|
Add my voice to those that prefer the higher level APs. I realize that some people don't like playing at the high-end of the game, so I understand the need for the occasional path to end earlier. But please don't make this the "norm".
Also, I'd be interested in a level 15-20 module/AP-cap. My preference would be for one a year, ending the two previous APs. But if you're going to be doing the APs in groups of threes (like the "Varisian Trilogy"), then doing one every 18 months and tying all three of them together would work as well (and would probably be easier on your schedule).
Another vote for higher levels.
I like higher levels. There might be some problems, but a decent adventure can counter many of them. Which means that high level adventures are quite useful for this!
Plus, I think adventure paths should comprise a whole campaign, and ideally, that one goes from 1-20. While there are people who don't like the APs going that high, there are also those who don't like them to stay too low.
Runelords had a decent spread: Players reached level 16, maybe even level 17, by the end of that path.
I think an AP should at least go to 15. For those who want the other 5 levels, there could be adventures that make good "sequels" to the APs.
|
|
However, from the very first, the AP's where billed as adventures AND supplimental material designed to help build and fleshout a new campaign setting. If was this, and the WAR art work which grabbed my attention.
I could not agree more. I really dig the supplemental material and think it's as important (sometimes more important) than the adventures itselves. I'm not sure if I'd be as interested in the APs if they were done as full 100 page-adventures without all this fluff. I'd much prefer an AP beginning at level 15 going to level 20+ (whatever happens to fit in a six-month AP) with this fluff. Or, better, the suggested idea of an high-level-supermodule outside of the Pathfinder AP series.
|
Now... if we WERE to do a stand-alone high level mega-adventure, what I'd be sorely tempted to do would be to set it up as a sequel of sorts to an Adventure Path. Maybe something that ties together elements from two or even three Adventure Paths, so it could serve as a continuation for several APs, even. High-level adventures take more time to write and develop and edit, and taking them off of the monthly schedule would be a HUGE advantage to us here at Paizo as well...
BUT: The question then becomes would enough people want to shell out 30 bucks or so for a big stand-alone adventure product that goes from, say, 15th level to 20th?
I know I would love to see an AP that goes from level 1 to 20. It was one of the things I was hoping the first AP would do. I was a little saddened to find out they didn’t, but that certainly hasn’t stopped me from playing any of them.
I know in my gaming group we have been speculating the idea that there will be a book designed to be used with the characters you played in the 1st AP that would take you to epic level. We were hoping it would be an epilogue arc. Which allows you to use your original characters from the AP. You would be able to level them from the end of the AP to 20, possibly using a thread in the AP that was purposely left open. Then again it could just be us hoping and dreaming.
As for a starting point, PLEASE start all the APs at 1st level. Having a character develop organically is so much more fun than starting at level 5 and having to explain to your party how you go there.
So to answer your question, yes James, I would pay $30 for a book that revisited previous APs and let the character go beyond the limits of the original AP. But I am a Paizo addict.
|
I can see that you're not alone in thinking that but I'd like to point out that the PF AP's are not replacements for Dungeon or Dragon magazine. They are in fact Adventure Paths and, imo, should only contain material that is entirely adventure related.
I know that personally I would be much less interested in the APs if the supplemental material were removed. This extra information gives options for DMs when players go off the rails and expands the game world in a way that directly supports play of the AP. Without this supplemental material, I feel there would be very little ambience in the APs. It would simply be completing one task after another. (Though I recognize that DMs can flesh out a world on their own, I am a sucker for Canon).
|
|
This is where I step in, of course, and point out that early in 2009 we'll be releasing "Blood of Dragonscar," a module for 15th level. If that module does a LOT better than the other modules, then we'll have even MORE proof that folk are hungry for and want high level adventures. If that module does equal to or less than the average module in the line, that'll tell us that folk are either against high-level or simply don't care. And if folk don't care, we'll probably continue focusing on low or mid-level adventures simply because they're less difficult to make happen.
Of course, Dragonscar's success is not the only measurement we'll use to answer this question. The high-level Pathfinders are there too, and of course threads like this one help us decide how often to do high level adventures as well.
