Jason S's page

Stairs is a combat romp in a great setting with challenging opponents. There isn’t a lot of roleplaying, however the setting and maps are interesting and it’s a good time.

This scenario had a "Rise of the Runelords" feel to it, which I enjoyed. I was really glad to see an iconic monster return to PFS! I was also glad to see an abundance of useful items on the chronicle sheet. I liked the references to the cooking pots, which can have the gore level increased or decreased depending on the group/GM. The reference to Xin Shalast was also exciting, hope we get to explore it.

Temple of EE is an investigation scenario with some roleplay elements. I love roleplaying scenarios, however I didn't feel like the roleplay or intrigue elements in this scenario were strong enough for the scenario to focus on it almost exclusively.

The encounters were extremely difficult for 4 players at subtier 1-2. If we were level 1 (instead of 2), we would have TPKed (or lost a few PCs and ran) because of a few very powerful abilities, through no fault of our own.

Serpent was just OK. The mission felt very mercenary, mundane, and didn't particularly interest me (or my PC).

I didn't find the encounters very believable, I think the enemies should have reacted more to our actions and been more intelligent / believable. In other words, we should have failed.

Maps. I took a quick peek at the (custom) maps and they looked pretty awesome. Unfortunately for GMs that love using sharpees, they look like crap. My GM didn't even bother drawing most of the rooms, he just said "Do you want to go through the east or north door". It was very hard to visualize where I was going and made the session less immersive. Also, almost every room was empty, which was part of the reason he didn't bother to draw anything. Sure, it's not the fault of the author but I just wanted to tell you what's happening in practice. The use of the flip map actually worked out great.

Regarding the story in Serpent, I neither understood why we were killing the enemy (besides the fact they had something we want), who they were, or why they wanted our stuff. From my perspective, there was no story that I could see (besides the obvious).

There was a good opportunity for roleplaying at the beginning, but it was shortlived. It was also ruined by a noisy games room. This was the best part of the scenario.

I have mixed feelings about Pagoda. On one hand we had a great time (it was mostly because of the players). On the other hand I didn't find the scenario itself very memorable. Too much time was spent by my GM drawing maps.

The combats were balanced but not memorable overall. We actually ended up bypassing all of the encounters except for two combat encounters. I'm honestly not sure how anyone finishes either Rats 1 or 2 on time if you're not diplomatic. Luckily, most groups have a diplomacy monkey, so it isn't an issue.

Everflame is a coming of age story which features some travel and a classic dungeon crawl. The story behind Everflame also makes it a great introduction to Pathfinder Society (because it's assumed you'll get recruited afterwards).

Unfortunately Everflame is too deadly in a few encounters, especially if the players are new to Pathfinder.

Although (mostly) irrelevant to PFS, Everflame also contains a detailed description and map of the town of Kassen, including many NPCs as well as your mentors/trainers. The town can easily be used as a springboard for an entire campaign.

For PFS, loot on the chronicle was relevant and useful, which is rare.

I found that the story link between Everflame and the next module, "Masks of the Living God", was weak. It wasn’t a storyline that my players were excited to pursue.

Paizo has thrown down the gauntlet. Yes, the challenge level of scenarios has been increased substantially in Season 3. Girly girl PCs need not apply when adventuring in groups of 4. I feel this scenario was designed for a group of six veteran players with well-made PCs.

Heaven is very combat centric and the combat encounters are both interesting and well designed.

This scenario is not an appropriate introduction to PF for new players with level 1 PCs. In this scenario, even if you win, it's likely that someone is going home in a body bag (ignoring fudging and GMs ignoring helpless PCs). If you took the four level 1 pregens (Valeros, Merisiel, Ezren, Kyra) and played this scenario, I don't think they're making it out alive. Needless to say, your group should think twice about playing up.

When we asked for increased challenge, I would have preferred if the challenge level was increased moderately. In season 1, some subtier 1-2 bosses have an average potential damage of 9 damage with an unlikely chance to hit (Citadel of Flame). The bar has now been raised to an average potential of 46 damage per round (with a likely chance to hit). Do I think it's way over the top? H*** yes.

In addition to the combat encounters, I also enjoyed the environmental effects of the scenario, which makes it more "realistic" and illustrates the need for non-combat spells / feats. I thought the bridge was good too, although some GMs/players won't feel the same way (my GM cut it out).

