I read "Shards of Sin" and fell in love with it. I dropped my other plans and will start running this tomorrow.
I'll have to wait until the rules come out properly to see whether it's possible, but I am considering adding mythic rules to Rise of the Runelords and Shattered Star, and running the same group of PCs through both. Theoretically they would be somewhere around APL 30 when they reach the end of Shattered Star. That would certainly spice things up a little.
makes m wonder how something like the runelords would look like with LARP.. and no rolling at all. Heroes will prevail.. but sometimes would run away for dramatics.
And plenty of beer to simulate combat damage :D If you cannot stand anymore, you are obviously dead :D
Finding the proper locations would be awesome too..
..some small town, and real torches to the goblins.. all masked out.
Location for xin-shalast sure will be difficult.
|
@Galnorag, the "meet in a tavern" thing was also done in Council of Thieves.
I think people have a stronger gut reaction to the way Skulls and Shackles started more than usual, because it basically says, "You PC screwd up and got caught by pirates, and you have nothing to say about that, and now you are kind of a slave and attempting to do something the captain of the ship you are on dosen't want you to do will result in punishment, maybe even death."
I'm sure you can see that's very diffrent from, "The Pathfinders, a group you work for, calls for your help." Players who don't like railroading want to have as much control over their PCs fate as possible, and so they would rather feel that the PC chose to get to where he/she is at when the adventure starts.
I'm with you on that though - I think the on a slightly higher layer of abstraction there is little to no doffrence between the beginning of Skulls & Shackles and that of any other adventure. I even find the fact that Skulls & shackles feel diffrent very refreshing.
I take that very differently. Railroading at the start of the game bothers me very little. Some is inevitable, even if it's just forcing everyone to be in the same town. It's campaign premise. Buy into it or don't. If you don't, then why are you playing?
Even the railroading in the 1st S&S module doesn't really bother me. Your choices are limited, but they're limited by real and obvious things. It's later on in the series I think I'd be bothered. You're pirates, you've got your own ship and the open sea in front of you, but you really have to go and do the particular set of tasks and dungeons crawls laid out for you. It seems that you should be free, but you aren't.
This one, you're working for the Pathfinders and hunting the shards. That's the set up and the buy-in. Sure it's railroaded, in the sense that you're going to go from dungeon to dungeon tracking these things down, but it's the premise of the module. If you don't want to do it, why are you...
Just to clarify, I'm with you on that, I actualy activley look out for "railroading" in APs, because honestly, as a GM I can make it work and have the plaeyrs feel it was all their brilliant idea. Just makes for a better story IMO. The entire, "So you guys are free to run about and do any sort of nonsense you want!" thing sounds really bad to me - it makes me think of computer games like GTA, while I'm more of a Mass Effect kind of guy.
I was just trying to get into the heads of those who hate the S&S opening premise, and I think I understand them correctly. Dosen't mean I agree with them, though.
|
Player driven games are awesome with the right game and right players. I vastly prefer player driven games (though my players aren't really the proactive type so it doesn't work with my current group :( ) but I also think player driven games work better in Vampire the Masquerade and such rather than D&D
Most certainly a different type of brush for everyone. But 6-8 hours for an AP-Adventure ? Looking at Skulls and Shackles AP parts I-III here... really ?
That seems... very much like running things through on rolls alone. Gotta go with subcreator here. Long sessions with fun, twisting talks with the NPCs are our rule hereabouts. Some weird and intricate plans. Even decision finding within the group...
Really don't see how an IC-Forum is going to help there, especially with the NPCs
6 is the low end. 8 is about average, 10 is a little high, and other other than Kingmaker I have never gone past 12. The only reason Kingmaker took longer was because we devoted entire sessions to building the kingdom. I would like to sit on someone else's AP to see how they do things though.
Creative Director
|
My only real issue with this AP after reading through Book One is that they seem to not want the PCs to do any of the research themselves. They pretty much hand all the information about this artifact over to the players through the NPCs who have already done the research or will have done it by the time the PCs finish their quest. That, I feel, is a mistake. The research should have been integrated into the campaign as an adventure in and of itself, I feel.
Naturally, I know that I will be able to integrate it myself by changing things up to include it . . . which I will, of course! Would have loved to see what the authors of this AP could have done with the research aspect though. They're brilliant writers and could have made a fantastic go of it, I'm sure. =)
The information is all there in the adventure so that if you as the GM want the PCs to figure all that out... you can. By simply handing that info out, though... we save enough space for more encounters.
