| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've kept tabs on AP's to one degree or another going back to RotRL, and own several in totality (and would love to pick up a couple of others). Right before Mummy's Mask started I went ahead and started a subscription, having really enjoyed reading through the last three (Shattered Star, Reign of Winter, and Wrath of the Righteous).
The thing is, this AP just isn't doing it for me. It feels almost too safe after what a pair of both mechanically and conceptually ambitious APs (especially RoW with its world hoping, setting changes, ect). The adventures seem to trudge on and in many ways just feel like filler to set up the last chapter or two. At first I thought maybe it was simply the first chapter or too being slow to get going, but after going through three (and hearing from a friend with similar taste that chapter 4 is much of the same)... eh.
The entire thing feels very safe, traditional, and almost as a bit of filler in many ways designed to let people cut their teeth (I'm told there are a number of new authors here) and placate people who were up in arms over the last two APs.
I was wondering if anyone else got that feeling, or if I'm in the distinct minority on this one.
What do you all thing? Good? Bad? Best in years?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wouldn't want to argue about Mummy's Mask as I have not really read it, but if you look at the chronology of the Adventure Paths, it's always been an experimental one followed by a more traditional one. It's part of the concept of the line.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The model of ' it must be six volumes each written by one author' doesn't always work and ends with lots filler
Do wish they would ditch the excess and make trilogies
MM does feel simple but feels like an adventure rather than a novel that some APs do. Feels PC centric which is a very good thing
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
As others have mentioned, Paizo will alternate "traditional" APs with APs that experiment. Even so, this AP did a few new things, such as turning research into a version of combat, rather than just knowledge skill checks.
So, no. I'm not disappointed in the AP so far. I've not fully-read Part 4 of it, but it's a fun AP, especially for fans of the remade Mummy movies.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
i could list all the ways i love Mummy's Mask, but i don't have the time or the word count for that post:)
so no, not disappointed in any sort of way whatsoever:)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, Cap, would you mind going over a few of them? I agree with Pete here, Mummy has been pretty disappointing to me.
Moreover, it is not due to the 'traditional' nature of the AP in the slightest. I'm not sure which APs are considered 'traditional', but if Rise of the Runelords and Shattered Star are among them, they are some of my favorites. With the exception of Chapter 3, which featured a hot fat chick, research done mechanically, incorporated exploration, and generally featured some interesting NPCs, this AP so far has left me feeling a little underwhelmed.
I'm a huge fan of the Mummy movies. I love Egyptian mythos. This AP should by all rights be one of my favorites, and it really isn't doing it for me.
So I would very much like to hear what the happy folk are seeing that I'm not. I want to like this one, but so far I'm not. Even the Bestiaries aren't as interesting as those in recent installments.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Like any AP, until you have read (and if you're lucky, run or played) the campaign, all you can do is judge each book on its own merits. IMO;
The Half Dead City was a crap start to the AP. Three consecutive dungeon crawls and only one had even the most tenuous connection to the main thrust of the story. The PCs are not given a very compelling reason to oppose the 'villains'. I rate book one 1.5/5.
Empty Graves was a much better adventure, containing some great roleplaying and combat encounters. The Cult of the Forgotten Phaoroh finally make their entrance and I think the cult is an interesting group of villains. Unlike the Whispering Way, they are all about securing hidden knowledge and only want to kill the heroes to keep them from unravelling the mystery they seek to protect. I rate book two 4/5.
Shifting Sands is also a great adventure, albeit one that will stink or sparkle dependent on the GM/group of players. Having to suck up to a "hot, fat chick" to get access to the library is roleplaying gold for a group that get off on that sort of thing. The chariot race is maybe the best mini game/subsystem I've seen for Pathfinder. The hexploration section at the end of the book scratches the sandbox itch, without losing direction (which wss arguably an issue with Kingmaker). I rate book three 4/5.
Finally, The Sightless Sphinx contains a little more hexploration (and manages to stay just shy of becoming too much of a good thing) - and then you reach the sphinx, which is pretty much one big dungeon contested by two different cults. I'm not a fan of overly long dungeons (because they can take so long to slog through), so I would have rated book four 3/5, but the inclusion of a certain 15ft tall treasure in the desert boosts my final score to 3.5/5.
And those are the reasons that (thus far) I am not disappointed by Mummys Mask. :D
Actually, Cap, would you mind going over a few of them? I agree with Pete here, Mummy has been pretty disappointing to me.
Moreover, it is not due to the 'traditional' nature of the AP in the slightest. I'm not sure which APs are considered 'traditional', but if Rise of the Runelords and Shattered Star are among them, they are some of my favorites. With the exception of Chapter 3, which featured a hot fat chick, research done mechanically, incorporated exploration, and generally featured some interesting NPCs, this AP so far has left me feeling a little underwhelmed.
I'm a huge fan of the Mummy movies. I love Egyptian mythos. This AP should by all rights be one of my favorites, and it really isn't doing it for me.
So I would very much like to hear what the happy folk are seeing that I'm not. I want to like this one, but so far I'm not. Even the Bestiaries aren't as interesting as those in recent installments.