Even a hint (a paragraph or a single incident) of something different about Tian Xia compared to Absalom would have been welcome. I think local flavor is a very important part of any scenario, and I don't necessarily feel that every GM should have to read every source book to give their players a taste of the locale.

Length: Fits into a 4 hour slot easily. Could be done much faster depending on how well the GM is prepared.
Sweet Spot: Both subtiers are good, but I prefer subtier 4-5 for the expanded boss abilities.
Experience: Player at subtier 1-2 with six (level 2) PCs. I'm GMing Heaven soon as well.
Entertainment: It's combat centric, but it's still a good time. (8/10)
Roleplay: The roleplaying aspects of this scenario are going to be dependent on the GM to add fluff. The guides should have tried to travel with us a little farther, to act as a foil, comedic relief, and possible cannon fodder. (2/10)
Combat/Challenges: I thought the encounters were challenging and unique for a travel scenario. (9/10)
Maps: Good use of flips maps and unique maps. (8/10)
Boons: The boon is in Part 3, although you need to play all 3 parts to get it. (n/a)
Uniqueness: Unique for a travel based scenario. (9/10)
Faction Missions: Average, but perhaps they did the best they could with this type of scenario. (6/10)
Overall: Enjoyable travel centric scenario designed for tough/normal PCs. (8/10)

I think 'The Edge of Heaven' will be an enjoyable journey for most groups, but maybe not so much for the guy who leaves in a bodybag.

This is the map you want for ship to ship combat.

I see the other reviewer's gripe about not being able to see all ship levels on one side, but that's a minor gripe and that's what map packs and perhaps printing out part of the PDF is for.

One of the most useful flipmaps they've made, I've used this map in a number of games.

There's no reason they shouldn't just make another print run of this one, I think they're losing money by not doing it. I think the pirate ship and this map can co-exist peacefully. Tis boat is more of a trading vessel whereas the pirate ship is made for combat.

I think this scenario will be potentially deadly for underpowered classes and/or inexperienced players, particularily if the PC casters aren't played well.

Some groups will find this scenario difficult but enjoyable, however with the wrong PC mix it's a nightmare. It certainly was for us. Having said that, the NPCs will only be as good as the GM wants them to be (or can make them), so the scenario difficulty can be adjusted with tactics alone.

The second encounter is frustrating for the same reason that similar encounters are frustrating in other scenarios. It's even worse this time since the enemy can counter your counter. If you're going to have contentious rules that heavily affect an encounter, they deserve 1-2 lines of explanation of the author's intention in the scenario. I sat at a table with 5 GMs and we could not come to a consensus on a certain spell/game rules. My GM did not run it correctly, which made the encounter more difficult.

The remaining encounters in the scenario could easily kill or TPK thoughtless and/or cocky players.

Although unique, I found the loot mechanics of the final encounter confusing and inconsistent with other scenarios.

I consider this a well designed scenario, however I feel like it's not designed for the Average Joe player and it heavily favors some of the more powerful PF classes that can control the battlefield.

I want to give this scenario a good review, but I had an awful time playing it myself and I know that it would TPK my home group (wrong class mix), so I can't in good conscience give it a good review when I know it will destroy so many groups. It's scenarios like these that make you think twice about sitting down with a table of strangers.

Delve is a basic dungeon crawl with some good (potential) roleplaying at the beginning and the end. The combats are appropriately challenging (easy) for level 1 PCs (with one dangerous encounter). There are some simple puzzles and curiosities for the PCs to play with. It can be easily finished in 4 hours or less.

We played this with 3 casters and pregen Valeros.

Delve does the job and isn't a bad introduction to Pathfinder, however it's not very glamorous and isn't as interesting as Parts 1 + 3.

Hinojai is an investigation and combat based scenario.

Edit: I've had to reduce the rating on this scenario. The story (as written) is not conveyed at all. Which makes the haunted house a series of unrelated traps. I had the fortune (?) that my 1st GM added lots of story, but as written this is a bland scenario.

The combat encounters were extremely easy, with both groups.

I thought the best part was the opening sequence at the house, because it set the stage.

The horror experience was a little too G-rated for my tastes and I'll be adding fluff when I GM it.

Nesting Swallow was fairly innovative and had a great climax. It was fun being a "super hero" at the end. I really enjoyed myself.

It also had the best (and most witty) faction missions I've ever seen. Several of the players failed their faction missions because they just weren't thinking. And the best part is that it didn't revolve around skill checks or McGuffins. Well done.

