I feel the quality of individual adventures has declined over the course of the third AP.Aside from length, how so?
Well, given that Paizo has in its stable some of the finest writers of D&D adventures in the universe, I am left thinking that length is the most significant aspect. In a shorter adventure there are fewer encounters, less space to develop interesting encounters, scenarios, NPCs, etc. Some of the things that make CotCT brilliant are its depth of NPC character, really interesting, complicated, and detailed encounter locations (Scarwall, Castle Korvosa, the temple of Urgathoa, Carowyn Manor, etc.), and the complexity of the overall storyline (including the cut scenes, development of relationships with NPCs, recurring themes and characters, etc.). Abbreviated adventures prevent the inclusion of all these elements, you might get a cool NPC OR a cool location OR a great plot twist with solid hooks linking the adventure elements, but not all of them, like CotCT managed.
A related issue is that the space that is available isn't always used most effectively. For example, as I mentioned above, the BBEG of Armageddon Echo gets a whole page stat block (including his unique magic item). This seems like a pretty big waste for a guy that the party is unlikely to even speak to beyond traditional good-guy v bad-guy banter.
Additionally, shorter adventures lead to the Dungeon adventure syndrome of either not covering very many levels (okay with me) or trying to pack the adventures with XP, making them uber-challenging (not OK with me).
I enjoy the fiction and articles, so I am left thinking that set pieces must go, in order to return length, and subsequently quality, to the main adventures (the reason we buy the book, after all)
I feel, to a certain extent, that SD is cashing in on the "Look! Drow!" factor, without maintaining the quality of product that Paizo has established so far (which is amazing, by the way). Personally, I think of drow as just one more evil humanoid race, so I'm not wowed by their inclusion, alone.
As I type this, I am trying to wrangle a squirming 18-month-old, so I hope it makes sense ...
I should add that I love Paizo's head-honchos' customer service and interaction, and that's probably the most significant reason I am still a subscriber to all the products on my list.
O
PS I am glad to hear that adventure length is climbing once more, and I'm looking forward to Legacy of Fire.
|
Reading through the third AP I do not agree that the quality has dropped. I am thinking that so far this might be my favorite story-line. That said, playing and reading an adventure is two very different things and I will have to wait and see how it plays. Overall though I see a lot more room for expansion in Second Darkness and appreciate that is not quite as tightly scripted as the first two, in a good way.
I just love the new short adventures. As someone who probably won't run very many APs they are the perfect ingredient to keep me buying. And may I add that I like the maturity. No PG suits me fine.
I am very disturbed by comments like this. I am afraid that people who are vocal about keeping the shorter adventure paths and set pieces instead of longer adventure paths are people who only read the books and do not actually game with them. Following their advice may result in a product that reads well but is less useful for actual gaming.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
I just love the new short adventures. As someone who probably won't run very many APs they are the perfect ingredient to keep me buying. And may I add that I like the maturity. No PG suits me fine.I am very disturbed by comments like this. I am afraid that people who are vocal about keeping the shorter adventure paths and set pieces instead of longer adventure paths are people who only read the books and do not actually game with them. Following their advice may result in a product that reads well but is less useful for actual gaming.
You are very disturbed that some people may play the set pieces and not the longer adventures? You get easily disturbed.
|
|
I just love the new short adventures. As someone who probably won't run very many APs they are the perfect ingredient to keep me buying. And may I add that I like the maturity. No PG suits me fine.I am very disturbed by comments like this. I am afraid that people who are vocal about keeping the shorter adventure paths and set pieces instead of longer adventure paths are people who only read the books and do not actually game with them. Following their advice may result in a product that reads well but is less useful for actual gaming.
I am running two Rise of the Runelord adventures (one at home - stalled by school and the other a PbP).
The third AP feels a little more 'sandboxy' to me and I like that. Sometimes I want a railroad and sometimes I want an road trip with plenty of little side excursions. The set pieces allow for more breadth to the adventure paths.
|
I do the hungarian ghoulash method.
It works best for me.
I have a recurring theme to either tie everything to, or ignore as the whim suits me. The aim is a good game, and not sticking to a recipe. It at least provides a feeling that there's something going on in the game world.....whether the characters end up at ground zero or on the periphery of that is immaterial.
For example; theme: say.....historically, Demogorgon is killed by a group of adventurers. What do the other demon lords do? Do the players care?
If they do, it's out there, if they don't.....can they be made to care?
Though this method can lead to utter chaos, following an AP can lead to breakdown and entropy as well.
I use the AP's to riff off of, steal real estate from, and generally to compare what a game writer would put characters of my gamers' levels up against. This may change, as I am growing daily more attached to Second Darkness.
The jury's still out for me if these little set pieces wreck the utility of the AP's for me.
I usually am happy to have a small, easily cut-and-paste mini-adventure that I can mold to my own uses. I think that the answer mainly relies on how good the set pieces are.
Also, if I was running an AP, this would give me the elbow room I'd want to cram my own weird set pieces into it somewhere.
|
Just the three adventures I've read in this AP so far...
#13 - The PCs interrupt an attempt to rob a gambling hall and end up working for the host. Eventually, he tires of them and tries to have the PCs killed. They return and lay siege to the gambling hall, ending with a climactic encounter with a drow on the cyphergate while a METEOR crashes down a few miles away, causing all sorts of destruction and tidal waves, etc...
