Even if Rise of the Runelords WERE in print, we'd probably want to start a sequel at 1st level, honestly.
I'm personally fine with a normal sequal AP. If you want to get away from Varisia, put it over in the Hold of Belkzen.
What I really would like is:
first three books of the ROTR-II of 150 pages instead of 100 with each two of the original adventures updated to PRPG and enhanced when possible with some of the wonderful ideas from years of messageboards and some Paizo original add... then a final side trek as for last volumes... and as usual articles and monster related to the trama...
the last three books could be completely new adventures perhaps each against one of the other runelords... arriving to level 20 at least
However even for me another AP settled in Sandpoint even starting again from first level will be fantastic especially if able to expand some places not described in the original serie. So a GM could link and merge the two if wanted...
It just seems to me that if a sequel Adventure Path intended to take on all the six remaining Runelords, it would be poorly served by starting at 1st level. I don't imagine any of the Runelords are much weaker than Karzoug, so starting from 1st, it takes six books to get to the level of fighting one of them...
Actually he was like the second most powerful, our boy could pack some punches.
'Return of the Runelords' does have a ring to it.
I like 'Revenge of the Runelords' even better.
"The Runelords Strike Back" wherein you discover that Xanderghul is really your father, and Seoni is your sister. (Yeah, you've been fantasizing about your sister, you sicko!)
Even if Rise of the Runelords WERE in print, we'd probably want to start a sequel at 1st level, honestly.
That's not much of a sequel, according to my players.
"Can't use our current characters who were victorious in the first one? PASS."
Even if Rise of the Runelords WERE in print, we'd probably want to start a sequel at 1st level, honestly.That's not much of a sequel, according to my players.
"Can't use our current characters who were victorious in the first one? PASS."
I would have to agree with the 'pass on doing this from 1st level again' on this one.
'Wrath of the Runelords' has to be a sequel. For my personal tastes, I would not want to start all over as a grubastic amphibian to take on another Runelord. All of the other Adventure Paths have a 'default' assumption that the Good Guys are successful in achieving the desired result - in this case, crushing Karzoug's skull beneath hobnailed boots and taking his cool stuff. Sorshen has been documented as the 'next in line' from the end of Curse of the Crimson Throne.
The 'Wrath of the Runelords' could also serve as the vehicle to demonstrate Pathfinder's epic rules, depending on what the expected APL was of those who survived the confrontation with Karzoug.
I would probably start such a sequel with the angle of "Pathfinder Whose-Name-I-Cannot-Remember-Right-Now" lands in a messy splattery heap of mangled goo on your favorite dining table. 'Help me Uber-Han-Shinobi, you're my only hope'. Toss in a teleportation Hit Squad that finishes the sorry sod off with a single death knell before throwing down with Your Heroes and the new AP kicks off with a bang and hopefully a whole pile of crispy-crittered NPCs in Sandpoint.
|
Even if Rise of the Runelords WERE in print, we'd probably want to start a sequel at 1st level, honestly.That's not much of a sequel, according to my players.
"Can't use our current characters who were victorious in the first one? PASS."
Because of course there is no reason for the original PCs to have had children and/or be reincarnated(without the spell) by the time the sequel is set to take place...
EDIT: Not trying to be snide or anything like that, just pointing out a possibility.
|
It just seems to me that if a sequel Adventure Path intended to take on all the six remaining Runelords, it would be poorly served by starting at 1st level. I don't imagine any of the Runelords are much weaker than Karzoug, so starting from 1st, it takes six books to get to the level of fighting one of them...
I would say that there are still ways to confront any number of the other 6 Runelords at any number of levels. Some plot device might weaken them as they come out of stasis. There could be MANY reasons.
On the other hand, facing 6 Runelords in the span of 2 (or possibly 1) adventures would still be AMAZING. Less minions. More heavy-hitters.
It just seems to me that if a sequel Adventure Path intended to take on all the six remaining Runelords, it would be poorly served by starting at 1st level. I don't imagine any of the Runelords are much weaker than Karzoug, so starting from 1st, it takes six books to get to the level of fighting one of them...I would say that there are still ways to confront any number of the other 6 Runelords at any number of levels. Some plot device might weaken them as they come out of stasis. There could be MANY reasons.
On the other hand, facing 6 Runelords in the span of 2 (or possibly 1) adventures would still be AMAZING. Less minions. More heavy-hitters.
Perhaps ... but nothing warrants exercising bragging rights like taking down a Runelord at full power. Some of the mechanisms used in past APs - Age of Worms, Savage Tide specifically - included boons that in practice made whack-a-moling the BBEG far too easy at the end.
