One Writer AP


Pathfinder Adventure Path General Discussion

101 to 150 of 171 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Brandon Hodge wrote:

This "master plan" and "overall supervisor" person already exists. It is the AP's lead developer. So if you'd love it, you've not only got it, but you've always had it! =-)

Taking the current Shattered Star AP an an example, the plotline was written and finalized by Paizo long before any freelancer ever got a look at it. Oftentimes, such as the case of Shattered Star, the author of that outline is also the lead developer (in this case James), so you already have a Paizo professional who is not only responsible for tying all of the elements together between books, but is also usually the author of the AP's basic story structure.

hmm. That might well be the plan.

Looking back at the AP's since Kingmaker, one wonders if the plan actually gets executed all that well, though. Intentions versus actual actions

"Serpent's Skull" : Started out seaside, the campaign traits were all seaward-journey bound.... then everything takes place in a lost mountain city.

"Carrion Crown" : no real cohesion between the AP parts. While some are lovely, there is hardly any visible interconnection.

"Jade Regent" : from caravan entrepeneurs to shapers of a Foreign Empire ? Yeah, worked, but as J.jJ noted some things might have been overdone.

"Skulls and Shackles" : hmmmm. I loved it in a way, but... cohesive ? Who was the BBEG again and when precisely did he turn up to become "the ultimate" challenge ? And btw,... the ultra-generic castleruns really chafed on th athmosphere. What again is the relation between PIRATES stumbling through dungeons ? Somehow, I expected ships... silly me. So where again was the leading hand ?

"Shattered Star" : Since the entire concept is such a turn down, I haven't read much of it yet. The only cohesion I see yet is "Varisia revisted". Howdy Ho, I'd like to go someplace else, too.


Umbranus wrote:

I'm in a game playing carrion crown (far from finished) and up u ntil now I feel a complete lack of cohesion. Perhaps it is different for the gm, as he knows how it all connects.

** spoiler omitted **

I'm in the middle of playing Trial of the Beast as well, and the lack of motivation seems a bit weird to us too.

"Oh no! This innocent man could end up getting killed! Well, too bad; next adventure, please!"

Dark Archive

James Jacobs wrote:


Which makes me wonder if we can push things a bit more along the assumption that folks aren't afraid to look back and forth between volumes of an AP rather than err on the safe side and spend extra page count duplicating content when it comes to reccuring NPCs and villains.

I think perhaps instead of encouraging jumping back and forth between AP's, the writers get together with the project manager during the AP and a simple online guide- similar to the player's guide is put out. Inside would be the listing of all of the NPC's, relevant mechanical constructs (I despised having to dig back to Skull and Shackles AP #1 to find the infamy/disrepute tables...considering this construct follows the entire adventure path), and a plot map, charting the course through the AP.

This would be a GM resource and digital format only. I think channeling some time and effort into a GM's guide for the AP might be more feasible than relying on a single writer AP, committee AP, or relying on the project manager to try and herd cats by getting 6 different authors on the same page continuity-wise.

Just have as a deliverable by the author when he/she turns in the project
a) NPC codex
b)continuity plot map (the PM ties these all together)
c)new mechanical constructs section

Once that is done, the PM reviews, ties up the loose ends, and aggregates it together into a GM's AP guide.

Contributor

Right, Vikingson! I'm not vouching for executive decisions or execution--that's above my pay grade. I'm testifying against the perception that Paizo picks 6 writers, gives them shove into the darkness without guidance, and tentatively strings together whatever adventures they eventually turn in to make an AP.

The APs, at least from my experience as a freelancer from Carrion Crown onward, are meticulously outlined in a rather intimidating document. If those connections between adventures are absent at the outset, they'll obviously be absent in the final product. Sometimes, as James notes, that's an intended goal for whatever the lead developer or outline writer has in mind. Other times, the final product might not quite conform to that vision given the material the freelancer provides, or there's a shift in those original goals during development.

I'd argue against some of the conclusions on some individual APs' cohesiveness listed above, but not too strongly. Depends on what your definition of cohesion is, I suppose. If you define it as recurring helpful NPCs, then CC, for example, would lack cohesion. But since everything you encounter in every book pretty much happens because of what the Whispering Way is ultimately up to, others might define that as a definitively cohesive thread.

Given that Paizo is trying to market these APs to a HUGE audience and please everyone at once, the GM has to shoulder some of that responsibility of tying it all together. And given the random acts of violence that are the tendency of the murderous hobos known as PCs, relying on a recurring villain or even helpful NPC can be a tough call when a later writer assumes they'll survive another writer's work, but your main BBEG eats a dagger to the face in Book Two during real play at the game table.

Sovereign Court

hogarth wrote:
Umbranus wrote:

I'm in a game playing carrion crown (far from finished) and up u ntil now I feel a complete lack of cohesion. Perhaps it is different for the gm, as he knows how it all connects.