#14 - Going to explore the crater for minerals, the PCs find that an alien species has hitched a ride and is now spreading all over this island. After an amazing set piece in a falling tower, they eventually stumble upon a drow encampment, further intensifying the mystery of the drow's involvement in surface affairs.
#15 - Finally looking to take the fight to the drow who the PCs now know are up to no good, the PCs, with the help of some elven reinforcements attack en masse an ancient elven city that was re-taken by the drow. Skirmishing and overall having a cool city-wide battle. But then the PCs step into a portal and go back 10,000 years to see the firsthand the cataclysm that destroyed civilizations.
I'm surprised that people are saying this AP is less good, and that it's kind of bland, and relies too much on drow. And really, it's an AP about stopping the drow from destroying the world (like always), so what, are the PCs supposed to face Redcaps for the first 5 adventures? It seems logical to me to include the drow early and often.
I just can't see how the short adventures are really hurting this AP. If anything, I would argue that they helped focus the adventures. I find there's less meandering. After all, brevity is the soul of wit, and I would postulate that the shorter adventures require more precise writing and are less diluted than the 40,000 word behemoths we got in Rise of the Runelords.
I guess I'm too late, as it seems the next AP will bring back up the word count. I will miss those useful set piece adventures (or wherever they take the 5,000 words from), but I'm sure the next AP will still be great. I've not been let down yet.
You are very disturbed that some people may play the set pieces and not the longer adventures? You get easily disturbed.I just love the new short adventures. As someone who probably won't run very many APs they are the perfect ingredient to keep me buying. And may I add that I like the maturity. No PG suits me fine.I am very disturbed by comments like this. I am afraid that people who are vocal about keeping the shorter adventure paths and set pieces instead of longer adventure paths are people who only read the books and do not actually game with them. Following their advice may result in a product that reads well but is less useful for actual gaming.
If people were interested in running smaller adventures and not adventure paths, wouldn't this be a better product to subscribe to?
Pathfinder Modules|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
You are very disturbed that some people may play the set pieces and not the longer adventures? You get easily disturbed.I just love the new short adventures. As someone who probably won't run very many APs they are the perfect ingredient to keep me buying. And may I add that I like the maturity. No PG suits me fine.I am very disturbed by comments like this. I am afraid that people who are vocal about keeping the shorter adventure paths and set pieces instead of longer adventure paths are people who only read the books and do not actually game with them. Following their advice may result in a product that reads well but is less useful for actual gaming.If people were interested in running smaller adventures and not adventure paths, wouldn't this be a better product to subscribe to?
Pathfinder Modules
The Pathfinder Adventure Paths also have world building articles making them indispensable to gaming in Golarion.
|
|
You are very disturbed that some people may play the set pieces and not the longer adventures? You get easily disturbed.I just love the new short adventures. As someone who probably won't run very many APs they are the perfect ingredient to keep me buying. And may I add that I like the maturity. No PG suits me fine.I am very disturbed by comments like this. I am afraid that people who are vocal about keeping the shorter adventure paths and set pieces instead of longer adventure paths are people who only read the books and do not actually game with them. Following their advice may result in a product that reads well but is less useful for actual gaming.If people were interested in running smaller adventures and not adventure paths, wouldn't this be a better product to subscribe to?
Pathfinder Modules
There might be an actual final equation that would model the phenomenon, but this theorem doesn't hold true in all instances.
Just the three adventures I've read in this AP so far...
** spoiler omitted **
I'm surprised that people are saying this AP is less good, and that it's kind of bland, and relies too much on drow. And really, it's an AP about stopping the drow from destroying the world (like always), so what, are the PCs supposed to face Redcaps for the first 5 adventures? It seems logical to me to include the drow early and often.
I just can't see how the short adventures are really hurting this AP. If anything, I would argue that they helped focus the adventures. I find there's less meandering. After all, brevity is the soul of wit, and I would postulate that the shorter adventures require more precise writing and are less diluted than the 40,000 word behemoths we got in Rise of the Runelords.
Again, let me repeat that the I am not saying this AP is less "good," since I haven't seen the whole thing yet. I have explicitly stated that I thinking the writing and primary plot are well conceived. I'm talking about the specifics of the individual adventures, regarding implementation and characterization of characters, scenes, and subplots.
Brevity is great when you're trying to make a point or give directions, but in an Adventure Path, more is better. I'm not worried about the quality writers that Paizo employs running out of good ideas and padding the adventure with garbage. Gimme as much as you can!
I would also like to point out that I agree with Doppleganger when he says that he's worried about a particular part of the audience here being more vocal. I think that the majority of Pathfinder subscribers do so because they don't have time to write their own adventures or even do major "filling in" the gaps of these (as I expressed re: the "missing" 6th level, in another thread). I'm glad that many readers enjoy the "sandbox" feel of SD, because it feels less scripted and open to adding side quests, etc., but I want scripted. It's why I pay for the adventures in the first place. I know how to adjust for my particular PCs and can add personalized quests as necessary. I don't want the adventure to force to me to do so, however, because I don't have time for that. I think there are many of us who are in a similar situation.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
I agree with Doppleganger when he says that he's worried about a particular part of the audience here being more vocal.
