How much of a problem is it to run an AP before it's completely published?
I was thinking of running Carrion Crown at my FLGS as it comes out, but on the forums I've read people suggest that only a fool would run an AP before completely reading it.
|
Personally, I think it can get dicey at times. Ideally, any GM running an AP should be able to read the whole thing front to back to have a solid idea of the big picture.
This has become a bit less of an issue since Paizo started putting out full AP synopses at the beginning of each path, either in the books themselves or elsewhere, but sometimes the finer details can get blurry and wires crossed right quick. You'll have to be ready to improvise(a GM should always be ready for that, but even moreso when they're flying partially blind).
The Paizo crew are awesome about answering any questions that may arise though, so that's a huge help.
Sorry, I'm mildly confused. Are we referring to the AP as the individual volumes, or as the complete collection?
|
|
Sorry, I'm mildly confused. Are we referring to the AP as the individual volumes, or as the complete collection?
The entire thing, sorry.
It gives a clear view of the big picture, but later AP volumes can help clarify bits in earlier volumes, or cast them in a different light the GM might not have considered otherwise.
It also gives the GM more room to improvise and foreshadow what's to come later in the AP, as well as helping players be prepared for where they're headed.
It's like, in one AP I'm running, something huge happens with an NPC in one of the middle volumes. My PCs never met this character, and never would have if I hadn't read ahead. In order to give that event impact and help things flow more organically, I knew I had to get him into the game ahead of time. There's also examples of NPCs one might expect to be throwaway characters coming back and turning out to be more important later on.
And another thing - it's really helpful to have the advice of other DMs on these boards, so starting early means that you're going into the AP all alone.
I planned on DMing Carrion Crown when it comes out, but I think I'll wait for at least Chapter 2 to come out before I start. I also runned into a problem:
|
|
I always wait for the entire AP to come out first. Three reasons:
1. You know the whole plot, so you can foreshadow, anticipate, think about how to engage players in the storyline and so forth.
2. You know how things play out in the grand scheme of things. Avoids the "ooops, I killed an NPC in the first adventure and he becomes a critical part of the story at the end!" problem.
3. You know what quality the adventures are and if there are any parts you have to alter/rewrite. Paizo's APs are of famously high quality, but even the best make their mistakes (Memory of Darkness, I am oh so looking at you.
Ideally you wait until the whole AP is out, not only because of NPC issues, but also to see if you like where the AP has gone and if you really want to GM it to its conclusion. Serpent's Skull, for example, seems very dungeon-based in its later chapters, and that is no the cup of tea for my players nor for me as a GM. It's good to know that beforehand.
However, in case my soon-to-start Kingmaker campaign utterly fails, I'll be going into Carrion Crown before it has been completely published.
Running an AP can be rough not knowing either where the guard rails are nor what plot points need to be emphasized.
I started my first AP, Serpent's Skull, after reading only the first 2 adventures plus the GM discussions and got lucky with one player, not so much with the other two. The Chelaxian noblewoman / cleric of Desna who looks a bit like an ancient hero (sans muscles) and reads Azlanti is awesome -- the generic mercenary bowman and the druid from 'somewhere north', not so much.
Starting over, I would have looked into tying at least one of them into the later NPCs or hooked to one of the other npc factions. Ah, well, the price of eagerness.
i dont see the problem with running the AP as it comes out as you get a synopsis of it.
We ran Second Darkness as it was comming out and it went fine.
Legacy of fire, might have been better to get them all first.
I dunno, i dont think it was a definate no.
i dont see the problem with running the AP as it comes out as you get a synopsis of it.
We ran Second Darkness as it was comming out and it went fine.
Legacy of fire, might have been better to get them all first.
I dunno, i dont think it was a definate no.
Oh, I think beginning the campaign with a not fully published AP is quite doable, but there are more advantages to using a completed one.
Creative Director
|
We really try to make each AP playable right out of the gate, and do our best to keep the GM informed the whole time; that's why we put a campaign outline into every first AP.
But changes and unexpected alterations to the storyline invariably occur as authors come up with cool ideas. So if you're running as they're published, you just have to be a bit more flexible and quick on your feet when slight curve balls get thrown your way. Again, we try to limit these to as few as possible, but they still can happen.
Of the two I am running, I started Council of Thieves after I had them all and Kingmaker after I had the first three books. My experience has been:
I'd generally recommend having the whole thing. First off you, as a DM, get an idea of what is and what is not important. Another important factor is that you get to decide is this adventure really is for you. Its not that uncommon to hear people complaining that the adventure started off being just what they wanted and then Paizo 'ruined' it by having the AP emphasize some style or element of RPGs that their group does not happen to prefer.
If your so hot to trot out the new AP its probably because you believe it will be like X...but what if its not? What if its like Y and you and your group don't actually like Y?