** spoiler omitted **

I'm in the middle of playing Trial of the Beast as well, and the lack of motivation seems a bit weird to us too.

"Oh no! This innocent man could end up getting killed! Well, too bad; next adventure, please!"

We had a lot of law and order type characters in the party, so we actually got quite involved. But with a typical adventuring party, I can see how it's hard to get people to care a whole lot.

I liked a lot about the adventure though. It's hard to write "investigation" adventures, but I find them fun and am looking forward to the next bit of Jade Regent I'm DMing, with a strong group of roleplayers and some fun investigation coming up.


Jess Door wrote:
hogarth wrote:

I'm in the middle of playing Trial of the Beast as well, and the lack of motivation seems a bit weird to us too.

"Oh no! This innocent man could end up getting killed! Well, too bad; next adventure, please!"

We had a lot of law and order type characters in the party, so we actually got quite involved. But with a typical adventuring party, I can see how it's hard to get people to care a whole lot.

Altruism and the prospect of a reward got us pretty far, as motivations go. But once we started getting into near-deaths and actual deaths and some actions that our party paladin had a little trouble rationalizing, it made us think that we were going through an awful lot of effort for one random dude!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Brandon Hodge wrote:
Given that Paizo is trying to market these APs to a HUGE audience and please everyone at once, the GM has to shoulder some of that responsibility of tying it all together. And given the random acts of violence that are the tendency of the murderous hobos known as PCs, relying on a recurring villain or even helpful NPC can be a tough call when a later writer assumes they'll survive another writer's work, but your main BBEG eats a dagger to the face in Book Two during real play at the game table.

Please don't perpetuate that horrible "murderous hobos" meme, Brandon. It needs to die quickly ( preferably not via murderous hobo ).

I think the concern here should rather be "if the main villain is attacked by a PC in book two, why doesn't he break that PC in half like a twig?". ^^ The obvious solution is to put the BBEG behind virtual walls, always surround him with people, be they multitudes of guards or vulnerable innocent bystanders. Or have the BBEG not be totally obviously be the bad guy.

And if everything still manages to go pear-shaped, then the GM can always say "But there still is his boss" and use the stats from the last book for somebody with another name. Thanos/Darkseid, y'know.


Altruism and reward is enough .otivation for adventure ussually. But whe the PC are in a crusade to defeat the murderers of his friend, setting it asside for a random dude is kind of a dissapointment. If The Beast would know something about the Whispering way, the PC would have a reason to save him.

Sovereign Court

I came into the AP a little late, so I don't know if I missed something, the GM is changing things or what, but I don't even know what the Whispering way is. We just finished the beast trial.

O.o

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I haven't read or played CC but I want to so watch out for spoilers guys.

I might point my GM to this thread so he can raise the volume on the conspiracy connection.


Brandon Hodge wrote:
Right, Vikingson! I'm not vouching for executive decisions or execution--that's above my pay grade. I'm testifying against the perception that Paizo picks 6 writers, gives them shove into the darkness without guidance, and tentatively strings together whatever adventures they eventually turn in to make an AP.

Well... good and honourable intention, but do things actually work out that way ? I personally don't think so. Seems like much of the Freelance work floats softly in the vicinity of the script, but only loosely takes up the theme or plot of the path.

Brandon Hodge wrote:


I'd argue against some of the conclusions on some individual APs' cohesiveness listed above, but not too strongly. Depends on what your definition of cohesion is, I suppose. If you define it as recurring helpful NPCs, then CC, for example, would lack cohesion. But since everything you encounter in every book pretty much happens because of what the Whispering Way is ultimately up to, others might define that as a definitively cohesive thread.

hmm, cohesiveness :

CotCR : Korvosa, the Queen, intrigues within intriques
Second Darkness : Earthfall and the "Rise of the Drow"
Legacy of Fire : more genies please, realm, setting
Erebus : I consider this one rather weak, but at least it had the recurring theme of the degenerate Chelian society.
Kingmaker : Very strong coherence. NPC, BBEGs, realm,
as for the rest, methinks I listed their weakness.

Is it so hard to stick to such a cohesion, instead of placing a generic... ahem left over cyclopic fortress as an obstacle into an Adventure Path that previously dealt with freedom, plunder, the seas and a dark Pirate Lord ? The final three parts of the Skulls and Shackles AP really reeked like they had been loosely adapted to the Shackles and Pirates from off-the-shelf stock. pre-boiled.

Brandon Hodge wrote:


Given that Paizo is trying to market these APs to a HUGE audience and please everyone at once, the GM has to shoulder some of that responsibility of tying it all together. And given the random acts of violence that are the tendency of the murderous hobos known as PCs, relying on a recurring villain or even helpful NPC can be a tough call when a later writer assumes they'll survive another writer's work, but your main BBEG eats a dagger to the face in Book Two during real play at the game table.