I get insulted and annoyed whenever someone tells me that one group's opinions are less valuable and shouldn't be heard. Give James some credit for being able to figure out what works for the audience after hearing the diversity of opinions.
I agree with Doppleganger when he says that he's worried about a particular part of the audience here being more vocal.I get insulted and annoyed whenever someone tells me that one group's opinions are less valuable and shouldn't be heard. Give James some credit for being able to figure out what works for the audience after hearing the diversity of opinions.
I don't want to derail the conversation here (even though it is, itself, a slightly derailed version of the original conversation), but in my defense:
I never said that anyone's opinion was more or less valuable than anyone else's. I'm simply pointing out that if a particular segment of the population is more vocal or provides more feedback than any other segment, then James might be making decisions based on inaccurate data. I (and I think Doppleganger) am trying to make sure that all the actual opinions are being expressed, in proportion to the actual number of customers who have a certain opinion. Rather than saying that anyone's opinions "shouldn't be heard," I am suggesting that everyone's opinions should be heard and am encouraging others who are leaning in a particular direction regarding length of adventures or set pieces or whatever, to weigh in. In that way, a minority opinion doesn't accidentally become misrepresented as a majority because of a more vocal base.
Carry on.
O
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
I never said that anyone's opinion was more or less valuable than anyone else's.
But the comment you are agreeing with certainly implied that.
I just love the new short adventures. As someone who probably won't run very many APs they are the perfect ingredient to keep me buying. And may I add that I like the maturity. No PG suits me fine.I am very disturbed by comments like this. I am afraid that people who are vocal about keeping the shorter adventure paths and set pieces instead of longer adventure paths are people who only read the books and do not actually game with them. Following their advice may result in a product that reads well but is less useful for actual gaming.
Why do you assume that the minority is more vocal here? Perhaps the majority appreciates the set pieces?
As for complaints about short adventures... folk'll be happy to know that I've okayed the first adventure of Legacy of Fire to be 35,000 words instead of 30,000, and after seeing so many complaints about shorter adventures, I'm pretty strongly considering making 35,000 the way it goes from there on out (which means that some back matter will get canned and some authors might not get paid and some articles might never see the light of day... but I gotta do what's best for Pathfinder as a whole, and if shorter adventures are hurting it... it's a no brainer.)
That's really good news, James.
I'll agree that the fiction is a waste of space for me. I don't even read it personally, and I can guarantee my players don't get access to it.
Articles? I'm going to give you solid feedback here: articles belong in some other package, not the AP itself. How about the Companion package? You could make that monthly instead of every other, and throw things like "all about City X" in there. That might convince me to actually take up that subscription. The current "Elves of Golarion" type material hasn't enough to do with the AP to merit me jumping on (yet). Link the two product lines deeper but keep the Companion optional for those that want to flesh out the AP environment more.
Please recognize what an AP is to most (admittedly not all) of us; it's a sustained cohesive package that we don't have to do a lot of work to run. Most players these days are adults with jobs and family and other obligations. While I actually really enjoy pumping out material myself, I don't have the time for it. Content that isn't directly germane to moving the story forward is wasted content to me, the purchaser.
For the record, I'm actually enjoying SD's overall structure. It's less lethal than RotR (in which I'm a player and have lost quite a few characters so far) but still challenging. It's nicely varied in environment and opponent make-up.
Really, IMHO all SD needs (and the first book was great) is more encounter density. The drow cave in CotV was maybe one quarter the size it should've been. The ultimate encounter was a long one to run, but it was more or less a gimme. My player scoped out the big cave, and sat back at the entrance. Time was on their side since there was no obvious sign that the half-dozen drow inside might get reinforcements anytime soon. The drow knew that, and had to address the interlopers. Buffs up, it was still a funnel, which is easy to defend. Pop, pop, pop, pop. Encounter over. Had the place been obviously bigger, that wouldn't've been as likely.
Creative Director
|
I just love the new short adventures. As someone who probably won't run very many APs they are the perfect ingredient to keep me buying. And may I add that I like the maturity. No PG suits me fine.I am very disturbed by comments like this. I am afraid that people who are vocal about keeping the shorter adventure paths and set pieces instead of longer adventure paths are people who only read the books and do not actually game with them. Following their advice may result in a product that reads well but is less useful for actual gaming.
Remember, Doppelganger: Pathfinder isn't JUST for you. Nor is it JUST for me. I need to make sure it pleases as many of my customers as possible, while annoying as few as possible. That's part of the tricky angle of the whole thing of balancing adventures versus other content. In any case, creating a product that reads well is in fact just as important to me as creating one that's useful in actual gaming; this is a HUGE reason why I dislike the delve format. It may make running individual encounters easier (always assuming that your PCs remain on the rail and come into the encounter the way the adventure writer assumes they will), but it makes it very unenjoyable to just read the adventures for entertainment. A large number of Pathfinder's customers never run the game or adventures from it; they just read it for fun (perhaps mining it for ideas, perhaps just reading it); I absolutely need to keep them in mind when developing future Pathfinders.
I do want to hear what you all want to see in Pathinfder, but please refrain from directly criticizing other folks' preferences.
|
Creative Director
|
I guess I'm too late, as it seems the next AP will bring back up the word count. I will miss those useful set piece adventures (or wherever they take the 5,000 words from...