We've actually done a fair amount of research and mystery investigation stuff in other Adventure Paths, and they're fun... but they're not all that appropriate for this adventure, where we want the PCs to know a lot about the item they're looking for automatically as possible at the start so we can focus more on the quest for the item rather than the quest for information about the item.
|
|
Yeah this AP should have more of an Indiana Jones vibe than anything else, I think, and if you think about it he NEVER does any research "on screen" - he either knows something in advance, or discovers it by adventuring.
That being said, it would be nice to get at least some sections of any of the adventures dealing with archeaolegy, which is something I suspect we will see quite a bit during
Yeah this AP should have more of an Indiana Jones vibe than anything else, I think, and if you think about it he NEVER does any research "on screen" - he either knows something in advance, or discovers it by adventuring.
That being said, it would be nice to get at least some sections of any of the adventures dealing with archeaolegy, which is something I suspect we will see quite a bit during
** spoiler omitted **
oh well, archeaology never really seemed too much on anyone's mind during the "Seven Skulls" campaign either^^. You know, walking about in an ancient, lost city, with real secrets below the ground.
Then again, archeaology, "conventionally done" is not all that exciting anyways.What I don't like is that if the players are not figuring out stuff themselves, for one the group looses the speculation, hyperbole and utterly strange debate what actually might be happening and.... yeah, they feel, as if they are not "in the know", or not permitted to actually know enough about the opposition by their "superiors". The military being kept-in-the-dark syndrome.
Again, I guess different brushes.
|
|
Yeah this AP should have more of an Indiana Jones vibe than anything else, I think, and if you think about it he NEVER does any research "on screen" - he either knows something in advance, or discovers it by adventuring.
That being said, it would be nice to get at least some sections of any of the adventures dealing with archeaolegy, which is something I suspect we will see quite a bit during
** spoiler omitted **
oh well, archeaology never really seemed too much on anyone's mind during the "Seven Skulls" campaign either^^. You know, walking about in an ancient, lost city, with real secrets below the ground.
Then again, archeaology, "conventionally done" is not all that exciting anyways.What I don't like is that if the players are not figuring out stuff themselves, for one the group looses the speculation, hyperbole and utterly strange debate what actually might be happening and.... yeah, they feel, as if they are not "in the know", or not permitted to actually know enough about the opposition by their "superiors". The military being kept-in-the-dark syndrome.
Again, I guess different brushes.
You can still get that aspect out of the adventures by having your PCs try to figure out the history and details of each dungeon they visit rather than on the artifact itself.
I started reading the first installment of this AP and while I wasn't enthusiastic at all after a first glimpse (or even the topic of the AP), reading through it has made me change my mind completely.
I wasn't too keen on the whole Pathfinder Society topic, but I accepted it as an interesting and refreshing premise (I don't play PFS). What really got my juices flowing was the overall layout of the AP as well as the adventure itself. While I would have preferred the initial investigation to be longer, I think the adventure turns out to be fantastic.
As for minor points that could be changed, I always try to emphasize that those APs aren't meant to be played exactly as written, but rather adapted to your own group. As far as "Shards of Sin" is concerned, one could imagine to change the PC's employer to the Aspis Consortium or other factions with little impact on the rundown of the AP. Or even add more clues/red herrings/ encounters within Magnimar for the investigation part, to answer my own criticism.
I'd really like to thank Greg Vaughn for this first volume, I think it's great, and reading it made me want to run it. That said, I'm very excited about so many things in this AP: Kaer Maga (my favourite part of the campaign setting), Leng, Windsong Abbey, Xin coming back! I think we're in for a treat. Keep them coming!
So... an AP where the whole party has to be elven paladins of Iomedae, exploring the new demiplane where Treerazer has begun to rebuild his extraplanar fortress? I'm in!You would have to be elves, because after SD (which we loved) no one in Golorion particularly seems affectionate to the Elves anymore (at least around our table.)
Honestly, after the 5th module they honestly were like "if it weren't for all the other people who would get hurt when Kyonnin became Golorion's second b@@% h+#&, we would let it happen."
I guess well cool, becoming meat puppets in the 4th module also didn't help either.
heavy sigh
Which is the primary reason why I want to redo the 5th adventure for Second Darkness. It was SUPPOSED to be the adventure that makes the PCs into friends of the elves, but it misstepped hard, alas.
Second Darkness is the low point of the APs for me personally. There was so much I disliked about it in the last two installments. I really would like to see the other 3.5 APs redone and improved for Pathfinder. Second Darkness would benefit most from that, and I absolutely loved Curse of the Crimson Throne.