I have to opine that the the success or lack thereof of a high level module does not necessarily reflect the desire of players to game at high levels.
Modules have the unfortunate trait that there is nothing tying in a partys' previous experiences. A well written AP, on the other hand, will build on the previous accomplishments of the players and reward them for long work.
I would be much much more interested in playing at 15th-17th level if I had been working towards it from 1st level, developing a character that interacted with the metaplot, than I would be just playing a 15th-17th level adventure with no ties to previous deeds.
Furthermore, I find that many modules are played by creating characters explicitly for that module and running it, rather than incorporating it into an ongoing campaign (ymmv of course). And a character pulled for the air at 15th level is much less interesting than one grown organically from humble beginnings.
In that light, I can see the situation where stand-alone high level modules would not fair as well as APs that ended to high level.
Interesting feedback.
It's certainly worth noting that my $30 price point was totally off the top of my head. Thinking more on it, a 15th–20th level adventure would be about 100,000 words long, likely with another 20,000 words or so of support material. Which means it'd be at least a 160 page book, maybe 200 pages or more. We've not really done softcover books in this page range yet, so I have no idea how the cost would break down. But it'd certainly be more expensive, and it'd certainly sell less than a lower level adventure of the same size (that's just a fact of life for high level adventures, I'm afraid), so the print run wouldn't be as huge as for a Pathfinder...
All of which means that we could be talking $40 or $50 or more. At which point we'd probably make it a hardcover and maybe think about a poster map... who knows?
We ARE looking at methods for doing high level adventures though... but we're still relatively far away from doing them for real.
But it's good to know that there's a pretty vocal support for them! :-)
I'm definitely interested in AP's going to higher level, but completely understand the market forces telling you guys otherwise. In any case, count me in on the 15th-20th level mega-adventure idea even at a $50+ price point.
BUT: The question then becomes would enough people want to shell out 30 bucks or so for a big stand-alone adventure product that goes from, say, 15th level to 20th?
Very possibly. Quality is the key for me. I don't think you'd want to produce too many but producing one or two would seem a good idea to me - especially if they could have tie ins (but not lock ins) to other paths...
("Return of the Runelords" springs to mind as a good title for example, where more runelord(s) wake - tied in to the first path in that background is similar, but you wouldnt necessarily HAVE to had played the path...)For example, I've certainly been eyeing up shelling out for a Drow War level 20+ campaign stuff from a.n.other supplier as I like their lvl1-20 books in that line ; I also have done similar things for many supplements for other systems.
Seems to me that the main reasons not many high level campaigns are played is very few high level campaigns are produced....
So in summary: Yes, if it was carefully thought out, good quality and had encounters that involve plot and thinking & not just "how gross can I make a monster by adding five templates to it" .
The difficulty as I see it would be it would be tricky to avoid world changing events, which could impact other planned releases if you set it in Golarion... and as Traveller/Megatraveller/New Era showed, that can split your fans a bit....(Personally, I loved the Rebellion. Not too keen on Virus)
However, Market forces is the question - we converts to the church of Paizo might well buy it ,but what of the non-faithful casual purchases ? Not so sure.
We find pretty consistently that sales for the last installments of an AP are lower than sales of the earlier parts, actually. It's been that way from the start. Pathfinder's not as bad, though, since we have such a stronger subscription base going on there. But also, Pathfidner APs don't go as high level as Dungeon's did, which could be why we're seeing less of a dropoff. In fact, this data point from working on Dungeon's 3 adventure paths is the #1 reason we went on to do Pathfinder's adventure paths as 14 level or so APs and not 20 level ones.
Ok. Then it makes economic sense for you to end the AP's around 12th-14th level.
Personally though before I started my Dungeon subscription (RIP), I picked and chose among Dungeon's offerings. I purchased Castle Maure (and expansions), the last three high-level episodes of the SCAP, last 3 of age of worms, and another high level one featuring a tree. I enjoy reading the tales of high level play as things come together, and I also find it much harder to personally craft high level games. There are a lot of skills and powers to take into account.
It's useful for me to grab high-level information from someone else's product. Whereas I can toss together a 3rd-8th level game pretty rapidly from scratch, it is much more difficult to build a balanced high-level game.
