I understand folks being eager to start their Wrath of the Righteous games, and I'm delighted to see the anticipation... but at the same time, we need to time the releases of these products right so that they all happen pretty close to simultaneous for various reasons.
If you're worried about not having enough time to prepare your character for a game, let your GM know. Were I your GM, I would either delay the start of the game a week (which would give me one more week to read and prepare the adventure itself, which is more complex than preparing a character and will have to start several days after you'll get your head start on character creation anyway), or I would let my players know that if after a few sessions they realized they made an error in character design they can rebuild as they wish.
Yeah but still. :p
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, we have several months of Skull & Shackles ahead of us, so it won't impact the campaign at all.
I'm just so hyped that I can't help the curiosity level :)
In fact... the 6 Campaign Traits in this one will have their own built in links to personal quests and additional rewards that PCs can explore, encounter, and earn as the Adventure Path goes on.
So would there be a campaign trait to my Aasimar Oracle that reflects the character concept I have set up?
Thread on Oracle: http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pg8c?Oracle-Aid
We actually are close to segueing into the last module of Jade Regent next week, so I'm full of anticipation to see the Player's Guide and the first module, to be able to give my players enough backstory to build their characters. :D
I am very much looking forward to this.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is interesting to see how many posters are planning to start this campaign right away. Personally, when I GM, I wouldn't think of running an AP until I've read all six chapters.
I just want my copy because I'm really looking forward to reading this one.
It is interesting to see how many posters are planning to start this campaign right away. Personally, when I GM, I wouldn't think of running an AP until I've read all six chapters.
I just want my copy because I'm really looking forward to reading this one.
I won't start running an AP without at least two books on my shelf. That gives me enough material that even if the third book is severely delayed, I'm good. Also, that gets me the summary of what the over-arcing meta-plot looks like.
That said, my hopes are to put on my player-hat for this one. DMing Slumbering Tsar and Runelords right now, so it'd be nice to con one of my players into running this.
In my case I started up Reign of Winter just before Book 2 came out... but I had two reasons for this. First, my Skype-based group was playing Runelords (Anniversary ed.), which is an absolutely superb AP. Thus I got hooked on the quality of Paizo's Adventure Paths. Second, I saw how I could integrate Reign of Winter into my current adventure - I'd have to increase the strength of various foes, but that wasn't going to be too big a deal. Also... RoW helped reinvigorate ME and make ME as the GM interested in gaming again. My only gripe is that my tabletop group doesn't meet often enough! (Monthly, if we're lucky.)
So while I can understand holding off on an AP until all six books are out... sometimes you have to take a leap of faith. And given the quality of Paizo's previous APs, in all likelihood you're going to have a good product.
I'll be jumping right into this one. However, that's because I'll be GMing Wrath of the Righteous via play-by-forums. Therefore, by the time we finish playing through the first part, the second and third will most likely be out.
For a face-to-face group, we just finished up Rise of the Runelords, and they've expressed interest in Reign of Winter, so I may be picking those up to start with that group.
Damn. I just had to do one last refresh to see if there were any new posts in the threads that I am following and this shows up. Oh well, I will sleep when I am dead.
-- david
edit: Downloaded and reading now....
I'm kind of looking forward to the outcry that animating dead = slaying innocents on the evil spectrum.
It is interesting to see how many posters are planning to start this campaign right away. Personally, when I GM, I wouldn't think of running an AP until I've read all six chapters.
It's basically the timing. We are finishing Jade Regent in (probably) the next two months and after discussion with the group, this AP came out on top of the ones I offered as the next one. After playing Carrion Crown before Jade Regent, people in my group are still tired of the "travel constantly, make no permanent friends" style of AP, which eliminated Reign of Winter.
It's basically the timing. We are finishing Jade Regent in (probably) the next two months and after discussion with the group, this AP came out on top of the ones I offered as the next one. After playing Carrion Crown before Jade Regent, people in my group are still tired of the "travel constantly, make no permanent friends" style of AP, which eliminated Reign of Winter.
That makes perfect sense. I also don't want to come off as if I feel anyone is doing it wrong.