I have yet to meet a stupid PC (either live or having been told about) who attacked either

Spoiler:
Barnabas Harrigan or Queeen Ileosa
. Just saying.

methinks, that is too much of a KoDT clichee.
Or taking a good look at Vencarlo Orsini....

But if paizo wants to roll the ball that way, their call, even if it hurts the story, which then become the low common denominator.

Sczarni

James Jacobs wrote:


Which makes me wonder if we can push things a bit more along the assumption that folks aren't afraid to look back and forth between volumes of an AP rather than err on the safe side and spend extra page count duplicating content when it comes to reccuring NPCs and villains.

I have run 3 APs... and in all of them there was at least one villain in book 1 that they ran from, and then wanted to either intimidate or wipe out in book 3 or 4. in CotCT its:

Crimson throne spoilers:
Eel's end - my dice hate me, and they keep talking their way out with the evidence... then during Escape from Old Korvosa they think the ships will still be there.


magnuskn wrote:
Brandon Hodge wrote:
Given that Paizo is trying to market these APs to a HUGE audience and please everyone at once, the GM has to shoulder some of that responsibility of tying it all together. And given the random acts of violence that are the tendency of the murderous hobos known as PCs, relying on a recurring villain or even helpful NPC can be a tough call when a later writer assumes they'll survive another writer's work, but your main BBEG eats a dagger to the face in Book Two during real play at the game table.

Please don't perpetuate that horrible "murderous hobos" meme, Brandon. It needs to die quickly ( preferably not via murderous hobo ).

I think the concern here should rather be "if the main villain is attacked by a PC in book two, why doesn't he break that PC in half like a twig?". ^^ The obvious solution is to put the BBEG behind virtual walls, always surround him with people, be they multitudes of guards or vulnerable innocent bystanders. Or have the BBEG not be totally obviously be the bad guy.

And if everything still manages to go pear-shaped, then the GM can always say "But there still is his boss" and use the stats from the last book for somebody with another name. Thanos/Darkseid, y'know.

Sadly, those kinds of parties exist so you have to prepare your adventure for that. Really, your adventure has to be robust enough to handle unpredictable PCs.

One concern JJ mentioned with Shattered Star was that they didn't want to make the players feel like they were helping the bad guys along along until the end. It's one of those things that, while it works in novels and maybe even for a couple levels in a game, wouldn't really work after 15 levels of commitment.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
gustavo iglesias wrote:

I understand the underlying logistic problems about the one-writers AP. But I'd really love to see the AP being designed by an overall supervisor, which make a master plan for the whole AP and decides what is the metaplot and how to foresee it in the AP, how to make the story feel connected.

In some AP, the plot is clear (CotCT Queen has gone mad), in others, it is too hidden until too late (Nyrissa's plans in Kingmaker).

Some of the books are too disconected. Varnhold's Vanishing, in Kingmaker's 3rd book. Why is it a Kingmaker's adventure? It could be a Carrion Crown adventure, or Rise of Runelords, or any other AP. It's a settlement with missing people, sequestered by a cyclopean lich. But the Lich isn't related to Pitax or Nyrisssa. It has nothing to do with the AP, or the PC, or the plot. It's really a one shot adventure, that you happen to play during Kingmaker AP.

That's actually how all Adventure Paths are designed.

One of us—me or Rob—as the Adventure Path's developer builds the outline and comes up with the overall plot for the whole thing. These outlines are about 16,000 words long—they are VERY detailed. They're ALL designed by an "overall supervisor who makes a master plan" for the thing, in other words.

Whether or not we're successful at that depends on lots of variables. But there are always reasons behind why we make our choices in the design of an AP.

Taking Varnhold Vanishing as an example, the reason that one is what it is is because at the time, we weren't 100% sure that folks would love the sandbox elements of parts 1 and 2. Furthermore, we were concerned that by adventure 3, many players might have grown tired of the sandbox and kingdom building aspects of the first two adventures. We decided to hedge our bets a bit by putting a significant dungeon into part 3, as well as giving the whole adventure a stronger self-contained storyline. By setting it in the easternmost section of the Stolen Lands, we made it into a sort of "bottled" adventure that carries on some of the exploration themes, but gives the players a chance to get back to the classic game play.

In hindsight, setting up Varnhold Vanishing as a more sandbox extension of the 2nd adventure with more kingdom building stuff probably WOULD have made that adventure fit into the whole better... but at the time we were doing that adventure, we had no idea that folks would respond so enthusiastically to what was, at the time, a DRASTIC change to how we did Adventure Paths.


Brandon Hodge wrote:
There have been several statements of this nature in this thread (so I'm not just picking on your, Gustavo) that reflect an inherent misunderstanding of the publishing mechanism by which APs are produced.

I'm sure you can understand, though, that if you're seeing several of these types of statements - in just this one thread! - that there might be some room for improvement here?