I can't however give it 5 stars for the following reasons:

I really liked this scenario, but like most scenarios, the enjoyment will be strongly affected by GM preparation, handouts, and fluff to make the scenario more organic and less mechanical.

Fortune's Blight was a short straightforward scenario. The scenario was simple, it didn't involve any sandbox play, and you are pretty much lead from encounter to encounter.

Blight can be a challenging scenario. It's especially deadly if the PCs have the wrong group composition or make the wrong decisions. The challenge level of the encounters can vary dramatically, depending on the tactics the GM uses and if he runs the NPCs correctly.

Imo, the story aspect of this scenario is overrated (the 'novelty' of homosexual themes is overused), but the story could also get lost depending on the storyteller. I found that it was very easy to get confused with regards to the story, especially if the GM reads the box text only.

There were noticeable stat block errors in Blight (in Sevenarches, on beach), as well a story inconsistency (the reason to kill Tylaca). If I saw this much with my naked eye, there are surely plenty more.

Regarding the recovery of magic items. If Pathfinders are going to recover magic items/artifacts, could they please be more powerful than +2 items? Sometimes it hardly seems worth the effort (1-3 months of travel, time wasted). Especially when several of us were using much more powerful 'artifacts' ourselves.

Length: 3 hours. Could take less/more time, we took our time, didn't have a lot of roleplay, but we finished combat quickly.
Sweet Spot: Both subtiers seemed appropriate for the story.
Experience: 6 players at subtier 8-9 (2 pregens). I also read the scenario afterwards.
Entertainment: Slightly entertaining. (7/10)
Roleplay: It's really up to the GM to add roleplay and liven it up. (6/10)
Combat/Challenges: Definitely challenging but not unique. A PC died even with 6 players at the correct APL. (8/10)
Maps: I didn't like the maps. Also, map packs and flip maps could be used. (5/10)
Boons: Best "boon" I've seen so far. Finally, something that makes sense. (10/10)
Uniqueness: Average. (7/10)
Faction Missions: Average. (7/10)
Overall: Short, simple, straightforward scenario, with a touch of deadliness. (7/10)

I think it's really up to the GM to liven this scenario up, convey the story in a simple and straightforward fashion, and play these deadly opponents to the best of their ability (especially for optimized groups).

This set of paper minis is unbelievably good. A lot of fine detail and effort went into this set, making it look first rate and "realistic". This is the best looking set of minis I've seen so far.

There are lots of minis you can commonly use: Wraiths, spectres, skeletal champions, skeletons (some L), skeletal warhorse and rider, evil clerics, orcs, zombies, shadows, imps, creepy dudes, gugs, gargoyles (L), barbed devils, bone devils, pile of dead bodies, DEATH, and an umbral dragon.

The most amazing mini is the Purple worm, which is huge enough to scare the pants off your players.

I also forgot, there are 23 pages of minis in this set, making it one of the largest sets.

I find that paper minis are excellent for NPCs and monsters. They're cheap, fairly easy to make, light, easy to transport. They're basically perfect, especially for limited use.

The problem with this set is that it's aimed at the PC market. For PCs, I'd rather use plastic or metal minis. They're more durable, less hassle, and look better. I also use paper/metal minis to identify PCs from the NPCs (paper minis).

It's definitely a personal preference, but I just can't take the artwork on these minis seriously. The quality of art is very good, it's just not a style I prefer. The art is also too silly to use for NPCs (I guess it would be ok for a silly NPCS).

So I'm rating this product on the actual use I got out of the product (none so far), not the quality of art (which was excellent), or the quantity of minis (which was quite a few). If you like the art and don't mind the drawbacks of paper minis, you'll like this product.

Rushed editing. Those are the two words that come to mind when I think about this scenario. Like so many other flawed scenarios, it has a great concept, but it suffers from a lack of development in the details. I get the feeling the entire scenario was rushed out the door, which is a shame.

The lack of editing is apparent from the start, major plot elements don’t match in both part 1 and part 2 of the series (does teleportation not work because of an intentional Dimensional Anchor or is it because of the orb?), although most players won’t care or will miss it.

The main problem with this scenario is the sheer number of combat encounters. There are too many combat encounters, they’re too repetitious, and they’re potentially too hard (especially if the PCs did poorly in the scenario before). If the PCs messed up before, chances are they won’t finish this scenario because they TPK or a lack of time. Either way, not fun.

