It really depends on your group, what kind of adventure they are looking for, what they would like to do with their characters. Having said that there are a few I would recommend for getting players hooked on Pathfinder:
Rise of the Runelords is a good classic adventure. It hits all the nostalgic high points and is downright fun.
Kingmaker is has a loose plot, allows players considerable freedom of choice (esp if your players do not like to feel "railroaded"), and lets them rule their own nation.
Legacy of Fire has some nice planar travel adventures.
I don't know to much about Serpent's Skull, but I've heard alot of good about it. Those would probably be my recommendations over anything else.
My favorites in order...
1) Rise of the Runelords- its why we play these games IMHO, all the traditional things are in here.
2) Kingmaker- Taming the Wilds and founding a kingdom and a great sandbox with a central plot.
3) Curse of the Crimson Throne- Best urban campaign ever.
then...
4) Legacy of Fire- Only reason it isnt above is that the arabian style might not appeal to everyone, I love it though.
5) Serpent Skull- shipwrecked on an island, then into the jungles for a lost city before you wind up in the underdark. The first 4 had me, book 5-6 not so much.
6) Council of Thieves- another urban campaign slightly less awesome than Crimson Throne.
7) Second Darkness- I need to read these one day before I comment. Not a fan of the very beginning "Ocean's Eleven" start though.
I always remember my first, but Rise of the Runelords hits all of those sweet nostalgia-flavored spots for me.
|
Though be aware that only Council of theives, Kingmaker and Serpents Skull are written for Pathfinder. The others are written for 3.5.
That being said, I am currently running Legacy of Fire, and the conversion is really easy. In most cases, the monster is in one of the bestiaries, or someone has already converted it online for me.
Age of Worms. :)
==Aelryinth
I'm enjoying Age of Worms and Savage Tide quite a bit.
I just start runing Curse of the Crimson Throne but i am going to buy the Pathfinder RPG core rule book's and i want to find out wich adventure path will be the best one to show Pathfinder RPG to my group.
From Argentina, Andres (Andrew).
The most direct answer to your question would be Kingmaker
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I have DMed both Council of Thieves and Kingmaker. The group I was with said they enjoyed Council of Thieves the most, but they had another DM run them through Rise of the Ruinlords and Second Darkness. I would have really liked to be a player in Kingmaker though. I really miss being able to play.
Be aware, though, that Kingmaker is very sandboxy. You will have to make up NPC's and personalities as you go along, otherwise it can feel very empty and monster-of-the-day like. The real story of the AP gets going in the last module, while it is more in the background during the first five modules ( which have their own mini-story, mostly ).
Rise of the Runelords is my favorite AP, especially Burnt Offerings (the first book). 3.5, but a quick conversion. It has a great mix of combat and skill encounters, and the goblins are just fun.
My next favorite would have to be Council of Thieves. I love the dark, urban element. The second book of CoT is my favorite in the set by far.
My favorites are Kingmaker (fey!), Rise of the Runelords (the grauls!), and Legacy of Fire (Kakishon!).
Only one of those are made for the Pathfinder RPG, but conversions aren't all that troublesome to do. It's still probably best to go with one of the APs that are made for the system when you are starting out with it though.
|
in a descending orders. my favorites:
1. Cusre of the Crimson Throne - has plenty of variety, intrigue and awesome
2. Council of Thieves - Cheliax gets me. besided, there is a lot of roleplaying to be had here side by side with some mildly good dungeon crawls
3. Second Darkness - epic plot, underworld, pocket dimensions, secret societys... Paizo went maybe a little to far with the crazy on this one, but it's enjoyable
4. Serpents Skull - some of the best dungeon crawls ever on APs... but not so big on the plot side of things
5. Legacy of Fire - first four parts are kinda great actually, but the last third of the AP is simply not fun IMHO.
6. Kingmaker - not a fan of sandbox adventures, though individual modules are ocassionaly kick-ass.
1. CotCT
2. KM
3. LoF
4. RotRL
5. SS
6. CoT
7. SD
Seems Curse tops most peoples list. :)
i'm going to go with
1.(tie). serpent's skull
1 (tie). kingmaker
3. rise of the runelords
4. council of thieves
5. legacy of fire
6. curse of the crimson throne
7. second darkness
|
There was a poll on ENworld on this very topic. Results:
1. KM
2. RotRL
3. CotCT
4. LoF/SS (tied)
5. CoT
6. SD
|
|
I've run through Curse and Rise each, and I'm starting up Kingmaker in the future.