1) i like the general pulp tone of it
2) The entire first adventure3) I'm always a fan of egyptian mythos
4)
5) the entire second adventure
6) i like that they are able to make it seem both old school and like The Mummy (i didn't care for the second movie overly much)
i don't have the third or fourth yet, so i can't say anything about them but they sound awesome!
i can list more as i think of them (and have time to, kids and all) or if others would like to expand on it:)
it should also be noted the top 2 requests for adventure paths i've been asking for since switching to pathfinder when kingmaker came out were Pirates and Egyptian flavored, so as you can imagine the last few years have been a great time for me, RPG wise:D
Yeah, I guess I'm trying to get at more specific things than 'the whole first adventure'. I like pulp, and I love Egypt, but I'm just not really feeling like a tomb raider, or someone chasing down that thing in your spoiler, or like Rick O'Connell, at all. So if I like this genre, and you like this genre, what am I missing that you are getting from this? That's what I'd like to hear. Something that gets me to go back and reread with new eyes on the material.
you'll have to bear with me here, i'm not a very good writer:)
i really like Wati, its fleshed out really well and the first two adventures are set there,
i did like the introduction, i feel its well written, my wife and kids found it quite refreshing
the first dungeon is pretty brutal!
i find the other groups interesting and is a flimsy pretext for me to bust out either the npc codex, i like that the RP moments aren't as fleshed out, as it give me room to taylor it for my PCs
i do wish that The Scorched Hand was a level higher but thats not that bad to fix.
book two is one of my all-time favorite adventures, i feel Crystal Frasier did one of the best Rise of the Dead adventures i've ever seen, lots of opportunities for RP even in fights that might otherwise degenerate into combat
thats all i have now, kids just started summer break this weekend, so very busy:)
|
Aside from 'Empty Graves', I've enjoyed the series thus far. I'm all for having more Garundi type of adventures for a nice break from Avistan (would love some Vudrani/South Garund/ full-Tian Xia sometime in the future!).
My main contention with Part 1 is I feel it's not far from "The players are a group with a single goal already in place" rather than having them work together and desire to be a team.
The other one is the rival group of adventurers - it feels like I'd have to figure out how to get the PC's aware that said group isn't there for getting some loot. Plus, the fact that two group members are kind of written that they can be 'led to abandon their group' feels hard to convey without making the encounter feel forced.
That said, the biggest thing I've enjoyed is that most of the campaign is in a urban setting (First two books, and half of the third), which is a nice refresh from having cities/towns being "places to visit/sell things." As Capt. said above, great RP possibilities.
TL:DR, despite minor things, I've liked what I've read so far. And since one person in my group loves Ancient Egypt, the group will enjoy it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having DMed CarrionCrown and played Shackels (sadly not as far as I liked) I have to say Mummy Mask is so far rather good.
I agree that the first book is a dungeon crawl and that's it, however I find it's one of most worked out books in regard of information, making it an excellent start for a new DM. More experienced DMs can use the time in between to get good roleplay in.
The second Book is quite ok. I will have an opinion when I finished book 1 and start preping in detail for 2, however so far I can see some points where information is missing or too sprawled across the book. Reminds me a bit of Trial of the Beast where tons of base Info wasn't there or scattered.
Volume 3 reads FUN and I'm looking FW to DMing it. Especially the little thinks that the author snuged in (getting the hight of the tower = IndiansJones in the Maproom).
I shaved read 4 yet (Holiday) but glanced it over and it looked solid.
But thats just me.
Comparing it to CC and Shackels it seems to me that more work was put into coherentcy and mote put together.
Not disappointed at all! This seems a very solid AP: one that I will probably be running after my home brew campaign ends.
Not disappointed. Helped my daughter run half dead city, and we all had fun. We spent a lot of time in the tavern, interacting with the NPC parties after clearing the tomb. She really played up the Schorched Hand, which led to some foreshadowing. We also almost got side tracked with helping one of the other NPC groups with their assigned tomb. I think if that hadn't been her first game as GM, we would have had a second tomb raid before exploring the haunted manor.
The manor itself was pretty creepy, and laid out clearly enough that a first time GM could grasp the concept and run the haunts with ease.
However, the group disbanded for the summer, so we'll be starting over with a different GM for the Mummy's Mask.
From a player's perspective, I think a majority of the enjoyment factor will come from the GM and their ability to create good dialogue. From a GM perspective, I have flipped through the first two books and would enjoy running Mummy's Mask. The first book is a great intro, and I think the chariot race is classic MGM Silver screen style Egyptian cinema brought to the table.
Not disappointed.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am absolutely loving it as a player. It's meeting or exceeding my expectations, and my expectations were not low. This is possibly my favorite subcategory of the genre, and frankly I would've been really irritated if it had started off with something other than dungeon crawls. I don't need the whole thing to consist of that alone, but I do need a little bit of that here before moving on to other things. If I'm raiding tombs, the Egyptian-themed ones have been my favorites forever. I felt that these were particularly well done, and taking a low-level group through them and surviving felt like an accomplishment. Of course, then we had two deaths, but that was fun, too!
OP - are you just reading them through, or playing/running them? I'd suggest getting involved as a player. Otherwise, it's a bit like judging a meal by the utensils in the kitchen.
I am absolutely loving it as a player. It's meeting or exceeding my expectations, and my expectations were not low. This is possibly my favorite subcategory of the genre, and frankly I would've been really irritated if it had started off with something other than dungeon crawls. I don't need the whole thing to consist of that alone, but I do need a little bit of that here before moving on to other things. If I'm raiding tombs, the Egyptian-themed ones have been my favorites forever. I felt that these were particularly well done, and taking a low-level group through them and surviving felt like an accomplishment. Of course, then we had two deaths, but that was fun, too!
