I know when Paizo saw the announcement of this adventure path, they were sceptical as well. They have done 5 adventure paths so far with a 6th in the works and know what works and what doesn't.
WotC has none of this experience working for them full-time and thus, their first stab at the first adventure is not very impressive.
I think WotC will have their work cut out for them in the months to come, especially with almost all their online material being either late, or of marginal quality.
Does anyone have any impressions of the adventure itself? I'd love to hear some play experiences.
|
Actually, Red Hand of Doom was a raving success. It was a great adventure with the exception of the very last "grudge monster" encounter. That's probably why they decided to base their AP on it.
Monte Cook's Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil? 2001.I didn't like it, though I know many did. I think opinions were sufficiently spotty that I wouldn't describe them as "raving." That may just be my bias against it, though.I would agree with that assessment. Even I have some complaints (some areas are just too large, takes time to get to the adventure and is easy to "derail", etc).
I was mostly serious, but also used that module to point out that the last time anything can remotely close to "raving" was 7 years ago and very early in 3rd Editions life.
I didn't know that. Rest assured, I LOVED Red Hand of Doom, so much so that I ran it to completion twice, and started a third game. So many options. I just didn't realize that it was so well received by many others.
Side Note: As a "grudge", the Aspect was no threat to my first groups Dwarven Fighter with a +3 Dragonbane Greataxe, +2 Black Dragoncraft Fullplate, and basic feats like Power Attack. Acid meant nothing, poison meant nothing, AC was great, huge attacks - he tore the Aspect and the High Wyrmlord to pieces.
Wizards doesn't get no more leeway now. This is NOT they first attempt at a AP. They have a Star Wars AP in progress right now and I glanced over the first adventure and it seemed alot better then the 4e AP. I will probably run the 4e AP because all I really need is the tactical encounters and I can play up my own rp/storyline.
|
|
Wizards doesn't get no more leeway now. This is NOT they first attempt at a AP. They have a Star Wars AP in progress right now and I glanced over the first adventure and it seemed alot better then the 4e AP. I will probably run the 4e AP because all I really need is the tactical encounters and I can play up my own rp/storyline.
I think that this is their MO right now. They provide the tactical encounter and we have to fill in the blanks.
|
Considering WotC's past and current adventure writing efforts, that probably is the best you can hope for, especially if it's done inhouse instead of using talented freelancers. I agree that if the backstroy and plot aren't very good, what's the point? Anyone in any edition can throw a level appropriate encounter together just by flipping through a monster manual. We don't buy adventures for that. We deserve much better as customers, especially if we are paying as much as 20 to 30 dollars for an adventure like WotC's current published adventures. The only upside to Rescue at Rivenroar is that it is currently free, except for paying the printing costs to convert it to a usable form.
file is damaged when I try to download. Are they in the process of editing the pdf?
Would not effect your download at all.
If they edit it they'll do something like go back to their main manuscript and clean it up. Then they save it to PDF form and then they post the new edited version. Last they point the link to the new edited version and probably archive the old version.
In other words there is no real point in time when the link did not connect to a specific version.
I suppose its minutely possible that you could get a problem if you where halfway through the download and they deleted the file on you but it seems like a stunningly remote possibility.
I suspect we'll only see a change (IF any is made) once the magazines are compiled. That's how it worked last month, at least.
Cheers! :)
|
I bet they are planning and writing these things as they go with virtually no long term plan except to go "from 1st to 30th-level." The lack of a campaign overview document seems to say a lot about how Scales of War is a write and post as we go effort from WotC.Just to prevent any misconceptions about this, there is actually an overview document of the AP similar in format to how Paizo does it.
There is? Please point me to it. It'll make me a lot happier to have this so I can plan ahead and tailor the AP to my players.
There is? Please point me to it. It'll make me a lot happier to have this so I can plan ahead and tailor the AP to my players.I bet they are planning and writing these things as they go with virtually no long term plan except to go "from 1st to 30th-level." The lack of a campaign overview document seems to say a lot about how Scales of War is a write and post as we go effort from WotC.Just to prevent any misconceptions about this, there is actually an overview document of the AP similar in format to how Paizo does it.
