When the PC's were storming Castle Korvosa in the last module, I had to combine five or six encounters to barely challenge them. I should note, however, that the group was composed very strongly for that campaign, with a Paladin, Inquisitor, Druid, Wizard and Sorcerer.
5 PCs with an assuming 20 point buy (seemingly average point buy among paizo threads btw) would likely decimate any Paizo adventure designed for 4 PCs on a 15 point buy without GM reworking. Some people just max out opponent HPs, or add a mook, etc (not saying you do this either btw :)) but it doesnt make much difference when the group is that powerful, enemies keep same 15 point stats usually, max HP doesnt do much when you are hammered with improved critical rolls, etc. YMMV
The second module of Second Darkness had so many "OMG, argh, RUN!" moments I can't even recall all of them anymore. :p I am a player in that campaign and we had to retreat two times from the caves to avoid beign TPK'ed. ^^
Im jealous, I would love to be in a game like this every now and then.
One thing that would really kinda help as well would be for folks to actually list specific adventures that they felt DID avoid having a "grindy" feel to them. Or alternatively, tell me what adventure AUTHORS you think did a great job handling the pacing of the adventure and its encounters.
Richard Pett is consistently excellent with encounter design.
James Jacobs, you are consistently excellent with encounter design.
Greg A. Vaughan is consistently very good. I usually do not omit encounters in his modules, but occasionally there are odd ones I could take or leave. Examples: The specter in Vordakai's tomb, the nihiloi in Walcourt,
Jason Nelson and Tim Hitchcock are also consistently good. They are predisposed to having mook encounters, though I'm not sure if that's because of their modules I most remember. House of the Beast + War of the River Kings both featured large amounts of gnolls and Pitax wardens respectively.
Neil Spicer writes very well but, in my opinion, the way he designs encounters is very 'grindy.' There are usually a large amount of encounters with groups of much lower CR enemies.
As for the most grindy modules, most to least:
Sanctum of the Serpent God. The entire urdefhan part of this book felt tacked on just so the PCs could level.
Thousand Fangs Below. See previous comments; two whole sessions of level 5 serpentfolk fighters.
The City of Seven Spears. When I had to draw a ziggurat every game for two months in a row, I knew I was basically playing the Groundhog Day of modules.
Fortress of the Stone Giants. Read, but not played, so take this with a grain of salt. I honestly wondered if I should even list this, because I'm complaining that there are too many stone giants in the Fortress of the Stone Giants.
Crown of Fangs. 14th level characters beating up on CR 8 Gray Maidens. Then, at around 16, they go beat up on CR 10 boggard barbarians. You beat up low CR encounters for about 1/3 of the time you're in combat in this module. But, to be fair, it made sense. The PCs had met the Gray Maidens before, and it was kind of cool for them because it made them feel powerful. Of course, I also only had the party face them combined with other encounters. I also got good use out of the mob template, which is a gargantuan-sized swarm of humanoids, essentially. (The cleric of Norgorber killed it in one channel.)
As for my definition of 'grindy': Grindy is a feeling that you get only when you break the illusion of disbelief. Combat always has to have something at stake. When that something at stake is... nothing, then it's grindy. If the PCs feel like they're fighting for the sake of fighting, it's grindy.
|
As for my definition of 'grindy': Grindy is a feeling that you get only when you break the illusion of disbelief. Combat always has to have something at stake. When that something at stake is... nothing, then it's grindy. If the PCs feel like they're fighting for the sake of fighting, it's grindy.
That's pretty good. I'd agree but shorten it to "combat for the sake of combat."
Which incidentally lessens the impact of non combat focused PCs by the way. If your game has gotten grindy then most likely your bard has fallen asleep at the table. It's something to think about.
As a substitution for endless monsters I'd suggest mixing it up with puzzles and noncombat encounters.
Come to think of it that's my biggest gripe with Serpent's skull. I can't recall a single puzzle besides the one in Smuggler's Shiv,(lowering the water). That was good, why couldn't there have been more puzzles like that?
For what it's worth, I think Carrion Crown is breaking this trend rather well. There's been a lot less combat, and a lot higher focus on skill checks, roleplay, or other means of advancing the storyline. And the few combats that do exist: rather difficult!
My definition of "grindy" would be any time the players look up at you and ask "why are we doing this?" or otherwise suffer fatigue. I think the key is to change up the pacing with a good amount of frequency. This is why early books in the AP lines are so lauded: you keep jumping between meeting new NPCs, some quick combats, seeing more of the setting, learning that there's a rabbit hole, and trying to figure out what's happening next. Whereas later modules it's just "we know everything, so let's just kill it."