A 3-issue AP could do this justice though, facing down 2 per chapter as one after another they awaken. Since it would not necessarily require the standard AP content count to fill the pages excepting perhaps monsters - many of which could/should be updated from RotRL itself - that leaves an awful lot of page count to use.
And frankly, asides from one other product nothing has caught my interest that approaches high-level stuff.
It really depends on what the decided feel is. Sorshen is the "known" candidate to awaken next as a result of Curse of the Crimson Throne.
It is also possible to set up a separate subscription for such material, with the understanding that these would not be monthly asides from perhaps the release schedule of the "High-Level Adventure Path" itself. And if enough people subscribe in advance, that should give Paizo enough information to work with - or not, if interest is insufficient. Say, a HLAP subscription with no specified release date with the explicit understanding that if there is insufficient subscription interest in the matter from hard data collected over a period of 1 - 3 months. Revisit the idea annually to keep a touch on the 'pulse' of the subscribers.
After all, it has been some years since RotRL, let alone STAP or its predecessors. Nothing released since has 'as written' taken a campaign through to the 20th level 'conclusion' range. And yes, I am aware that a GM can 'fiat' that the characters get the capstone abilities early - but it is simply not the same thing as getting there 'by the book'.
(much edited)
If the Runelords Path is to be revisited with a 'follow on' adventure, I think it should come a number of years down the line. If I understand correctly rules suited for working with high level play are going to be explored in the Kingmaker adventure path next year, which is scheduled to conclude with a release in July 2009. Given distractions from people being away on holiday and other delays built into the system from shipping time and not everyone being 'up to date' with their play throughs of adventures, I imagine that extensive feedback on how these rules play is not really going to start happening until the autumn of 2010 at the earliest, and I assume that such feedback would be invaluable for developing an epic level book . By that point I would think it would be too late for work to begin on an epic book to release at GenCon in 2011, and the more feedback the better, so I would guess an epic level book at GenCon in 2012 (for the fifth anniversary???) might be the earliest date such a release would make sense.
Assuming that the world and/or Paizo doesn't end in 2012, I would think that by the time that feedback from the epic book has started to come through (and maybe to accompany the errata'ed second printing in late 2012 or early 2013) it might be the moment it to release a stand-alone module. As far as an Adventure Path goes, it would have to wait until 2014, and run with something like the following tagline: 'Seven Ancient Swords, Seven Deadly Schools of Sin, Seven Runelords: Paizo celebrates seven years of Pathfinder adventures and the world of Golarion with a return to the Runelords....'
Sir Charles,
I suspect Paizo would go much closer to the feel of high-level / epic game play along the lines of the 'feel' of latter 2e's rather good High-Level Campaigns book that the funkiness of 3.0 ELH.
I do like your suggestion regarding the 'Theme of Seven'...
Even if Rise of the Runelords WERE in print, we'd probably want to start a sequel at 1st level, honestly.That's not much of a sequel, according to my players.
"Can't use our current characters who were victorious in the first one? PASS."
Because of course there is no reason for the original PCs to have had children and/or be reincarnated(without the spell) by the time the sequel is set to take place...
EDIT: Not trying to be snide or anything like that, just pointing out a possibility.
^_^ I find that players more often than not tend to shy away from families. Something about 'hostages' and 'not Vader-ing MY kiddies, thanks' and 'they did WHAT to my spouse?!'.
Yes, but who said they have to be legitamate offspring.
I have one player already who has done some irresponsible partying after (and during) the Swallowtail Festival...
I'm all for this..
Yes, please!
yes, please! And make it high level! Whats the point of those nifty capstone abilities if the players never get to use them?
Say, don't I know you?
Yes, but who said they have to be legitamate offspring.
I have one player already who has done some irresponsible partying after (and during) the Swallowtail Festival...
A good point!
'Officially', however, the APs seem to be fairly short in game time frame - a few years at most, often no more than a year or two depending on which one you're looking at.
The trick to that is - presuming shorter-lived illegitimate offspring - the time to maturity places a sequel to RotRL some 15 to 20 years' game time after the first, far longer for dwarves and elves.
*If* the subsequent Runelords' time to awaken is similar to Karzog's - and it may not be, as the Runelord of Gluttony has a tripartite artifact required to glue him back together - then the bastard children of the first group are still tykes.
Even if Rise of the Runelords WERE in print, we'd probably want to start a sequel at 1st level, honestly.That's not much of a sequel, according to my players.
"Can't use our current characters who were victorious in the first one? PASS."