(Final note: I despise 1st and 2nd level games, though the new Pathfinder rules may change my opinion.)
Mr. Jacobs has sales data that prove my opinion is in the minority, but I just wanted to let him know that some customers really do appreciate the artistry of high-level challenges.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Add me to the supermodule fan club. Then again, I'm also one of the ones pushing for a Ptolus reprint.
Especially if/when PFRPG tackles the hurdles of high level adventures, something trying the first 3 APs together in a high level finale would be great. Especially if the writers took the leap and worked levels 15-25 for example. Maybe culminating with something involving the starstone and retiring the characters as demi-gods or rank 0 godlings. Hey Cayden still went on adventures after hitting godhood, why not the PCs? Also I think there will be some major deviation between high level 3.x characters and high level PFRPG characters, with many a wizard ending on a PF fighter's enchanted golf club going "But I'm a freaking archmage..."
|
BUT: The question then becomes would enough people want to shell out 30 bucks or so for a big stand-alone adventure product that goes from, say, 15th level to 20th?
In a second. Now, my campaigns have never gone past 15th level. But it Paizo provided a supermodule that 15th to 20th, I would be very interested in running a campaign to those levels.
I do want to say, APs level spans should run in accordance to the story you have planned. The AP shouldn't suffer because you are trying to stretch it out over 16 levels. Let the story you want to tell determine the way the AP flows.
If I had to guess, you audience is probably evenly split in this regard. Some don't mind them running higher while others would prefer something a little lower. That is a hard position to be in.
In the end, keep doing what you are doing. Some can run higher while others end earlier. Just because an AP ends at 12th level it doesn't mean the campaign has to end. But, for that, people would need something that runs 12+. I know I would prefer to get the goods from Paizo as opposed to other sources.
|
|
I understand what you're saying but I just think that material belongs somewhere else.
Also only 2 levels is pretty much the same as the Modules.
You can't call level 13 the end of an adventure path!
Stuart,
if you have another look at the general threads about adventure paths you will find a lot of threads related to this topic.
The main point by many posters was that after a certain encounter level encounters grow more and more "unwieldy".
You obviously disagree, but the proponents of that other opinion very quite audible in those threads.
Comparing PF modules to PF APs is somewhat harsh, though.
I don't know about any single 6 part module series... ;-)
Kr,
Günther
P.S.
Paizo staff mentioned repeatedly that not all APs are to be low level ones.
Btw. I am also a fan of "low level APs". The current 3.5e rule set simply requires too much micro management during combat encounter after passing a certain "sweet spot".
Another vote for higher levels.
I like higher levels. There might be some problems, but a decent adventure can counter many of them. Which means that high level adventures are quite useful for this!
Plus, I think adventure paths should comprise a whole campaign, and ideally, that one goes from 1-20. While there are people who don't like the APs going that high, there are also those who don't like them to stay too low.
Runelords had a decent spread: Players reached level 16, maybe even level 17, by the end of that path.
I think an AP should at least go to 15. For those who want the other 5 levels, there could be adventures that make good "sequels" to the APs.
Well, PRPG Beta has three different rates for gaining experience. Why not just run this with the fast rate (should level you up about 33% faster) and simply upgrade the monsters and traps to the higher CR's you need?
I know it would be preferable to have Paizo update these villains to the higher CR's you'd need, but they've already said they aren't interested in web enhancements or in wasting the space in the Pathfinder issues themselves. Perhaps with the community use license that is forthcoming you could get a whole group of DM's together to provide updated stats for this and spread the work around?
Hmm, maybe I should have looked at that a little closer. The target 13 encounters of the party's EL to a level is what the fast track is set at. Apparently I had assumed the middle road was what the 3.5 one was. In other words, disregard my above post completely.
|
|
I have a chicken vs. egg problem with high level play. I definitely prefer 1st-15th level, but that is largely due to the dearth of material for the higher levels. I would play or run high-level games if there was enough good material for them. True, Paizo did three excellent paths, but I've already run one, and the other are spoken for by other DMs.
I'm hoping that PRPG really does alleviate the difficulties of high-level play, drumming up demand for such modules.