Based on reading and running the APs, my ranking is:
1. RotRL - Classic adventure, lots of fun, does some cool stuff, epic fights.
2. CotCT - Would be number one if I liked the BBEG fight better. That said, this is one of the most epic urban adventures ever, and has some amazing dungeons as well.
3. KM - Haven't run it yet, but loved reading it twice. Really like the open feel. My players are chomping at the bit to start.
4. LoF - Really interesting planar campaign. Only reason I'm not running it next is Kingmaker came out.
5. SS - The first four adventures really had me hooked. The last two kinda soured it for me.
6. CoT - Love the second adventure. Had some issues with issue one. Not as good as CotCT, rough pacing for my liking.
7. SD - Had some trouble with this one. My buddy is reading through it and considering running it. May be better than I think, though it wasn't my cup of tea.
I had a great amount of fun running the Crimson Throne AP for my players. As a DM, that's my favorite thus far.
As a player, I'm getting a kick out of Kingmaker. Of course, I gave our DM enough backstory for him to thoroughly grab the party by the collective short-and-curlies using it.
I have not seen The Shackled City brought up but once I think. It is set in Golarion? If so, is it not as good as these other APs or was it passed over because its older? Don't mind conversion if its good.
Shackled City, Age of Worms and Savage Tide are set in the 3.5 default setting of Greyhawk. I'd assume the reason most people in this thread haven't said anything about one or more of these is the fact that they're less likely to have read them (since they're older).
|
|
I have not seen The Shackled City brought up but once I think. It is set in Golarion? If so, is it not as good as these other APs or was it passed over because its older? Don't mind conversion if its good.Shackled City, Age of Worms and Savage Tide are set in the 3.5 default setting of Greyhawk. I'd assume the reason most people in this thread haven't said anything about one or more of these is the fact that they're less likely to have read them (since they're older).
Considering that the thread is in "Pathfinder AP" forum, I think that everybody assumed that we're talking about Golarion APs in here.
|
|
So far, I really liked all of them (even Second Darkness which seems to be generally considered the weakest AP so far) so it's difficult for me to chose my favorite. In terms of the exitement I felt when the campaign started, I'd say Age of Worms followed by RotRL. And both exceeded my expectations, so it's probably those two.
But the important thing is that I have yet to see an AP which I wouldn't want to run right away.
1. CotCT
2. SS
3. KM
4. CoT
5. LoF
6. RotRL
7. SD
|
|
Kingmaker- Sandboxy fits my GMing Style a lot better!
Rise of the Rune Lords- Some fantastic gems all the way through; the only AP that doesnt suffer too much from the high level weirdness syndrome.
Legacy of Fire- the first three adventures are some of the best; the last three go off on a railroad into the land of late level weirdness.
Curse of the Crimson Throne- Some good ideas and one of the best one off adventures- Seven Days to the Grave. Suffers from the lets abandon the city and go off to exotic lands syndrome.
Serpents Skull- I feel like this AP should have been a lot more than what it was; the pulpy indiana jonessque feel never jumped off the pages. In fact, the backdrop seems to have been ill used. It needed a lot more of the "african/mystical" elements rather than meandering into the same old buried city syndrome
Council of Thieves- Least memorable in that nothing about this AP stands out.
Second Darkness- seems the most incoherent AP of them all.
2. Legacy of Fire- "high level weirdness syndrome." What do you mean by this? I am considering running this AP but have heard quite a few negative comments about the latter parts.
The 4th part is excellent, in my opinion, so it's not just the first 3. However,
The 5th part has been criticized for being another "we're trapped and have to find a way out" just after the 4th part, which also essentially has the same plot.
Part 6 is not as good as it could have been considering the backstory; Most of the wishcrafted monsters should have been more interesting and more obviously different from normal monsters.