Catering to the groups who actually completed the entire Rise of the Runelords AP is probably not a great idea; that is a relatively tiny audience. Historically (and I'm pretty sure the Paizo guys have mentioned this before), long-term published campaigns see a lot of drop-off over the course of the campaign. Fewer people have played The Skinsaw Murders than have played Burnt Offerings, for instance, and fewer still have played The Hook Mountain Massacre. By the time you get all the way up to Spires of Xin-Shalast, only a fraction of the groups who started playing the AP are still taking it on.
Oh, and then of course you have to subtract from that group all of those people who aren't interested in high-level play, for whatever reason.
Starting this hypothetical AP from level 1 is the way to go.
|
I don't see the need to try to cram in 6 more runelords. I would hope that not all 6 would have been successful in surviving the cataclysm anyway. The runelord of sloth can easily survive as a (demi-)lich, and I have a soft-spot for Alaznist and the underwater legions idea, but I'd say having 3 attempt to return is plenty, and I'd be just as happy with only 1 making it back as a full-fledged (epic-level) threat.
Creative Director
|
I appreciate all of everyone's suggestions and enthusiasm for this idea, and I can certainly confirm that I've been thinking about and connecting SOMETHING along the lines of a "Return of the Runelords" adventure path more or less from the start of Pathfinder... but we're still many years away from seeing something like this actually get announced. There's a lot that can happen in those years. And what happens in those years, and what kind of feedback I get on these boards and on chat rooms and at conventions will certainly help to shape the future.
In any event, it's way too soon for me to reveal what my still-formulating plans are for the other six runelords, and while I'm 99.5% sure we'll never do an AP that starts at anything other than 1st level... note that .5%! In any event, we've never done a true sequel adventure path before, so there's a LOT of things I need to mull over and consider beyond the obvious "what about the PCs who played in the first adventure?" But I can say this: The adventure, whatever it ends up being... IF it ends up being... won't ignore the fact that a group of PCs probably already played the original adventure.
Because of course there is no reason for the original PCs to have had children and/or be reincarnated(without the spell) by the time the sequel is set to take place...
*shrug*
My players' preferences are not up for debate, I'm afraid.
Catering to the groups who actually completed the entire Rise of the Runelords AP is probably not a great idea;
Maybe. Maybe not.
In any case, I thought we were talking about "sequels" here, not spinoffs.
And whether doing a sequel is a "probably not a great idea" or not is quite debatable and not relevant to what my players like. I think my post was pretty clear.
Alternatively, for those of you who want to continue the adventure path, the community could always a sequel itself. I am fairly certain out of Paizo's multitude of loyal followers there exist the ones with skill enough to craft a well-written campaign.
Although creating the additional rune lords would require a great deal of extrapolation and guess-work, was could possibly be more fun than taking established material and making it your own? Besides, writing wizard end-bosses is fun (if not time-consuming).
Just to assuage any Paizo Publishing officials who may read this, I'm not advocating that your material be published without your consent. It's probably what I would do I my players ever played (and finished) Rise of the Runelords and still wanted more. After a certain point it would really just become a "Boss Rush" anyway (what with greater teleport, gate, and other such instant-transport spells) as the PCs actively seek out the still-torpid Runelords and assassinate them before they fully awaken.
Maybe. Maybe not.
Again, from a business standpoint, you're talking about investing the same amount of time, money and other resources in a new adventure or set of adventures that holds significantly less appeal to those who haven't played through the first set than it does for those who have.
In any case, I thought we were talking about "sequels" here, not spinoffs.
It would be a sequel in the chronological sense, and in that it would expand heavily on the major themes introduced in the first adventure path. The line between sequel and spin-off is thin, at best. Is Lufia II a sequel to Lufia, or is it a spin-off? Are the Resident Evil games spin-offs of one another?
And whether doing a sequel is a "probably not a great idea" or not is quite debatable and not relevant to what my players like. I think my post was pretty clear.
You're right, it's not relevant to what your players like. Unless, of course, it was your intention to try and persuade Paizo to produce the AP you're looking for by explaining to them what your players like. Then it's relevant. And, if that's the case, you need to find a way to persuade them that producing the AP you're looking for makes roughly as much business sense as producing another AP in the regular manner.
I don't think this is really something that can be debated well, though. A number of people (Paizo staff and others) have brought up plenty of reasons in the past why it simply is not feasible, at present, to produce a high-level adventure path, much less one that expands on a story that most of Paizo's customers haven't themselves fully experienced to begin with. I have yet to see someone produce any compelling arguments to the contrary. Charles Evans 25's post regarding Kingmaker and high-level play is about as close to justifying the move as I've seen (though I rather strongly disagree with the contents of his rant against high-level play believability).
|
Creative Director
|
What it REALLY boils down to is that we need to build the Adventure Paths so that they appeal to as many readers as possible. We can't build an AP to appeal to EVERYONE. We can, though, churn out 2 a year and hopefully increase the chances of appealing to everyone.
