GhostParadigm's page

5 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS


Zaister wrote:

I guess he means the Player's Guide with the information about Torch.

And yes, if you play an adventure path, players should definitely have read the appropriate Player's Guide.

Yeah that's what I meant. That is partially my fault. I was running Ire of the Storm previously and expected to just be able to jump in. Not the case lol. I was rushed a bit into running this.

I really do appreciate the amount of great writing put in to the town and the backstory. Unfortunately the adventure path just didn't work out for my players. I've read about other groups that had a great time doing Iron Gods and their players were more inventive in roleplaying.


Demonskunk wrote:

I'm really frustrated with this adventure. there are a number of encounters that seem like they were written by people with no knowledge of encounter design.

** spoiler omitted **

Obviously as the GM I can deal with small omissions like that, but it's still frustrating.

Not happy with this adventure path so far, I hope the quality goes up with book 2 :T

I'd say go with it if you haven't already. The AP needs a rewrite anyway. It has pacing issues, poorly designed encounters, and a lot of backstory that relies on the players having read the player companion.


Demonskunk wrote:

I'm really frustrated with this adventure. there are a number of encounters that seem like they were written by people with no knowledge of encounter design.

** spoiler omitted **

Obviously as the GM I can deal with small omissions like that, but it's still frustrating.

Not happy with this adventure path so far, I hope the quality goes up with book 2 :T

I just recently finished running this adventure after running most of Ire of the Storm. I really disliked a number of things about Fires of Creation that I will cover in the spoiler below. The encounters are poorly done and feel like filler.

Plot and encounter spoilers:
Given the urgency of an extremely important NPC to the city missing and possibly dead... my party (and I agreed) logically wanted to rescue him as soon as possible. That meant we had to go through the first area (water and caves) through a bunch of weak fights, then through the habitat module (again more trivial encounters), and then through the ship area to find Khonnir. It's a lot of fighting that was expected to be broken up but made little sense to be broken up.

Also, the whole Silverdisk Hall event we skipped because of the above. I think this would have been a neat thing to have done but we did not spend a week in town and we're not going to go gamble when a man's life is at stake lol.

I think this adventure would have benefited greatly from better pacing, a more engaging town (additional quests/interactions/exploration), better designed encounters,
and less emphasis on ridiculous DCs for less tech oriented characters.


PossibleCabbage wrote:

Should my answers about "Gaming community" be more representative or the 5-6 people with which I regularly play these sorts of games, or the broader community of enthusiasts with which I could play these sorts of games (e.g. at a Convention) or the even broader group of people with which I might discuss these sorts of game (e.g. on these message boards)?

Since, for example, the group I personally play with is carefully curated to avoid the sorts of prejudices I feel one is very likely to encounter, say, at random tables at a convention.

You raise a great point. The terms need to be better defined. I'd really like to take this survey but I can not until it is revised. OP, please revise and come back.


You say you're looking for distinctions but the questions asked don't seem to distinguish different categories of gaming. For example, there is a question about ways that we game in a community or group. For me it is mmorpgs and Pathfinder and there would be a difference in my responses depending on the game we're talking about (Pathfinder vs MMORPG). The answers I could provide would be answering for both game types. I could not finish the survey because of this. I think the survey needs to be revised.