It's just that, for me, I know I need to read the whole AP, so I can have the full picture. I'm also guessing, that I'll need to learn the new Mythic rules, to help guide my players.
These may not be the best examples, but my Serpent's Skull and Second Darkness campaigns turned out to be very fun, but only because I read through them all and set expectations early. I also had the added benefit of reading through the notes of those who played it before. Serpent's Skull has especially benefited from this.
Reading the Player's Guide has me more torn. I've been excited to read this AP because I haven't actually read a new AP in a while. I set all of the issues of Reign of Winter to the side and gave them to another DM as I wanted to play that.
Now, we have an AP that screams for a paladin. I'm the only person in my group who loves to play paladins. I mean I LOVE paladins. I may not see another AP like this to play for a long time. I just don't know if I can set another AP to the side; ignoring the e-mails that tell me my PDF is waiting in my downloads, receiving that white envelope and just putting it un-opened in a drawer until I can give it to my friend at the next game. For another 6 months.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The traits are way too specific and basically straitjacket players into coming from Mendev and also tying themselves to a mythic path, which, at this point, nobody really knows if that will be the best path to go for them. It's very probable that I'll have to replace them with more generic traits ( or add additional ones ).
Sorry, but from an RP point, so far these are the worst thought-out traits from all player's guides I've seen. Railroading to the max for character generation is not good.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The traits are way too specific and basically straitjacket players into coming from Mendev and also tying themselves to a mythic path, which, at this point, nobody really knows if that will be the best path to go for them. It's very probable that I'll have to replace them with more generic traits ( or add additional ones ).
Sorry, but from an RP point, so far these are the worst thought-out traits from all player's guides I've seen. Railroading to the max for character generation is not good.
Not necessarily. The only trait that pretty much forces you to have been in Mendev/the Worldwound as a child is the Chance Encounter one because
and even then you could have had it happen fairly recently without destroying the campaign.
With Child of the Crusade your parents could have retired and moved anywhere and you felt the desire to travel to Mendev to follow in their footsteps, Exposed to Awfulness... demons are everywhere. Riftwarden Orphan even says that you're raised by a foster family in Kenebres but that could easily be changed to anywhere in Golarion, Stolen Fury, again demons are everywhere and Touched by Divinity is so open it's crazy.
They're really not any more limiting than any of the other traits in the other Player's Guides and that they hook you up to one of the mythic paths, and events right in the campaign as it progresses, is part of what I think makes them the best thought out campaign traits in the APs. They not only give you some really solid reasons to be in Kenebres at the time of the big event that happens in adventure 1, but they lay the foundation for your destiny as a mythic hero. Pretty damn epic. APs require a certain amount of understanding between players and GM that you have to be in the area and willing to go on the rails of the adventure and if that means making an event happen in your backstory and means that you start in Kenebres, well, that's the assumption right?
Sorry, I deeply disagree. Nobody in my group has any idea of how the mythic rules even work at this time. Forcing a choice of their mythic path on them at character creation is very likely to lead to wrong choices. And tying the very, very specific roleplaying scenarios to the mythic paths is also extremely railroady. Not even to mention that "if you want the same trait, you need to have experienced the same event". Choo-choo, railroad!
I am quite okay with events in an AP itself being the same for every player, but trying to force even character creation to be the same story for everyone of the same role persuasion ( FYI: I got 2 melee Paladins, 1 melee Barbarian, 1 Melee-heavy Cleric of Asmodeus and one other melee character in the group I am GM'ing this for. And one Merfolk Bard from our resident "I must crunch da numbahs!" player, le sigh ) is bad for roleplaying diversity.
I hear you on most of the traits allowing people from outside of Mendev (although I think they very strongly "encourage" player characters to come from there ), but these traits are bad for free character generation, much more so than any other group of traits I've seen from past player's guides. I'm very disappointed and this is not an encouraging start to the AP.