While you might disagree with vikingson's conclusions, I think they are more than legitimate.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lord Snow wrote:

Given the kind of risks Paizo is willing to take lately (going to earth in Reign of Winter and basing an entire AP on a new hardcover book of optional rules), I think the risk of attempting to create an AP with much stronger connections between adventures is rather minor. I can see a lot more people turned away from Wrath of the Righteous because it requires a whole new rulebook than people turned away from an AP module because it requires to get the previous adventures in the same AP. Of course evry AP Paizo creates is a risk by it's own unique features and stacking on top of that the desire to creat stronger connections between adventures only adds to that risk.

I join those who are willing to flip back and forth between seperate books in the AP to find the information about the background and plot rather than have it reprinted several times.

I actually agree. Which is why I'm going to be trying to set up Wrath of the Righteous to have strong connections between each volume by not only having recurring NPCs and recurring themes and an obvious bad-guy from the start and all of that. If that's really something a lot of folks want in an AP (and it's certainly something I want to do in an AP), then my hope is that'll soothe some of the fears folks might have about the fact that this AP also uses Mythic Adventures.

That said... I don't think that there's a large element of folks who would be turned away from an AP simply because it utilizes a new hardcover book. Sales of the hardcover books remain QUITE strong, so that tells me that folks do like them and, in fact, being able to use a new hardcover immediately with an AP designed to make use of it might result in MORE purchases of both.


I love to see the why behind the decissions. It makes is value more the AP and understand how it works.

Good communication

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

James Jacobs wrote:
The main reason the logistics would be difficult is indeed because they're freelancers. If they were staff writers, that's a totally different thing. But getting six authors to set aside several hours at a time for multiple meetings is tough when those authors have jobs, go to school, have newborn children, etc.

I've been involved with more than one multi-author project that actually went so far as to fly out all of the involved parties for a full-day or even multi-day planning summit. And while those are fun and often generate some good ideas, and are worthwhile for other reasons, I don't think that I've really seen "better cohesion" come out of those types of thing. I think the most efficient way to ensure that is just to have a single person whose job it is to make sure that there's cohesion.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

It should also be noted that one of my goals with Shattered Star was to try to do something that NO AP before it had done.

Spoiler:
Shattered Star does not, in fact, have a BBEG for the whole thing. Every other adventure path does, whether it's an obvious one from the start (as in the case of Curse of the Crimson Throne) or not until the end (Kingmaker). Going into Shattered Star, one of the big things I was hearing from folks is that they were eager for an adventure path that didn't have one big bad guy behind it all. Whether or not Shattered Star will eventually prove or disprove the myth that an Adventure Path will or won't work without a single bad guy or organization or whatever serving as the cause of the plotline, only time will tell.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I actually like having a single "stand-alone" adventure. Varnhold Vanishing was fun for my players because of the

Kingmaker #3:
Centaur tribe at the centre of it.
It's just a matter of limiting it to one book.

My biggest (really my only) complaint about Curse of the Crimson Throne is that the players were gone from the city for

Crimson Throne:
two whole books Skeletons of Scarwall should have been a short punchy dungeon at the end of a history of Ashes, and book 5 should have been all about the rebellion against the queen.

The diversion/change of pace adventure serves an important function, it takes the PCs out of their comfort zone for a while, and it stems theme fatigue. What's important to remember is the diversion shouldn't spill across multiple books, and it should fulfil a subplot that was brewing from book 1 in order to give a feeling of resolution. Varnhold Vanishing only succeeded on this task because I had a Varn subplot.
History of Ashes succeeds because Shoanti are a big theme of Crimson Throne.

For some groups APs take years to complete, a palette cleanser is important but divert for two long and players will forget what's important.


Mmm... just to point:

I didn't dislike Varnhold Vanishing bexause of being more railroady insteas of sandboxy. My problem with it is that it doesnt feel integrated with the story. If the cyclops would have been more important in tge grand scheme, or if Pitax or Nyrissa where involved in the vanishing, it would feel more connected. But as written, it is pretty much a standalone. A very cool adventure, but not that much part of the adventure path


DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

I actually like having a single "stand-alone" adventure. Varnhold Vanishing was fun for my players because of the ** spoiler omitted **

Wow. I guess this just proves how hard is to make everybody happy, and how much merit does Paizo have. What your group likes is exactly what mine dislike.


As for Varnhold Vanishing. Yes a pretty ....nice adventure ( I don't really like dungeons, but liked this one) , if not connected to much to the Kingmaker AP.

But like the jersey, ahem Sandpoint Devil (and some other pretty americano-mythic stuff) it really depends on the players knowing the Roanoke vanishing connection. Easy enough for most people over on the western end of the pond.. I am not so sure about the European side^^

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Arnwyn wrote:

I'm sure you can understand, though, that if you're seeing several of these types of statements - in just this one thread! - that there might be some room for improvement here?