OP - are you just reading them through, or playing/running them? I'd suggest getting involved as a player. Otherwise, it's a bit like judging a meal by the utensils in the kitchen.
I guess my problem with the first book is that I trnd to convert the adventure paths to run in Savage Worlds, which doesnt handle dungeon crawls particularly well. I generally have to condense a dungeon into a series of set pieces for the party to blunder through. This process has been tricky for The Half Dead City (particularly the house of Pentheru).
Cannot wait to get into books 2 & 3. :D
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've actually enjoyed it. I doubt I will ever get the chance to run it (too many things on that list, already), but the fact that I am contemplating it means that I think this one is well done. Of course, there are three more books I need to read, so things could go south in a hurry, but so far here is what I've enjoyed:
1 - The "traditional" adventure aspect speaks to my role playing roots, and I know I could introduce a whole new batch of fresh-faced gamers to this AP and get them very excited about the hobby.
2 - Book 1 opened with ADVENTURE! Not just the standard goblins or kobolds or other irritating nuisances. The players went exploring and finding treasure, and that's a cool way to open a campaign.
3 - The fact that the bad guys and their motivations are fleshed out early. Until Wrath of the Righteous most APs suffered from having a nebulous bad guy that the GM had to really work at making the players know and hate. The last two APs have not had that problem, and as a long-time GM who enjoys watching his players actually figure out the story I really appreciate the effort spent in this aspect of the AP design.
4 - Bringing various bits of alternate rules into the game. The third book, especially, is masterfully done in this regard. I love the opening sequence with the politics, parties, races, and library exploration. I've never seen that pulled off before, and think this was incredibly fun to conceptualize. The hexploration bad-guy hunting of the second part was also fun, though I would want more encounters, I think.
5 - The new style of fiction is awesome. Using it as a tie-in for the AP would be easy, and I can see even handing it out to players to read as prep of their own to play.
In short, Paizo has gotten back to writing good adventures. Whether the theme appeals or not always going to depend on the person, of course. But there are no more gaping plot holes, weird motivations, or terrible morality tests that players are destined to fail.
So, no, I'm not disappointed in the least little bit. I've been very impressed, actually.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thoroughly Enjoying it
1) There is no deus ex machina to bring the party together.
2) The amount of loot in book 1 is *gasp* as it should be. Every other AP I've played does the books as follows: 1 - Way below WBL, 2 - Way below WBL, 3 - Way below WBL, Final Dungeon Complete - At WBL. This breaks that horrible horrible tradition.
3) Only 1 gimmick and it is actually... functional! The tacked on rule sets that the APs have are often derided in my gaming circles for being a) horrible, b) not play tested and c) needlessly tacked on. Research once again breaks the poor mold set forth by the likes of Kingmaker, Jade Regent, etc.
4) Ample RP opportunites, most of which are given in a broad outline.
5) Compelling dungeons
6) Non-european adventures!
7) DIV!
The last AP I liked this much was Carrion Crown, but it had some horrible things going for it (Missing Antagonist, The Splatterman being statblock retarded, Abberant Promethean, Book 4, Book 5). By the time we actually get out of book 1 and into 2 and 3, I doubt my players will be clamoring for something else like they were at the end of Broken Moon. So far, for me, 8/10.
I must admit, one of the complaints I've had from my Reign of Winter crew is the lack of treasure. At least until they took the Pale Tower and suddenly had so much treasure they couldn't unload it in Waldsby. Heck, the trade silver ALONE filled the Bag of Holding entirely.
Through the first three books, I'd give it an okay grade, but nothing better.
The first volume was my least favorite of the AP so far. I enjoy the big initial scenes to start off an AP...this book was just drab. Go to a dungeon, do it again, and do it again. Blech.
Enjoyed the second adventure a bunch. One of my favorite volumes in the last year or so.
I have only read through the third volume, so I'm not sure about the research subsystem. Most of them in the past have been weak at best, so until I play the system, I can't really speak on it. The adventure itself was okay, but I do enjoy the strong RP element that stretches throughout.
I think I'd give it a C+ or B- through three volumes.
Actually, Cap, would you mind going over a few of them? I agree with Pete here, Mummy has been pretty disappointing to me.
Moreover, it is not due to the 'traditional' nature of the AP in the slightest. I'm not sure which APs are considered 'traditional', but if Rise of the Runelords and Shattered Star are among them, they are some of my favorites. With the exception of Chapter 3, which featured a hot fat chick, research done mechanically, incorporated exploration, and generally featured some interesting NPCs, this AP so far has left me feeling a little underwhelmed.
I'm a huge fan of the Mummy movies. I love Egyptian mythos. This AP should by all rights be one of my favorites, and it really isn't doing it for me.
So I would very much like to hear what the happy folk are seeing that I'm not. I want to like this one, but so far I'm not. Even the Bestiaries aren't as interesting as those in recent installments.
My thoughts exactly. This AP has so far been a great disappointment to me.
I cancelled my subscription after reading the first adventure but have kept buying volumes as they come out from amazon. Unfortunately, I haven't seen anything so far that would make me want to run this AP.