I don't even see why the Traits are tied to specific Mythic Paths. What's the reasoning behind some of those choices?
|
Magnus, for the complaint about the traits being tied to a Mythic path, I think it's expected that the players know going in that they will be Mythic soon enough in this path and will have access to the Mythic book to see which path will best fit their character concept before the game starts. That's just my thought on it. I've known for awhile that my Paladin will either be a Champion or Hierophant, I just need to decide which.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Magnus, for the complaint about the traits being tied to a Mythic path, I think it's expected that the players know going in that they will be Mythic soon enough in this path and will have access to the Mythic book to see which path will best fit their character concept before the game starts. That's just my thought on it. I've known for awhile that my Paladin will either be a Champion or Hierophant, I just need to decide which.
I have to agree with magnuskn. This is way more pigeonholed than any group of traits I've seen before. It's not even "pick one of these six backgrounds". It's "who are you planning to be? ok, well here's your background".
The last set I really looked into for character creation was Skull & Shackles. Certainly, some of those didn't fit my character. But, several of them could be woven into my character's backstory with little or no effort. They were flavorful, story-appropriate, and yet generic enough not to force decisions on the players.
This is disappointing.
That's a bad assumption on the part of the developers, then. Mythic rules are not out and they expect players to instantly assimilate them when they are?
In every prior AP I had the opportunity to give the players enough time to prepare their backstories (even in Jade Regent, where I also started with the first module being the only one out) and I know my players enough that they will have problems if I have to additionally force-feed them the mythic rules so fast that they can take those traits into real consideration.
The best solution would have been to tie the traits simply to being mythic, not being a particular kind of mythic character (i.e. not tying them to the particular mythic paths). It's probably the way I am going to go with them.
I don't know I find it pretty obvious which Mythic paths fit which classes the best. *shrug* Obviously a Paladin's not going to be a Trickster and a Rogue won't often be a Hierophant.
No, but a Paladin could be a Marshal, Heirophant, Champion, or Guardian...
But, that's actually beside the point. It's more about how story specific these traits are, rather than class/tier specific (though that's pretty bad, too).
EDIT: Some of this assumes Mythic still works largely the same as the playtest.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
I hear you on most of the traits allowing people from outside of Mendev (although I think they very strongly "encourage" player characters to come from there ), but these traits are bad for free character generation, much more so than any other group of traits I've seen from past player's guides. I'm very disappointed and this is not an encouraging start to the AP.
First, taking these traits is not required. If none fit, cool, move along. You don't seem to like the basic purpose of campaign traits which is to define one life event which ties you to the campaign. Here, the campaign has 2 big aspects 1) you are part of a crusade which fights demons and has a long history and 2) you are mythic. Having campaign traits ignore one or the other would be a disservice.
Second, there are much more character defining traits than these. Traits which dictate significant life events are *not* new to this AP. Curse of the Crimson Throne traits are pretty similar in terms of story, each ties you to one crime boss in one city, one makes you framed for murder another can make you a drug addict. In the game world those are far more notable than you worship a deity or have cool parents or are an orphan. Likewise, Jade Regent traits all connect you to one of a few NPCs all of whom live in(or are linked to) the same city. One chooses your entire family for you.
Plus these traits are pretty standard adventure backgrounds:
Saved by a key NPC/mysterious figure; adventuring parents; exposed to badwrong energy (2x); orphan with cool parents; visited by the divine/some great power.
Third, even with your group which, to be fair, appears to have far more characters stomping on the same roles than would usually be the case, there is no reason to have the PCs all be forced into the same role/backstory:
Champion and Guardian for paladin1/barbarian, marshal paladin2, heirophant cleric, archmage or trickster bard is probably the most obvious set up, and each would have their own trait. That did not take a ton of mythic system mastery.
|
Legacy of fire and Carrion Crown come to mind about having similar ideas, including how the initial traits would be coming into play later down the line. I think that a part of the perceived difference might be from the unknown aspect of Mythic as well as the (to me) the innate possibility for noble/holy quests that a Good and/or crusader AP would probably include.
