Creative Director
|
I understand that you need to create products for the wider audience, but from what I read on these messageboards, I am not convinced that is correct.I imagine that Paizo has done some market research to support their belief that they would lose sales. We often see what we want to see on the Message boards or among our friends. Such "evidence" is rarely of any substantive value, as we tend to add importance to what we agree with and minimize that which we don't.
In fact, we have. I've been listening to readers and critics alike talk about the magazines and now Pathfinder for over 5 years, and pretty much everything you see in Pathfinder is a direct result of using what I've learned there in tandem with what I think might make some cool adventures.
Now I obiously haven't read Pathfinder #6 yet, but stopping the runelords just seem a bit good aligned heroic, and making it evil for the sake, would not make me as a player save Sandpoint from goblins, or to help retake a fort occupied by ogres. It just doesn't make sense.
Coveting the resources of Sandpoint is a sin of greed. A sinful party may save the town not out of compassion for the innocent, but from the motivation to exploit its value.
There are many evil reasons why a party would want to use Sandpoint as a base of operations. The smuggler tunnels and the runewell have potential. Destroying the Kaijitsu family will allow the PCs to potentially acquire the Glassworks.
One thing that's missing from Sandpoint that is a Balabar Smenk or the pirate villain from the first Savage Tide module (can't remember her name offhand). I guess Vhiski is one of the better 'plot neutral' villains you could align your party with.
In fact, we have. I've been listening to readers and critics alike talk about the magazines and now Pathfinder for over 5 years, and pretty much everything you see in Pathfinder is a direct result of using what I've learned there in tandem with what I think might make some cool adventures.
Good to know - keep it up, you are doing masterly job (at least from where I am standing) right now.
As for the "evil" AP.
Basically, it is pretty easy (with some forethought and imagination - myself, I don't count that as "work", but the mileage may differ ) to adapt almost any and all of the APs to "evil" groups.
Friend of mine is running AoW with an evil-aligned group (or rather ruthless and ethically untroubled group). It seems to work well, although he has a hard time keeping them from inevitable backstabbing caused by their diefferent backgrounds.
Another friend of mine ran an evil SCAP, with the Zhentarim as the main sponsors ( and deus-ex-machina check on the party staying on track and within bounds ) behind the party - who even pretended to be good guys - they had the goal of taking over Cauldron and were pretty surprised and then PiXXed that another group was doing the same, resulting in an all-out mob-war within the course of the SCAP. They ultimately failed - due to two players getting bored and self-destructing the campaign.... which really piXXed of my friend - but until then it actually ran well, if with a strong harnessing arrangement in place (the Zhent as the team sponsor, looking for results and threatening severe repercussions in case of failure ).
So, adapting an AP to an "evil" course can be done (I basically consider the STAP as far easier with an evil group), but there will always be the problem that players will consider playing"evil" characters as a "carte blanche" for over the top atrocities or in-party backstabbing... if only for the novelty *yawn* of it. Which usually boils down to matters of bad taste - is thios or that form of violence or atrocity a turn off for every-one else - and the maturity of your players to cooperate despite being amoral bottom-feeders.
You don't need a specifically "evil" AP, what you need is a good group - because than, anything will go.
But in any case, we ARE watching the boards and our emails. If there's a call for an evil adventure path, we'll do it. I'm just not seeing that call from our readers yet.
Thanks! It is great with a company that listens, and answers, even if they decline. It is not random customer service kids who answers on these messageboards, and that alone gives you guys a lot of respect.
Keep up the great work you are doing.
|
Is there any chance of a lost treasure type? Say starting the characters as interns for the Pathfinder assoc. Where there goal is to gather items that make something like Rod of the Seven parts.
Would anyone else like to see one like this? Thought it might be a good way as well to show the players more of the world.
|
Is there any chance of a lost treasure type? Say starting the characters as interns for the Pathfinder assoc. Where there goal is to gather items that make something like Rod of the Seven parts.
Would anyone else like to see one like this? Thought it might be a good way as well to show the players more of the world.
An adventure more tied to the Pathfinder organization, whether exploration or treasure hunting, would, I think, be great, .
|
Creative Director
|
Is there any chance of a lost treasure type? Say starting the characters as interns for the Pathfinder assoc. Where there goal is to gather items that make something like Rod of the Seven parts.