I still have hope that part 5 and 6 by Michael Kortes and Mike Shel respectively will be good based on their previous work.
I liked the first book actually. I thought it made sense. And it technically wasn't three dungeons - it was two dungeons and an abandoned house and cellar.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I liked the first book actually. I thought it made sense. And it technically wasn't three dungeons - it was two dungeons and an abandoned house and cellar.
It doesnt really matter if you're in a tomb, a house or the wreckage of an alien spacecraft, if you're kicking open doors, killing monsters and taking their stuff, you're in a dungeon. :p
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I liked the first book actually. I thought it made sense. And it technically wasn't three dungeons - it was two dungeons and an abandoned house and cellar.It doesnt really matter if you're in a tomb, a house or the wreckage of an alien spacecraft, if you're kicking open doors, killing monsters and taking their stuff, you're in a dungeon. :p
Mike, it really DOES matter if you disparage a piece of work but you neglect to mention that you're frustrated that it doesn't covert easily to a completely different rule system, especially one that is deliberately streamlined, has a radically different player economy/reward system, and is generally more narrative.
I really hesitate to write this, because of the school of thought that "all feedback is good feedback" and "the customer is always right".
Nevertheless, you have been extremely critical without being forthcoming that you actually think The Half-Dead City is a lousy Savage Worlds adventure. I have to admit, when I read that I was both relieved and disappointed that you weren't forthcoming about that to start with.
I do appreciate the frustration. I tried to convert Curse of the Crimson Throne to 4E with very mixed results. Yet, I didn't blame the product for it, or even Wizards for their RPG. It just didn't work out.
I liked the first book actually. I thought it made sense. And it technically wasn't three dungeons - it was two dungeons and an abandoned house and cellar.It doesnt really matter if you're in a tomb, a house or the wreckage of an alien spacecraft, if you're kicking open doors, killing monsters and taking their stuff, you're in a dungeon. :pMike, it really DOES matter if you disparage a piece of work but you neglect to mention that you're frustrated that it doesn't covert easily to a completely different rule system, especially one that is deliberately streamlined, has a radically different player economy/reward system, and is generally more narrative.
I really hesitate to write this, because of the school of thought that "all feedback is good feedback" and "the customer is always right".
Nevertheless, you have been extremely critical without being forthcoming that you actually think The Half-Dead City is a lousy Savage Worlds adventure. I have to admit, when I read that I was both relieved and disappointed that you weren't forthcoming about that to start with.
I do appreciate the frustration. I tried to convert Curse of the Crimson Throne to 4E with very mixed results. Yet, I didn't blame the product for it, or even Wizards for their RPG. It just didn't work out.
You are right, I have been unnecessarily harsh/vocal in my cricicsm and for that i apologise. I was disappointed with The Half Dead City because it would not convert well to my go-to system - although I have been looking into running it with the Radiance RPG and that looks more promising. You have already said in another thread that a design decision was made not to begin the AP in crisis mode, while this did not work for me, other people on these forums have praised that approach. I personally think more could have been done to tie this book into the rest of the adventure, but that's just my opinion and as GM, that's something I can change when I run the AP.
Again, my apologies for acting like a jerk.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do appreciate the feedback about the first chapter, and I don't want anyone think that it falls on deaf ears.
I do wonder what the take-away is from this?
We can't expect players to be self-motivated? We can't tell the GM, "Players should make characters that are interested in exploration and the recovery of valuable treasures" and expect them to communicate that to the players and have them work with an established premise? Are some of you saying, "Yes, please, milk the guilt, responsibility, or fear angle, because otherwise its not really roleplaying."
That might sound sarcastic, but hear me out, if that is really the case—then its good to know. Be aware, your feedback can shape future design, so its good to be aware of the message you're communicating.
I find adventures to be fun to read, as does our Creative Director. That said, adventures are not the same as a novel, because the main characters are missing. Those are the players and their characters. Everything else is a stage for them to tell their own stories.
Now.. it is fair to say that the Half-Dead City might be challenging in that you (the GM) get a greater benefit from incorporating the gazetteer and developing stories for the individual players.
Now, if folks find the backdrop to their characters lacking, you have my regrets. Honestly and sincerely.
But please know that I have and continue to find some of the critiques to be somewhat puzzling. If this post offended, you have my regrets.
You are right, I have been unnecessarily harsh/vocal in my cricicsm and for that i apologise. I was disappointed with The Half Dead City because it would not convert well to my go-to system - although I have been looking into running it with the Radiance RPG and that looks more promising. You have already said in another thread that a design decision was made not to begin the AP in crisis mode, while this did not work for me, other people on these forums have praised that approach. I personally think more could have been done to tie this book into the rest of the adventure, but that's just my opinion and as GM, that's something I can change when I run the AP.
Again, my apologies for acting like a jerk.
We're good Mike. No apologies necessary. And perhaps I was a bit stern because I have been refraining from comment for quite a while. You raise an important issue and I don't want attack you for it. Freelancers are discouraged from talking back, but I just finally got to the point where I want to engage and at least guide the conversation towards a constructive end.
You're saying you buy a product for a specific purpose or content, and you're explaining that it didn't have what you were looking for. THAT is something worthwhile knowing and discussing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I find adventures to be fun to read, as does our Creative Director. That said, adventures are not the same as a novel, because the main characters are missing. Those are the players and their characters. Everything else is a stage for them to tell their own stories.