While you might disagree with vikingson's conclusions, I think they are more than legitimate.

I don't inherently disagree with vikingson's conclusions or find them illegitimate at all. It is the base assumptions from some folks that are flawed, such as the perception that there isn't a lead designer, for instance. As I stated in my followup post:

Brandon Hodge wrote:
I'm not vouching for executive decisions or execution--that's above my pay grade. I'm testifying against the perception that Paizo picks 6 writers, gives them shove into the darkness without guidance, and tentatively strings together whatever adventures they eventually turn in to make an AP.

Nor am I saying there's not room for improvement. Heck, I LOVE these discussions and debates, and there were even some threads going on while I was writing Dead Heart of Xin that ultimately changed the whole nature of the adventure (in particular, complaints about BBEGs just showing up in the last room of the tallest tower--note how many times your party gets harassed by Xin in the AP finale and how he's turned into a living, breathing, and somewhat sympathetic antagonist that you get to know throughout the course of the module--you're welcome! Hahaha).

So, I'm listening. But I only think criticism can be fair (and ultimately be learned from) if it operates on correct assumptions about how these things are written. And those assumptions by some in this thread that APs are a leaderless or haphazard project are wrong, as James and I have both detailed. Whether or not they succeed within that framework is, again, above my pay grade, and not something I've really engaged in debate about, but I am enjoying the thread.


What I think a lot of this discussion shows is that what seems like lack of cohesion caused by the development process is actually deliberate decisions from the top. You can argue about whether those decisions were good or bad, but they don't usually seem to be result of too little coordination.

And thanks for letting us in on some of the thought behind the design. Very interesting.

Contributor

thejeff wrote:
What I think a lot of this discussion shows is that what seems like lack of cohesion caused by the development process is actually deliberate decisions from the top. You can argue about whether those decisions were good or bad, but they don't usually seem to be result of too little coordination.

Thank you, thejeff, for summing up in two sentences what it has taken me three posts to say. =-)


Brandon Hodge wrote:
So, I'm listening. But I only think criticism can be fair (and ultimately be learned from) if it operates on correct assumptions about how these things are written. And those assumptions by some in this thread that APs are a leaderless or haphazard project are wrong, as James and I have both detailed. Whether or not they succeed within that framework is, again, above my pay grade, and not something I've really engaged in debate about, but I am enjoying the thread.

Being one of the people you might be referring to, it wasn't that what I tried to say. Of course it is not leaderless. In Kingmaker campaign, I can feel the conection in books 1-2, and 4-5. It's book 3 the one that feels completelly unconected. If the project itself were leaderless, books 1-2 and 4-5 wouldn't be connected either.

This is not about claiming Paizo not doing their homework. This is about identifying why such homework fails in some chapters of some APs (for some people, as we have seen that some other groups find desirable those "sidetreck" stand-alone style adventures)

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

For Kingmaker was never a "cohesive plot that goes from A to B to C". It's more a "here are 6 big adventures that you can drop in your sandbox".


gustavo iglesias wrote:
Brandon Hodge wrote:
So, I'm listening. But I only think criticism can be fair (and ultimately be learned from) if it operates on correct assumptions about how these things are written. And those assumptions by some in this thread that APs are a leaderless or haphazard project are wrong, as James and I have both detailed. Whether or not they succeed within that framework is, again, above my pay grade, and not something I've really engaged in debate about, but I am enjoying the thread.

Being one of the people you might be referring to, it wasn't that what I tried to say. Of course it is not leaderless. In Kingmaker campaign, I can feel the conection in books 1-2, and 4-5. It's book 3 the one that feels completelly unconected. If the project itself were leaderless, books 1-2 and 4-5 wouldn't be connected either.

This is not about claiming Paizo not doing their homework. This is about identifying why such homework fails in some chapters of some APs (for some people, as we have seen that some other groups find desirable those "sidetreck" stand-alone style adventures)

I dont know if you were here at the time, but Kingmaker was also a huge departure in that people had been asking for a "sandbox AP". Prior to that, there had been a pretty clear focus on a more linear plot development. I think in trying to achieve that goal, a certain "lack of cohesion" is probably going to be necessary.

For my part, I like about a third of the APs, love another third and really dont get into the rest. I think that level of success is about right, though. If they were all written as per what I think I want, I'd never have been surprised to discover what I actually want (like I was with Serpent's Skull, for example, which I was expecting to find completely unengaging).