"Pace change" is what saved Kingmaker. Because, as presented, it's just an awful series of one-shot outdoor encounters. But the PCs break these up by having KingdomBuilding turns back at the homestead, as well as get to deliberate about where to go and what to do next. "Pace change" is what also saved Sins of the Saviors: that had the potential to be a horrible grind, but it was fun to explore the artistic expression of the different sins, and there was a real feeling of progress as you went along ('cuz you knew you only had to do 7).
The other big topic, as other posters have mentioned, is "purpose." You could look at the final book of Legacy of Fire as a big grind, but it had great emotional resonance with the party, as they are re-saving their hometown. Contrast with anything that happened at the end of Serpent's Skull, where there was just a big feeling of apathy, and you have no idea how long the pain will last.
Authors: Pett, Hodge, and Jacobs all seem to have the pacing thing nailed. I'll buy their stuff on name recognition alone.
I don't remember who wrote Racing to Ruin, but I think it's better written than Souls for the Smuggler's Shiv. Sorry James. :)
I am still astounded as to how such a great adventure concept, exploring an ancient azlanti city, could go wrong... I guess we all make mistakes.
|
.
Thousand Fangs Below. See previous comments; two whole sessions of level 5 serpentfolk fighters.
The City of Seven Spears. When I had to draw a ziggurat every game for two months in a row, I knew I was basically playing the Groundhog Day of modules.
Best description of my problems with CoSS and TFB, ever.
Sanctum of the Serpent God. The entire urdefhan part of this book felt tacked on just so the PCs could level.
I agree possibly. My problem was the Urdefhan in general. I don't like their race in general and for the life of me I can't see a reason they would be needed to fit into the spirit of this particular AP (ancient ruined underdark snake-city, following a jungle romp). Aren't they Daemon offspring or somesuch?
They also kind of remind me of Cenobytes from Hellraiser not your traditional underdark species, but it fits their planar type more. I would have used Duergar, Derro, even a guerilla band of mutant-trolls as a more flavor-fitting underdark temporary resident.
I loved this AP and wanted to run this until my read through of #5. I stopped when I read about the Urdefhan, and skimmed #6 to see if I'd see more Urdefhan and I did. Ill probably never run this AP unless I cap it at book 4 and eliminate the underdark part or redo ALL the Urdefhan into another race like my Derro example. Not likely.
I don't remember who wrote Racing to Ruin, but I think it's better written than Souls for the Smuggler's Shiv. Sorry James. :)
They are both great.
That said, I think Smuggler's Shiv is fantastic. It's one of the most plug and play AP beginnings ever. You can run this entirely as a one shot by killing whateverhernameis in the ruins, then go on to just about any other adventure or AP after getting rescued.The castaways had distinct personalities, there were shipwrecks, island exploration, cannibals, other weirdo NPCs (like the Tengu and Dryad). An island adventure with nothing out of place (not a fan of enemy goats though). The camping rules were light and non-clunky, but I prefer roleplaying results as opposed to making the physical rolls needed to shift their personalities.
All in all, an AP volume for the record books IMHO.
I also not so fondly remember a game where almost all the fights were CL+2 or higher. Which meant that any encounter where the players were having a spell of bad dice rolling resulted in a very unfun encounter. Specially one where the DM didn't intend it to be all that important to the story but a necessary stop on the way.
The general feel was that we had to be very careful in picking a fight. Some DM's might like the idea of this but, this lead us to occasionally taking inaction over action. Which clearly frustrated the DM at times and drastically changed the final outcome of the game. It was a negative feedback loop but perhaps your group was much more open to more failure then ours.
Still, that adventure, while fun in the end, changed my viewpoint a lot on terms of encounter design.
It's the job of the GM to react to that on the fly and, if necessary, adjust the encounter mid-combat to be a bit more forgiving. The catch is recognizing when the encounter is turning badly on the PC's and begin fudging some dice if necessary.
And as I said, putting a few mook encounters in your game is totally fine and should be done to show the players that their PC's have gotten stronger and are the heroes of the game. But there's a important difference between having some jobbers to throw at the party and having a ton of them, to the point where it gets a tedious job for both sides, not fun.