Now.. it is fair to say that the Half-Dead City might be challenging in that you (the GM) get a greater benefit from incorporating the gazetteer and developing stories for the individual players.
Now, if folks find the backdrop to their characters lacking, you have my regrets. Honestly and sincerely.
But please know that I have and continue to find some of the critiques to be somewhat puzzling. If this post offended, you have my regrets.
I've been an AP subscriber since Skull & Shackles (which was being released about two years ago maybe?), between then and now I've read every adventure path from cover to cover - and actually run none of them. Sure, I'm halfway through Rise of the Runelords (running from PDF copies the old 3.5 release) and I ran half of The Wormwood Mutiny, but mostly I buy them to read and fill shelves in my house. I cannot imagine I'm the only person doing this. So when I read The Half Dead City and saw three consecutive (albeit flavourful) dungeons and no real plot progression, I was all like; "WTF?! 1.5/5!"
I propose roleplaying (for some folks - like me) is more of a spectator activity that anything else, due to time restraints, etc. I spend a LOT more time reading other people's game reports and listening to podcasts of other people playing than I actually spend playing myself. It's not really all that different from watching sports or a film (or maybe radio drama would be a better comparison). I read Paizo's AP series and imagine what I would as a player in those scenarios - a bit like running through one of the old Fighting Fantasy books, only it's all in my head. Does that make me sound mental? Maybe I am. :p
These are all general observations in response to Jim's post and are not exclusive to the Mummys Mask AP, but I still wanted to put them out there.
|
I have to say that Mummy's Mask is a really fun AP to read so far, and one that I hope to run in the future. My hope is to adapt it to a pulp setting in the 1920's Egypt, with two-fisted pulp heroes at the heart of the AP.
But even if I were to run it straight, there is so much to love, maybe because I like to have some margins as a GM to expand and put my own stamp and content in. Wati has plenty of those margins, with not only a city full of tombs and dungeons, but rival adventuring parties and the living half of the city full of vibrant life.
Book 3 has such a great premise with Research and Exploration at the heart of the adventure.
In games, there are some major pillars of design to consider and I think Exploration of both Geography and LORE is something that gets overlooked. It's very difficult to handle well. Serpent's Skull came close, but dropped the ball (due in part to production problems that just didn't really get a chance to be fixed).
Anyway, there's a lot of stuff to praise in Mummy's Mask, and I look forward to seeing how the final few chapters go :)
I do appreciate the feedback about the first chapter, and I don't want anyone think that it falls on deaf ears.
I do wonder what the take-away is from this?
We can't expect players to be self-motivated? We can't tell the GM, "Players should make characters that are interested in exploration and the recovery of valuable treasures" and expect them to communicate that to the players and have them work with an established premise? Are some of you saying, "Yes, please, milk the guilt, responsibility, or fear angle, because otherwise its not really roleplaying."
That's...not really my complaint at all. I frequently tell the players to produce a pre-game motivation and that they are obligated to bite on the first hook I provide (while using that adventure to better understand the characters, so that later adventures can have more appropriate hooks), or they get left behind.
And honestly, I'm not quite sure why the adventure (as a whole, not just singularly) has been hard for me to appreciate. By the numbers, this ought to be my favorite, but it's not.
I don't feel like I'm Rick O'Connell chasing down a menace that I (or some other less scrupulous explorer) let free. I don't feel like I'm Indiana Jones, scouring the tombs for lost relics of the past. And why not, when I'm literally forming a party to go raid tombs? Is it because the fire and forget Pathfinder trap rules are boring compared to the tense movie nature of the same? Is it because there's little reason to know/care about the main bad guy?
I'm not complaining just to complain. I actually want to know why I'm not liking this adventure, because it doesn't make sense to me. I'm also really happy that there seem to be a ton of posters on the thread who are having a blast with the AP...I just want to know why, so that I can go back and feed on that joy like a sweet...er, reread the adventures again and gain a new appreciation of them.
I think the thing about Mummy's Mask is, it does a bit less hand-holding for the GM. Things like PC motivation aren't handed out in the Player's Guide, the GM needs to work with the PCs to make it happen. This is GREAT in my opinion, but if it doesn't happen because the GM or players are used to the other approach, I can see it feeling lackluster. (Not saying that applies to those with negative comments - just thinking through this out loud.)
The same thing applies to dungeon crawls. If the GM and players approach it as "you walk until THIS happens", then it can get old quickly. Exploring a new Osirian tomb should be an exciting, dangerous foray into the unknown. It's not a tactical miniatures wargame, which many of the other APs can easily become if that's the play style that the players and GM desire. The descriptions, the mood set at the table, the possibility of unknown creatures or traps around every corner, the rich story of the entombed which is there waiting to be discovered... to me, that is awesome material. I can't wait to run it.
But please know that I have and continue to find some of the critiques to be somewhat puzzling.
Jim,
I realize that you might not have been referring to my post above, but I was one of the people who posted expressing my disappointment with the AP and without elaborating in this thread why I felt that way.
I did submit a review of The Half-Dead City when it was first released explaining why I was disappointed by it and tried to give some constructive feedback.
