I've been thinking about this a bit recently, and I thought I would get your opinions on it.
What do you think makes for a good adventure in Pathfinder?
|
Interesting events/locations/monsters with a strong hook and a big finish.
I'm a fan of the LOCK school of adventure writing.
Lead: Open with something big. Indiana Jones, James Bond or Star Wars style. Something major which leads us to the plot hook/quest giving NPC etc. Burnt Offerings Spoiler
Objective: The PCs should be tasked with something important, or a seemingly less important quest evolves into something greater. Curse of the Crimson Throne: Edge of Anarchy Spoiler
Complication: The PC's quest should be complicated. Usually that's where the monsters and traps come in. The really great adventures also complicate the plot. Kingmaker: Rivers Run Red Spoiler
Knock-Out: The big finale of the adventure should be a fitting end for the hard work the PCs put into playing it. Dangerous and with a touch of spectacle. Second Darkness #1 Spoiler:
These things when they are all together make for excellent adventures.
Additional questions:
As a DM, do you mind if an adventure contains material you may not end up using? Do you prefer it when an adventure focus' on a single central plot?
As a player do you like sprawling investigative adventures with red hearings and dead ends, or do you prefer a linier story/investicgation, where clues lead from a to b to c to d ? If you have played either the power behind the throne, or masks of nyarlathotep, do you prefer the investigative elements of these, to those of say the carrion crown adventure path, or do you prefer carrion crown.
As a player do you mind if you don't see all of the plot, or do you want to be left seeing all of the big picture at the end? Does a dangling thread or two bother you?
As a player, do you mind if you are not the only group driving action, and events occur even if you spend three days drinking and wenching? Or do you feel like you should be the only people changing the status quo, and that events should not move on unless by your hand?
Do you like having a single plot within an adventure, or multiple plots?
I've been thinking about this a bit recently, and I thought I would get your opinions on it.
What do you think makes for a good adventure in Pathfinder?
A good adventure is one that appeals to both the GM and the players and caters to their playstyles. This varies from group to group. The general rules are to keep it varied, allow yourself to be surprised, and ensure that there is engagement on all sides of the table.
Wow, big questions, requiring inline response.
As a DM, do you mind if an adventure contains material you may not end up using?
No, because A) I like 'deep background' and B) things I don't use, I can recycle later. The important caveat to A is that Far Too Many Writers can't distinguish between deep background and self-indulgence.
Deep background means that I know enough history and motivation to get into the heads of the antagonists, giving me a surplus of flexibility in the game itself if the players do something 'off the map.' Self-indulgence is background material that doesn't provide me with that. As a rule, if there's a question, it shouldn't be there.
As a player do you like sprawling investigative adventures with red hearings and dead ends, or do you prefer a linier story/investicgation, where clues lead from a to b to c to d ?
A good sprawling investigation is much better than a good linear adventure, but a bad investigation is much worse than bad linear game.
A linear investigative game is something of a contradiction in terms and the worst of all the possibilities.
As a player do you mind if you don't see all of the plot, or do you want to be left seeing all of the big picture at the end?
The best adventures allow - but do not force - an "Usual Suspects" moment. Plot speculation is fun, and the point is for the players/characters to catch on, not to be lead to it by the DM. For my money, there is nothing more satisfying in an RPG than three sessions later getting to have a "Wait a minute, I understand!" moment.
Of course, if it's a one shot, I want total resolution.
As a player, do you mind if you are not the only group driving action, and events occur even if you spend three days drinking and wenching? Or do you feel like you should be the only people changing the status quo, and that events should not move on unless by your hand?
The former, though this one can get very tricky. There are at least two important distinctions here. One, the party should be totally able to avoid /the/ adventure. It should not be able to avoid /an/ adventure. Two, the party should have a disproportionate level of control over the status quo as relative to the scope of the party's own power (not level).
Do you like having a single plot within an adventure, or multiple plots?
One plot per adventure, but if it's a longer term thing, I want plot arcs as well.
|
As a player, what makes a game to me, are NPCs. I want NPCs that feel real and reoccur. Nothing gets me into a game quite like meeting a really deep NPC that has real motivations and such more than once. It makes this come to life and that makes me want to invest back into the game even more. Also, when NPC's interact with you it makes you feel like your decisions and actions have consequences on the world. As stated above, thats good for players.
Having a decent variety in your adventure is important. If its all social role playing, some players will feel left out or accidentally sabotage when they try to socialize. If its all combat, then you're missing out on everything else. Too many non-combat dangers and you have the Tomb of Horrors. Get portions of everything in there. Give the rogue secret doors to find, give the paladin demons to smite, give the bard intrigue to play with, and give the inquisitor heretics to kill.
Something I've started doing is having at least one encounter that can best be solved with one of the stats. Strength could be a monster with DR or swimming in a current. Dexterity could be a series of platforms to jump around on to get over a snake pit. Constitution could be having to go through a gas filled room where you have to hold your breath or make Fort saves. Intelligence can be riddles and puzzles (though this can target the player's intelligence instead of the PC's). Charisma could be a dinner party where the PC's have to convince a Duchess to let them take her son on an adventure. Wisdom could be a very serious temptation for the PC's to take an easier route that actually has more danger too it.
Wow, big questions, requiring inline response.
Do you like having a single plot within an adventure, or multiple plots?One plot per adventure, but if it's a longer term thing, I want plot arcs as well.
Have you ever run or played 'Rough night at the three feathers'? It contains seven plots(admittedly some are relatively minor) running concurrently, through the course of a single nights stay in an in. Events related to each plot occur, and PCs are free to join individual plots as they wish.
It plays somewhere between a bedroom farce and murder mystery, and is great fun. If you have plays or run it, did you enjoy it, and how did it influence your opinion on this. If you have not, have you played a similar adventure(what was your experience) and what would you think if confronted with such a scenario?
Is their some reason that you favour a single plot?
Emotional investment in the characters and their stories.
1)A good hook. Something that is unusual or that the players haven't encountered a hundred times before. Originality. Also a good story that is emotionally engaging without becoming trite.
2)Good encounter design. If it's a dungeon crawl there should be clear choices to be made, and it shouldn't be completely linear. Branches with each choice having pros and cons. Monsters should be different enough from their stock versions, or the scenarios should be different enough to make it interesting.
3)A well paced story. You want the plot doled out at a regular pace not a whole bunch of exposition followed by a whole bunch of fights/whatever.
4)Should be written in a way that accounts for different behaviors of players. Advice for if your players get too far off the rail and even story branches to account for that.
5)One overarching challenge and clear goals and benchmarks in overcoming that challenge. You must piece together the rod of 7 parts, or kill an elemental of each element, or travel to these cities, etc. Players should always have some idea of what they're doing, why they're doing it, and how well they're doing at accomplishing it.
6)A good conclusion. Evil is thwarted, you get the girl/treasure/whatever.
7)All these things should be done in a way that the players feel like it's not an adventure at all. That's the hard part. They need to feel like they are affecting the game world. They need to win the tournament.
I guess these can all be boiled down to: good story structure (pacing/benchmarks) and being engaging and interactive to the players as individuals and as a group, both in combat in role playing.
