So how does RotRL stack up to later APs? Is it still fun? Is it an enormous pain to convert it to Pathfinder from 3.5? Would a group only familiar with later APs enjoy it?
Thanks in advance for your input.
Personally I thought it was one of the best APs paizo has put out (I have played through, GMed or watched all of them to date), which shouldn't be surprising. RotRL was the launch point for paizo in my opinion -- it is the product that (to me at least) proved they had the moxie to do what no other 3rd party publisher had done to date -- wrest control of 3.5 from WotC.
The only down side in it to me is the somewhat difficult treasure in a few parts. I enjoyed RotRL more than any other AP I played in.
The first three parts are all fantastic and well worth spending the time converting. The next three are all good but have their flaws.
I think your group would enjoy playing through it.
The investment in hero labs really helps with conversion and helps you make them the right power and CR for Pathfinder.
I converted all of 2nd darkness (and made alot of personal changes) in a week or two
I played it with two grops, one 3.5 one PFRPG with minimal adjustment. We had a great time.
Parts 1,2 and 5 are the high points
Very cool. In glancing through the first book it looked great (an abominable typeface aside) but I wanted some opinions of people with first-hand experience. Thanks!
It's a great AP overall and gives a great introduction Golarian. If you are planning to campaign in Golarian for a while I would say starting with RotRL is a must, it just introduces so many hooks that later APs pick up on.
I only play 3.5 so I can't speak of the conversion but I don't remember anything that would be so complicated to cause a problem. All of the adversaries are pretty standard types.
As far as comparing it to other APs I think Curse of the Crimson Throne is better organized and focused from a story/adventure perspective but RotRL is a bit more epic.
Interesting! My group tried CotCT and finished the first book, but then the GM flamed out and we dropped the campaign. This may be veering into the wrong thread, but my impression of it (without getting spoilery) was that there was a difficulty with character and player motivation between the first and second books, since by the end of the first book you'd pretty much fulfilled your goals and there wasn't a lot of reason to keep going as an adventuring group. At least that was the problem our group ran into. Does RotRL avoid that?
|
In most campaigns there is a transition from events happening to the heroes (stuff happens in your town, you get hired to do stuff) and the heroes taking the fight to the villains for other reasons (altruism, greed/lust for power). RotR is no different.
The first two books have stuff happen to the PCs.
In the third book, the PCs are hired to do stuff.
In the fourth book, stuff happens again and the PCs hit the road for revenge/to stop the apocalypse and get to the fifth and sixth books that way.
To answer your first question about conversion, it's pretty easy to convert - probably about the same difficulty as the step between a 4 PC party and a 6 PC party, so something that can be done on the fly pretty easily. I'm using it as the first introduction to Golarion and it works great for that because it starts small and organically grows from there.
The only things the party needs for CotCT is a desire to save Korvosa or figure what is going on with it. If the party has neither of these motivations they should just do another AP.
I think that was the crux of the issue we had. The GM never really got a feel for what made the city interesting, so we as players never got the feeling that it was a place we really wanted to save rather than, say, get out of before something bad happened. The general feeling was, "Jeez, this place is a dump. Why would I want to risk my neck for it?" The GM was never able to provide answers.
|
If played well, Sandpoint is really a town you'd like to save. There are so many hooks with NPCs ...
Rotrl, as JAmes Jacobs said somewhere, was rather "conventional" and was aimed to please as many people as possible including the grognards. Nevertheless, in this "conventional" way there are many many surprises (goblins, i'm looking at you) ...
A good deal of dungeons with some RPing and a lot of fun.
The approach to this AP is sometimes very mature and some parts may need to be cut for younger players (Ogres i'm looking at you this time). Overall it's probably the best adventure I had so far...
I didn't read any other APs so far (barely started reading CotCt) but I really enjoy GMing Rotrl.
Finally for the conversion there are some conversions available in Pathfinder in this forum. So that won't be a lot of work.
Until recently and as I was too lazy to convert them, I was simply adding 20% HP to the NPCs to make it a bit harder as Pathfinder Characters are a bit stronger than 3.5 (more feats, more HPs for casters and more powerful in general).
Read the whole Rotrl forum, there are plenty of great ideas to use.
If you search the threads under ROTRL you will find someone has converted them for you :)
So how does RotRL stack up to later APs? Is it still fun? Is it an enormous pain to convert it to Pathfinder from 3.5? Would a group only familiar with later APs enjoy it?
Thanks in advance for your input.
Yes.
Yes.
No.
Probably.
You're welcome.
It is a little less polished, the art isn't as good, and they try some really hackneyed plot vehicles (like all villains keep diaries).
On the other hand, for all its flaws it si a great AP, and it is by far the most discussed AP which means that there are a ton of fan-made resources. Also, it's really easy to get advice on patching the plot where you don't like it.