However, please continue to make "experimental" APs. The variety offered by the APs is really great, and even the APs I don't like (even SD, in the first few modules) have aspects that I enjoy. Also, the sub-systems that show up in those sorts of modules (caravans, ships, etc) allow the game to continue to grow, and do so with a more organic feel that just "lets release a book about X".
|
To weigh in here, my group loved the buy in for S&S they though being pirates would be awesome, I warned them they would be press ganged but it would work itself out quick. To date we have put in roughly 12-14 hours and are not even finished with book one. I have to think that makes it a success. PLEASE keep trying the oddball stuff, some of the ones I looked at and didn't like turned out to be huge favorites of my players. Oh and for what it's worth my least favorite was Kingmaker, my guys didn't know what to do with themselves and needed constant prodding to keep from just stagnating.
I like the fact that it builds on the previous APs. I have a group that has played through Rise of the Runelords, and we'll soon be starting Curse of the Crimson Throne, and I think this is a good AP to follow up on that then. Windsong Abbey and Leng sound cool indeed, even if I could really do without Kaer Maga, I just really don't like the concept of a monster city. The finale sounds great though.
|
|
Zaister,
This AP is probably a good follow up to CotCT, seeing as how CotCT is a very dungeon light AP while this one is really just a mega-dungeon spread over Varisia. Nice little change of pace - providing that you run Crown of Fangs not as a crawl but as a more dynamic and fast paced expirience.
Mine All Mine - I dislike Kingmaker for the very same reason, and I also have some not so great things to say about the later 2/3 of Serpent's Skull. I do think, however, that this dosen't mean these APs are bad and am happy Paizo is constantly shifting and twisting what an AP can do. Adds a lot of fun :)
Lord Snow — I get what you're saying about Serpent's Skull. Actually, in the group I mentioned we played SS after Runelords until recently. But ''City of Seven Spears'' really put us off, especially me as GM. That adventure unfortunately is so unfinished and uninspired. It became a chore for me to prepare for the sessions and nobody really did have any fun, so we finally decided to end it right there. Next up, the Crimson Throne!
Contributor
|
Unlike most people on this thread, I'm planning on ramping up the Pathfinder Society involvement in a side plot/overarching intrigue, that I hope will make things (even) more interesting for my players.
Part of the intrigue being that after the discovery of Xin-Shalast (in Rise of the Runelords) the Pathfinder Society was able to reap the rewards of plundering that city (of knowledge and artefacts). When one of the Decemvirate learns of the existence of the Sihedron and somehow discovers what will happen when it is put back together, they think the Society will have another city to plunder/discover. Whether they are doing it for self-aggrandisement or the good of the society might be nebulous at first.
This high-level Pathfinder will act as a mentor to some of the PCs and will likely be the one involved in awarding any Field Commissions, or supporting their training specifically for performing this role.
I'm also planning on fitting in a parallel search for the books of Zutha's Gluttonous Tome, some new uses for ioun stones, and lots and lots of lovely red herrings. I sometimes think my players prefer it when they have no idea of what is going on ;-)
I haven't quite worked out how it all fits yet, but I love stitching this kind of plot together.
You can still get that aspect out of the adventures by having your PCs try to figure out the history and details of each dungeon they visit rather than on the artifact itself.
.
You need something strange, exciting ( yes, dare one say it ?) , something otherworldly and not rehashed a few dozen or more times. Not "another dungeon in the bridge pilings - why does it exist ?" vibe but something unconventional.This looks more like "another four years of.. " yeah, well, dungeons.
The whole artifact hunt theme, to my mind, is... unoriginal..... Almost something like the ancient "Rod of Seven Parts" adventure back from the nineties. Visit the location/dungeon, find the piece, move on...... Artifact, Assemble !
I hope at least the BBEG will have an early appointment, so the players know why they should chase the stuff.
.
I mean looking at thw "Crucible of Chaos" adventure, you have a lost city, elusive and with an unknown history. There could be anything out there... anything. Cthulhu or King SOlomon''s mines... The Arc of the Covenenant or Congo ! Investigating that... Now that would be interesting. Have a campaign cenetred on one of the lost cities like, say Kho... Baby steps, than some extreior adventures, the player later returning and slowly, by their own actions unravelling the dark secret hidden.. The Golden Statue of the Elder Thing is ALIVE !!!
But let's see how this turns out. JJ promised us "a new take on dungeons" and while I am cyncially doubtful, let's see what happens. In the meantime, I have lot's of fun reworking and rebuilding "Skulls and Shackles"... and adding more piracy.
|
Contributor
|
The whole artifact hunt theme, to my mind, is... unoriginal..... Almost something like the ancient "Rod of Seven Parts" adventure back from the nineties. Visit the location/dungeon, find the piece, move on...... Artifact, Assemble !