This is my list in order of how I liked the AP's
Rise of the Rune Lords
Kingmaker
Serpent's Skull
Curse of the Crimson Throne
Council of Thieves
Legacy of Fire (to be fair I keep flip floppy on this and council)
Second Darkness
Is this in terms of playing them or reading them?
|
Is this in terms of playing them or reading them?This is my list in order of how I liked the AP's
Rise of the Rune Lords
Kingmaker
Serpent's Skull
Curse of the Crimson Throne
Council of Thieves
Legacy of Fire (to be fair I keep flip floppy on this and council)
Second DarknessSame question for me. I just don't see how people are playing this many APs in such a short amount of time since publication.
I hate to think people are forming opinions on whole APs based on reading them alone!
Both, though no I have not played/ran them all. You can form a opinion on reading them though. I have ran RotRL and CotCT, I played in LoF and SD(though this one ended due the the GM having issues with it) I have read all of them.
Also keeping in mind your view of something will depend how your group does, especially how good the GM does. Which may or may not have anything to do with how good a AP is or is not.
|
|
Great comments. I have some questions for you that I think can help me decide which AP I should run next.
1. Did you DM or play in all the APs? If not which did you DM or play?
2. Legacy of Fire- "high level weirdness syndrome." What do you mean by this? I am considering running this AP but have heard quite a few negative comments about the latter parts.
3. Serpents Skull-"I feel like this AP should have been a lot more than what it was". I have read this or similar sentiment elsewhere. Right now I am not considering it but would like to hear if your experience comes from DMing it, playing it, or reading it through.Thanks.
BTW, I am DMing Curse right now as far and far as the "Suffers from the lets abandon the city and go off to exotic lands syndrome." My players are currently at the very end of "Escape from Old Korvosa" and have come to the conclusion that they need to leave Korvosa to regroup. They feel the Queen has won this round and they need to come up with a counter punch. Yes...
SOME SPOILERS TO FOLLOW:
One of the most important points i'd like to make is to ONLY run adventures, and even parts of encounters that you know you'll enjoy, and that your group will enjoy. If an encounter or part of an adventure doesn't sit well with you or you find tedious, then don't run it, or if possible, modify it into something you'll enjoy.
1. I have DM'd the following from start to finish:
Kingmaker, Legacy of Fire, RotRL, Savage Tide, Age of Worms
I have used parts of adventures from the following APs:
Serpents Skull, Second Darkness, Curse of the Crimson Throne
I have read all of the APs and have used bits and pieces from all of them, including Council of Thieves [there are some interesting bits in the Sixfold Trial and Mother of Flies; very cinematic, fun encounters].
Alas, i have never had a chance to play since I GM my groups.
2. "High level wierdness syndrome" goes something like this; Party, during the initial adventures, form relationships, have a base of operation and are intrinsically tied to a location, the people, and the plots therein.
However, as the group gets to the higher levels, it is hard for the module writers to challange the higher level capabilities while taking all of the parties abilities into consideration and maintaining versimilitude. Hence, the party is sent of into the netherlands (usually a plane of some sort) to accomplish task(s) where the netherworldly creatures can challenge the party. It's most glaring in this AP in that how the party gets to the "netherworld" is scripted and so grating that it is bound to irritate them (release the bad guy, get trapped in the demi plane with no other recourse.) Uusually a good GM can give the PCs at least the appearance of choice; it would take a lot of work in this case.
What also tends to happen is that by using this method, the AP tends to lose momentum and also a lot of the flavor of the narrative and the setting (I believe most of the APs outside of Kingmaker suffer from this to some degree).
3. Serpent Skull could use a lot more of the African/dark continent pulpy flavor. It's there to some degree, but not to the extent i would prefer; for example, a lot more of the juju magic appendix etc. could have been leveraged to give it the sensibility, i think, it was meant to have. I'd also have pulled forward and integrated more of the "serpentfolk" stuff into the earlier APs (magic, influence, presence etc.) The later adventures, again take the PCs to a location far away from the basis of the adventure, and one of the key NPCs has nothing to do with the location at all... To simplify my post, read the awesome Pathfinder Journal story in the AP- THAT ia what i think was missing from the adventures themselves (kudos to Robin Laws).