I think Greg means there is an overview document internally at WotC - it's not a willy nilly build-as-you-go AP.
That said, it would be nice if they made that public for DMs. Otherwise we have to make assumptions that may unravel plot points later on - "What do you mean the mayor is the major villian...I killed him off two adventures ago!"
There is? Please point me to it. It'll make me a lot happier to have this so I can plan ahead and tailor the AP to my players.I bet they are planning and writing these things as they go with virtually no long term plan except to go "from 1st to 30th-level." The lack of a campaign overview document seems to say a lot about how Scales of War is a write and post as we go effort from WotC.Just to prevent any misconceptions about this, there is actually an overview document of the AP similar in format to how Paizo does it.I think Greg means there is an overview document internally at WotC - it's not a willy nilly build-as-you-go AP.
That said, it would be nice if they made that public for DMs. Otherwise we have to make assumptions that may unravel plot points later on - "What do you mean the mayor is the major villian...I killed him off two adventures ago!"
I'd like to see a list of who the contributors are going to be.
I'd like to see a list of who the contributors are going to be.I don't know where that exists either, Jeremy. I do know the first four, however. They are the aforementioned David Noonan, Robert J. Schwalb, who does a lot of work for Wizards and Green Ronin, Scott Fitzgerald Gray, who I am less familiar with, and me. Beyond that I have not seen who the assignments were given to.
Well I'm a player in this campaign so I just want to say I don't know how your going to top Kings of the Rift but I'm willing to be surprised.
No pressure.
I'd like to see a list of who the contributors are going to be.I don't know where that exists either, Jeremy. I do know the first four, however. They are the aforementioned David Noonan, Robert J. Schwalb, who does a lot of work for Wizards and Green Ronin, Scott Fitzgerald Gray, who I am less familiar with, and me. Beyond that I have not seen who the assignments were given to.
I expect yours to be up to par. If so then I will be running this AP as I like your material! But don't get a big head I like Nicolas Logue and Richard Pett as well!
The Carriers?
More like patient zero :)
That’s really it. Compared to the 52 pages dedicated to a Paizo AP (each combat of which rarely ever takes up an entire page, especially two), along with 22 more pages of extra fluff and monsters, this is extremely pitiful.
Wow. Talk about comparing apples to oranges. Need we be reminded that Rivenroar is currently free? Even when the subsciption fees do begin, it's supposed to be $15 all-inclusive. Pathfinder is $20 for one adventure. There's no way a free web document could measure up to that.
It seems more reasonable to compare Rivenroar to the freebies Paizo offers. I can't think of any except the Player's Guides, which are essentially glorified advertisements for the Pathfinder APs, or the Pathfinder RPG playtest rules, which are made available so the game can get free playtesting.
However, I must say that Paizo has excellent customer service.
|
|
That’s really it. Compared to the 52 pages dedicated to a Paizo AP (each combat of which rarely ever takes up an entire page, especially two), along with 22 more pages of extra fluff and monsters, this is extremely pitiful.Wow. Talk about comparing apples to oranges. Need we be reminded that Rivenroar is currently free? Even when the subsciption fees do begin, it's supposed to be $15 all-inclusive. Pathfinder is $20 for one adventure. There's no way a free web document could measure up to that.
It seems more reasonable to compare Rivenroar to the freebies Paizo offers. I can't think of any except the Player's Guides, which are essentially glorified advertisements for the Pathfinder APs, or the Pathfinder RPG playtest rules, which are made available so the game can get free playtesting.
However, I must say that Paizo has excellent customer service.
My issue is that it's essentially advertising for the final product.
It's supposed to say "this is why you want to pay $15 a month."
To me, it says "this is why you don't want to pay $15 a month."
It seems more reasonable to compare Rivenroar to the freebies Paizo offers. I can't think of any except the Player's Guides, which are essentially glorified advertisements for the Pathfinder APs, or the Pathfinder RPG playtest rules, which are made available so the game can get free playtesting.
Hollow's Last Hope (?) and Revenge of the Kobold King were both freebies and, in my opinion, are head and shoulders above Rivenroar.
|
My issue is that it's essentially advertising for the final product.
