 characters (Alain, Kyra, and Seoni).


Ah I misunderstood.

We found enora very vulnerable in early scenarios. Figured it was quite typical for mages at low level - later will shine. Finally we worked out a few rules. Apart from exploring only locations the char can close, each char must be able to fight and/or evade. It's even worth a round to just waste a timer if team is unprepared - losing a fight and near dying sets back further.. Mage must count Cards and use his natural spell recharge (it's really a heal ability) to keep his damage as low as possible. Alain can be as reckless as he wishes... Just grab a couple of lances and he's set. Kyra is almost unkillable with her heal abikity. At the start to keep enora alive just pick 3-4 basic cure spells instead of the recommended starting configuration. Enora should group with kyra. If enora hits a golem she can't handle and handwipes + 3 dmg from golem (almost dead) kyra can cast heal before enora turn ends. Alain Solo the crap out of locations. He can even handle the lava pool as his ability allows him to run in, explore and run out.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think one of the main weaknesses of PACG is that you can't easily grab the game with a bunch of friends and start playing, unless you've been playing the entire game with those people so far.

So it would be cool if like one or two of the B scenarios were not part of a B path or the adventure path at all, but just separate, box content-scalable and repayable scenarios. Kind of like an adventure path independent default play mode, which you can play whatever the current contents of your box, with a fresh character scaled up to the box level in some very simple, very quick way (perhaps some kind of drafting mechanism could be fun? Or integrate it in playing the actual scenario in a clever way, I don't know, I'm not a game designer).

That way PACG doesn't only become more of a stand-alone game, it crucially also becomes a stand alone experience when you want it to. And if the scenarios are implemented with enough variability that playing them more often doesn't necessarily feel like actually playing the same scenario, it actually would also be something you could play with your characters after finishing the main adventure path.

It's far from trivial to implement a scenario with this kind of flexibility and variability, if it even can be done at all. But if done well, it would increase the value of the base set for pretty every type of player.

Adventure Card Game Designer

For folk concerned about difficulty of Wrath B scenarios, there are two new entries on the FAQ today. One concerns a fix to Vinst which makes him function the way he's intended in The Elven Entanglement. The other gives an optional swap of some cards by set to make the B scenarios a bit easier. Hope that helps.


You've been busy today with updates!

Pathfinder ACG Developer

Mike's always busy; today it's just _visibly_ busy :)

201 to 214 of 214 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Card Game / General Discussion / Paizo Blog: How Hard Should it Be? Adventure Card Game Power Curves All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.