You're not too late. There will still be a set piece in Pathfinder #19. The 5,000 words we're adding to the adventure come from an article that was going to be in there about a village that the PCs are involved with. The reasons we cut that article and went with expanding the adventure size are:
1) This is the kickoff adventure for a new adventure path, and we're experimenting with expanding the adventure mostly to include more content to focus on the first adventure setting the mood for the entire campaign, as well as a large section at the end that talks about what the PCs can do between adventures.
2) The article that got cut was going to be a gazetter of the adventure's starting village, similar to how we did the article about Sandpoint in Pathfinder #1. I was going to write both the adventure and this article in this volume, but when Second Darkness nearly exploded with an author having to bow out of writing an adventure due to medical reasons only 7 weeks before we had to ship, my freelancing free time suddenly turned into crisis mode fix Second Darkness. While I was able to get Second Darkness a new author who did a GREAT job (thanks, Brian Cortijo!), I wouldn't have had the energy or time to write both the adventure and the article. Fortunately, Erik Mona took the bullet for me and is writing the adventure. The information that was going to be in the village article is now absorbed into the adventure, similarly to how we handled Xin-Shalast's article in Pathfinder #6.
Beyond Pathifnder #19, the authors are still tasked with providing 30,000 word adventures. I'm looking at Pathfinder #19's 35,000 word version as an experiment; both to see how the readers react, and to see how those extra 5,000 words affect the adventure's workflow during developing and editing.
|
Creative Director
|
I never said that anyone's opinion was more or less valuable than anyone else's. I'm simply pointing out that if a particular segment of the population is more vocal or provides more feedback than any other segment, then James might be making decisions based on inaccurate data. I (and I think Doppleganger) am trying to make sure that all the actual opinions are being expressed, in proportion to the actual number of customers who have a certain opinion. Rather than saying that anyone's opinions "shouldn't be heard," I am suggesting that everyone's opinions should be heard and am encouraging others who are leaning in a particular direction regarding length of adventures or set pieces or whatever, to weigh in. In that way, a minority opinion doesn't accidentally become misrepresented as a majority because of a more vocal base.
To echo my comments from above... I do hear everyone who posts here. As it works out, I personally feel that the opinions that the adventures are too short and should be longer is the loudest voice here, but I suspect that's because I often find Doppleganger's method of commenting to be borderline insulting or antagonistic, and that type of comment sticks out (in the wrong way) like a sore thumb.
When I ask you to please be kind to each other and to refrain from veiled insults or passive-agressive posts, keep in mind that one of the main reasons I do this is that, psychologically, I'm more likely to discount someone's opinion not because they're soft-spoken, but because if you come across in your post as antagonistic or a jerk or something like that, I'm more apt to not care about what you think.
I listen to everyone's opinions. But when posts make me start wondering if I should lock threads or ban posters from posting, the thread's usefulness has started to ebb. This thread isn't there yet, not by a long shot, but I can see it heading in that direction Very Easily.
So! Keep the feedback coming! Just try to keep it feedback about Pathfinder, and not feedback about other people's posts.
The Pathfinder Adventure Paths also have world building articles making them indispensable to gaming in Golarion.You are very disturbed that some people may play the set pieces and not the longer adventures? You get easily disturbed.If people were interested in running smaller adventures and not adventure paths, wouldn't this be a better product to subscribe to?
Pathfinder Modules
If they want more information on the setting, then wouldn't Pathfinder Companion and/or Pathfinder Chronicles subscriptions be better choices?
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
If they want more information on the setting, then wouldn't Pathfinder Companion and/or Pathfinder Chronicles subscriptions be better choices?The Pathfinder Adventure Paths also have world building articles making them indispensable to gaming in Golarion.You are very disturbed that some people may play the set pieces and not the longer adventures? You get easily disturbed.If people were interested in running smaller adventures and not adventure paths, wouldn't this be a better product to subscribe to?
Pathfinder Modules
Those are great products but, I repeat, the Pathfinder Adventure Paths also have world building articles making them indispensable to gaming in Golarion.
|
My ideal Pathfinder issue would be:
- the adventure
- Set Piece. However... done in a way that it can be ran as part of the main plot. So far, PF 13 set piece was Ooo-kaaay-ish, PF 14 was the low point - a pirate ship fight, yay, that's totally something I couldn't come up with myself in 30 minutes *SARCASM MODE OFF*, PF 15 was awesome (haunted elven music hall, now we're talking !) and PF 16 seems good too, at least easily integrated into the adventure.
- 1-2 background articles (ideally: 1 directly linked to places/events/people in the adventure and 1 "generic" one on some aspect of the setting)
- Bestiary
NOTE: this means no fiction. I love fiction. But if I want to read fiction, I buy a book. If I buy a gaming accessory I am after relevant Fluff and Crunch, and Eando's adventures don't grab me in any way).
Those are great products but, I repeat, the Pathfinder Adventure Paths also have world building articles making them indispensable to gaming in Golarion.If they want more information on the setting, then wouldn't Pathfinder Companion and/or Pathfinder Chronicles subscriptions be better choices?The Pathfinder Adventure Paths also have world building articles making them indispensable to gaming in Golarion.You are very disturbed that some people may play the set pieces and not the longer adventures? You get easily disturbed.If people were interested in running smaller adventures and not adventure paths, wouldn't this be a better product to subscribe to?