The similarity to "Rod of Seven Parts" is one of the main things that sold this AP to me. I'd been hankering for a more 'classic' style game and Shattered Star came along at exactly the right time. I'm going to pad it out with my own intrigues and fluff (see above), but I definitely love the idea of a dungeon-delving artifact hunt.
The similarity to "Rod of Seven Parts" is one of the main things that sold this AP to me. I'd been hankering for a more 'classic' style game and Shattered Star came along at exactly the right time. I'm going to pad it out with my own intrigues and fluff (see above), but I definitely love the idea of a dungeon-delving artifact hunt.
To each his own. Speaking for myself, I am fine with having graduated from the "Let's bash em" dungeons of my childhood ("Lost caverns of Tsojacanth", how we miss thee.. nevermind the "Temple of Elemental Evil" original edition.... ) to more socially dynamic, more sandboxy and less "you have to climb through a stupid statue hitting monsters" (and yes we had that in the Dragonlance-series^^).
How about an island sized (or chain of islands) based artifact hunt for open air artifacting ? Or chasing through valleys of a huge mountain range, discovering the secrets of lost dwarven holds and outposts, the remnants of their battlefields, goblin fiefdoms and what's not.... while... hunting for artifacts instead ?
Exploring a couple of strange foreign and/or lost cities hunting and trailing a series of .... relics or artifacts ? Or trailing an artifact thief along the North coast of the Inner Sea, before his recquisitioning of relics let's him finally awaken a great and Elder Evil out in the sands of Thuvia ?
And while we never had an AP without "dungeons" yet - wouldn't that be a surprise - we get spoon-fed at least one major "slaughter-site", but usually two or more each and every time around. This time 6/6.
Is it too much to ask to actually get someting for once without that "special sauce" ?
Btw, I consider "Rod of Seven Parts" one of the worst major campaigns/dungeons ever published for DnD. But again.. to each his own.
I loved temple of elemental evil! That Said So far i like every AP each one is good in its own way. I feel most people try to say how can I make this fit my party, I like to ask my self why did they wright it this way and how can I challenge my players to go out of the box. Good player or party can have fun by being put in hard or new places. Take time to think about the hard work put in to the AP and, push your players to new lvl not pull a part the AP because its not the same stile your players like to do every time.
Ah... yes... Temple of Elemental Evil. The 2nd adventure I played right after Keep on the Borderlands. I think what made TOEE so special was that I was new to the game and I had no idea what was going to happen when someon opened a door. And when the door was opened, I usually had no idea what to do!
The Pathfinder APs bring a little of that feeling back whenever our groups encounters a new monster, item, NPC or whatever. My favorite AP is still Rise of the Runelords, so many interesting things to see and do.
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is it too much to ask to actually get someting for once without that "special sauce" ?
It might be, in all honesty, since the game is built so much to have dungeon-type combat.
So... if we some day DID do an Adventure Path without dungeons... does that mean we'd never print a single map that uses a grid? Would exploring a 7 encounter shipwreck on a coast count as a dungeon? What about a watchtower captured by orcs? or a ruined castle that's all open air?
What makes a "dungeon" isn't necessarily the fact that it's underground.
That said... a truly dungeonless Adventure Path would be an interesting and challenging experiment, but I'm really REALLY worried that no one would want it since dungeons are such a well-loved and traditional element of the game. We've done several wilderness adventures before and they all have dungeons peppered through them—several of the Kingmaker adventures, Souls for Smuggler's Shiv, Racing to Ruin, etc...
Frankly, the fact that you refer to dungeons as being "spoon fed to you," implying that dungeons are akin to baby food and that those who prefer them are babies/immature gamers delves a LITTLE close to being pretty dang insulting... but I'll choose to think you didn't mean it entirely like that.
But the fact is, dungeons are pretty popular. They're unlikely to go away. Published adventures, as a result, might not be the right thing for you, and that's fine! I'd suggest looking to our regional sourcebooks like "Lands of the Linnorm Kings" or "Magnimar" or the like to help build campaigns for your game.
(All that said... I'm really not a big fan at all of "Rod of Seven Parts," and in a lot of ways, Shattered Star is my attempt to build my response to how I think a seven-part artifact hunt campaign should work.)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That said... a truly dungeonless Adventure Path would be an interesting and challenging experiment, but I'm really REALLY worried that no one would want it since dungeons are such a well-loved and traditional element of the game.
I personally would love to see a heavy urban, RP heavy AP. One where they might be some fights but they would be things that happened in a variety of places and very few in the same place. With a lot of stuff between the fights.
Of course i am fairly sure I am in a vocal minority but a minority the same.
I'm not vikingson, but here are my answers:
It might be, in all honesty, since the game is built so much to have dungeon-type combat.