A big feature of Paizo that keeps me subscribed is their willingness to innovate and experiment. I think a necessary component of that is recognition that a significant number of those innovations won't suit me. The upside is the fact that sixty six instalments in, it's still a highlight of the month when my Paizo package arrives. I suspect that if I had eleven APs that were exactly what I thought I wanted, I would have been quite bored by now.


vikingson wrote:
But like the jersey, ahem Sandpoint Devil (and some other pretty americano-mythic stuff) it really depends on the players knowing the Roanoke vanishing connection. Easy enough for most people over on the western end of the pond.. I am not so sure about the European side^^

Oh, c'mon man! There are European legends and mythology thrown all throughout a great many APs! Don't begrudge an adventure that uses one of ours! ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

An interesting thread.

A few thoughts on Carrion Crown from my group:

Spoiler:

My players have questioned why so much of what they do have apparently little effect on the Whispering Way's success. (just started part 6, skipping the majority of 5 for later).

*Stopping, or failing to stop the werewolf "war" did not give any signs that the werewolves would (not) be an asset against the WW further down the line.
*The players' interruption in Feldgrau has no apparent impact on the Carrion Crown ritual.
*The retrieval of the Raven's Head in part four made my players assume they disrupted the ritual based on the poem and the listed ingredients.

When encountering the vampires in part five the reaction was: "Vampire killer on the loose? This is probably a good thing for the people of Caliphas, but we're short on time hunting the Whispering Way so we will have to deal with the vampires later." Thus we have switched the order of part 5 and 6, should they still be interested in the Vampires after taking care of WW.

Now, we're having a great time and the players are having loads of fun, but plot wise it seems that the Whispering Way should have had a stronger connection the individual parts, and that the players would feel their actions meant something. If they had clear hints that what they did throughout the AP, then the Whispering Way's plan would weaken, then I believe they would be more interested in dealing with what has seemed like a series of side-quests.

Consider that (ignoring the aspect of levels and power level) had the players left Ravengro and went south to Caliphas or Renchurch, the other events concerning the Whispering Way would have been largely the same, except that Auren Vrood would also be alive, if it played out as written.

To repeat: Despite of the above we are having loads of fun and this AP has been a blast so far.

For my group it is more about seeing results of what they do, and less about recurring NPCs (although not having a surprise BBEG in part 6 would be good).

Cohesion for us would mean that what they did or did not do (for major events) should have an impact on later adventures. Of course one cannot account for all the what-ifs, but it would be good seeing more results of past actions, or at least knowing that those actions did something to the overarching plot.


Sub-Creator wrote:
vikingson wrote:
But like the jersey, ahem Sandpoint Devil (and some other pretty americano-mythic stuff) it really depends on the players knowing the Roanoke vanishing connection. Easy enough for most people over on the western end of the pond.. I am not so sure about the European side^^
Oh, c'mon man! There are European legends and mythology thrown all throughout a great many APs! Don't begrudge an adventure that uses one of ours! ;)

Didn't - just had to explain to nearly everybody in the area.... and to be honest, I originally came across it mostly by having played "Werewolf" ^^

But knowing off the original story helps enjoying the development....

Looking at "continuous development within the AP's plot" : the cohesiveness has IMHO decreased over the years - instead off, as one might have expected, increased through experience gained by paizo's staff.


vikingson wrote:
Looking at "continuous development within the AP's plot" : the cohesiveness has IMHO decreased over the years - instead off, as one might have expected, increased through experience gained by paizo's staff.

Come to think of it, I think their connected plots peaked with Savage Tide.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber

Let's not forget we are talking about highly creative people, who typically work in highly personal ways. You WANT these people to have the creative space to do what they do. As soon as you have some "parental boss" figure nit-picking every little thing they do that is when you will have anemic non-creative material.

Moreover, I imagine there are times where an adventure as written is ultra-cool, and is low on the cohesiveness scale, but because it is so cool you want it to see the light of day.

There is an art to working with these type of people that only experience can show. I'm thinking the Paizo folks are amongst the most experienced with regard to this.

All that said, some general criticisms, and desires- cool, but as soon as we start trying to parse and nit-pick the creative process as if it was some mathematical/computer type job, then you are just way off base.

Personal comments: There are times I would like to see more obvious GM-help for player motivation. But, I do not want give up ultra-cool and creative stories to do so. I would much rather a flawed story that is unique and interesting, than a perfectly structured story that is just okay.


Steve Geddes wrote:
A big feature of Paizo that keeps me subscribed is their willingness to innovate and experiment. I think a necessary component of that is recognition that a significant number of those innovations won't suit me.

This is exactly why I'm still subscribed, even though I initially subscribed only to support pirate-themed APs & focus. I'm glad they are experimenting and innovating, even if not everything suits me or my groups.

-TimD

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Coridan wrote:
I am curious James, what so far you have taken from this thread?

...

And an observation that the call for more interconnected elements in the adventure paths isn't an overwhelming one—lots of folks seem to feel that the APs do a pretty good job at this already, with opinions as to which ones do it best relatively spread out. There's a vocal minority of folks who want more interconnections, particularly some who've been calling for us to do this for some time, and as it turns out I kind of agree with them.