I am glad that your group is enjoying CoCT. It is ultimately about you and your players having fun, and you understanding what drives your group. The group I GM'd would have had a hard time going off like the AP expects you to- In fact, they were much more likely to stay and form a resistance group, and to usurp power rather than abandoning friends, family, colleagues etc.
A History of Ashes is a pretty good setting and adventure that I have used heavily. The AP is definitely pretty good overall, but for me, part 5 is a definite outlier. It will also take a bit of effort for you to make the "resistance" that acts as the background for part 6 more than what it is, and for the last part to feel like more than just a set of encounters and to make the party feel as if they are coming back into a active resistance. The encounters are way too thin in this regard and could have been a lot more climatic (and can be if you add in the additional encounters and RP opportunities that the last part is lacking.)
|
|
Great stuff...
Thanks for the information I very much appreciate it. I see what you mean by "High level weirdness syndrome" now.
It seems you are pretty happy with Kingmaker as it seems the majority of people are. How do you feel the AP would run using the "Kingdom in the background" rules? Suppose a group had little interest in actually running a kingdom, does the AP hold up without this aspect? Especially if I ran it with the same group of players right on heels of CotCT and before that RotRL? One concern I have about doing Kingmaker next is that my group will only have a casual interest in running a kingdom and will be looking for an intense plot like Rise and Curse had but the AP will fall short in this area.
The main pitfall with this AP is that it is easy to let things lag, and for things to slow down to a crawl if you, as the GM, don't move the action along. Also, the AP can easily devolve into a series of encounters if you don't have the right impetus.
Key #1 is to make sure that each of the PCs have the right motivations and ambitions[ i'd give the group the intro flyer and guage their interest first and let them make their characters based on that). This in and of itself should make the campaign intense. If you have the PCs with the right motivations, you can have a fab time; in fact this AP might even be less work since the PCs will move things along.
It is also important to moving time along (i'd do it between sessions via email or other means if possible rather than asking "so you have six months, what do you do?" during a game session), and letting events happen, and letting the PCs react to it ("you are sitting around eating grapes and entertaining the price of persia when a filth covered peasant comes running to the throne room door...."but, but the owlbear ate the ENTIRE TOWN!"...as your guards try to get rid of the rabble).
Hope that makes sense.
The running the kingdom stuff is purely optional. It is a matter of tracking what the PCs have and have not done; I'd recommend that you do this offline (so as to not slow down game play) or go with the kingdom in the background rules. However, a lot of the "plot" has to do with the responsibilities of being in charge, as noted above, so it's important to preserve that sense and you can add whatever headaches or heartaches as you so choose. Being King and his minions is a b%+#@.
EDIT: One other key point- you'll need to develop a lot of NPCs and really RP them up and have them be living, breathing people rather than just props. The more the PCs care about their subjects (and vice versa) the more fun the AP will be and the more the PCs will want to take care of all the troubles they face; after all, it might be a much more meaningful task to save your family and friends from danger than saving the world (for example, one of the PCs has his entire tribe of displaced elves following him and settling in the kingdom).
1) KM
2) LoF
3) CotCT
4) SS
5) RotRL
6) CoT
7) SD
In fact, if I had to guess, I would say that the majority of negative opinions of Second Darkness are from read throughs. My guess is that (and this is just a guess) the AP plays much better than it reads but it reads so poorly that many groups opt not to play it at all or only heavily modified.
And it is indeed just a guess. The play-throughs documented in the SD forum tell quite the story.
In any case, I, personally, don't buy your theory.
You can form a opinion on reading them though.
Absolutely!
Personally, I find the most interesting comments come from people who have GMed a module and found things to criticize about it through the course of gameplay. But I wouldn't use that as a basis to determine whether a module is worth reading.
|
I am currently GMing my group through book 5 of Curse of the Crimson Throne and have been incredibly impressed with this AP overall. I have only read the others, but the ones that interest me the most are Kingmaker and Serpent's Skull.
I know it is only getting started, but I am also extremely excited about Carrion Crown. If the writing of the rest of the books is as good as the first one, this will be the next AP I run with my group.