I have copied the review below in case anyone is interested:
When I learned that Paizo was going to put out an Egyptian themed AP, I was excited. When I heard that the first adventure would feature dungeon-delving and a rival adventuring party I was ecstatic. Unfortunately, having now read The Half-Dead City, I feel it could have been much better. So what went wrong?The Good:
1) Exciting themes: Egyptian tomb-raiding featuring lots of death traps and a rival adventuring party
2) The author does a good job with room descriptions which are lush with detail and give the adventure an atmosphere of mystery and dread that is appropriate to the themes
3) The first dungeon-crawl features a very evocative Water Flooding Room Trap.
4) The third dungeon-crawl has clues to the fact that the PCs are not the first ones to explore the temple. It's a nice mystery which is related to the rest of the adventure pathThe Bad:
1) Slow start: The opening of the adventure seems like a huge time waster with lots of speeches and a sham tomb selection lottery (i.e. there is no real element of chance with regards to which dungeon-crawl the PCs will enter first). The PCs also cannot gain much in the way of meaningful information from this opening scene. Since it's the start of the campaign, why not just start with the adventurers standing outside the Tomb of Akhentepi with a short explanation of what went on before?
2) The first two dungeon-crawls have little to no bearing on the rest of the adventure which makes them feel more like a series of linked Pathfinder Society Scenarios than the start of an adventure path.
3) Unfortunately, as written, the Water Flooding Room Trap (mentioned above) malfunctions and leads to the room being filled to a maximum of 2 feet of water?!? As stated in the adventure texts "There is little danger of drowning, even for Small creatures, but smaller creatures such as animal companions or familiars might require assistance, and any PC who falls unconscious into the water will require immediate aid to avoid drowning." Seems really anti-climactic even for a 1st level party.
4) The ambush encounter is bland and unavoidable
5) The other Rival Adventuring Parties: The adventure introduces a half-dozen other adventuring parties. Unfortunately, they are featured in a single roleplaying encounter, the sole purpose of which is the introduction of The Scorched Hand, which is the main rival party of the adventure. It would have been nice to have these other rival adventuring parties to be encountered in the first two dungeon-crawls because there is currently little chance to do any roleplaying during the first two dungeon crawls given that the enemies almost exclusively consist of vermin, constructs or undead.
6) The Scorched Hand: I was hoping that the adventure would provide a timeline and guidance on how the main rival adventuring party would explore the dungeon in parallel to the PCs. As it currently stands, the DM is given no guidance for how to play the rival party beyond "You should deploy them wherever makes the most sense for your story and campaign " and as a result, it is assumed that the Scorched Hand merely waits patiently for the PCs to arrive.
7) The fact that there is only one way to access each and every level of the three dungeon-crawls makes the adventure feel like more of a railroad than it should. A good dungeon-crawl would allow the PCs to approach from several different directions. Yes, in this adventure, the PCs can choose to go left instead of right, but there is only a single entrance on every floor and the PCs must find this entrance in order to proceed.
8) Finally, because the rival party is not showcased enough in the rest of the adventure, it didn't feel satisfying to me for it to be the last encounter and it's quite possible that a party completing this adventure might feel as if they had not really achieved any meaningful milestone. Sure, the Scorched Hand paid off some thugs to ambush the PCs earlier in the adventure and their leader has ordered some sort of temple guardian to block the PCs way, but there's a good chance that the PCs may not even find out that the Scorched Hand had any roll in this until they actually come face to face.Overall Impression
I feel disappointed by this adventure and think that this is a missed opportunity on many fronts. I would have much preferred that the three dungeon crawls be combined into a single larger one that required multiple forays to completely explore. I would have also preferred it if the adventure allowed the PCs to interact more with the rival adventuring party and featured more puzzles and obstacles that needed to be solved by thinking on the players' part rather than just rolling dice.
|
|
Up to this point my group has been enjoying Mummy's Mask so far. Book 1, while it does feel a bit disconnected from book 2 in reading, seems to really setup the group for book 2. It introduces the town and many NPCs that may become at risk in book 2. In fact this is what I worked on adding to it. During book 1 I tried to play up various NPCs. The group established good relationships with the Daughters of the Desert and "Mad Dog" Marrn's group, and earned a bit of enmity with Black Kiss's group. They fought alongside against the Daughters against a couple of Sandlings (the one from the first dungeon escaped and came back with it's mate). One of the random adventuring groups from the back they had a run in with too, and let them go after a failed robbery attempt. I've established an NPC of my own to help connect them to the church of Pharasma and to Ptemenib. And a couple other minor things.
All these connections established in book 1 I've used to help really connect to the problems in book 2. I altered several of the encounters to be more specific to my particular group. The esobok scene I'm replacing the victim with a favored shopkeep the group likes. One of the random encounters (a gearghost) I established as the Daughters of the Desert attempting to save orphans from a burning orphanage after the gearghost trapped it and killed the caretaker. While this is going on I'm going to have one of the two headed snakes come in for a quick snack of the orphans already on the ground, leaving the PCs who arrived next to stop it while the Daugters save the orphans. "Mad Dog" Marrn will be severly wounded and many of his dogs dead from another random encounter and the PCS will have the chance to save him. Old Eye Taker will have finished off Black Kiss's party and ready to killl her next when the PCs come and can attempt to barter for her freedom legal wise, or just re-murder everything.