I don't think this is all that true, and seems to be a little myopic. The numerous rules and details to this point (PF and 3.x before it) shows that's probably not the case. (Depending on how you might interpret "dungeon" - see next.)
So... if we some day DID do an Adventure Path without dungeons... does that mean we'd never print a single map that uses a grid? Would exploring a 7 encounter shipwreck on a coast count as a dungeon? What about a watchtower captured by orcs? or a ruined castle that's all open air?
"Not necessarily" to most of the above (watchtower being the exception). Sort of: shipwreck > open-air castle > watchtower.
What makes a "dungeon" isn't necessarily the fact that it's underground.
Indeed. But with that said, why did Skull & Shackles fail on this front? (One might answer "I don't think S&S did fail", but there are enough posts/threads in the S&S forum to negate such an answer and demand something a little more thought-out.) Kingmaker (most of it) and Souls for Smuggler's Shiv are great examples, since they are very much 'dungeon-lite' - and it sounds like they were reasonably popular. Though, for something like S&S, I think the locations offered could have been thought out a little better for that specific AP.
I suspect going to dungeon-heavy Shattered Star from the surprisingly-traditional-dungeon-heavy-when-it-should-have-been-anything-bu t S&S (and yes - sea caves with water is pretty much traditional in 2012) might be some of the cause of such ire.
This is very much a big dungeon crawl AP.
[...]
If you're not a big fan of big dungeons, Shattered Star might not be the campaign for you, in the same way that if you're not a fan of pirates, Skull & Shackles won't work for you, or if you're not a fan of horror, Carrion Crown's a bad choice.
Hi James,
Thank you for letting us know this bit. It's getting to be about time for me to pick up and GM an Adventure Path, and I decided during the dungeon of Jade Regent's "Night of Frozen Shadows" that I'm sick of dungeons. I was initially drawn to running Shattered Star because it's new, it's about the Pathfinder Society, and it would be an opportunity for me to add in an Andoran-vs-Cheliax-with-Taldor-and-the-Sczarni-on-the-side plot in the style of the Pathfinder Society faction missions. However, the prospect of a bunch more dungeon crawls is quite the turnoff.
It's ironic that Greg Vaughn wrote both "Night of Frozen Shadows," the book where I finally got tired of dungeon crawls, as well as the first Shattered Star book.
Thank you, James, for letting me know.
-Matt
I suspect going to dungeon-heavy Shattered Star from the surprisingly-traditional-dungeon-heavy-when-it-should-have-been-anything-bu t S&S (and yes - sea caves with water is pretty much traditional in 2012) might be some of the cause of such ire.
...
Seriously? I was just thinking that Skull and Shackles would be my second choice...
Shelyn's bountiful bosom... how about Council of Thieves? Is that one dungeon-heavy?
-Matt
Is it too much to ask to actually get someting for once without that "special sauce" ?
It might be, in all honesty, since the game is built so much to have dungeon-type combat.
So... if we some day DID do an Adventure Path without dungeons... does that mean we'd never print a single map that uses a grid? Would exploring a 7 encounter shipwreck on a coast count as a dungeon? What about a watchtower captured by orcs? or a ruined castle that's all open air?
The problem of a "dungeon" is the linearity of its approach.
Enter HERE... progress though it... Exit HERE. Little to no freedom on how to approach the problem.It's nota question of grids of setpieces. It's the problem of having to progress through a limited, but set number of rooms, in a rather set pattern, to reach the final and local "BBEG". It's like a connecting-the-dots picture.
That's what makes up a "dungeon" for me. It takes away the GM's narrative freedom (because the more interesting BBEG has to sit around and wait) and limits the players' choices of approach. Yes it does make life easier for those interested primarily in the tactical aspect of the game. But is that the only valid interest ?
What makes a "dungeon" isn't necessarily the fact that it's underground.
I absolutely agree with you there, looking at "Island of Eyes" from the S&S AP. Fully linear, open air. Succeed in clearing or be unable to progress.
That said... a truly dungeonless Adventure Path would be an interesting and challenging experiment, but I'm really REALLY worried that no one would want it since dungeons are such a well-loved and traditional element of the game.
Are they, now ? Looking at the half-dozens of groups in my vicinity and circle of friends, I'd say, they are absolutely the hated part of the game, and usually the point where campaigns stall due to mounting disinterest.
We've done several wilderness adventures before and they all have dungeons peppered through them—several of the Kingmaker adventures, Souls for Smuggler's Shiv, Racing to Ruin, etc...
But those were micro-dungeons usually. A few rooms, resolved within a session at most.