Pathfinder Modules
Maybe those articles should be removed and put in one of those other products. Then you wouldn't have people purchasing an Adventure Path who have no interest in running an Adventure Path, merely to get some articles that perhaps would be better served in another product.
|
Creative Director
|
Maybe those articles should be removed and put in one of those other products. Then you wouldn't have people purchasing an Adventure Path who have no interest in running an Adventure Path, merely to get some articles that perhaps would be better served in another product.
Pathfinder's already very successful, and part of the reason for its success is the mix of articles to adventure. I can't imaging cutting all of the support articles would increase its success... but I can easily imagine such a move hampering its success, either because folk who really loved those articles drop it or because it reduces the usefulness of a volume of Pathfinder to a one-shot adventure. If there's nothing left of a volume of Pathifnder to really use once you've run the adventure... that's bad.
Nevermind the fact that we wouldn't be able to handle the development of a 90+ page adventure every month. It's more than one person can do. Think of Pathfinder as a big plate of desert that comes out once a month. One person has to cook each piece of desert on that plate, so we fill it with a big cookie, a pie, a bowl of pudding, and a cake. That's the result of 4 cooks. One cook would only be able to make one piece of food, and if that cook, say, tried to fill the entire plate with just a cake, that cake would have bits of uncooked parts in it, some of it wouldn't be frosted, and you'd probably find a band-aid in there somewhere.
The monthly schedule of Pathfinder limits how big any one part of the whole can be, in other words.
I have to say at first the Pathfinder fiction struck me as a waste of space, to me it really had no place in my book and was not unlike an advertisement. Then out of boredome I read the one in 13, and it was fun and amusing, and kind of like what I want an adventure to feel like. I liked it. But in the end if anything needs cut I think I'd prefer it over the extras that provide world insight and ideas for mining etc. If anything cutting it by a few pages (maybe a 1 or 2 page version) and maybe cutting a creature or two from the bestiary would be best, but only in my opinion. Don't get me wrong the bestiary is cool, but I'd wager 1 out of every 4-6 of the things are either way too high level for me or just way to out there (Fungal crawler? Maybe as a mount for mycanoids ><) But again this is just the opinion of one guy and probably a very minority one.
PF 14 was the low point - a pirate ship fight, yay, that's totally something I couldn't come up with myself in 30 minutes *SARCASM MODE OFF*
As a counter example, my current campaign my party has come up with their own side quest. They want to hire a boat and hunt a dragon turtle. So the first thing I thought of was the set piece from PF 14. Instead of making stats for crew, I'm going to let them hire the pirate ship.
Could I have made the stats and other info? Sure, I certainly could have. But it saved me time, I've enough things to work on as it is. I will admit that I think the set pieces need to be improved, both in how they can be hooked into the adventure path and how rich a plot they can have on their own.
I can't compare SD to other adventure paths, but I have been enjoying reading it and want to run it someday. I have RotR but I've refrained from reading it in the hopes that I might get someone else to run it. But I haven't enjoyed a linked campaign this much since Warhammer's "Enemy Within" (a real classic in my opinion.)
I will admit, that while I like the fictions, if I were to make space for a slightly longer main adventure, that's where I'd cut. While the side articles like the gazetteer of Riddleport could have been put elsewhere like the companion, I really liked the solar system article and would hate to see those go. The bestiary is also awesome, I keep trying to find a good place to use Moonflowers.
So while I wouldn't mind more from the adventure path, I do like the set pieces too. If anything, I'd make the companion series a little bigger and move some of the extra articles there.
|
|
Articles? I'm going to give you solid feedback here: articles belong in some other package, not the AP itself. How about the Companion package? You could make that monthly instead of every other, and throw things like "all about City X" in there. That might convince me to actually take up that subscription. The current "Elves of Golarion" type material hasn't enough to do with the AP to merit me jumping on (yet). Link the two product lines deeper but keep the Companion optional for those that want to flesh out the AP environment more.
I see where you're going with this, and as cool as it would be to get a concentrated Adventure Path supplement every month, I disagree that it would be better for Pathfinder. I've always felt that one of Pathfinder's main strengths is its variety; there's something there for everyone. You've got the beef of the product (the AP adventure), you've got some neat fluff articles on cities, countries, religions with a bit of crunch sprinkled in (like prestige classes, magic items, spells, etc.), you've got a 4-page short story, a mini-adventure, and you have a bestiary with a slew of new monsters.
It's also a pleasure for those who read the product without running it (like myself; though I do plan on running it one day, it's so far away that at this point, I just read through it and come up with how I would run certain encounters as a mental exercise) because you're not just reading about the same thing for 92 pages, there's a good variety in there. Cutting the support articles, the set piece, the Pathfinder Journal, or even some of the bestiary would be a sure-fire way to piss off Pathfinder customers, while not necessarily increasing the amount of customers otherwise. Pathfinder has been an incredible success, and I don't see why everyone keeps wanting to change it. As it was said many times before, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
|
|
You're not too late. There will still be a set piece in Pathfinder #19. The 5,000 words we're adding to the adventure come from an article that was going to be in there about a village that the PCs are involved with. The reasons we cut that article and went with expanding the adventure size are:
~snip~
Beyond Pathifnder #19, the authors are still tasked with providing 30,000 word adventures. I'm looking at Pathfinder #19's 35,000 word version as an experiment; both to see how the readers react, and to see how those extra 5,000 words affect the adventure's workflow during developing and editing.