Would anyone else like to see one like this? Thought it might be a good way as well to show the players more of the world.
There's absolutely a chance for this kind of adventure path. In fact, one of my half-dozen or so adventure path plots to do in my head is a treasure hunt type campaign. And there'll be an element of this in Crimson Throne, particularly in Pathfinder #10 and #11.
I think evil games could work, but it does tend to work better with mature players that either can manage a MO for working well together or still manage to have fun while they all backstab each other.
As Vikingson mentioned, I'm used to an evil group due to the novelty or the group's persepctive that playing other alignments were too constricting (i.e. they felt "good" aligned characters would never negotiate or speak with any non "good" aligned NPC's without immediately killing each other on sight), so they can do more things than just hack 'n slash all the time.
Since Planescape, I relished the idea of the deus ex machina (i.e. Lady of Pain) that allowed Paladins to share the same bar with Balors akin to two immortals talking on holy ground. . . a kind of *we can banter now, but we may cross blades elsewhere* approach without feeling one's alignment being *compromized.*
I'm enjoying how Pathfinder seems to encourage such encounters, where, even if a group consists of *good*-aligned PC's, don't have to always commit to a Nulla salus extra ecclesium where players engage in a Neca eos omnes. Deus suos agnoset. Perhaps they capture one for hostage exchange, hostage for ransom, question for answers and information, or perhaps going to the more extraordinary lengths of diplomatically making alliances, trade/ truce agreements, etc. Especially when considering that low level PC's might run into demons and dragons, it's only practical.
There's a huge difference between vile and creepy and evil bad guys for your good guys to defeat and an evil adventure path.
I wholeheartedly agree. Big difference.
But in any case, we ARE watching the boards and our emails. If there's a call for an evil adventure path, we'll do it. I'm just not seeing that call from our readers yet.
You can put me down as being against a (live vile) evil AP. There's enough of it going on in real life without dragging it into my nice clean fantasy rec time.
It does. It does even if you quote text that uses that word. And there are other sneaky ways to have it happen too, but I'm not sure what those are.Cool.
Indeed.
[url=smurf] [/url]
It does. It does even if you quote text that uses that word. And there are other sneaky ways to have it happen too, but I'm not sure what those are.Cool.Indeed.
That is quite smurfalicious
James, thank you for consistently keeping us in the loop, when you really have no obligation to do so, which is the approach most other companies take. I wish the complainers on this board, who will likely never be happy with the finished product ("what? where are the fire-breathing ninjas?!!") would just tone it down and trust that you are listening to the players and their wishes. However, at some point majority has to rule here, or else one person's wish becomes a really dumb thing for the community at large (a la' fire breathing ninjas)...
smurf!
I might otherwise think there should be *less* fire breathing ninjas in Golarian, except that I'd hate to find my sake poisoned some day.
Go, Ninja Smurf!!
As has been pointed out here, it is funny, that the more "creepy", "evil" you make your adventures, the more interrest there are in them. If you guys made a really creepy, evil, path, with reasons as to the group should keep togehter, and not kill everything around them, I would doubt very much that the general community would hate that. An adventure where the "heroes" would feel heroic by doing evil deeds, and when the path concluded, the heroes may feel that they have saved their evil world from destruction by the forces of good.
A creepy adventure is one thing, creepy long term characters in a campaign is another. I dont see a number of people in my group doing it but we might be the minority. Then again it might be far enough from now that I'll need to take a break and catch up on old APs.
I do think some gamemastery modules might be a nice way to test the waters.
Contributor
|
It does. It does even if you quote text that uses that word. And there are other sneaky ways to have it happen too, but I'm not sure what those are.
The sneaky way I know is it put in a url="smurf" tag (within brackets, natch). Make sure to put in a /url tag as well, but put nothing between them. So it would look like this: (url="smurf")(/url), with the parenthesis replaced with brackets. :)
However, at some point majority has to rule here, or else one person's wish becomes a really dumb thing for the community at large (a la' fire breathing ninjas)...
But... my fire-breathing ninjas... :(