And after building over half a dozen of these things over the past 6 or so years, one thing that I'm pretty convinced of is that most AP players want them to start at 1st level. And as long as the AP remains one of Paizo's core products, I'm not really into taking risks with it.
By the time we finally get to the point where a "Return of the Runelords" adventure path is being published many years down the road, though, that may have changed.
A lot of things have to happen before I'd ever okay an AP that started at above 1st level, is what I'm saying.
|
It just seems to me that if a sequel Adventure Path intended to take on all the six remaining Runelords, it would be poorly served by starting at 1st level. I don't imagine any of the Runelords are much weaker than Karzoug, so starting from 1st, it takes six books to get to the level of fighting one of them...
Such an adventure that starts at level 1 would assume new characters are taking up the fight, months, if not years, after the first. The events of fighting Karzoug would simply be backstory for the new adventurers.
|
|
By the time we finally get to the point where a "Return of the Runelords" adventure path is being published many years down the road, though, that may have changed.
Maybe years down the road!
PSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSH.
I'll be DEMANDING Return of the Runelords come the 5 year anniversary of Burnt Offerings, and you my friend best be authoring it!
|
|
In any event, it's way too soon for me to reveal what my still-formulating plans are for the other six runelords, and while I'm 99.5% sure we'll never do an AP that starts at anything other than 1st level... note that .5%! In any event, we've never done a true sequel adventure path before, so there's a LOT of things I need to mull over and consider beyond the obvious "what about the PCs who played in the first adventure?" But I can say this: The adventure, whatever it ends up being... IF it ends up being... won't ignore the fact that a group of PCs probably already played the original adventure.
That's more like what I would like it to be.
I am not interested in lvls beyond 15 or so (although the highest i've reached are lvl 14).
It would be just great to take a lot from original adventure and have tales about the old heroes ... "Yes sir, that monk was AT LEAST 15 feet high and was farting fireballs the size of a dragon ..."
Mind you,I'm only in the middle of Skinsaw and there are lots and lots of other APs i'd like to play before.... :D
With all due respect, this is a classic example of the false dilemma logical fallacy. You needn't cater only to those who have played "Rise" by making a high-level AP that is its potential sequel.
A high level AP could be written that could both stand alone (i.e. be a high level AP that cares not how you got there -- anyone heroic would be interested in stopping the machinations of the remaining Runelords) and yet still serve as a sequel for "Rise of the Runelords" if you wished to add that dimension.
On this, you are absolutely correct. Paizo could develop an AP that both serves as a sequel and provides a way for those new to the setting (or just to RotR) to enjoy it as well. Heck, if they did start the path at higher levels I can see them creating a web supplement designed specifically to link the two campaigns together, for those groups that did finish RotR.
[QUOTE="Gary McBride"I would also note that WotC does not believe that 1st to 30th level campaigns are anathema to sales. They have already released one full 1st to 30th level adventure path (the H1-3, P1-3, E1-3 series of adventures) and are about to conclude a second one in the pages of Dungeon (Scales of War). These megapaths seemed to have done, economically speaking, so disastrously that they are starting a third one next year (HS1, HS2, etc).
Is it wrong to hope that where 4th edition D&D will by 2011 likely have at least three completed megapaths, that Pathfinder might eventually have just one?
Well, in this case, WotC firmly believes that epic-tier play is an enjoyable, smooth experience with its own allure. On the other hand, the difficulty of high-level play in 3.5 is one of the most oft-leveled criticisms of the system. It's not an accident that Paizo writes their APs up to the teens while WotC writes theirs all the way through the end of the game's level progression.
I think WotC is confident that they have developed a game that can be enjoyed equally well, and with near-equal ease, at all levels. I don't think Paizo has that same confidence about developing high-level adventures, though hopefully the upcoming work they are doing on high level play (apparently there will be something in the Kingmaker path on this) will help in that regard.
The more I think about this "sequel" idea, the more I agree with it starting at level 1 and definately at a "5-10 years later" frame.
Time for those runewells to start bubbling again.... :)
You're right, it's not relevant to what your players like. Unless, of course, it was your intention to try and persuade Paizo to produce the AP you're looking for by explaining to them what your players like.
Of course I'm right. And trying to discern intentions and motives on the internet isn't that smart. Please don't try. Like I said - my post was clear on the matter.
I'm not trying to "persuade" Paizo to do anything. They will do what they need to do. Period.