I'm really glad to hear that the set pieces will be staying around for at least a little while longer, hopefully they'll get the chance to grow on people, as I find they're an invaluable resource and I would hate to see them go. As for extending the first adventure in an AP, that makes perfect sense. After all, there needs to be so much more information to properly set up an AP, and not everyone will have access to the associated Pathfinder Companion, so it's good to put a little extra background into the adventure. I can't wait to see how it turns out!
Also, as for that last part: Hooray for SCIENCE!
Wow, see I felt the opposite about Crimson Throne and Rise of the Runelords. While I loved RotR, I felt Crimson Throne was bloody brilliant.
I feel this way as well. Rise of the Rune Lords was a good but very traditional RPG feeling. Curse of the Crimson Throne was both great and unique. I generally did not feel, in CotCT, that I could have created this AP on my own using back issues of Dungeon Magazine.
Now there is nothing wrong with telling a good story that includes elements and themes we have seen before. By necessity thats going to happen a great deal because truly unique stories are few and far between in this industry after 30 years but when an AP does go above and beyond in this manner then I am duly impressed and I felt that CotCT did just that often enough to make it an exceptional product, it was doubly sweet since it was coupled with a great premise and an excellent plot.
Something thats actually uncommon with truly unique adventures most of the time - most of the time they present something that brilliant and completely out of left field but then fall short on execution. I'll still run such products in preference to more mundane fare but often find myself doing a lot of work to get the whole adventure up to snuff.
Articles? I'm going to give you solid feedback here: articles belong in some other package, not the AP itself. How about the Companion package? You could make that monthly instead of every other, and throw things like "all about City X" in there. That might convince me to actually take up that subscription. The current "Elves of Golarion" type material hasn't enough to do with the AP to merit me jumping on (yet). Link the two product lines deeper but keep the Companion optional for those that want to flesh out the AP environment more.I see where you're going with this, and as cool as it would be to get a concentrated Adventure Path supplement every month, I disagree that it would be better for Pathfinder. I've always felt that one of Pathfinder's main strengths is its variety; there's something there for everyone. You've got the beef of the product (the AP adventure), you've got some neat fluff articles on cities, countries, religions with a bit of crunch sprinkled in (like prestige classes, magic items, spells, etc.), you've got a 4-page short story, a mini-adventure, and you have a bestiary with a slew of new monsters.
It's also a pleasure for those who read the product without running it (like myself; though I do plan on running it one day, it's so far away that at this point, I just read through it and come up with how I would run certain encounters as a mental exercise) because you're not just reading about the same thing for 92 pages, there's a good variety in there. Cutting the support articles, the set piece, the Pathfinder Journal, or even some of the bestiary would be a sure-fire way to piss off Pathfinder customers, while not necessarily increasing the amount of customers otherwise. Pathfinder has been an incredible success, and I don't see why everyone keeps wanting to change it. As it was said many times before, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Echoing this. My gaming has diminished greatly of late: I've moved, and while I'm playing with a group once a month, I'm not currently running anything as my old group is 4 hours away. I read the AP's for pleasure, and much like Nameless, I have fun thinking through the way encounters will potentially go. The support articles though I absolutely love. They feed my imagination, and because I have every copy of the AP's so far and only one of the Chronicle's line, I have more than enough material from the articles to run in Golarion with out ever actually playing through those adventure's. This is valuable to me. I'm going to start running a game for my nephew and while I'd love to run the AP, they are a bit mature for him, the articles however are indispensable for coming up with adventures. Taking the articles out, would piss me off. I might still continue to subscribe to the AP's, but I'd likely change my focus to what ever line the articles become part of. So no, I'm not in favor of kicking out the support articles. Especially if it means that the longer adventures will be of poorer quality, or not come out as often as the AP's currently do.
To echo my comments from above... I do hear everyone who posts here. As it works out, I personally feel that the opinions that the adventures are too short and should be longer is the loudest voice here, but I suspect that's because I often find Doppleganger's method of commenting to be borderline insulting or antagonistic, and that type of comment sticks out (in the wrong way) like a sore thumb.
I apologize for any and all insulting or antagonistic posts that I have made in this thread. Kruelaid, James, anyone else, I am sorry for my words.
I just love the new short adventures. As someone who probably won't run very many APs they are the perfect ingredient to keep me buying. And may I add that I like the maturity. No PG suits me fine.I am very disturbed by comments like this. I am afraid that people who are vocal about keeping the shorter adventure paths and set pieces instead of longer adventure paths are people who only read the books and do not actually game with them. Following their advice may result in a product that reads well but is less useful for actual gaming.
Oddly enough my concern is in many ways the opposite. These things have to make great reading to keep me interested because I'm going to run one in three of these APs max. There simply is not enough time in my life to run them all to conclusion and I suspect that this is actually the majority position - I doubt that most groups can manage to do all of these and that, on average, groups are falling behind.
Hence my fear is that a cut in content is going to result in a cut in the fluff and story line portions of the adventures. The in depth villains and their interesting motivations for example. If Paizo cuts length of a product or an authour has less words to work with its the fluff type material that gets cut first because the stat blocks are static and the amount of XP a party needs (and therefore how many encounters they must face) are static and. more or less, these must remain constant and use up X amount of the word count.