All these little things helped to really make the first two books seem better connected. But what's really done it is the stoloen headpiece. When my group came upon Ekram, one of them thought his mask was the missing mask, and let's just say stealing loot from my PCs is the last thing someone wants to do. They all speak Ignan and communicate that way, and since the Ekram was acting like he didn't speak it, it was great when one of them mentioned the mask. (up to this point one of the group acted like they owned the brickworks and they were 'negotiating' allowing the silver chains to use it for a cut). That really cinched everything as connected.
so reallly, guess I'm just saying my groups hasn't been disappointed in it thus far. It has the same minor problems all APs (and most pre-written adventures) have, but can't really fault Paizo or the writers for that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Laric,
I certainly did read your review. I have some friends, bless their hearts, who text me while I'm eating out or at the movies, to let me know who said what. I'm serious. I probably need to tell them to stop, but I'm a gentle soul that way.
Against my better judgment, I'll talk a bit about your comments. Not to argue with you, but perhaps to present another perspective.
INTRODUCTION: The introduction is actually quite short, as it stands. You suggest that we have no introduction and just start them at the tomb. I see that as a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" proposition. If some introduction is not present, I feel many GMs would be much more upset. As it stands, the introduction is easily expedited. You suggest this is a long drawn out scene when its two short read-aloud texts, which are incredibly easy to zip through or bypass. There is a generous amount of background information, but that is there to provide a contextual rationale and verisimilitude. I feel you're depicting me as standing over your shoulder rapping your knuckles with a ruler if you don't spend 20 minutes droning aloud. That's a bit unfair.
This is where I question "armchair reviews" because I have to wonder how it would actually play out if I got you at a table with some players in front of you. Whether that opening scene might not just be over with in a few minutes and then you would be on to proper play with the PCs fully engaged.
FIRST TWO DUNGEONS: That's somewhat unkind to the PFS freelancers and developers who work very hard to deliver some great adventures. That said, you sound like you're looking for the "crisis trigger". I respect what you've said. One thing to consider (very mild spoiler, probably won't wrreck the story, but I err on the side of caution):
WATER TRAP: I appreciate the point Laric, I really do, but that trap is killing PCs. I don't do a happy dance reading that, because that's not my goal. However actual play experience is pointing towards it being a meaningful challenge. Again, you might not see that from an abstract reading.
I DO take your other comments as constructive feedback. You have a lot of worthwhile observations and I really did read them when you first posted them a few weeks ago. Again, I'm sorry it disappointed you.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I liked the first book actually. I thought it made sense. And it technically wasn't three dungeons - it was two dungeons and an abandoned house and cellar.It doesn't really matter if you're in a tomb, a house or the wreckage of an alien spacecraft, if you're kicking open doors, killing monsters and taking their stuff, you're in a dungeon. :p
You realize that anything, even the outdoors, could be considered a dungeon under that broad description.
I mean, let's take a hedge-maze taking place during a thunderstorm. How is that any different than a dungeon that is under a lake (but still has drainage)? Or let's take the cornfield in Book 2 of Runelords - that's just a dungeon where you can push through the walls but can't see more than a foot when doing so.
Nor is there anything wrong with dungeons. When I was a teenager (back before there were editions for AD&D) I didn't have a gaming group (introvert living in a rural part of a suburb, and AD&D had a bad name back then), so I'd draw up dungeons and put my own characters through them. I even tried to design dungeons where it made some sense - there were underwater rivers that would provide monsters with fish for food, and water for drink.
Hell, it's the first part of the original name of the game: Dungeons and Dragons. Dissing the game because it has a couple of tombs (which is entirely logical for an Egyptian-style campaign involving mummies, if of the mundane variety at first) dismisses not only the very core of what made D&D great... but it also seriously constrains you.
And honestly, I'm not quite sure why the adventure (as a whole, not just singularly) has been hard for me to appreciate. By the numbers, this ought to be my favorite, but it's not.
Entirely fair, and I'm glad you're speaking up.
I don't feel like I'm Rick O'Connell chasing down a menace that I (or some other less scrupulous explorer) let free. I don't feel like I'm Indiana Jones, scouring the tombs for lost relics of the past. And why not, when I'm literally forming a party to go raid tombs? Is it because the fire and forget Pathfinder trap rules are boring compared to the tense movie nature of the same? Is it because there's little reason to know/care about the main bad guy?
There are some pacing decisions at play there, certainly. I alluded to some in my reply to Laric above.
I'm not complaining just to complain.
I believe you. I just want to say that outright. I haggled with Laric a little, but I believe them as well.
I actually want to know why I'm not liking this adventure, because it doesn't make sense to me. I'm also really happy that there seem to be a ton of posters on the thread who are having a blast with the AP...I just want to know why, so that I can go back and feed on that joy like a sweet...er, reread the adventures again and gain a new appreciation of them.
We share the same goal. If nothing else, these conversation are really helpful because I think they draw out the issues, so we can identify them and improve.
So thank you for speaking up.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
According to the obituaries thread, that water trap is upping the kill count! I like it!