Following what James Jacobs has suggested, I would certainly be open to whatever products that fiscal sense would allow. A sequel super-adventure would be excellent, especially since my players are already pleading for me to stretch out Rise of the Runelords to 20th level.
We find pretty consistently that sales for the last installments of an AP are lower than sales of the earlier parts, actually.
That's because it's hard to sell book #6 to someone that doesn't have books #1-5, while at the same time people may not like the AP, may not have the discretionary funds, etc etc.
It's the same reason that publishers in the computer game industry prefer either stand-alone expansions (don't need the base game to play it) ala Dawn of War, or true sequels. Not many games get true expansion packs that require the original game to play nowadays - because you're effectively capping the potential sales of the game to the number of people that bought the original.
So it's not something you can draw a real conclusion from unless you're noticing a truly sharp decline in the number of sales for the last modules in the APs. It should be expected that sales of each successive module will drop off naturally because you're capping the number of potential customers to the number of people that bought the previous one.
... of course, you're the professional publisher and you're probably already well aware of all that. But still...
I am perfectly happy finishing the AP in the early teens.
Presumably if you then did a stand alone module that also had some connection to the AP that would have the attraction of the single module and also some AP appeal. I would put it at 1 or 2 levels above the proposed finished level to let some time go by and allow for those of us who cram extra stuff in to an AP
-- how well did the follow ups to the Kobold King stuff do?
A1 Return of the Runelord....'This time it's personal!'
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
Now... if we WERE to do a stand-alone high level mega-adventure, what I'd be sorely tempted to do would be to set it up as a sequel of sorts to an Adventure Path. Maybe something that ties together elements from two or even three Adventure Paths, so it could serve as a continuation for several APs, even. High-level adventures take more time to write and develop and edit, and taking them off of the monthly schedule would be a HUGE advantage to us here at Paizo as well...
BUT: The question then becomes would enough people want to shell out 30 bucks or so for a big stand-alone adventure product that goes from, say, 15th level to 20th?
Sure I'd pay for that.
What about if say an AP goes to level 15, what's to stop you doing a follow up Pathfinder Module to continue the story up to level 20?
It could be a stand alone adventure in it's own right, but if you have played through the AP to 15th, then it also has story elements that pick up where that left off.
You could do this with every second AP maybe. That way you're not taking two out of the six Modules a year and making them high level, you're only doing one high level adventure a year and it has ties to an AP.
Creative Director
|
We find pretty consistently that sales for the last installments of an AP are lower than sales of the earlier parts, actually.That's because it's hard to sell book #6 to someone that doesn't have books #1-5, while at the same time people may not like the AP, may not have the discretionary funds, etc etc.
It's the same reason that publishers in the computer game industry prefer either stand-alone expansions (don't need the base game to play it) ala Dawn of War, or true sequels. Not many games get true expansion packs that require the original game to play nowadays - because you're effectively capping the potential sales of the game to the number of people that bought the original.
So it's not something you can draw a real conclusion from unless you're noticing a truly sharp decline in the number of sales for the last modules in the APs. It should be expected that sales of each successive module will drop off naturally because you're capping the number of potential customers to the number of people that bought the previous one.
... of course, you're the professional publisher and you're probably already well aware of all that. But still...
Actually... there IS more info beyond that. Very few high-level adventures ever got pitched to us; we were always scrambling to get high level ones in Dungeon. I think we only ever saw 2 or 3 epic level submissions EVER. And reader feedback about the adventures overwhelmingly supported low and mid level adventures.
Being the end of an AP certainly is one reason that the end adventures sold less, but them being high level didn't help either.
|
|
-- how well did the follow ups to the Kobold King stuff do?A1 Return of the Runelord....'This time it's personal!'
This is exactly what I would like to see.
A follow on module to Rise of the Runelords; to the Curse of the Crimson Throne (taking one of the ideas from the end of the path to continue the campaign).
Being I have not received the Second Darkness finale I am not sure yet but I am fairly confident that would also be a great module...
How about the clean adventur path series - 2 volumes for Runelords, 2 volumes for CotC and 2 volumes for Second Darkness... Now that would be a path that would be great... (sorry I got carried away).
