West517's page

James Jacobs wrote:

Hey everyone! Just wanted to chime in here to apologize to those who didn't enjoy this adventure path's climax. We knew going in that it wasn't going to appeal to everyone, and included sidebars to help empower GMs with advice on how to adjust the end if they felt it wouldn't play well for their group... but I think we could certainly have been more clear about that.

We take all feedback seriously, be it good or bad. But at the same point, if you're abusive or insulting in how you give your feedback, or make assumptions about the editorial process you can't have insight into, you can become your own worst enemy and devalue your own argument. So please, pick and choose your words responsibly and consider the impact they'll have on those who their aimed at—be it a review of a product aimed at its creators, or a response to a review.

In any event, this plot twist isn't going to be one we explore or repeat in future adventure paths. It was something of an experiment, and a risky one that I feared would result in backlash like this. So, again, sorry it disappointed some of you. The good news is that when you run your game you get to change things so that they work better for you!

Points have been made and have been heard.

Please be calm and considerate and friendly to each other going forward.

As someone who doesn't mind the "twist"(especially since it does come with sidebars on alternative) and who actually would have preferred the Return's equivalent to be more severe than "You can just resurrect them afterwards", I think Paizo shouldn't be afraid to pull similar stuff in future, but at same time I don't think Paizo should do similar stuff because if you pull this too many times in couple of years, it won't be a twist anymore and it will make players be cynical and not really excited if they think its going to happen at end of every campaign.

To be precise, ** spoiler omitted **...

It was nice to see these posts, first by James and then by Corvus. Acknowledging the backlash was a hard thing to do. Will be very curious what the talk will be at GENCON over this AP and hear what people are saying other than in this message board. For me, this quite all could have been about the expectations. My expectations were REALLY high for the final AP of Edition 1, I think the transition could have gone a little better. I am REALLY looking forward to seeing Lost Omens World Guide next month. My expectations are high for that as well and I hope they stick the landing this time.

I guess Rogue One had no reason to be filmed then.

Your logic is flawed. This is a game, you are speaking of a movie.

Rysky wrote:

Dracovar wrote:

unless you have player buy-in from the get go.

If you're running an AP from start to finish that's something you kinda need.

To a point. If the game ends with everyone dying and being able to fulfill what the players had in store for them, then why bother play? Sure, if you’re down to play an AP there’s some sense of reservation for disbelief that you’re going to railroaded to a large degree. But if you’re given zero options and told that no matter how hard you think outside the box or how well you play the game, everyone dies because that’s just how it’s written? That’s a terrible narrative that kills any kind of enthusiasm and has people go “this is why homebrew is superior.” After this many APs being written, much like the Dark Phoenix movie, having that kind of forced ending does not make for a worthy finale to the series of adventures.

I’d hope there’s an out where if everyone does everything in their power to survive, at least one of them can live to tell the tale. The players at least deserve an Endgame ending.

I could not agree more with this post. Survival horror without the survival. These are not novels folks!