Which makes me wonder if we can push things a bit more along the assumption that folks aren't afraid to look back and forth between volumes of an AP rather than err on the safe side and spend extra page count duplicating content when it comes to reccuring NPCs and villains.

I do not think this is the flip side to making things too interconnected. I think if you make things link tighter, the complaints you will hear will come from DMs that now mix and match, or cherry pick material for their homebrews. Basically, of the DMs satisfied with things as they are now, some will complain that more closely integrated APs are too interdependent. There's probably also some who like loose connections since part of the fun of DMing (for them) is improvising the connections others want you to provide.

That said, I personally like recurring NPCs, though a Vanthus in every one is probably too much. I did like the frequent potential allies in Shattered Star, though.


magnuskn wrote:
Brandon Hodge wrote:
Given that Paizo is trying to market these APs to a HUGE audience and please everyone at once, the GM has to shoulder some of that responsibility of tying it all together. And given the random acts of violence that are the tendency of the murderous hobos known as PCs, relying on a recurring villain or even helpful NPC can be a tough call when a later writer assumes they'll survive another writer's work, but your main BBEG eats a dagger to the face in Book Two during real play at the game table.

Please don't perpetuate that horrible "murderous hobos" meme, Brandon. It needs to die quickly ( preferably not via murderous hobo ).

I think the concern here should rather be "if the main villain is attacked by a PC in book two, why doesn't he break that PC in half like a twig?". ^^ The obvious solution is to put the BBEG behind virtual walls, always surround him with people, be they multitudes of guards or vulnerable innocent bystanders. Or have the BBEG not be totally obviously be the bad guy.

And if everything still manages to go pear-shaped, then the GM can always say "But there still is his boss" and use the stats from the last book for somebody with another name. Thanos/Darkseid, y'know.

Another solution is to for the main villain to level up through the AP as well.

Contributor

7 people marked this as a favorite.

This is an interesting thread, particularly for me as I'm embarking upon a one writer AP called Levee, which you'll see some initial promotion for soon.

The challenge is to bridge the gap between running an immersive AP with friends, where you are able to regularly tweak things, bring things forward, react and generally make the PCs the centre of action, and juggle the obvious issues when writing for everyone else that some groups like some things more than others.

Levee will run from 1st-12th level and be dungeon light, with a strong mix of roleplay and action leading to an apocalyptic climax. It'll be in a bas-lag style setting with shifty politicans, lots of rats and anarachists. Not everyone will like that style, but I hope the writing will draw you in and even if the whole AP isn't used, you'll cherry pick things from it. Like many of you I'm very busy, and can't spend a lot of time writing adventures for my group. Using an example of the adventure path I'm running now - Tatters of the King for CoC - not everything in it is my cup of tea and has been tweaked, but the feel of the AP is brilliant so I've run with my own slightly twisted version of it.

Even with all the cards in my hands, however, Levee is giving me a lot of headaches, particularly when the need for a cohesive group to move things along is needed. This AP will run to about 120,000 words, small change compared to the 200,000 words of a Paizo AP, not counting support articles. The fact that Paizo keeps things so fresh is really admirable, and the input of seasoned writers and newer contributers with fresh ideas is a great one. I can't wait to see what the Reign of Winter is going to be like, but I know all the writers will have worked to a very close outline and been in regular talks with the Paizo crew.

One of the many useful things I've found from these boards is the number of brilliant ideas and suggestions from seasoned and new GMs who come here, long may it continue.

Huzzah!

Rich

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I just realized...

Reign of Winter has no Pett adventure. I am going to cry.

Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:

I just realized...

Reign of Winter has no Pett adventure. I am going to cry.

Don't worry my faithful homonculus, the longer they leave it, the more depraved I become, ranting and screaming into the night in my attic cell. If they ask me again in the future I'll just pour my wrath into that adventure to make them suffer:)

Plus, it very handily gives me time to put a few demented things to paper that Paizo wisely perhaps couldn't suffer to see the light of day.

Actually, I can't wait to see what Reign brings, snows of summer must be the coolest ap title ever so far, and Spicer is bound to do an annoyingly brilliant job on it, the line up is awesome and the idea fantastic.

Huzzah!
Slithers off.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The fact that you're writing We Be Goblins Too! is some sort of consolation. But mark my words, Squealy Nord or else.

Contributor

But Squealy Nord what? That's the question...

Poor Nord.

Sovereign Court

*Googles Roanoke* Ooh, interesting.

What I want from the APs is not just recurring characters but a recurring community.

Everybody loves going back to Sandpoint in my Rise of the Runelords game but I've had to put things in to allow them to go home (Shayliss' husband, for example, wants to see his pregnant wife).