It's supposed to say "this is why you want to pay $15 a month."
To me, it says "this is why you don't want to pay $15 a month."
"Well, our free adventures suck, but the ones you pay for will be good! Never mind that this is the first part of the AP. Never mind that neither the DM nor the players have any idea where the AP will lead to or what this AP will be about. Never mind that the DM will have to put a lot of work into the adventure to make the PCs actually care for Rivenroar. As soon as you pay for DDI all will be better!"
I say it again and again, WoC are and see themselve as the leaders in the RPG industry. They have the manpower and they have the funds. There is NO excuse for the shoddy work in this adventure!
Wow. Talk about comparing apples to oranges. Need we be reminded that Rivenroar is currently free? Even when the subsciption fees do begin, it's supposed to be $15 all-inclusive. Pathfinder is $20 for one adventure. There's no way a free web document could measure up to that.
Maybe.
But Paizo's oranges are fresh and tasty, whereas WotC's apples are old, bruised, squishy, odorous, and delivered late. OK, I might be exaggerating a bit ;)
Professionals of WotC's (presumed) caliber do not come to the table with a project half-done -- free or otherwise. And Rivenroar is a flagship product for them. It's not just the shortcomings of the current product, but rather the low standards it sets for future releases.
There's no reason to think this leopard is going to change it's spots just because we start paying.
OK, first off, I don't think it's fair to compare Rescue at Rivenroar to a modern Paizo AP, like Rise of the Runelords. Paizo had had three APs under their belt by that point, and had things down to a science. A much better comparison would be between Rescue at Rivenroar and "Life's Bazaar", the first module in the Shackled City AP, Paizo's first. Now, how do they compare?
Rescue at Rivenroar still falls behind.
On the surface, both modules are pretty similar. They're big sprawling dungeon crawls (Life's Bazaar has a huge dungeon... that leads to another huge dungeon!), feature hobgoblins taking hostages and link up to themes later in the path (I assume, what with the one-way portal and the letter in RaR).
I'll agree with the people who are saying that the neo-Brindol of RaR is not very well detailed, especially in comparison to Cauldron, Diamond Lake, etc. But then again, those details were filled in in supplementary articles; these articles may be planned, but not yet released.
RaR starts off pretty well. There's an instant hook with the bar fight, and despite some complaints here about encounter balance, I think the ogre fight works well here. The ogre's slowed down by the cart, uses ranged attacks even though it's bad at them, and is right next to a powderkeg of flaming death that can easily be used against it. Problem is... this encounter actually seems like it'd be better in 3e. With the devaluation of mundane equipment in 4e, there's no alchemist's fire (a must for a canny low-level 3e party), and with the "don't sweat the small stuff" approach to monster equipment, it's less likely for someone to pull the bitumen-soaked torches off of the goblins and throw those instead.
I really liked the use of skill challenges in this module... to a point. Specifically, I liked how failing the skill challenge doesn't make it impossible to progress, it just makes it harder. Fail to interrogate the hobgoblin properly, he still tells you where to go, but gives you a nasty detour on the way. I do have a problem, on the other hand, with the failure for the "tracking the hobgoblins" skill challenge. A cave bear is a Level 6 solo--not something I'd throw against a first level party just for failing a few Nature rolls.
Also a problem is that the plot simply stops once the dungeon is reached. In Life's Bazaar, there were all sorts of empty rooms and creepy flavor-things, making dungeon exploration feel like, well, exploration. In addition, the motivations of the villains are quite clear. The hobgoblins are slavers; they're capturing kids on a commission to sell to the horrible denizens of the Underdark. The hobgoblins in RaR also take hostages... but why? Are they slavers? Do they intend to ransom the town's citizens and treasures back to Brindol? Does the Hobbo Boss want to give them to the deathlock to turn into undead soldiers? Did he not tell his minions to capture anybody, so is now trying to work them into his plan? The adventure doesn't say. And the roleplaying interactions with the prisoners have potential, but are often flawed. The dwarf, for example. He has very good directions... to where? And why are there gnomes in the dungeon, anyway? Their room has a shrine to the Raven Queen; do her dictates correspond to the neo-Red Hand's plans? Are they just filthy sadists? Were they the original inhabitants of this abandoned castle, and so have squatter's rights?