I don't think this is really something that can be debated well, though.
Much better!
|
|
Why does a sequel have to be an AP at all? 1-3 linked adventures like the old days of 1st AD&D could do it, and could be a part of the adventures line or a bonus series. Start at level 16 with the first one, end up post-20th level using the hopefully brand-spanking-new epic rules for PRPG in the last installment.
|
|
First off - a "sequel" to RotRL is a marvelous idea!
Now, I may be misinterpreting the word EPIC, but as far as I know - when the word epic applies to levels of characters in a D&D-ish game, it is universally assumed to mean levels 20+; thanks to the EPIC LEVEL HANDBOOK which spoke directly to that aspect of the game.
With that in mind, I do not need, nor do I want "epic level" play or an AP for it.
That being said, I would prefer a Sequel to RotRL to be for characters level 16-20 (high level yes, but still sub-epic level).
The reasons for this are varied - primarily to allow players that have played it to continue to use their characters where they left off. Also the first three APs that Paizo created (Shackled City, Age of Worms and Savage Tide) was awesome and did take characters to level 20 - though I know there was a lot of trouble for a lot of people. I think that Paizo doing this allowed for them to find the problem areas, and have addressed many of them with their own PFRPG rules.
Thus I would prefer a sequel to pick up where the other left off.
I see James' concerns that APs should start at 1st level, and I agree with that.
What I envision however is a product that is ancillary to the normal APs. Dungeon Magazine (which Paizo knows a thing or two about) has shown many examples of a higher level adventure that can be started as a sequel to something or a stand-alone.
I imagine that a series of 2-4 adventures released over the course of a year (anything from every six months, or once per quarter) as a product that continues the story with each one raising the previous level. This can be done via the Pathfinder Modules line, or something completely different - a mega adventure that is released seperate of all other things - like the box set for Castle Whiterock by Goodman Games, or the Rappan Athuk by Necromancer Games.
Now this is not to say that I wouldn't buy or continue to subscribe to the APs should one revisit the Runelord (been there done that got the tshirt) concept (of course i'd still subscribe) - but I would prefer Paizo taking a stab at continuing the pre-existing story and getting a published chance to use those high end and capstone abilities that paizo so wonderfully recharged with their new rules.
Robert
What I envision however is a product that is ancillary to the normal APs.
Yeah, I was thinking along the lines of a "Mega-Module" (or three) that were not necessarily a completely connected adventure path. That way, you could have level 16+ stuff, and not have to start from level 1 and make a full adventure path.
Probably a silly idea, just like Camelot.
What I envision however is a product that is ancillary to the normal APs.Yeah, I was thinking along the lines of a "Mega-Module" (or three) that were not necessarily a completely connected adventure path. That way, you could have level 16+ stuff, and not have to start from level 1 and make a full adventure path.
Probably a silly idea, just like Camelot.
Actually, with a 16+ mega-module, you could probibly pull characters from any of the first three APs, as there are/were set in Varisia (though Second Darkness does kind of wander).
|
Creative Director
|
If we DID do a true sequel to Rise of the Runelords... I'd probably set it up so that it could serve as a sequel for Runelords, Crimson Throne, AND Second Darkness. So you'd be able to play the adventure with any of those characters from any of those campaigns. Of course... whether or not any one particular player still has his character from an adventure he finished playing, say, 6 years ago by the time this hypothetical sequel comes out, and if that character was even of the right level to go on the sequel... those are additional variants that make doing a sequel in this manner problematic.
Of course, we might have an Epic level book out by then and it might become super popular, in which case an epic-level sequel would be more or less perfect for this.
Anyway, as I've said before, it's so far in the future still that something like this could change directions dozens of times still. Do keep posting your thoughts here, though, since that'll help me make decisions some day! :)
A level 15 or 16 to level 20 mega-adventure might be cool. I like that idea better than an epic level thing.
ok, my thoughts. I want to see this happen:
Of course, we might have an Epic level book out by then and it might become super popular, in which case an epic-level sequel would be more or less perfect for this.
If we DID do a true sequel to Rise of the Runelords... I'd probably set it up so that it could serve as a sequel for Runelords, Crimson Throne, AND Second Darkness. So you'd be able to play the adventure with any of those characters from any of those campaigns.
I dream of the remote chance that our gaming group makes it through all three APs and then gets to run the sequel with all of them!
If we DID do a true sequel to Rise of the Runelords... I'd probably set it up so that it could serve as a sequel for Runelords, Crimson Throne, AND Second Darkness. So you'd be able to play the adventure with any of those characters from any of those campaigns.Yes, please
+1