Mine went home at the end of AP2, had a small adventure on Chopper's Isle at the end of AP3 and were guests of honour at the re-consecration of the cathedral. At the end of AP4 they're going to need Quink to help them in the library. For AP5, I'm going to let them set up a link between the Scribbler's base and the library so that they can get around better and take their time to explore the library before all of the clues fall into place and they head off to runeforge. Again, they'll call back to Sandpoint at the start of AP6 to use the library (with Quink's help) in order to find Xin-Shalast.

The AP does some work to bring the players back to Sandpoint but I really think they should do something there in every AP.

That is why I am excited about Thornkeep, they'll be based in Thornkeep, getting involved in local life and still going off on fantastic adventures.


I haven’t read all the posts on this thread so I’m not sure if it’s covered.

But here are some specific examples of not being cohesive.

Skulls and shackles- you meet a bunch of cool NPC’s they leave on Harrigan’s ship. They don’t re-occur until book 3, and one of them “Caulky” seems to have a brand new personality. Skipping all of them in book 2 is in cohesive. Why not have at least one of them show up in book 2 abandoned by Capt. Harrigan, where he/she can talk about something the PC’s will really hate him for, cruelty, etc. It seems almost as if the author of book 2 did not know anything about the NPC’s in book 1.

Kingmaker- Nyrissa doesn’t really get foreshadowed much until book 5. Almost as if the authors of the previous books didn’t know much about what was going to happen in the end. Why not have her assault on the players kingdom start earlier with slowly grow in power with explained cross overs between the 2nd world which the party has to deal with but they can’t do anything to fix them, leaving the party worried about what is coming later.


Richard Pett wrote:

This is an interesting thread, particularly for me as I'm embarking upon a one writer AP called Levee, which you'll see some initial promotion for soon. . . .

. . . [a bunch more great stuff].

Rich

This. This just made my day.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
I wonder what proportion of customers buy a single AP instalment without being concerned about having the rest?

I really REALLY wonder that.

I hope we get some customer survey things going someday soon.

I'm fairly certain when they do, it's not for the AP part of the content. Really wanting the article on X god or Y race or Z location would be the reason I'd pick up one.

On the other hand, I'm not the right person to ask. I had to take a break from my subscription, but I'm only missing 8 volumes and plan to pick them up soon.


deinol wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
I wonder what proportion of customers buy a single AP instalment without being concerned about having the rest?

I really REALLY wonder that.

I hope we get some customer survey things going someday soon.

I'm fairly certain when they do, it's not for the AP part of the content. Really wanting the article on X god or Y race or Z location would be the reason I'd pick up one.

I could imagine some people (who prefer to create their own worlds/campaigns) picking up individual modules - perhaps based on their favorite author or on the theme of that instalment.

AP#2 (for example) would be a great place to go if you were looking to run a "haunted house" scenario, or if you were just generally a fan of Richard Pett.

Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 4

I have read this thread. Interesting.

I'm going to do a rare thing for me, I'm going mostly keep my mouth shut.

But... I'll ask for feedback on Reign of Winter #2, in the context of this thread, when it is available next month.


Jim Groves wrote:

I have read this thread. Interesting.

I'm going to do a rare thing for me, I'm going mostly keep my mouth shut.

But... I'll ask for feedback on Reign of Winter #2, in the context of this thread, when it is available next month.

Reading Part Two right now and really liking it. Not finished yet, so I apologize for not being more specific.

I've been reading and perusing threads without actually commenting much, but I felt compelled to reply now.

I used to Freelance for the RPGA back in the day and found myself on the outside when the big changeover happened with Hasbro. One part of that definitely is my fault, but live and learn.

I did win an Ennie in 2004 (Yeah, me!!) and I wrote the D&D Open in 2002, so I'm aware of some of the logistics of a mega-adventure. That's my resume, let's move on.

While the Open isn't as big as an AP, you do deal with the challenge of coming up with multiple adventures that build on each other.

When writing it, I was very aware of the need for some foreshadowing and having a big payoff in the climatic finale. NPC continuity wasn't stressed as the logistics of the Open demanded more hack-n-slash than roleplaying, just the nature of the beast.

Going through the various APs, CotCT definitely is one of my favorites, Kingmaker completely blew my head open, and Shattered Star turned out to be one of the best dungeon crawls I've read in the last 10 years.

I loved Carrion Crown. The AP was broken down into recognizable parts that worked well for me. Judging by some comments here, I may not be in the majority with my opinion.

Bottom line is you can't please everybody.

My Two Cents: Consistent NPCs from one part to the next are cool, but are not completely essential provided the AP stays focused on one "Quest." Once PCs get going on a quest, things tend to take care of themselves. If the players are determined to go off the map, there usually isn't much you can do except tell them, "You're going off the map, which is fine if that's what you want to do."

I like the idea of more foreshadowing, but the occasional red herring is great just to keep things interesting.

That's about it.

Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 4

Thank you!

101 to 150 of 171 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Path / General Discussion / One Writer AP All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.