My understanding of Mythic is also that a great deal of the character's Mythic power is not directly related to their path or destiny, but rather the selection of Mythic (and non-Mythic) options they choose besides their paths. A Power Attacking warrior can still take Mythic Power Attack, and bump it up to 11 regardless of if they are a Guardian or a Hierophant, or an Archmage warrior guy. But we will need to wait and see.
Um, yeah. Carrion Crown traits are kind of a counter-example to the traits here, because while they tie you to professor Lorrimor, they are otherwise very open-ended and allow for characters from basically all over Golarion. And unless I remember incorrectly, they don't come up all later in the campaign.
I still don't see why these specific traits are tied directly to Mythic paths. It seems to limit a player's choice. And to be honest, these Traits are overpowered enough to qualify as Feats. As a GM I'd be strongly tempted not to allow these specific Traits... unless it was the sole Trait and taken as a result of the Additional Trait feat. (ie, it's a Feat)
That said, I'll reserve final judgment as I'll not be running this AP for probably a year. When we see the first AP, the Traits may make more sense.
And to be honest, the Traits in the Campaign book are more fleshed out (BTW, the book didn't specify - are you still limited to one Trait per Trait path, or is that rule no longer in force with Ultimate Campaign?) so I'll likely just use those Traits instead.
Maybe it's just with the people I game with but the player of the tiefling wizard wrote up a novel worth of a backstory about a month ago and just needed a minor tweak for Riftwarden Orphan to fit the trait in perfectly with what she already had set up because, yeah, wizard becoming an archmage makes all sorts of sense.
Perhaps not with your group though. Whenever we create our characters we always do our best to not step on each others toes and fill as many 'roles' as possible so campaign traits along these lines have never been a big deal, also we're not so hung up on backstory that something simple like "Your parents were Riftwardens!" or "You were captured by a cult and exposed to Evil Energy(TM)!" somehow totally ruins our creativity. If anything, for myself at least, I was in serious character block from playing several campaigns and one of the traits gave me a nice creative boost to get a character made for this campaign.
As far as campaign traits go, these are far from the most "railroady" out there. Remember Curse of the Crimson Throne? EVERYONE had to be screwed by Gaedren Lamm in Korvosa SPECIFICALLY for the characters to get together as written. Jade Regent required you to have a significant link to one of four very specific NPCs. Then there was Rise of the Runelords (Anniversary Edition) which, IMO, had the worst traits I've ever seen (Seriously, your hook to being in Sandpoint is to drink foul water from a fish tank? You liked to spy on the goblins in the dump?). Really, if you want to talk about the "worst" traits, I'd start there.
I know the traits from all three of those AP's quite well and all of them leave you much more freedom to develop the rest of your backstory, IMO. And they don't include the "if you have the same trait, it happened to you at the same time together" caveat.
I know the traits from all three of those AP's quite well and all of them leave you much more freedom to develop the rest of your backstory, IMO. And they don't include the "if you have the same trait, it happened to you at the same time together" caveat.
My group and I found the exact opposite to be true since the implementation of the traits into the backstories we were going for ended up feeling really clunky and forced if we weren't Korvosa or Sandpoint natives, especially with Jade Regent, while going "Oh, so my birth parents weren't the ones I wrote up, those were my foster parents? Adventure hook!" and "So at some point I was kidnapped by cultists and forced into a fell ritual then used the energies to escape? That's pretty exciting!" worked in much easier with anything we came up with as long as we start in Kenebres proper. We'll have to agree to disagree. Different creative process and all that not to mention that in every AP we've never doubled up on Campaign Traits just so that we all have different reasons to be there.
Most probably, yes. I actually am running two different groups through Jade Regent and the characters backstory was quite diverse. Admittedly, only one character was not from Sandpoint between the 9 player characters.
Campaign traits are not always a perfect fit. But, there's usually no problems with tweaking or reskinning them a bit to fit your character. These give the impression that it would be a problem.
1. They make some fairly significant statements about the characters background.
2. They tie into plot developments or encounters in a way that hasn't been done before.
3. They tie into your character's advancement in a way that has never been done before. (Granted, mythic has never been done before.)
Some of this may smooth out once the AP and Mythic are released.
|
|
They tie into plot developments or encounters in a way that hasn't been done before.