But then there are those dreadful, story-breaking crawls like "House of the Beast", "The Impossible Eye" or "Sins of the Saviours". Or "City of Seven Skulls" more recentlyAs for "spoon fed" : I meant "we, the consumers" have little choice in the matter. We can take them (tasty or not^^) or rewrite that 1/6th of an AP into a more feasible, less locality bound pattern of events. I didn't mean to offend.
I do the later, enthusiastically if the AP has a good concept and story arc like say "Skulls & Shackles", but a friend and co-GM (in whose group I play) has deciced to only run "partial APs" anymore, because our more story-oriented group didn't like the long-term multi-level dungeon monstrosities. "Jade Regent" at the moment, but he feels unsure we will actually like what awaits us in Minkai.
And basically I am buying everything from you guys anyway, but I find myself sensibly disappointed (the same way, a wet summer makes me disappointed) if I run into a "all dungeons" concept which really stifles ANY interest in salvaging the plot.
(All that said... I'm really not a big fan at all of "Rod of Seven Parts," and in a lot of ways, Shattered Star is my attempt to build my response to how I think a seven-part artifact hunt campaign should work.)
We shall see, and as I said, I am waiting in slightly (cynical) anticipation^^
Shelyn's bountiful bosom... how about Council of Thieves? Is that one dungeon-heavy?
-Matt
Yes, it is. Some micro, but many larger ones. Although it has to be said, it also features one of the oddest and most memorable adventures with "the Sixfold Trial"
Yes, it is. Some micro, but many larger ones. Although it has to be said, it also features one of the oddest and most memorable adventures with "the Sixfold Trial"
I see...
So, which APs would the community say are not dungeon-heavy?
An AP not being dungeon-heavy could mean that the major events that the PCs participate in and advance the story do not occur at the end of dungeon-like environments. For example, the PCs fight the baddie at a public appearance, not at the center of his labyrinth. Which APs are structured this way?
-Matt
Not dungeon heavy (my take) :
"Curse of the Crimson Throne" : urban, lots of "locations", many of them possible mini-dungeons (say about 5-8 rooms). One very large dungeon (AP-V), which luckily and structurally can be circumvented, and is good fun even if played straight from the book. Finale consists of basically locating and facing down major oponents in dungeonesque structures, though these will also heavily explain much of the "behind the scenes" plots and can be very informative and socially interactive. CotCT = possibly best AP ever^^
"Kingmaker" : Pure outside fun, several small micro dungeons, some larger Structures (Castles, guilds...), one medium sized dungeon as AP-III, which does have some fun allusions to real history events (americans will like it more than us pesky Europeans who mostly have never heard of Roanoke ) and can be modified.
"Legacy of Fire" : Much wilderness and social interaction, very nice side treks and options for explorations in accompanying articles, much exploration but also two huge dungeons, which will need some considerable and thoughtful rework (especially AP-II )
"Carrion Crown" : Starts with a very tough dungeon, than has a series of outside and investigative settings and plots, including the excellent "Trial of the Beast". Mixed bag, style wise. Finale is dungeon-based.
Recommended in the order of appearance, if my take is worth anything
|
Creative Director
|
That said... a truly dungeonless Adventure Path would be an interesting and challenging experiment, but I'm really REALLY worried that no one would want it since dungeons are such a well-loved and traditional element of the game.I personally would love to see a heavy urban, RP heavy AP. One where they might be some fights but they would be things that happened in a variety of places and very few in the same place. With a lot of stuff between the fights.
Of course i am fairly sure I am in a vocal minority but a minority the same.
Actually... an urban RP/politic heavy adventure path is one of the most often requested types of adventure paths. Not QUITE as heavilly requested as, say, an Adventure Path about the Worldwound or Baba Yaga/Irrisen or a megadungeon, but certainly in the top 10. In fact, if the city in question is Absalom, then that type of AP jumps up to the top 3.
We've done a few urban/roleplay intense Adventure Paths before, to varying degrees of success. Carrion Crown has a LOT of urban roleplaying elements, for example, and Council of Thieves takes place almost entirely in a city. Curse of the Crimson Throne has a lot of urban stuff also.
We'll do another one in the future, rest assured.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually really enjoyed the Impossible Eye and Scarwall. But I personally like big dungeons. I'm alright with a campaign having one or two big ones. I get a bit bored with only little encounters here and there or nothing but just roleplaying.
Not dungeon heavy (my take) :
"Curse of the Crimson Throne" : urban, lots of "locations", many of them possible mini-dungeons (say about 5-8 rooms). One very large dungeon (AP-V), which luckily and structurally can be circumvented, and is good fun even if played straight from the book. Finale consists of basically locating and facing down major oponents in dungeonesque structures, though these will also heavily explain much of the "behind the scenes" plots and can be very informative and socially interactive. CotCT = possibly best AP ever^^
Hehe...