Actually... there IS more info beyond that. Very few high-level adventures ever got pitched to us; we were always scrambling to get high level ones in Dungeon. I think we only ever saw 2 or 3 epic level submissions EVER. And reader feedback about the adventures overwhelmingly supported low and mid level adventures.
Is it not also true though that the 3.0/3.5 D&D game simply does not "work" as well at the high end?
Shem,
I'm with ya. That would RAWK!
-- how well did the follow ups to the Kobold King stuff do?A1 Return of the Runelord....'This time it's personal!'
This is exactly what I would like to see.
A follow on module to Rise of the Runelords; to the Curse of the Crimson Throne (taking one of the ideas from the end of the path to continue the campaign).
Being I have not received the Second Darkness finale I am not sure yet but I am fairly confident that would also be a great module...
How about the clean adventur path series - 2 volumes for Runelords, 2 volumes for CotC and 2 volumes for Second Darkness... Now that would be a path that would be great... (sorry I got carried away).
|
Creative Director
|
Actually... there IS more info beyond that. Very few high-level adventures ever got pitched to us; we were always scrambling to get high level ones in Dungeon. I think we only ever saw 2 or 3 epic level submissions EVER. And reader feedback about the adventures overwhelmingly supported low and mid level adventures.Is it not also true though that the 3.0/3.5 D&D game simply does not "work" as well at the high end?
It's not as simple and it's not as fast to play as a result... but it's not broken. A lot of people seem to be fans of saying the game doesn't work at high level, but it does. It just slows down, especially if not every player at the table's really good with the rules and their character, or has lots of summoning/cohort type stuff going on. I've run plenty of high level games (just finished off Savage Tide, in fact), and I prefer the low to mid level games simply because things move faster, and stats aren't as complicated, but the game still works at 20th level. As long as the adventures you send the PCs on are built with high-level in mind. Just as you wouldn't throw a CR 2 creature against a 20th level party, you have to realize that a lot of the classic tropes and elements of adventures (pit traps, long overland journeys, murder mysteries, etc.) work differently or not at all at the high levels and if you really want your game to continue using them, you should think about skewing your campaign's maximum level lower and when you reach that level, restart at 1st level.
Just putting my vote in for higher level AP's.
Actually... there IS more info beyond that. Very few high-level adventures ever got pitched to us; we were always scrambling to get high level ones in Dungeon. I think we only ever saw 2 or 3 epic level submissions EVER. And reader feedback about the adventures overwhelmingly supported low and mid level adventures.Being the end of an AP certainly is one reason that the end adventures sold less, but them being high level didn't help either.
Yep, like I said, you're the professionals here and I kinda went on a mini-rant about a topic not in my discipline. I trust you guys to know what you're talking about; my speech was as much for other people who never have to think about that kind of stuff, I guess. I definitely support higher-level stuff (and can't wait to get my hands on your Epic Level Handbook when you get around to making it), but I can understand all too well the pressures of needing to make what sells.
Anyway, mark me down as a vote for a higher level AP.
I am a fan of lower level adventures not only because they are easier to run, but also because it is easier to scale up an adventure rather than scale one down. Advancing monsters is easier than trying to scale back the CRs, and allows for extra customization towards your group.
The thing to watch out for, of course, is not the monsters, but the plot and environmental obstacles that can be easily overcome with the right high-level ability or spell. As has been said before, a high wall or a deep pit is not an appropriate obstacle for 13th level characters, while it might be for 5th level. Mysteries require different strategies to be effective at high level play, and too often (at least in my experience) "kill first ask questions later" is the rule of the day unless an opponent is godly more powerful than the PCs... in which case the PCs find a way to leave the plotline altogether. But then, that last part may just be the groups with which I've played.
If we're going to see lower level APs, I would appreciate perhaps a sidebar pointing out the higher-level considerations beyond just advancing monsters. If flight would ruin a monster tactic horribly, or if a divination would reveal too much info too early... that sort of thing. Previous adventures have been off-and-on at revealing these flaws in the text or flavor, but having a seperate bullet-point-like entry would speed up planning for an adventure.
Our games invariably become less and less fun past 10th level. I have not yet seen a counterexample. I would *love* to see a complete AP that was capped relatively low, so that we could enjoy the whole thing.