There are a lot of good APs out now, as a rule I think any DM should have little problem running one of the excellent offerings already out and be picking up the newest AP as they come out. If it turns out to be the greatest series of adventures since the Queen of the Demonweb Pits series, well so much the better, you can run it next - best of all, with all the information of the whole AP at your disposal and probably the insights of the message board denizens to boot, you can make it the best campaign ever including things like for shadowing and other tricks of the trade to liven up the campaign.
Running them after the entire series has appeared helps insure that actually running what you think your running and allows you more time to make small adjustments to cater the adventures to your groups tastes.
|
Ideally, would you rather have the whole AP in your hot little hands first?
Sure. Absolutely. No argument.
But there are a whole number of reasons why a new campaign begins "now" which go beyond somebody else's publication schedule. Timing and both GM and Player interest and engagement -- and availability -- don't run on a schedule. Or at least, on some other party's schedule.
So while it's better to have it all first, that does not mean that you can't start beforehand and do your best to rock and roll with the series as released. Usually? It's not that big a deal.
I started Age of Worms when there were just publishing Prince of Redhand. My campaign survived (easily) and that AP was soon finished in any event. Not the best example perhaps, as I did have the first 7 or 8 AP installments in my hands when the campaign started. Still. You get my point.
For podcast review purposes, one of the podcast hosts started Serpent's Skull when she only had volume one and two. Well, thepublication of that AP is about to end and her campaign has just finished Smuggler's Shiv. No harm done.
I'm starting The Haunting of Harrowstone in the first week of March, 2011. Ideal? Hell no!! Possible?
Well - I'm betting "hell yes".
Our Carrion Crown sessions will be recorded so you will theoretically get the chance to see for yourself.
All by way of saying: "don't", "can't" and "shouldn't" are big words. :D
The whole thing.
I would absolutely NOT run any AP without having read all the volumes first.
AFAIC, one is doing their players a huge disservice by running the AP before having read all the volumes.
AFAIC, one is doing their players a huge disservice by running the AP before having read all the volumes.
Meh, YMMV.
I'd probably wait till the second book is out (or in my downloads at least) before I ran a brand new AP.
The outline helps but it would be nice to know which NPCs might play a pivotal role in later installments. This was done in a CoT thread here at Paizo where someone (James iirc) recommended which NPCs should survive from Bastards of Erebus. It would be nice to have this kind of info in the outline. Maybe a sidebar in book one of who might be needed in later installments.
Well, in case that I fail horribly at GM'ing Kingmaker, I will definitely start running Carrion Crown instead of Serpent's Skull, since the latter doesn't appeal to me very much for its general flavour and because it is a bit too dungeon heavy from what I've seen.
It depends. For some APs, it won't matter much if you haven't read everything from start to finish before starting it, while for others it might.
For instance, if you start Age of Worms before you have read it through, you run the risk of a player creating a character that will have big problems being effective once the campaign becomes as undead-centric as it does (like, say, an enchanter). If you had read it through completely, you would be able to tell the player to hold that character concept for another campaign.
Other than things like that (which are minimal in the Pathfinder APs), there are no real problems with starting an AP right away. There are benefits to reading the AP through completely before starting the campaign, though, such as being able to foreshadow things, and being able to play up the importance of the NPCs that will be recurring.
How much of a problem is it to run an AP before it's completely published?
I was thinking of running Carrion Crown at my FLGS as it comes out, but on the forums I've read people suggest that only a fool would run an AP before completely reading it.
I did that with the Council of Thieve AP, I really regret doing that. In hind sight there is so much I could have added to that AP the would would have made the last part less problematic.
Introducing more nobility at the Cornucopia event and dropping hints and what the nobles could do. That way when it came to rallying the nobility at the end the players could see why that would be good idea with out me having hit them on the head with the concept.
|
For me I would prefer to have the whole AP but that is not always possible.
I love the idea of Carrion Crown so much that I decided to start a new group this month to start the AP. We only play once a month for a long (12 hours or more) session. Meaning I would only get through the part of the first chapter before I received the second and by the time I was done with the second chapter I would likely have the whole thing.
Unfortunately, with the first chapter being pushed back to March, I will be meeting with the group creating characters and doing a one off to get to know each other this month and start the AP next month.
I have run Runelords, Crimson Throne, Part of Second Darkness and am currently running Serpent Skull. I am also playing in Legacy of Fire.
Runelords I started when the first one arrived switching from a Forgotten Realms campaign. It went fine but would have been enhanced if I had the whole thing before starting. Crimson Throne and Second Darkness I had already.
Serpent Skull I had three or four chapters (and still have not finished reading chapter three I believe but will get them done in the next few weeks).
Overall, it has not mattered if I had read it all before I began running it or not. Nicer to have all the information stored in the computer but not necessary.