A lot of really basic things didn’t make sense in this scenario either, which will bother thinking players and GMs.

Faction missions are some of the worst I’ve seen, several of them are confusing (for both player and GM), and/or too difficult. They’re also a distraction and will likely make the scenario go overtime if they are even done at all. This scenario would have benefited from having only 1 mission per faction, or perhaps been more innovative and not had any at all.

There is a lack of roleplaying in this scenario, but it didn’t have to be written this way. Because of the lack of roleplaying, it actually made the scenario seem less dramatic than it could have been. Roleplaying builds suspension. In general I would have appreciated more roleplaying opportunities and less combats.

I think the tracking of Awareness from Part 1 didn't work very well.

Finally, I believe there needs to be consequences for major decisions that PCs make, even if they are cosmetic only.

Also, there were a lot of stat block errors, most notably with the big boss. RAW, the encounter with the big boss is anti-climatic.

Length: At least 5-6 hours. When I played it, it took 5 hours and we only finished 4 encounters out of 7. When I GMed it, it took 5.5 hours.
Sweet Spot: Subtier 3-4 is best. Subtier 1-2 is too deadly and subtier 6-7 doesn’t scale well.
Experience: Player and GM at subtier 3-4 with 4 players in each.
Entertainment: RAW, it’s a good idea but not executed well. (7/10)
Roleplay: RAW, very little. (2/10)
Combat/Challenges: Too hard, too repetitious, no interesting choices, too many combats. (3/10)
Maps: Awesome main map. Kudos. (10/10)
Boons: There should have been a boon, but there isn’t. (n/a)
Uniqueness: Despite its flaws, it was a cool idea and unique. (10/10)
Faction Missions: Crapppppppp. (2/10)
Overall: Cool concept, I think it just suffered from a lack of editing and development. (5/10)

Snakes is a fast, solid, easy-to-run scenario.

Your players will find it enjoyable but probably not memorable. I don’t however regret playing this scenario; I had a good time, especially within the context of the series. There is a lot of (potential) roleplay in this scenario, which is the best part of the scenario.

Our run of this scenario was also a "cakewalk" and we should have played up (APL 6.75) and didn't.

Also, I wish that writers would stop multi-classing their NPCs "to make them interesting". It makes them weak, and I believe it's also a reason why the scenario was so easy.

Also, there was a lot of DR in this scenario, which makes one of the encounters impossible for some groups and something you want to handwave for other groups.

The Dog Pharaohs’ tomb has everything that should be in an iconic Pathfinder scenario. A good story, traps, puzzles, challenging fights, it awards players who think, and it even has some roleplay.

Several of the fights can be handled in many ways, and if the PC charge without thought, they could suffer. I found them innovative. This is exactly what I’ve been looking for in scenarios.

The puzzle could have been a little more difficult. My GM made a mistake and didn’t give us the 1st handout and we still completed it (quickly).

"Pathfinder skills" are strongly needed in this scenario. In this scenario, you’re made to finally feel like a Pathfinder.

This scenario has every element that I want in a scenario, so for that it deserves 5 stars. I had a good time.

Length: Easily fits into a 4 hour slot.
Sweet Spot: TBD.
Experience: Player at subtier 5-6 with 4 players.
Entertainment: Tomb has every element I want in a PFS game. Something for everyone. (9/10)
Roleplay: Not much roleplay, but it was still good to have some. (7/10)
Combat/Challenges: Good challenge for 4 players, could be too easy for 6. GMs should play this scenario "hard", not easy! Success or failure will also heavily depend on both luck and player intelligence. (10/10)
Maps: Good simple maps that are easy for the GM to draw, appropriate to the setting. (8/10)
Boons: The boon is in the next scenario of the series. I don't like that they must be played consecutively. (n/a)
Uniqueness: Finally a "Pathfinder" scenario. (9/10)
Faction Missions: Above average. (8/10)
Overall: Wonders has a great Pathfinder feel to it, it has it all. (9/10)

The "Wonders of the Weave" scenarios are perhaps the most iconic Pathfinder scenarios I've played so far. I highly recommend running this series.

Manor is a sandbox investigation and combat scenario with small amounts of roleplaying.

In season 3, this scenario was appropriately challenging, but in season 7+ the combats might seem a little on the easy side, even with 4 players.