I would buy the high-level supermodule as a curiosity, but I would never try to run it or play in it. My husband might, but would have to find some other players or GM. Our last high-level game (SCAP) literally reduced me to tears; I stopped playing for quite a while, having become convinced that D&D was not fun. It took a lower-level game to hint that that might not always be the case.
But it seems clear that there is no consensus, so a mixture of APs made for different level ranges sounds like a really good strategy.
Mary
The game works at high levels. We have played a lot at high levels, and the game has been very satisfactory.
I prefer high level modules and APs. The reason is simple, I can design a low-level adventure in a few hours, but having a high level pre-made adventure saves me a lot of work and time. I always adapt and expand, but it saves me a lot of work. I usually do not buy low-level modules, I do not need them.
So… just putting my vote in for higher level APs and modules.
I'd really love to see an entire AP written for use with the slow experience developement
We ARE intending to play with the starting and ending levels for the APs. We aren't looking to start them at anything other than 1st for a bit, but I suspect we'll give that a try at around AP #7 or #8 or so. We've already started work on AP #5 and #6, and they're both starting at 1st level, mostly because those are the first two that work with the new rules; it'd be silly to abandon 1st level within a year of the PF RPG's release.
We're certainly adjusting the end levels here and there, though!
I think some adjustments to the starting level, the levels covered, and the ending level are good. Especially once there is more than one PfRPG AP out there, I'd like to see some variety, giving us more richness in lower level play, and eventually the option to take it to higher levels. I'm surprised that there is not more call for variety, compared to the calls to leave it alone or take it higher only.
Mairkurion, that is for three reasons:
-First, because Paizo will not stop publishing low-level modules because publish more high-level material. None of us have said this (And it is unrealistic to expect that, either). We only want that Paizo remember that many players like high levels, even if others do not like.
-Second, because there are many low-level adventures on the market (from other companies and Paizo), but very few at high levels. And as GM sometimes I find it very frustrating to seek a high level adventure for to adapt and expand to my group, and not find it. There are so few!
-Third, because I know that designing an adventure at high levels consumes more resources than at low level. But precisely because this is more useful (for me, at least) to buy a high-level campaign that a low level. I can write a low-level adventure in a few hours, but it takes me weeks or months to prepare campaigns at high levels. Therefore, if I choose to buy, I prefer the modules save me more work and time. Oh, absolutely not, commercial adventures have a philosophy that my group does not share. But adapting a campaign is much easier than to create it from zero, and to have prepared NPCs stats saves much work, so ... you know what I mean?
I do not want that Paizo don’t design modules at a low level, I say that I do not need them and I prefer modules that save me time and work, and those are the higher level. I want to have the option to purchase such adventures. I know well that Paizo will create more low levels adventures and that's okay. But I encourage Paizo to do more adventures at high levels, because there are people that want them, and because there are many at low levels on the market.
We (my party) play campaigns from 1st to 20th-level. Therefore, if an AP finish the campaign at level 14 means that I have to complete six levels ... and those who take more time to prepare! To be honest, I prefer to prepare the first six levels before the last six. Much faster and easier! And starting an AP above of 1st level allows PCs with some experience and more interesting background, or older PCs (we do not like 1st-level PCs 40 years old that receive 15 levels in the short space of time of an AP...)
That said, when I say high level play, I mean pre-epic. I think that high levels work fine, but I have not so clear the epic levels (especially after the 25 level)
Sorry for my poor English :(
*three reasons*
I don't think I am that far away from your way of thinking, Iridal, although there may be a difference of emphasis on my end. My main interest is for Paizo to maximize the variety (both slower progression and higher play) they offer us across the APs as far as the economics will allow. My thought was that the greater demand for relatively lower level material dictated Paizo's decisions in the matter, but if that is an incorrect impression, then they should recalibrate their offerings based on a more accurate understanding of demand. (I have no interest in being right on this subject, and people who know me might say to enjoy this.) If they can offer us more higher level and epic materials and either keep their profit the same or increase it, then I'm all for it. Your observation here is salient: I can whip up a low level adventure off-the-cuff that makes my players happy (and they are convinced I must have had more preparation than I did), but I can't do that past a certain level, and it takes a lot more effort and precious time to prepare the higher you go.