5 PCs with an assuming 20 point buy (seemingly average point buy among paizo threads btw) would likely decimate any Paizo adventure designed for 4 PCs on a 15 point buy without GM reworking. Some people just max out opponent HPs, or add a mook, etc (not saying you do this either btw :)) but it doesnt make much difference when the group is that powerful, enemies keep same 15 point stats usually, max HP doesnt do much when you are hammered with improved critical rolls, etc. YMMV
While all your assumptions about the group composition are true ( I'm running Kingmaker with 15 points now ), much of the problem stemmed from high AC's and overtly good saves, not to mention that the Paladin was having a field day with all those evil opponents running around.
Five players is a bit more difficult to balance, because it goes one over the assumption of the AP for CR's ( but funnily not for WBL ), yet not so much that I'd consider using the "Kingmaker for six PC's" conversions.
Im jealous, I would love to be in a game like this every now and then.
The second module of Second Darkness had so many "OMG, argh, RUN!" moments I can't even recall all of them anymore. :p I am a player in that campaign and we had to retreat two times from the caves to avoid beign TPK'ed. ^^
Heh, it had me think very deeply about the commitment my character ( a rather overtly cautious sort of person ) was feeling to the group and cause. I was honestly thinking about retiring him, due to him getting almost PTSD over the whole thing. I'd never considered doing that with a character before. ^^
It's the job of the GM to react to that on the fly and, if necessary, adjust the encounter mid-combat to be a bit more forgiving. The catch is recognizing when the encounter is turning badly on the PC's and begin fudging some dice if necessary.
+100
( I'm running Kingmaker with 15 points now ), much of the problem stemmed from high AC's and overtly good saves, not to mention that the Paladin was having a field day with all those evil opponents running around.
The lowered stats of the 15 point buy will help balance ACs, HPs and saves. The Paladin thing is different, chalk it up to his time to shine. :)
If I ever GM again IRL or pbp (my group of 20+ years disbanded recently to RL stuff), ill be using 15 point buys and rolling enemy attacks privately off-post. :)
One thing that would really kinda help as well would be for folks to actually list specific adventures that they felt DID avoid having a "grindy" feel to them. Or alternatively, tell me what adventure AUTHORS you think did a great job handling the pacing of the adventure and its encounters.
I'm part of Ice Titan's group and read his forum posts. I saw this and decided I wanted to comment because this is something we talk about a lot at our table. I'm also his DM who ran Kingmaker for him but got burnt out part way through and conned him into finishing it for me (I quit because of the Niel Spicer book, but Ice Titan has already summed up my thoughts about that much more eloquently than I can).
Combat is actually my least favorite part of the game because it can get repetitive easily. However, I do enjoy combats that are very important to the story and ones where there is a lot at stake. I also like secondary objectives like having to protect or rescue an NPC or something while we fight. I like it when new things I wasn't expecting happen so it doesn't feel like just rolling dice over and over until we can get back to the story. My favorite part about stopping the execution in Edge of Anarchy was actually all of the planning we did beforehand to make everything go smoothly. I like when encounters have a gimmick to make them feel less hack and slash. Mook fights are never fun. They feel like they're only in the game to take up space and waste time. We always wonder why we're fighting these crappy random guys instead of people who matter. It's fun when we beat a difficult encounter because we played intelligently, not when we stomp all over the monsters because they're actually not challenging enough for us to be fighting.
Modules that have us fighting the same or very similar creatures over and over feel grindy. City of Seven Spears was super grindy because every session we fought some trivial low cr monsters on top of a ziggurat. Fighting serpentfolk over and over again later in the AP was annoying too. Changing the class levels of a creature usually helps vary them up enough to where it doesn't feel like you're using the same encounter over and over again. It was different with the serpentfolk because they have absolutely infuriating racial bonuses. The alchemist won pretty much every encounter for us because he only had to hit touch AC. Everybody else just got mad because the game was putting us up against these creatures we couldn't hit reliably because whoever designed the modules chose not to put the amount of treasure we needed in the game for us to be able to hit them. The DM who ran it for us, while a cool guy, was not a fan of editing the modules to be more playable, so we had to suffer books 3, 5, and 6 in most of their full glory. Way too many of the same/similar encounters over and over.
In general I love investigating, puzzles, mysteries, having to plan things out, knowing who the villain is early on, side "games" for lack of a better word (like the play in Sixfold Trial), strong story (I honestly don't care if it's a railroad or not, I just want a good story). Kingmaker didn't have a story so it was boring for me to run. I understand that the point was for the PCs to make their own story, but it just wasn't an interesting way to play for us.
Here are my favorite books (in no particular order) and why:
Haunting of Harrowstone - We're not done playing it yet, but so far it's been great. I really like all of the investigating and mystery.