1 Serpent's Skull.
2 Rise of the Runelords.
3 Carrion Crown.
4 Kingmaker.
5 Legacy of Fire.
6 Council of Thieves.
7 Curse of the Crimson Throne.
8 Second Darkness.
Serpent's Skull has some flaws. What makes it awesome for me is the extra background that I can bring to running it. I lived in Africa for most of my life, and none of my players know much about the continent. I am going all out with
I just start runing Curse of the Crimson Throne but i am going to buy the Pathfinder RPG core rule book's and i want to find out wich adventure path will be the best one to show Pathfinder RPG to my group.
From Argentina, Andres (Andrew).
It isn't complete yet, but so far Carrion Crown is hands down the best AP I've seen. The first three have moved alongside my all time favorites such as Expedition to Castle Ravenloft and The Evil Eye.
That being said, you really can't go wrong with any of them, as all of the AP's have been high quality work.
My rankings--only APs I have played in or run.
#1 Council of Thieves (player). For me this was what Crimson Throne should have been, but without the sudden departure from the city, and with a setting I liked a lot better. My GM hybridized it with the first two modules of Savage Tide, which I think works really well.
#2 Kingmaker (GM). I am a sandbox GM and this one is really good for my style, though it's been a lot of work (we are halfway through). The plot is miles from the rails by now but the module info is still useful, and hey, we just helped establish the Free City of Restov! I am looking forward to module 6, and it's the only AP I have *ever* been able to say that about as usually I dislike running or playing at high levels.
#3 Rise of the Runelords (GM). I can criticize the individual parts but it's diverse, fairly smooth to run, has a lot of great stuff in it, and the overall arc works out--you never question "Why are we bothering anyway?"
#4 Age of Worms (GM). This one suffers by taking the players away from their base and never coming back, and the late modules were, to me, an overblown mess. It also has a deathtrap module midway through that did bad things to our group. But the first 10 parts (of 12) were a decent run, with the gladiatorial games probably a high point.
#5 Shackled City (player). This one is the hardest for me to rate. It had really, really good parts, intricate story, good setting. But it was a tactical meatgrinder--way, way too hard for me--and eventually chewed up my morale as a player to the point where I nearly gave up the game.
#6 Curse of the Crimson Throne (player). There were some things to like early on, but we had constant problems--setting problems, plot problems, logic problems--and the departure from Korvosa was a deal-breaker so the game ended there. My GM has since run pieces of it for his other group and had similar problems. I see that this one is a general favorite but I ended up disliking it very much. I see Council of Thieves as "what CoCT should have been". GMs might consider cannibalizing CoCT for extra material for CoT.
#7 Second Darkness (GM). The first two modules would be a good mini-campaign, and with considerable modification the fourth module would be a (different, unconnected) mini-campaign. We had *tons* of fun in the underground city but only by abandoning everything in the module except the sourcebook. This one has more broken plots and unmotivated decisions than any of the others I've been involved with, and module 5 is an all-time low point for both logic and fun. I'm not sorry I ran it, because of that underground city arc, but I wouldn't recommend it. The first two modules could be cannibalized for CotCT or CoT.
I cannot speak for anyone else but I GMed Second Darkness modules 1-5 and the first third of 6 before my player called it quits, and to me it was far and away the weakest of the APs. Modules 3, 4 and 5 had very severe logic and motivation problems that were hard to fix. I feel my run of #3 was a complete failure, the biggest failure I've had with any Paizo module.
In retrospect, what SD #3 should do is to introduce the elven politics of the capital city in the days before its fall and *show where the Underdark houses came from.* I think having the PCs get to know various elf factions and then realize later on that the drow are still continuing those same political divisions would be a really powerful effect.
But that would require abandoning the module and writing a citybook, and I didn't have it in me. Also I'm not sure I knew the drow well enough until after I ran #4 (which is when my player came up with this idea) and that was, of course, too late. If I ever ran it again and had loads of prep time, I'd try this.
The other thing that helps SD, and I STRONGLY recommend this, is making the PCs agents of the Winter Council. I feel it's the only hope to have decent motivation for the later modules. I know of two campaigns like this including mine, and both GMs ended up feeling that this was the only sane way to go. It is not, in my opinion, a good AP for generic adventurers. There is no good reason they should do what they're asked to do in any of #3, #4, or #5.