Though I don't claim to have any insight into the matter, I will risk wondering about one more. You brought up the modules in addition to the APs: I wonder if there would be a difference between demand for higher level and epic modules versus the demand for them in the adventure paths. I also wonder if experimenting is less risky in the modules than it is in the APs, as I am concerned with risk-taking in these economically scary times.
Hopefully this clarifies what I meant by being surprised, and also my expression of interest in more variety to be inclusive of more higher level material.
Is there any word I know in the begining it was an estimate that the game would be ending at 13th level has there been a change at all? Im still hoping this will go to higher levels with out me haveing to do a ton of work cause the story sounds great
|
Creative Director
|
Is there any word I know in the begining it was an estimate that the game would be ending at 13th level has there been a change at all? Im still hoping this will go to higher levels with out me haveing to do a ton of work cause the story sounds great
Right now it's looking like the adventures are gonna flow like this:
#1: level 1–5
#2: level 5–7
#3: level 7–9
#4: level 9–11
#5: level 11–13
#6: level 13–15
So, pretty much identical, more or less, to Second Darkness.
Right now it's looking like the adventures are gonna flow like this:
#1: level 1–5
#2: level 5–7
#3: level 7–9
#4: level 9–11
#5: level 11–13
#6: level 13–15So, pretty much identical, more or less, to Second Darkness.
Great to hear I was think the story sounded great but didnt want it to end at 13th
What about adding a spacer level at the higher end like 10th or 11th of one of these like you did in Second Darkness on the low levels
|
Creative Director
|
Great to hear I was think the story sounded great but didnt want it to end at 13th
What about adding a spacer level at the higher end like 10th or 11th of one of these like you did in Second Darkness on the low levels
We won't be putting in spacer levels. Ever again. If we get an adventure in that's "short" on encounters, we'll instead adjust the storyline so the next adventure starts at a level lower.
Good. I'm really glad to hear that there will be no more spacer levels.
I'm really looking forward to more "meat" (adventure materials) with less "calories" (levels). I mean, don't get me wrong, but at times certain parts seemed a little rushed, if you know what I mean. I found myself embellishing and adding a lot to satisfy my players. Since the adventures will have the same word count just less levels I'm expecting higher quality of material (not to say it hasn't been quality already). Got me excited!
|
|
Now... if we WERE to do a stand-alone high level mega-adventure, what I'd be sorely tempted to do would be to set it up as a sequel of sorts to an Adventure Path. Maybe something that ties together elements from two or even three Adventure Paths, so it could serve as a continuation for several APs, even. High-level adventures take more time to write and develop and edit, and taking them off of the monthly schedule would be a HUGE advantage to us here at Paizo as well...
BUT: The question then becomes would enough people want to shell out 30 bucks or so for a big stand-alone adventure product that goes from, say, 15th level to 20th?
YES
YESNow... if we WERE to do a stand-alone high level mega-adventure, what I'd be sorely tempted to do would be to set it up as a sequel of sorts to an Adventure Path. Maybe something that ties together elements from two or even three Adventure Paths, so it could serve as a continuation for several APs, even. High-level adventures take more time to write and develop and edit, and taking them off of the monthly schedule would be a HUGE advantage to us here at Paizo as well...
BUT: The question then becomes would enough people want to shell out 30 bucks or so for a big stand-alone adventure product that goes from, say, 15th level to 20th?
Indeed! A high level mega-adventure to be a sequel to...oh...I don't know, the first to APs...
:D|
|
My 2 coppers worth says do a high level AP that ties up some loose ends of the Varisia stories: RotRL, CotCT and SD respectively. Maybe the other Runelords are coming, unify the city states into a nation and the like. Keep the ideas simple yet make them pull the heart strings of the players. Also to make the DM cackle in glee as they bring the smack down on their player base.
|
|
Now... if we WERE to do a stand-alone high level mega-adventure, what I'd be sorely tempted to do would be to set it up as a sequel of sorts to an Adventure Path. Maybe something that ties together elements from two or even three Adventure Paths, so it could serve as a continuation for several APs, even. High-level adventures take more time to write and develop and edit, and taking them off of the monthly schedule would be a HUGE advantage to us here at Paizo as well...