Ironically (that's twice in one day!), I found myself surprised and disappointed at the number of dungeons in Curse of the Crimson Throne. Our group made it to Book Five, and all five books featured dungeons as environment where the major plot points were dealt with.
I: The older thief's house
II: Beneath the hospice, with what became the Night of 1000 Scythe-Crits
III: The manor labyrinth, with the rakshasa
IV: That dungeon in the mountains
V: The mega-dungeon
We've done a few urban/roleplay intense Adventure Paths before, to varying degrees of success. Carrion Crown has a LOT of urban roleplaying elements, for example, and Council of Thieves takes place almost entirely in a city. Curse of the Crimson Throne has a lot of urban stuff also.
Now, I honestly found Crimson Throne dungeon-heavy. Do you have any advice for me on this front, as a GM, of where I should head?
-Matt
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Indeed. But with that said, why did Skull & Shackles fail on this front? (One might answer "I don't think S&S did fail", but there are enough posts/threads in the S&S forum to negate such an answer and demand something a little more thought-out.) Kingmaker (most of it) and Souls for Smuggler's Shiv are great examples, since they are very much 'dungeon-lite' - and it sounds like they were reasonably popular. Though, for something like S&S, I think the locations offered could have been thought out a little better for that specific AP.
I suspect going to dungeon-heavy Shattered Star from the surprisingly-traditional-dungeon-heavy-when-it-should-have-been-anything-bu t S&S (and yes - sea caves with water is pretty much traditional in 2012) might be some of the cause of such ire.
Whether or not Skull & Shackles failed depends on your point of view. If it DID fail, I would put it to you that the point it failed was with us not properly letting folks know ahead of time what kind of adventure they'd be expecting. Furthermore... Skull & Shackles had to handle some pretty significant non-core elements—ships and nautical themes and fleet battles are not handled really at all in the Core Rules, and the rules in Ultimate Combat are a bit TOO complex for what we wanted to do. Which mean that it was a really really hard AP to pull off. As a result, it fell significantly behind on the schedule, and perhaps we ended up biting off more than the game could chew.
But still... I think the complaints for this one could land squarely on the "mismanaged expectations" front, combined with us pushing the system too hard with not having enough time to deal with the repercussions.
And that's another reason why we went with a heavy dungeoncrawl theme for Shattered Star.
1) It's nostalgic (and this is good in a year when we're being nostalgic), but more to the point, it's really EASY for authors to write dungeon crawls and thus really EASY for us to develop them, and thus we can get back on schedule so that, maybe, we can try some weirder stuff again in the future.
|
Creative Director
|
In the end folks... one thing that's important to keep in mind that, like it or not... dungeons and dungeon crawls are VERY popular. So that's probably the #1 reason you see dungeons show up so often in adventures.
I get that not everyone likes them. And I understand that's the whole point of this thread.
But they're popular.
If you don't like them, by all means let us know. We'll keep doing non-dungeon heavy Adventure Paths, sometimes to greater success than other times, but taken as a whole, non-dungeon heavy Adventure Paths will always be the minority as opposed to ones with more dungeons.
And it's important to keep in mind as well, I suppose, that I don't believe that "Dungeon Heavy" can't also mean "Rich with Story" or "Replete with Opportunity to Roleplay." I think that ALL of Shattered Star's adventures have great stories and lots of chances to roleplay in them. In fact, building dungeons where these things occur is one of the other things I was eager to try to prove could exist.
Again, whether or not we're successful at that... time will tell. But I'd love it if folks who don't like or hate dungeon crawls would still give this series a chance and check it out. Obviously it won't be for everyone... but it might be less onerous than you expect!
CotCT had the perfect crawling vs. else balance, IMHO. There was just enough crawling in 5 modules + 1 ubercrawl adventure for those who really love this kind of stuff.
Hmm...
I would have to investigate further, but now I'm wondering...
Which of the APs could I, as a GM, edit out the dungeon parts and still conserve the flavor and the plot? I only ask because it sounds like Shattered Star would not cater to this approach.
And as a follow-up, in which of the APs would this objective be easily accomplished?
-Matt
Actually... an urban RP/politic heavy adventure path is one of the most often requested types of adventure paths. Not QUITE as heavilly requested as, say, an Adventure Path about the Worldwound or Baba Yaga/Irrisen or a megadungeon, but certainly in the top 10. In fact, if the city in question is Absalom, then that type of AP jumps up to the top 3.