Shadow in the Sky - Working for Saul Vancaskerkin and getting screwed over by him and stuff was fun. I liked that there were casino games at the beginning for us to play too while the PCs met each other. Leaving Riddleport and never coming back after this book was disappointing though.
The Sixfold Trial - The play was awesome. I absolutely loved getting to act it out.
Souls for Smuggler's Shiv - We had a lot of fun exploring the island. We felt very Indiana Jones.
Edge of Anarchy - My favorite part was crashing the execution. It felt very dramatic and we put a lot if planning into it. I also liked that somebody we met in the first book turned out to be the BBEG instead of us meeting them for the first time in the last book. Most of the rest of the AP was very cool too, though I know my DM changed some things to make the weaker parts of the AP more fun. If I had to pick a favorite AP as a whole, it would definitely be Curse of the Crimson Throne.
Thanks for the feedback, guys.
Neil Spicer writes very well but, in my opinion, the way he designs encounters is very 'grindy.' There are usually a large amount of encounters with groups of much lower CR enemies.
I've kind of wrestled with the whole "mook" thing, knowing it wouldn't satisfy some play groups (such as yours), because the encounters themselves wouldn't have the "pop" of the traditional "same CR or higher" opponents. But, ironically enough, for the purposes of giving internal credibility to the underlying story of the adventure, I felt like you had to have multiple lower-CR mooks present in those lairs (i.e., the urdefhans and the serpentfolk), because they were basically waging a guerilla war against one another. So, I needed foot soldiers. But, I couldn't just create foot soldiers at the same level (or CR threat level) as the PCs, because if these armies had soldiers that potent, they would have presented such a daunting challenge to the surface tribes of Saventh-Yhi that it wouldn't make sense, considering they should have overrun Saventh-Yhi a long time ago.
So, by way of explanation, I tried to give both the urdefhans and the serpentfolk reasonable shocktroops. And then, I put enough of them together (and sometimes with higher-CR "boss" monsters) to still present a viable, CR-appropriate encounter for the PCs. Not necessarily one that would challenge the PCs all that much, of course. Because, frankly, lower-CR mooks like that aren't going to last exceptionally long. They will force the PCs to use up resources, however. So, the later fights against the BBEGs in each lair should hopefully have presented that much more of a challenge for them. And, as mentioned before, these encounters were very much intended to give the high-level PCs a chance to come in and lay the smack down. At high-level play, you kind of want to give the PCs a chance to play like superheroes, because that's exactly what a lot of their powers and capabilities are mimicking by that point. And, it's the bigger-CR threats (when mixed properly) that give them their challenging moments.
So, I don't offer any of that up as a defense. I mainly just wanted to acknowledge your feedback...and the fact that I've been keeping an eye on it for myself, as well. "Sanctum of the Serpent God" is the first high-level adventure I've ever written. So, the whole thing is a learning experience for me. We'll see how much I'm able to apply the lessons I've learned here on my next such assignment. And keep the feedback coming. I'm open to hearing what people thought.
Sanctum of the Serpent God. The entire urdefhan part of this book felt tacked on just so the PCs could level.
Actually...
The urdefhan lair was intended to play a pretty pivotal role in the PCs being able to form an army to go into Ilmurea and challenge the serpentfolk. My original turnover had a backstory whereby the daughter of the local chieftain of the Saventh-Yhi tribe was abducted during an urdefhan raid on his people. Obviously, the urdefhans were taking her into the tribal native's interpretation of "hell" (i.e., Ilmurea)...and, the chieftain blamed the PCs for it, because of all their forays into the Darklands below Saventh-Yhi. He noted their rescue of Eando in "The Thousand Fangs Below" and took that as the reason for why the urdefhan got stirred up enough to come to the surface again and attack his people.
So, he held them responsible for the loss of his daughter. And, as such, he withdrew all support from the PCs' faction in Saventh-Yhi and refused to join their army...unless...they could get his daughter back. After all, the PCs had already shown the ability to go into the Darklands and rescue Eando. So, why not retrieve his daughter as well. That was the original intent behind why the PCs needed to venture into the Hunter's Maze and root out the urdefhan. And, it just so happened that...along the way...they'd have a chance to discover Aveshai, a cyclops general and one of Savith's original allies, frozen in suspended animation due to some serpentfolk technology. And, the whole Hunter's Maze itself (which was constructed by the serpentfolk) would give further insight into the culture of the serpenfolk of ancient Ilmurea.