There are a few NPCs in this scenario that are fun for the GM to play, but annoying for the PCs. :)

One of the main attractions to this scenario is that it is sandbox, but with such a large map it's very difficult for the GM to map everything out properly. Even if the GM draws on-the-fly, it takes a long time. In my session I had no idea where I was or where I was going, and the GM got confused as well. I suggest preparing the manor maps beforehand and on-the-fly draw the outdoor maps.

Positives
1) Interactive events are fun because you (hopefully) feel like you’re part of something larger. It doesn’t matter if you’re all running “Asmodeus Mirage” all at the same time, it’s going to be fun by virtue that you’re all in the same place at the same time, hopefully helping each other and crossing table boundaries. This happened a lot more compared to “Blood Under Absalom”, but I think it was also partially to do with the organizer and the fact we had 3 tables only. It lead to a better experience.

2) There was less dead time compared to “Blood Under Absalom” (but perhaps this was also due to the small number of tables). The scenario seemed to go fast.

3) The best part of the interactive was the table talk between the tables. Letting each other know our progress, successes, and defeats. It was hilarious. The interactive definitely benefited from less tables. Definitely helps if you have organizers, GMs, and players willing to shout.

Negatives
I liked the interactive, but it’s mostly because of the organizer, GMs, and other players. Like I said before, because it’s roleplaying and an interactive, we could have played the worst scenario and it would have been fun. So with that in mind I have the following comments.

1) I just didn’t understand the plot at all. Besides “the evil guy is doing bad things, stop him”.

2) The introduction made no sense.

3) The whole Shadow Lodge thing still doesn’t make any sense to me. Just because some Pathfinders feel like the Decemvirate are doing a terrible job of running the Pathfinders, doesn’t mean they are “evil” and would drive an army of ____ and ____ into Absalom. Or destroy the “fabric of reality” or Absalom. How is that a better use of resources? That’s just taking it way too far.

4) Some encounters didn’t really make sense.

5) The scenario made me wish I made an archer, not a melee combatant. Way too many encounters that could only be defeated by range only. I found this really annoying, especially at my subtier. Sure, I can pull out a bow and do relatively insignificant damage, but you're still going to be a non-factor.

In general with interactives, it’s OK if there are common areas across all subtiers, but I’d really prefer it if different subtiers had different missions. (I know this makes more work, but still). And I would strongly prefer the GMs to tell us (generally) what’s going on with the other subtiers! It’s just too hard to suspend my disbelief when group A finishes combat (in the same area) and can’t help group B finish theirs and have to wait around 10 minutes.

Length: We did it in 4 hours, but it took a very disciplined organizer (with a good timer) to run it that way.
Sweet Spot: I have no idea unless I read it. I’m guessing subtier 10-11 would have things on an appropriately epic scale that would feel pretty good.
Experience: Player at subtier 5-6.
Entertainment: Below average scenario but all interactives have an element of fun (8/10)
Roleplay: Some non-meaningful roleplay at the beginning (2/10)
Combat/Challenges: Except for the last encounter, I didn’t enjoy them particularly, which was made worse because I was melee. (4/10)
Maps: Didn’t seem like maps were used at all in this scenario. I had trouble understanding where I was and where I could go, it was very abstract. (4/10)
Boons: Good one-shot boons without being overpowered. (9/10)
Uniqueness: If this weren’t an interactive, this scenario would rate quite low. (3/10)
Faction Missions: None, thank god. Some scenarios, it’s just not a good idea to have faction missions and I hope Paizo keeps this in mind for other scenarios (n/a)
Overall: Below average scenario that allows some cross-table interaction, can be decent at times.(7/10)

I’m just glad the Shadow Lodge story arc is over with tbh. The Shadow Lodge story arc should have been built on uncovering lies, deception, and intrigue, instead we got pure combat meathead missions, which is exactly the opposite of what should have happenned. So I'm just glad it's over.

Another perfect flip-map made by Paizo.

I find warehouse settings are very common in RPGs, so this flip-map will see a lot of generic use. Also, it's very easy to change details in a warehouse with a map-pack or other small map laying over it.

The art is very good.

Most importantly, both sides are great. The 1st side has a single massive warehouse. The 2nd side has 3 smaller warehouses.

Great job!

I think the title of my review says it all. I love flip-maps, but I find most map packs would be better as a flip-map(s). As a result, the subscription would have more value if there were a lot less map packs.