However if I'm buying these in part just to read them then they become far less interesting if the fascinating NPCs, locals and background fluff is stripped out. I think this is a dangerous tack to take because, if the product is only good at the game table and not to read for pleasure, then eventually a DM has the AP he is currently running, the one he will run next and a third one that he will run at some undefined future date. After this a DM has to ask himself if he even needs any more such product? I mean maybe he should just save his money and buy more APs after he's finished this one, the next one and started on that third one he already has - say start buying the APs again a couple of years from now when there is actually some chance he'll be able to use them.
My ideal adventure path would be like the Shackled City hardcover:
-90% adventures (with no breaks in between)
-10% support stuff
-0% fiction
-100% in one package
Hey, a guy can dream, can't he?
|
Creative Director
|
I apologize for any and all insulting or antagonistic posts that I have made in this thread. Kruelaid, James, anyone else, I am sorry for my words.
To echo my comments from above... I do hear everyone who posts here. As it works out, I personally feel that the opinions that the adventures are too short and should be longer is the loudest voice here, but I suspect that's because I often find Doppleganger's method of commenting to be borderline insulting or antagonistic, and that type of comment sticks out (in the wrong way) like a sore thumb.
Thanks, doppelganger; that actually means a lot to me. Especially since you do strike me as someone who's really passionate about the Adventure Paths and that they remain true to themselves. I would love them to be longer and more detailed as well; as a customer, I'd eat up giant adventures (and I still do; I recently bought several of Goodman's giant adventures, including Castle Whiterock, even though I'll probably never run them). Giant adventures are awesome; they're also tricky beasts to get put together, and Pathfinder's formula will continue to be tweaked an adjusted as long as it's not perfect. And I'm possibly too critical of Pathfinder for it to ever be perfect in my eyes.
Anyway, thanks for the post; now back to the gaming! :)
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
I like the set pieces and other non-adventure articles. As Second Darkness heads towards the finish, I've currently run 2 adventures (Crimson Throne 1&2) out of the 16 AP books I own. For Dungeon, I'm 1-for-3, finishing out Age of Worms but having done nothing with Shackled City or Savage Tide. Basically, there's more Path than I can run, but I can (and do) use the other articles.
So: I say keep the value high, and give people a reason other than adventure to buy Pathfinder.
So! Keep the feedback coming! Just try to keep it feedback about Pathfinder, and...
At the risk of sounding a little sycophantic, I think one thing we can all agree on is that we're critical because overall we like what you're trying to do with Pathfinder/Golarion and want it to be even better.
So, while there are some products that you've produced that are "less good" than others, don't let the staff and writers get discouraged- as a team you're still producing some of the best fantasy supplements I've seen in a long time.
Make that a VERY long time.
Although I've not seen anything yet to be a match to Masks of Nyarlathotep or Beyond the Mountains of Madness <which are IMO the best camapigns written for any system. anywhere> I still think the Paizo writers and staff deserve a continuing pat on the back ...
So, to balance some of my criticisms let me say:
The elf/drow transformation : Terrific idea, I love it.
RotRL & CotCT : Fantastic in both senses of the world.
Campaign setting: Best thing I've bought all year (and I buy alot of stuff for many systems)
Paizo customer feedback: A+ , something of which you should be rightly proud.
But then, as pointed out, I'm only one customer, so ...lets see whether everyone agrees with me :-)
|
Creative Director
|
Although I've not seen anything yet to be a match to Masks of Nyarlathotep or Beyond the Mountains of Madness <which are IMO the best camapigns written for any system. anywhere> I still think the Paizo writers and staff deserve a continuing pat on the back ...
I would agree. Those two adventures you mention are pretty much the pinnacle of RPG adventures in my book as well. If we can even approach the level of brilliance of those two with something in Pathfinder, I'll be very, very proud indeed.
Although I've not seen anything yet to be a match to Masks of Nyarlathotep or Beyond the Mountains of Madness <which are IMO the best camapigns written for any system. anywhere> I still think the Paizo writers and staff deserve a continuing pat on the back ...I would agree. Those two adventures you mention are pretty much the pinnacle of RPG adventures in my book as well. If we can even approach the level of brilliance of those two with something in Pathfinder, I'll be very, very proud indeed.
I agree with your view on Masks but I thought beyond the Mountains of Madness to be very dreary. Guess it takes all kinds - maybe I will dig it out and give it another read.
I prefer no set pieces but only marginally- I will add all set pieces back in to the adventure path when i run them and as long as I can do this it doesnt really matter to me that they are in a set piece or part of the adventure.
I havent run Masks or CoCT but I think CoCt for it's variety of adventure style events is the first adventure I read where I said, this is perhaps as good as Masks.
I agree with your view on Masks but I thought beyond the Mountains of Madness to be very dreary. Guess it takes all kinds - maybe I will dig it out and give it another read.I prefer no set pieces but only marginally- I will add all set pieces back in to the adventure path when i run them and as long as I can do this it doesnt really matter to me that they are in a set piece or part of the adventure.
I havent run Masks or CoCT but I think CoCt for it's variety of adventure style events is the first adventure I read where I said, this is perhaps as good as Masks.