BUT: The question then becomes would enough people want to shell out 30 bucks or so for a big stand-alone adventure product that goes from, say, 15th level to 20th?
Ok this is just my opinion of course and nothing more. Personally I would actually rather see the paths pared down a little maybe cap at 12-13 range. Mostly as the quality can be more easily kept up I think with smaller level ranges than bigger ranges. One of the problems I see with the AP's is if the players miss much they won't be high enough for the next AP.
As for the debate about the extra fluff in the AP's well honestly thats why i subscribed otherwise I would likely just buy the ones I liked the most. Like the last one Second Darkness as a whole didn't appeal to me but I bought them for the extra fluff in them and idea's.
I wouldn't be against seeing a AP start at a higher level now and again say maybe something like starting level 8th and end at 20th. But cause of the larger stat blocks the range might need to be dropped down to 12-13 starting range to 20th.
So one else mentioned this sorta before. But while I would be interested in a higher level one, maybe a better approach would be the return to AP's be mini AP's like 3 AP's start after the first one ended and going from the likely end level of it to around 20th. That would be cheaper for us the buyers to buy in to test the waters. I mean i would be a lot more tempted to drop 15 bucks than 30-40 bucks. Just saying thats how the AP's got me addicted in the first place, low buy in and then the quality of the work hooks you.
Of all the ones done the first one RotRL is the one i think most begging for a follow up. I think it would be interesting to see a follow up mini AP set a couple of years after are so after the first series, but tying in nicely.
Anyways the above is all just one customers opinion and nothing more. Plus it is late and I think I rambled a bit.
|
|
Right now it's looking like the adventures are gonna flow like this:
#1: level 1–5
#2: level 5–7
#3: level 7–9
#4: level 9–11
#5: level 11–13
#6: level 13–15
So, pretty much identical, more or less, to Second Darkness.
---------------
AP's going to 15th level works well for me. I am hoping that once Paizo publishes another 2-4 AP's of them, they will start vary the formula just to mix it up a bit. If they all start to look and feel the same, that to me is bad.
Having the first two cover levels 1-7 is fine. However, the first SD PF (#13) seemed rather light, and I am hoping there is more crunch in PF #19 and the rest of LoF.
I would like to see a capstone module or another separate book that provides a continuation of an AP. I am in favor of modules that are written to be used in tandem with AP's. Now, I realize that this is a bit of a challenge, but I am a big proponent of tie in products, which includes modules.
Again... it's worth pointing out that Legacy of fire breaks down like this:1: levels 1 to 3
2: levels 4 to 5
3: levels 6 to 7
4: levels 8 to 9
5: levels 10 to 11
6: levels 12 to 13 (and you'll MIGHT be able to hit 14)So a bit over half of Legacy of fire falls into the "sweet spot" of 7th–15th.
But it's only half an Adventure Path
Hookmountain massacre got a lot of attention for being more than a little pressed for space.As for the rest of the fluff...thats a major reason why i buy pathfinder products at all.
I'm not saying the Fluff is bad. It's stuff that player's and DM's might like to read, like the Journals stuff for example. If it's something player's can read then it doesn't belong in an adventure path book for DM's. I think that stuff could be elsewhere, freeing up space for more levels of adventure.
I think my player's will feel short-changed if their efforts are halted around level 13/14.
|
|
Hookmountain massacre got a lot of attention for being more than a little pressed for space.As for the rest of the fluff...thats a major reason why i buy pathfinder products at all.
I'm not saying the Fluff is bad. It's stuff that player's and DM's might like to read, like the Journals stuff for example. If it's something player's can read then it doesn't belong in an adventure path book for DM's. I think that stuff could be elsewhere, freeing up space for more levels of adventure.
I think my player's will feel short-changed if their efforts are halted around level 13/14.
I disagree with that. Honestly if there was less fluff I wouldn't buy all the AP's only the ones that interested me. But I always like the fluff so half the time i buy them for idea's and the fluff and the adventure is secondary.