The encounters in the dungeon themselves aren't too bad. There's a few headslappers (do we really need a one-way portal to summon ochre jellies when one could just crawl out of a latrine? What's with the pillars of fire near the entrance?), but they're definitely serviceable fun. The fight with the Hobbo Boss, especially, looks exciting, what with his abilities to pull PCs into his spiked armor, trip them, then stomp on their faces.
Overall, I'd give this module a C. Average dungeon crawl, shows some promise in the beginning, needs more work on the plot and another pass through editing. Not how I would have started off an AP, but not as dire as some people claim.
RaR starts off pretty well...
If it were an adventure, I'd agree. But it's not -- it's the first chapter of a campaign.
Now somebody at WotC knows the difference -- hence Chapter 8 of the DMG. But the author of RaR didn't bother reading that.
Mechanically, I don't dispute that it's a competent adventure, but there is no depth to the backdrop, no connection to a larger world, that is a fundamental hallmark of good (and great) campaigns.
Its more akin to the APs in Dungeon magazine's print run which had an outline but were largely a mystery to the readers until they were released each month.
Well, actually, both Dungeon APs outside of the very first one had overall plot synopses, IIRC. (Do I?)
|
Just to be different. I Liked it.
The rescue things was a good start, it beats the idea of going to dungeon x to find loot,, which is what they could have done.
The little details the hostages know are gonna be helpful and I can see some good RP coming out of those.
I like the fact I can set this wherever the hell I want without too much trouble. I pretty much modify most of the modules I get to suit my characters style of play as it is. Also, since we run our games in Eberron, I have to modify everything I get from Paizo already. This one just doesn't require me to read through all of their pregenerated fluff and pretty much allows me to generate my own without trying to make it compatible with every other facet the autors created.
There are some skill challenges in there, and you know what, i think I'll throw some more in during the hack part. My players are pretty much going to go off script anyway if I get to run this (we're sticking with 3.5 atm but you never know), so I'm willing to add all sorts of extras to it.
If you want more empty rooms, then add some. I've never really bought the idea of a perfectly good castle above ground haveing a much bigger complex of stuff underground any way. I usually break these massive crawls into 2 or three separate dungeons anyway, or at least try to make it more of a separate jaunt. This allows my guys to heal up between sessions withouth the issue of all the baddies being ready for them next time or maybe, you know, swarming out and slaughteriing everyone during the night. Or maybe even fleeing in terror at the amzingly powerful Pc's who've just wiped out all their mates. While I have done all of these at times, it's not what my players llke.
Paizo do great stuff, I'll always buy their products. Bt for the way I play and DM, and for what my group do, this one wasn't so bad.
Also, I like the idea that the plot gets revealed slowly to the DM as well. It keeps MY interest up. Of course that's just me.
Cheers
I just looked this over, and I wasn't satisfied with it-- it's lacking compared to the quality of the Paizo APs. But maybe there is going to be a lot more material coming in Dragon to flesh it out. But from what I could tell ** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **
I agree completely with the spoiler in this comment. Keep on the Shadowfell and Rivenroar are both "let's get to know the rules" adventures, deliberately set up not to scare people off who have never roleplayed before.
Something like Crimson Throne is far more complex and is targeted at experienced players. Burnt Offerings I felt also was too gory at points and unsuitable for new players.
I also don't agree that Wizards wrote no decent modules. Some were fine.
Let's keep our minds open and keep tabs on what they produce. Thunderspire to me is a fine adventure and much more challenging than Shadowfell and I am sure that the adventure quality will only improve. Bear in mind too, that 4.0 hasn't got any templates for adventure-writing as yet. The ruleset is capable of handling anything, but it does it in a different way and whoever writes modules for 4th edition will have to get to grips with this over time.