For me, most map packs don't have a lot of value. There are problems with map packs: they don't store well, tiles come apart all over the table (which is a pain, I have to tape tiles together which make them harder to transport), and when I remove the (scotch) tape sometimes it removes the image from the map as well. I strongly prefer flip-maps.

Sometimes, multiple tiles in a map pack make sense. For example the "Mines" map pack was useful (but only if it comes with a PDF!). Map packs can also be used to provide good variation for flip-maps (for example, adding a second story to a flip-map like the "City Flip-map" is useful).

However, most map packs would be better if you either created multiple smaller flip-maps or you combined multiple map pack tiles into one big flip-map. For example, the Wizard's Tower map pack would have been much better of if you combined all the tower levels into a two-sided flip-map. (I would gladly buy the flip-map version of this map pack, even though I own the map pack!).

If you do create smaller flip-maps for map packs, I'd like to see them made with thinner material if possible, so they're easier to store and unfold. This is desirable as long as it doesn't overly damage the durability.

Like I said, I love flip-maps but I have the following general feedback about them.

In flip-maps, I want to see the interiors of buildings, I don't want to see rooftops (with the interiors in a map pack). Because you don't show the interior, there is limited value in Flip-Maps such as "Necropolis" and "City" (although City probably sells really well, because we have nothing better). If you want to make a map pack to *support* a flip-map (such as adding variant interiors or second stories), this makes sense, but I don't want to see roof tops in my flip-maps, I want details. Recent flip-maps seem to have made this change.

Anyway, that's my feedback, thanks for listening.

Bloodcove has some decent roleplay in it, but the combat encounters are very average. This is a 3 star scenario with an average GM, and a 4 star with a good GM that can really bring it to life.

The sandbox nature of this scenario is vastly overestimated; to me it was the same as picking door number 1, 2, or 3. The reason it wasn’t completely sandbox is that you just want to get in and get out of Bloodcove. In real life, we have only 5 hours to finish the scenario. In the game, roaming around the city attracts unwanted attention. So it's not sandbox at all, you go from point A, to B, to C.

I wish the scenario emphasized the fact that the PCs are likely not Mwangi (black) and they don't speak Polygot. That makes things much more challenging and allows for interesting situations (and humor). More importantly, it allows PCs with language, disguise, and illusion spells to shine.

The awareness system (which is really a 4E skill challenge) was interesting and I wouldn’t mind seeing it again in the future.

I thought many of the combat encounters were too easy and could have been removed. I was especially disappointed with the lack of creativity in one encounter in particular

Length: Very long. When I played it we took 4.5 hours, when I GMed it took 5.5 hours. Both times the optional encounter wasn’t used. You really have to move this scenario along.
Sweet Spot: From what I can tell, this scenario plays well at all subtiers. Perhaps the 6-7 subtier is too trivial, since the encounters don't seem to be scaled well for this subtier (and it wouldn't make sense to have level 7 "thugs" as well).
Experience: Player and GM subtier 3-4.
Entertainment: Depends heavily on the GM and could be much lower. (8/10)
Roleplay: Using a fake Jamaican accent all session long can be fun. There are good opportunities to roleplay, almost every encounter. (8/10)
Combat/Challenges: Too many easy filler encounters. Lura/Xeanja can be good. (7/10)
Uniqueness: It's something different. (8/10)
Faction Missions: I liked the Osirian mission, but the rest are average. If you get lucky, you'll get Cheliax and Andoran in the same party, but that's unlikely. (7/10)
Overall: This scenario is somewhere between 3 and 4 stars, a solid 7 out of 10. (7/10)

Btw, Aram Zhey is a jerk. :)

The APG is the best "splatbook" I've ever purchased, in 30+ years of gaming. This rulebook contains many new options to create new heroes that you've never thought of before. The concept of archetypes was a simple and brilliant way to make a class something completely different. The new classes are welcome and fit in with the core classes. If your players are looking for something "different" to play, you should purchase this book.

The best news is that everything in this book (for the most part) is balanced and won't break your game. Also, there is NO FILLER in this book, amazing. This book is so solid, you sometimes wonder why this material wasn't part of the core game. I now consider this one of the core rulebooks. Great job.

Paizo did make this map a little too dark (thus 4 stars instead of 5), but I still find it usable. I can easily see the marker on this map.

In addition the darkness can add to the setting.

The reason this is a good map is because both sides are useful and are excellent variants. I use this map a lot.