As I recall, this was something people had been demanding for some time. In APs like Curse of the Crimson Throne and Carrion Crown, the campaign traits had a habit of mattering once at the very beginning of the AP and then never again.
EDIT: that should teach me not to post from a phone...
They tie into plot developments or encounters in a way that hasn't been done before.As I recall, this was something people had been demanding for some time. In APs like Curse of the Crimson Throne and Carrion Crown, the campaign traits had a hobit of mattering once at the very beginning of the AP and then never again.
Hmmm... I wasn't aware that was a common complaint. I thought the whole point was to put the PC's together in the opening without resorting to awkward "you're all in a tavern" type scenarios. Then they often provide skills and/or situational bonuses relevant to the AP, at some point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have to wonder how penalized players will be if they DON'T take these Traits; say a GM doesn't want to allow them because he feels they constrain players (like... oh... me.) Seeing these Traits are more powerful than normal Traits (to the point I've seen Feats that are less useful and with less effect), it's almost like giving players a free Feat.
So how do you compensate for denying them a free Feat?
Give them a free feat?
Also, NOT allowing them constrains players as well since you're denying them an option that you feel is too restrictive, yes? I'd advise to let your players make their own choices. Who knows, one may fit a concept that one of your player's likes.
Given the Player's Guide is only available if they create an account with Paizo... and that I've not shared Player Guides for my other two campaigns because of the downloading aspect (while I did tell the players of the Runelords Campaign Traits, the RoW game started after the players were already built and were 3rd to 4th level) I don't see how this is really a factor.
None of my players for either game ever bothered with the Player's Guide. It didn't impact either game. And I am willing to bet there are plenty of groups that don't bother with the Player's Guide... especially for those people who buy the APs from local gaming stores and have never bothered to go to the Paizo website and thus are completely unaware of these guides.
If the Player's Guide has suddenly become Required Reading specially for this AP, then how would players learn about this? Especially if they don't go on the Paizo forums and whose exposure to Pathfinder is over a tabletop while rolling dice.
In addition, Traits are an Optional Rule. What about those GMs who don't even bother allowing Traits? How are THEY affected?
Just saying.
|
|
Based on the playtest, which I still have around, this basically means that a third of your class levels are dictated by the trait you take (I know, I know, paths are not classes. Same number of choices and similar power levels, it's not an unfair comparison I don't think.)
More like a fifth. Per the "Ask James Jacobs Anything" thread, as of Mythic Adventures a Mythic tier is about as powerful as half a level, so a level 20/tier 10 character is about equal in power to a level 25 character. Mythic tiers are responsible for five of those "levels". Q.E.D.
But that's exactly the problem people like Tangent and Magnus have with these traits; they force the players to make a lot of choices very early.
|
|
No more than normal IMO. Do you go into a campaign not knowing what class you're playing until after you create the character? No? Then in a Mythic game, you should probably have an idea of what path you are going for as well. I understand that some people are going to be running this right out of the gate, without having time to allow the players to absorb the mythic rules, but then you shouldn't complain that the campaign that has been toted as the "MYTHIC" campaign requires you to have some knowledge of Mythic and an idea of where you're going with it when you start the campaign. Again this is just my opinion, but I truly don't like the idea of running a game as it comes out, I'd much prefer as a GM to absorb all the material (and by proxy be able to have things like the Map Folio, the Face and Item cards, the Pawns, by the time I start the game)
Actually? I don't see WHY a player would need to know the Mythic Rules while creating their character. The Mythic Rules do not come into play until the end of Book 1. So really, you don't need to read up on those rules 'til that point.
Why craft a character around rules that might not matter? We've 1st level characters witnessing a Silver Dragon being beheaded by a Balor first thing. Then they have to go through a catacombs that is undoubtedly going to have nasty hazards that could kill one or more of those characters. New characters may thus be needed... and entire backgrounds may end up tossed in the scrapheap because of early deaths.
Or to put it another way: why prepare for a way before you even come into sight of the bridge? You may end up not taking the bridge at the end... or even seeing that bridge.