Thus, the urdefhan "dungeon crawl" wasn't meant to just be a leveling exercise for the PCs (though it certainly helped accomplish that goal, too). I generally don't craft encounters for that type of purpose at all (and certainly not exclusively). Instead, most of them are included for the purposes of widening the credibility of the entire lair. For instance, if you're going to be attacking the last bastion of the urdefhan in Ilmurea...and you know they're waging a guerilla campaign against the serpentfolk who have reclaimed the city...you kind of expect to find enough foot soldiers present in such a lair to match up with their opponents. Same goes for the sanctum of the serpent god. It's the main temple stronghold and fortress for the entire serpentfolk faith. It's where Vyr-Azul has holed up with his forces while he prepares the resurrection of his god. And, to lend credibility to that encounter location, I wanted there to be enough lower-level foot soldiers to give the PCs the sense they were definitely headed into a fortress defended by such forces. So, I needed numbers...something to give the impression of an army...or at least a vanguard defending the temple.
So, my apologies for the long explanation. Just wanted to give you a bit more insight where I could, while also acknowledging I read everything here and apply it as I can. Thanks for taking the time to post your thoughts. These are simply my own after following along with what everyone's shared so far.
My two cents,
--Neil
On the subject of mooks...
I believe mook fights are needed.Period. Maybe not on the level of Seven Spears but needed nonetheless.
Bad guys have cronies. Some bad guys use alot of cronies. If everyone was a mini-boss (I hate using video game terms btw but it fits here), bad guys would never get anything done as the mini-bosses with the same power level would be fighting to take the leader role.
On top of that, mooks serve do the smaller things like watch patrols, etc. Story-wise it all fits.
The last thing is what Paizo has said before a few times. Mooks serve to make us shine more. A wizard tossing a tricked out (metamagic enhanced) Fireball and clearing a way through a platoon of mooks is what we all strive for as heroes. Again, if done too much it's tedious, Im in agreement there. My point is Mook Fights are needed just as much as the more memorable mini-boss fights. More so when the end cap is a possible army growing to threaten somewhere.
On a lighter note, did I mention in my previous post how much I do not like the Urdefhans in general? ;)
P.S. To the Davises, Spicers, Kulps, etc. Keep up the good work, just scale back when you aproach Seven Spear levels. :)
That being said, Mook in my description tends to be CL+0 and no less then CL-2. Something that has some bite to it but not so completely wimpy that it's a total waste of time.
That example takes away some of the realism when you factor in a high level adventure. Average mooks like soldiers are usually in the single digits and rightly so. If you are doing a level 16 adventure and using an army of level 14 mooks, you have to stop and think "wow a level 14 filled army could pretty much invade and wipe out any golarion empire at that level".
You need wimpy mooks.Besides they dont take that much time to run through. If there were too many, id roll a single attack roll for them. A fireball later and they are yesterdays speedbump.
etc. etc.
You want tedious mooks? Look at 2nd editions Dragon Mountain. That box was a "Seven Spear" ( <---- are we coining this phrase now? ;)) on 'roids.
The last thing is what Paizo has said before a few times. Mooks serve to make us shine more
It's weird since my group feels the exact opposite. Everyone at my table only feels like they're really shining when they defeat a monster who is actually there to challenge us. My group doesn't like to waste time fighting low CR monsters because we already know that we're going to win easily no matter what we do.
I'm not saying that everything needs to be a boss fight, it's just not fun for us when the monsters are too weak to pose any sort of threat at all. The other trap that mook-centric modules fall into is making us fight the same low CR encounter multiple times.
Generally, I feel that every encounter in a module should be different from every other encounter in that module (if not different creatures then at least different class levels or different tactics), and that all of the encounters should be CR appropriate. Otherwise combat becomes grindy and boring.
Good stories and fun modules to play aren't always one and the same. If a particular story only makes sense with a ton of mooks, then maybe it isn't a good choice to make into an adventure. Maybe it's possible for the bad guy to have mooks, but not bring them up in actual gameplay. The story could be written to be a stealth mission where the party gets to avoid the implied mooks.
My group gets really crafty with avoiding these types of encounters when we have a feeling that they're coming. We love it when a module gives us a portable hole because we can stuff all but the stealthiest party member inside, make the stealthy person invisible, and have him sneak us to the next encounter that is something new. Or I shouldn't really say that we love it. We actually kind of hate it when we need to resort to that.