Again, there is clearly a deliberate ploy to include combat in these early adventures, as this is the main difference between 3.5 and 4.0 and few people are saying that the combat is worse. It's good and fun and I know players have enjoyed playing Shadowfell, a module, which is of a high quality. There's very little in it I would criticise and even the best Paizo modules have their own foibles.
I'm excited about the new products coming up, especially the FR modules, and I hope that we see some more intellectual stuff coming in soon, to suit experienced players. Let's hope too that our favourite Paizo bite the bullet and make some 4th edition adventure paths in the near future. That's where the money is.
Creative Director
|
I'm excited about the new products coming up, especially the FR modules, and I hope that we see some more intellectual stuff coming in soon, to suit experienced players. Let's hope too that our favourite Paizo bite the bullet and make some 4th edition adventure paths in the near future. That's where the money is.
There's PLENTY of money for us where we're at, honestly. And personally... I'm more interested in producing fun adventures than I am in making money (that's why I'm an editor, not a businessman!). (My personal preference for 3rd edition over 4th edition certainly plays a role in my own tastes... but fortunately, judging by the numbers... they're not isolated tastes.)
As for the question of adventure outlines; we did indeed make public our outline for Age of Worms (it was a month late, though...). And we published the outline for Savage Tide in Dungeon as a preview the issue before the first Savage Tide adventure hit. Giving GMs access to the outline is key, in my experience, since it not only allows the GM to plan his campaign and to adapt and enhance to his tastes in an educated manner that won't be at odds with the adventures to come... but also because it serves as a great preview and excitement-builder for the entire adventure.
|
|
Why would you need an 'adventure writing template' for writing fluff and fleshing out details. They have a good template for creating tactical situations (they have been using the dungeon delve format for some time now, and that is what they use here to describe the encounters), but there is not so much flavor in describing the rooms (aside from tactical considerations).
Also, they have a preview adventure in the back of the DMG, Shadowfell, and they've had a few months to write preview 'ventures in eDungeon (of which a couple are much better)
I definitely give the author the benefit of the doubt here. David Noonan has created some fine work. I question how much was evaporated due to editing, and the shoddy job of quality control (ie the disorientation of the maps between encounter 1 and 2).
I just hope that some of our faves who are contributing to the AP dont get poo-poo'ed on too.
|
Creative Director
|
I question how much was evaporated due to editing, and the shoddy job of quality control (ie the disorientation of the maps between encounter 1 and 2).
In my experience with my own writing... editing tends to improve the final product.
AKA: Blaming editors for perceived deficiencies is, more often than not, an inaccurate way to go about it unless you're one of the few who actually saw what state the raw text was in. For the record, I didn't see the text for this adventure before editing; and I haven't read the final product. It's just irksome to see folk blaming editors like this.
(AND: +2 points for striking a pet peeve of mine so squarely!)
|
Creative Director
|
As for the question of adventure outlines; we did indeed make public our outline for Age of Worms (it was a month late, though...). And we published the outline for Savage Tide in Dungeon as a preview the issue before the first Savage Tide adventure hit.There you have it from the mouth of the fiendish T-rex himself. Outlines were indeed published in advance for AoW and ST. I had completely forgotten about them after the shift to Pathfinder (I may have been remembering Shackled City). I still don't know if WotC has published a comparable outline for Scales of War.
Yup; we never published one for Shackled City, because the outline for Shackled City was basically a page of one to two sentence notes; the majority of the overarching storylines and direction of the plot was left to the authors, who were more or less expected to come up with the plots and then talk with the editors to make them fit. It was sort of a backwards way to do it, and it was one of the GREATEST discoveries to me, at least, that it's not the way to do an AP. The outline needs to be DETAILED at the start. This resulted in an AP that had more disconnects than I wanted, and less connects than I'd hoped for, and all made it a great candidate for republishing as one big book.
I'm in the process now of doing that for Legacy of Fire, and remembering that the hardest part is coming up with a dozen or two NPC and location names that aren't silly...
|
|
(AND: +2 points for striking a pet peeve of mine so squarely!)
I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing...but its a bonus so good?
So, during what phase of the process would they miss the maps' discrepancy?
WotC said that there were no space considerations since it was an electronic format. Why the dearth of backstory then?