Well, I can see that there are two adventures that I need to track down. I've never been into Call of Cthulhu as much as I would probably have liked, but I'm willing to give any good adventure a read through.
I will state the CoCT is... well lets say as far as Paizo's AP's go (keeping in mind I haven't read Age of Worms or Savage Tides) I found it to be fantastic! Fantastic! I loved the AP, and I can easily qualify it as my favorite so far.
I would like to add more to the conversation, but honestly everything that I have to say I've either already said or has been stated by another poster here. You folks are doing a fantastic job though James. I'm not going to enjoying everything to the same degree that you put out, but there hasn't been a thing thus far that I haven't enjoyed at least a little. As soon as that happens, well, you'll be the first to know about it.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
I apologize for any and all insulting or antagonistic posts that I have made in this thread. Kruelaid, James, anyone else, I am sorry for my words.
To echo my comments from above... I do hear everyone who posts here. As it works out, I personally feel that the opinions that the adventures are too short and should be longer is the loudest voice here, but I suspect that's because I often find Doppleganger's method of commenting to be borderline insulting or antagonistic, and that type of comment sticks out (in the wrong way) like a sore thumb.
Well, I'm also sorry if my response came off as a bit harsh. When I said I was "insulted and annoyed" maybe "moderately peeved" would have been a more accurate word choice. You've stated your opinion about the set pieces clearly. I want to do the same without my opinion being discounted as invalid. Cheers.
I have a mixed opinion on the Set Pieces. I don't feel they've harmed the main adventure at all. They're an extra source of maps. But, none of them have been compelling enough that I'd want to run them (either as part of the AP or alone).
If the Set Piece is cut in future issues, why not replace it with a page or two of maps. Unique maps that can be used by DMs to create their own side treks or expand on existing encounters. These maps would share the same theme as that month's adventure. Like the "Map of Mystery" from Dungeon, but with more purpose. For example, I don't plan to run the "Lament" set piece but I can use the Elven Conservatory map to create a battlefield encounter of my own.
As for cutting other material, cutting the articles is non-negotiable — don't! They're the first thing I read when receiving an issue and I look forward to those most of all. I don't use Golarian as my game-world, but the articles are still the most entertaining portion of an issue.
I can't say what other peoples opinions are on the fiction segment, but I completely ignore it. If there is a vote for what should be dropped from future issues, fiction gets mine.
I like the idea of the set pieces, but I am undecided on whether they have reached the point where they are worth the trade-off. As for running the AP, I don't have the liberty now, but I do plan on running them when opportunity arises (especially CotCT). So for me, all three uses of the AP are important.
I would really hate to see the fiction cut, and would be even more unhappy with any further trimming of the bestiary. And I love the articles and would hate to see them go--especially as someone who can only subscribe to the AP at this point. How's that for covering the bases?
I agree with your view on Masks but I thought beyond the Mountains of Madness to be very dreary.
Having run it as a ref, I can guarantee that dreary it is not. Except for the checking of the inventory, thats best skipped over.
Trying to avoid going off topic too much, but ...
At first glance it may apear that a lack of upfront critters would be dull, but the apparently mundane tasks really do add to the game.
My players are mainly action junkies, so you'd expect them to hate it, but said discovering the opposition had sailed and making pemmican
still ranks as some of the most memorable moments they've had. They voted it best campaign of any type/game they've played (apart from one player who put it second to MoN, and one who put it second to a homemade Harn campaign i ran about 10 years ago))
If after re-reading, you're still convinced its dull, might I suggest you to speak to the call of Cthulhu community and find a happy home for it?...they are many who are desperate to get copies of the supplement - it goes for quite a fair sum on e-bay ! (I'm lucky myself , I bought it the first time around)
Anyway, we now resume your broadcast of "the set-pieces in pathfinder"....
|
Creative Director
|
Having run it as a ref, I can guarantee that dreary it is not. Except for the checking of the inventory, thats best skipped over.
I agree with your view on Masks but I thought beyond the Mountains of Madness to be very dreary.
Actually, when I ran the game, even the inventory checking went really well. It gave the players a great feeling that they were involved in the expedition's organization and let them plan ahead and add things, while at the same time let them know what was coming in a certain way. And then when problems popped up with the inventory, no one felt like it was cheap shots. You know an adventure's doing something right when even going over an inventory list for an expedition is fun.
I agree with your view on Masks but I thought beyond the Mountains of Madness to be very dreary.Having run it as a ref, I can guarantee that dreary it is not. Except for the checking of the inventory, thats best skipped over.
Trying to avoid going off topic too much, but ...
** spoiler omitted **Anyway, we now resume your broadcast of "the set-pieces in pathfinder"....
Off topic. I will not sell it- I will hoard it, as I do with all my gaming material. In case someone says something in the future to make me rethink it, like y'all just have. :)
On topic.
My list of most important bits in pathfinder AP's are
1-AP
2-background stuff
3-bestiary
4-set piece
5-fiction
(I have only read the 1st two set pieces and they seem a little plain. IMO set pieces should have odd stuff to add to the AP not plain stuff, like a chase scene (like that orc/volcano sleigh ride in the competition last year), a wierd encounter - say with an interesting NPC or unusual monster, a sidebar thing- trip to the oracle etc.)
BTW I love the bestiary, it kills me that it comes in third.