A few thoughts IMO on a few modules mentioned here:
Fortress of the Stone Giants: No there really aren't too many stone giants. There's actually quite a variety of other giants and once you are inside the fortress there's really a bunch of encounters that are not stone giants. Last 6 or so fights didn't even have a stone giant, well other than the main one :P
Sins of the Saviours: Offers a great set of themed mini dungeons that are wicked cool, but is terrible at giving the pcs a reason to be there. Let me rephrase that, plenty of reason to be there but no clue as to what to do once there. I had to kind of have an Npc explain it. Other than the disjointed nature of this, great adventure.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
On the topic of mentioning creatures in the flavor text: I personally appreciate this. I find that if I mention the dragon in the room first, my players immediately switch to "combat mode" and completely ignore the rest of the description. I then find myself repeating the room features multiple times for the players who weren't paying attention because they were already rolling initiative. If I describe the room first, and then say, "Oh, and there are five orcs in the room," then they at least hear the details the first time.
With regard to "grindy" encounters, I think the biggest problem is fatigue with mega-dungeons. "Skeletons of Scarwall" was particularly bad for my group -- there is a good variety of undead, and there is a good story behind the place, but about 2/3 of the way through, my players just clocked out. "Oh, more ghosts? Joy."
It is also frustrating when I run my PCs against groups of enemies who simply can't hit them. It seems like a waste of time to throw in 5 or 10 mooks who can only hit on a 19. They are no threat at all to the party. As others have mentioned, this was particularly bad in "Crown of Fangs." A few such encounters are good, because they make the Party feel awesome and powerful. But more than, say, a half dozen in an adventure really starts to bog things down.
Thanks for the feedback, guys.
** spoiler omitted **...
Thanks for the insight. I'll be honest when I say that while your encounter design isn't to my taste, I have a higher opinion of you because you go out of your way to talk to us on the forums about stuff like this.
I completely agree with the notion of suspension of disbelief and having to have the mooks there to make it feel like it was a real location that existed outside the character's "instance". A main thing that turned me off about the urdefhan in the Hunter's Maze was that Eando Kline was basically like "Okay, there might maybe be something kind of maybe possibly there that might kinda sorta sometimes look like maybe sorta a weapon. Get to it!" and that was our motive to go dungeon delving. The PCs having a purpose-- them going to rescue the daughter of the chieftain or however-- would've really made that entire section of the book just more important. Like I said earlier, things have to be at stake. When the party goes to the Maze just to wistfully look around and poke things with sticks, it's boring. When the party goes there to save a recurring NPC, things are more important. When the party goes to the Fortress of a Thousand Fangs to find a guy they've never heard of who someone with amnesia maybe knows is being held prisoner somewhere... it's boring.
I guess that's kind of a flaw in the way APs are written.
Skeletons of Scarwall
Skeletons did what a lot of other dungeons did not do. It feels like a tour of interesting, crazy and evil undead or undead-like monsters. If you don't bother with the CR 1/3 skeletons and undead, the module has a tremendous amount of encounter variation.
Another module that has a fantastic amount of encounter variation is the Jackal's Price. I've only read it, but beyond the gnoll-infested opening, each encounter is different. What else... Seven Days to the Grave is a good example of a module that has mooks, and a lot of them, but doesn't feel grindy. There's something about the balance between story, encounter and flavor that makes the module gel really well.
|
|
When the party goes to the Fortress of a Thousand Fangs to find a guy they've never heard of who someone with amnesia maybe knows is being held prisoner somewhere... it's boring.
You mean my group wasn't the only one standing around the portal leading to the underdark saying quite literally, "Who's this guy? Why do I care?" and my favorite, "Should we really be taking suggestions from mentally challenged women?"
|
I think there is a place for both sand boxes and railroads in adventure paths. I hope that they continue to mix it up. I liked the pacing of RotRL & CotCT, and I liked the sandbox feel of KM and SS. I just want to see adventures that stretch the boundries of what we have seen before, with interesting plots and BBEGs.
PS...still hoping for vikings and mega dungeons!
and we've had enough complaints about APs only going to 14th level that I'd rather not shorten them much more.This is a tough situation to be in.
We either have:
1) the aforementioned interminable grind in at least 1 volume of the AP put in to get the characters up to an artificially higher level (and thus possibly "compromising the experience of the AP" as Ernest Mueller points out), or
2) APs that keep ending at 14th level (or lower!) and skipping out entirely on the higher level range (and thus leading to disappointment that a large portion of character levels are being ignored).
Having to choose between one evil or the other. Not sure either of these are that good...!
Um an epi level guide and a sequel to kingmaker that goes 14-25 would get my vote.