I'm a fan of urban campaigns, too, but somehow I fail to see this big attraction of Absalom. Somehow, to me the city seems mostly a faceless, more or less generic metropolis. Can anyone explain to me why it is so highly valued?
|
Contributor
|
The similarity to "Rod of Seven Parts" is one of the main things that sold this AP to me. I'd been hankering for a more 'classic' style game and Shattered Star came along at exactly the right time. I'm going to pad it out with my own intrigues and fluff (see above), but I definitely love the idea of a dungeon-delving artifact hunt.To each his own. Speaking for myself, I am fine with having graduated from the "Let's bash em" dungeons of my childhood ("Lost caverns of Tsojacanth", how we miss thee.. nevermind the "Temple of Elemental Evil" original edition.... ) to more socially dynamic, more sandboxy and less "you have to climb through a stupid statue hitting monsters" (and yes we had that in the Dragonlance-series^^).
Funnily enough, I'm currently playing in a friend's 2E Temple of Elemental Evil campaign. We had a session this evening. Ours is definitely not a "Let's bash em" dungeon. It all depends on the GM running it, as ever. I imagine if you played through those dungeons from 'your childhood' now, you'd get a very different experience from them than just bashing stuff.
|
|
That said... a truly dungeonless Adventure Path would be an interesting and challenging experiment, but I'm really REALLY worried that no one would want it since dungeons are such a well-loved and traditional element of the game.I personally would love to see a heavy urban, RP heavy AP. One where they might be some fights but they would be things that happened in a variety of places and very few in the same place. With a lot of stuff between the fights.
Of course i am fairly sure I am in a vocal minority but a minority the same.
Actually... an urban RP/politic heavy adventure path is one of the most often requested types of adventure paths. Not QUITE as heavilly requested as, say, an Adventure Path about the Worldwound or Baba Yaga/Irrisen or a megadungeon, but certainly in the top 10. In fact, if the city in question is Absalom, then that type of AP jumps up to the top 3.
We've done a few urban/roleplay intense Adventure Paths before, to varying degrees of success. Carrion Crown has a LOT of urban roleplaying elements, for example, and Council of Thieves takes place almost entirely in a city. Curse of the Crimson Throne has a lot of urban stuff also.
We'll do another one in the future, rest assured.
Yeah I meant one with no dungeons at all though. I like dungeons just fine, i just think it would be neat to see a AP with none at all.
To be fair, there really hasn't been an AP that had no RP elements. Even the two first adventures in Shattered Star have a decent amount of roleplaying opportunities in their dungeon crawl. The entirety of the second dungeon in Curse of the Lady's Light is great for this too.
Of course, I don't believe rping and dungeon crawling are mutually exclusive.
I wanted to point out that I really like what you've been doing with these dungeons in Shattered Star, James. It's much, much more than an entrance, an exit, and doors in-between. These dungeons are *fun* and full of roleplaying opportunities.
I'll be starting a Shattered Star campaign in a couple of week and I'm very much looking forward to it after two years of the open Kingmaker campaign we finished just a few hours ago. The Kingmaker campaign was also a lot of fun. Different fun, but fun nonetheless, and that's what makes Paizo and their people so great. They can tackle completely different stories and feels and make them all interesting. Is it always a success? Of course not, but it's much more often a success than a failure.
I've been converting several Pathfinder Adventure Paths to play using Savage Worlds, a system not well suited to long, drawn out dungeon crawls and I don't feel we've lost any of roleplaying opportunities or atmosphere. Any published dungeon can be cut down by trimming any encounters that are not entertaining or relevant to the story. The problem you've got in Pathfinder is that the group need the XP from these additional encounters to level. Unless you put your party on the fast advancement track, you're likely stuck with them.
|
I thing, that sometimes with a new AP, that is good with some additional rules to make it work better.
I have never been a huge fan of the Dungeon crawl concept, and iknown that they are popular. But in this AP's concept is so old school, that is just brings a lot of good memories back, and i am a Fan of collecting complicated artifackts.
But i like to see a Ap i the world wound, with less dungeon crawl :-)
I've been converting several Pathfinder Adventure Paths to play using Savage Worlds, a system not well suited to long, drawn out dungeon crawls and I don't feel we've lost any of roleplaying opportunities or atmosphere. Any published dungeon can be cut down by trimming any encounters that are not entertaining or relevant to the story. The problem you've got in Pathfinder is that the group need the XP from these additional encounters to level. Unless you put your party on the fast advancement track, you're likely stuck with them.
That's why you give out XP for more than just combat, like RPing. Or what many have down and simply remove Xp altogether. I did that last year and I have to admit, I feel much more freedom in encounter design when I do this.