This is why we've started looking around the web more and more for larger campaigns. Currently we're looking at 'Slumbering Tsar Saga' from Frog God Games. At 14 separate pieces, and hints that it leaves PCs at 20+ level, it looks right up our alley. Of course we'll be playing it using the Pathfinder ruleset....the rules themselves are something that Paizo has certainly gotten right....
You might check out "War of the Burning Sky" -- you'd have to convert it from 3.5, but that's not terribly hard with Pathfinder. Also, I've heard Mongoose is going to re-release "The Drow War" updated to the Pathfinder rules; that one goes to level 30, so they'll have to release PFRPG epic level rules themselves along with it if Paizo hasn't done it by the time the third volume comes out.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Excellent posts by Ice and Summon Monster.
And here, gentlemen, do we hit upon a mystery that's plagued adventure paths for several years now:
Here are my favorite books (in no particular order) and why:
Haunting of Harrowstone - We're not done playing it yet, but so far it's been great. I really like all of the investigating and mystery.
Shadow in the Sky - Working for Saul Vancaskerkin and getting screwed over by him and stuff was fun. I liked that there were casino games at the beginning for us to play too while the PCs met each other. Leaving Riddleport and never coming back after this book was disappointing though.
The Sixfold Trial - The play was awesome. I absolutely loved getting to act it out.
Souls for Smuggler's Shiv - We had a lot of fun exploring the island. We felt very Indiana Jones.
Edge of Anarchy - My favorite part was crashing the execution. It felt very dramatic and we put a lot if planning into it. I also liked that somebody we met in the first book turned out to be the BBEG instead of us meeting them for the first time in the last book. Most of the rest of the AP was very cool too, though I know my DM changed some things to make the weaker parts of the AP more fun.
Price Question: what do these - uniformly excellent - modules have in common?
They are all the OPENING modules of adventure paths. (Ok, Sixfold Trial is #2, but it's still early on.)
And this brings up something I've observed over the years (as has this gentlemen whose reviews have been spot on over the years).
I don't know why, but most adventure paths seem to fall apart when module #3 or #4 kicks in. Loss of focus has been mentioned before. But that's only one thing. They come across as lacklustre when compared with the high promise - and excellent execution - of the kick off modules. (What's especially bizarre, and that's my key point, is that the uniformly awesome campaign outlines in the closing pages of each of the #1s is never lived up to. Why is that?)
This is what happened to Council of Thieves. It brought low Serpent Skull. And reading the reviews of Carrion Crown #3 on these boards, it seems the thing falls apart again, though that adventure path had arguably the strongest start ever.
In fact, going back in time, this is how lots of people felt about Rise of the Runelords, which went into pedestrian after #3. Or Second Darkness, when with the arise of #3 - surprise, surprise! - the adventure path took to elfland and abandoned all that was cool about it.
I've come to realize that the best, money wise but also in terms of time investment, is to purchase the first two modules of an adventure path, and then write the rest of the thing myself. I'd like the thing to live up to the expectations of it, in a manner that the in house authors for one reason or another consistently fail to live up to. And I don't have the slightest idea why. Maybe they need more story line direction from above. Maybe there needs to be a different sort of quality control. Maybe they need more time. I have no idea.
Even if you disagree with the conclusions drawn here, I think the discrepancy in early to mid and (certainly) late modules in nearly each adventure path is a datum that needs to be explained badly and fixed soon. Let's dispell the bane of the #3s!
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Even if you disagree with the conclusions drawn here, I think the discrepancy in early to mid and (certainly) late modules in nearly each adventure path is a datum that needs to be explained badly and fixed soon. Let's dispell the bane of the #3s!
I can personally guarantee that Jade Regent #3 awesomeus maximus!
Windjammer, I would like to posit three counterexamples:
- Hook Mountain Massacre. I know it's got some weird continuity problems for the GM to untangle, but for the PCs, this is a great module, and my favorite in all of RotRL. My Paladin has never felt so good. And it's a #3.
- End of Eternity. It's a #4, and yet, it's one of the best in the AP line. Yes, it gets flak because it's followed by #5, which feels like back-to-back pain, but that is very much not #4's fault.
- Sound of a Thousand Screams. It's a #6 (so not the "problem zone", but still definately not an opening module), but it is also one of the best modules produced for the entire AP line. Because it's high level and at the end of an AP, not as many people will actually end up playing it, but that doesn't take away from the fact that is a work of art.
I'm surprised these three didn't get more callout in this thread. I mean, look at the reviews for LoF4 and KM6.
|
|
Windjammer, I would like to posit three counterexamples
...and I agree with all of them. :) I even said that Rise of the Runelords only veered off after its #3. Legacy of Fire is a bit odd, since I think its #3 (scroll of K.) is - again! - the weakest in the entire line, only to be followed by Nelson's #4, which I agree was a serious high.*
Though you're absolutely right to temper my concern, the gist of it remains in place I think. I can count on one hand the middle to late adventures that do match the early instalments. ;)
*It took me a while to find this out, as I back then cancelled my subscription when I heard that Greg Vaughan had been assigned to make the City of Brass a dungeon crawl behind prison bars, delegating the actual city to a back drop the PCs only see from afar if at all. The thread just linked to queried whether Paizo does not 'get' higher level play to the extent that it (undeniably) gets lower level play. Maybe instalments #4-#6 need to deviate more strongly from the old Living Greyhawk mold, in that players expect something different out of their D&D experience above a certain level, not just the same old shtick with higher CR numbers filed off. I think Kingmaker got round the problem successfully, and I'm certainly curious how Jade Regent will handle this.
Windjammer, I would like to posit three counterexamples:
- Hook Mountain Massacre. I know it's got some weird continuity problems for the GM to untangle, but for the PCs, this is a great module, and my favorite in all of RotRL. My Paladin has never felt so good. And it's a #3.
Hook Mountain had some huge problems: timeline, black magga, story, .
I tuned down violence and gore by 70% and my female players where still disgusted.The only thing that saved that adventure where very memorable villains and two great locations (after you scrubbed away all the gore)
not a good example
|
|
Windjammer, I would like to posit three counterexamples:
- Hook Mountain Massacre. I know it's got some weird continuity problems for the GM to untangle, but for the PCs, this is a great module, and my favorite in all of RotRL. My Paladin has never felt so good. And it's a #3.
Hook Mountain had some huge problems: timeline, black magga, story, .
I tuned down violence and gore by 70% and my female players where still disgusted.
The only thing that saved that adventure where very memorable villains and two great locations (after you scrubbed away all the gore)not a good example
Huh, I've actually had to turn the violence up, use Nic Logue's "Director's Cut" version and leave one player scarred for life after his elven Duskblade got anally violated. Using an ogre hook. Repeatedly.
Man, I love this module. Especially when the players are in "yeah, it's routine fantasy, orcs live in the hills and steal sheep once in a while blah blah blah".
Still Windjammer does indeed have a point as I'm now looking for a module to replace Carrion Crown #4 completely after reading it last night.
I don't want to veer this thread offtopic, but I am curious for your reasons why. Alex, could you please post a review in the forums? I'd love to hear your thoughts. (You needn't make it very long if you don't wish to, I just want to know your reasons.)
Even if you disagree with the conclusions drawn here, I think the discrepancy in early to mid and (certainly) late modules in nearly each adventure path is a datum that needs to be explained badly and fixed soon. Let's dispell the bane of the #3s!I can personally guarantee that Jade Regent #3 awesomeus maximus!
As long as we can get another of your awesome "director's cut" modules. :p Or better, just let the editors leave all the awesome stuff in it when printing it. :D
I want more Horribulous Rat Swarms!
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Even if you disagree with the conclusions drawn here, I think the discrepancy in early to mid and (certainly) late modules in nearly each adventure path is a datum that needs to be explained badly and fixed soon. Let's dispell the bane of the #3s!I can personally guarantee that Jade Regent #3 awesomeus maximus!As long as we can get another of your awesome "director's cut" modules. :p Or better, just let the editors leave all the awesome stuff in it when printing it. :D
I want more Horribulous Rat Swarms!
Ha! I love those guys, if only for the sheer unadulterated horror for the PLAYERS, not the characters. :)
Ha! I love those guys, if only for the sheer unadulterated horror for the PLAYERS, not the characters. :)Even if you disagree with the conclusions drawn here, I think the discrepancy in early to mid and (certainly) late modules in nearly each adventure path is a datum that needs to be explained badly and fixed soon. Let's dispell the bane of the #3s!I can personally guarantee that Jade Regent #3 awesomeus maximus!As long as we can get another of your awesome "director's cut" modules. :p Or better, just let the editors leave all the awesome stuff in it when printing it. :D
I want more Horribulous Rat Swarms!
Jade Regent is the AP I've been looking forward towards the most since it was announced. Knowing that you'll write one of the modules makes it even better. :)