To be fair, we haven't started playing this yet. But reading through, there is a large dollop of flavor with some pretty good pacing. I like how things start slow and build a sense of menace - a menace that so far is pretty behind the scenes. In Raiders of the Lost Ark, Indiana Jones didn't go toe to toe with the Nazi leaders, he faced of against Belloq and subordinates. It's the background of the cult willing to do whatever it takes to stop the PC's that adds the tension and need to rush a little.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
i think what is happening here is that most people expect every adventure to be like the Mummy or Indiana Jones right from the start. rather people should be looking at the whole path as one movie and each individual chapter needs to be seen as one part of the whole movie.
if looked at in that context i think The Half-Dead City does an exceptional job of introducing us to the stars (i.e. the PCs) and setting up for Mummy shenanigans later on.
great job Jim! it has been a joy playing thru your adventures and watching you grow as a writer:)
Hey Jim,
Thanks for your reply.
Just to clarify some things:
INTRODUCTION: The introduction is actually quite short, as it stands. You suggest that we have no introduction and just start them at the tomb. I see that as a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" proposition. If some introduction is not present, I feel many GMs would be much more upset. As it stands, the introduction is easily expedited. You suggest this is a long drawn out scene when its two short read-aloud texts, which are incredibly easy to zip through or bypass. There is a generous amount of background information, but that is there to provide a contextual rationale and verisimilitude. I feel you're depicting me as standing over your shoulder rapping your knuckles with a ruler if you don't spend 20 minutes droning aloud. That's a bit unfair.This is where I question "armchair reviews" because I have to wonder how it would actually play out if I got you at a table with some players in front of you. Whether that opening scene might not just be over with in a few minutes and then you would be on to proper play with the PCs fully engaged.
I don't have the adventure in front of me at the moment, but as I recall, the introduction is more than just two read-aloud texts as I think the adventure encourages DMs to have PCs roleplay meeting NPCs at the lottery. However, the PCs have little chance of discovering any worthwhile info or affecting the outcome of the lottery, making this a futile and possibly frustrating exercise in my opinion. But from the posts above it sounds like this was a big issue for most groups.
My suggestion in the review was simply that instead of starting the PCs off in an encounter where they have no hope of affecting the outcome (i.e. the result of the lottery) why not give them a quick blurb explaining what went on and start them off where the adventure truly begins (i.e. the entrance to the first dungeon-crawl).
FIRST TWO DUNGEONS: That's somewhat unkind to the PFS freelancers and developers who work very hard to deliver some great adventures.
Actually, I'm not looking for the crisis trigger in this adventure. I'm fine with that happening in the second adventure.
That said, you sound like you're looking for the "crisis trigger". I respect what you've said. One thing to consider (very mild spoiler, probably won't wrreck the story, but I err on the side of caution):
I did not intend this as any kind of disrespect to PFS freelancers or developers. When I buy an AP I expect it to feel different than a PFS scenario. Because the Half-Dead City was set up the way it was, it reminded me of linked PFS scenarios that I've played or read, that's all. I'm not saying that PFS scenarios are bad, I'm saying that I expect an AP volume to feel like one big adventure instead of three smaller loosely-related ones.
WATER TRAP: I appreciate the point Laric, I really do, but that trap is killing PCs. I don't do a happy dance reading that, because that's not my goal. However actual play experience is pointing towards it being a meaningful challenge. Again, you might not see that from an abstract reading.
Fair enough.
I DO take your other comments as constructive feedback. You have a lot of worthwhile observations and I really did read them when you first posted them a few weeks ago.
I believe you. You are one of the most committed posters at Paizo, a fact which I appreciate. I can also sense your enthousiasm and energy at working for Paizo and writing adventures.
Again, I'm sorry it disappointed you.
Reading The Half-Dead City, I definitely got a sense that you put a lot of effort into writing it. Sometimes it just comes down to people's taste being different. Good luck with your next project!
Sorry, due to a copy/paste error on my part, two of my responses inadvertently got switched. Here's what it should say:
FIRST TWO DUNGEONS: That's somewhat unkind to the PFS freelancers and developers who work very hard to deliver some great adventures.
I did not intend this as any kind of disrespect to PFS freelancers or developers. When I buy an AP I expect it to feel different than a PFS scenario. Because the Half-Dead City was set up the way it was, it reminded me of linked PFS scenarios that I've played or read, that's all. I'm not saying that PFS scenarios are bad, I'm saying that I expect an AP volume to feel like one big adventure instead of three smaller loosely-related ones.
That said, you sound like you're looking for the "crisis trigger". I respect what you've said.
Actually, I'm not looking for the crisis trigger in this adventure. I'm fine with that happening in the second adventure.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, I am disappointed in Mummy's Mask. To the point where I actually decided to skip the rest of the AP after reading part 2. That has never happened to me before with a Paizo AP (although I assume I will skip any Kingmaker-like APs in the future - I had enough faith in Paizo to carry on till the end of that one, which kind of paid off with an awesome part 6, but if an AP style is not for you, don't force it).
The reasoning for my disappointment actually isn't really with the adventures themselves. I think Half Dead City and Empty Graves are both very well written adventures, and I assume playing them will at least be fun.
But well written adventures and just regular D&D-like fun is not the reason I read (and when I get to, run) the APs. With an AP I'm looking to have something bigger than just a collection of adventures. So far, Mummy's Mask did such a terrible job in that regard that I lost all appetite for it, despite loving the themes.
First, the whole plot of this AP is a tangled mass of secret societies (there are, like, 3 of them involved) and bad pacing. The background around the Pharaoh's return is so convoluted that I couldn't bring myself to care about what's going on. Think about Reign Of Winter - the story there is certainly not simplistic, involving schemes and secrets and spread all across the universe and whatnot. Think about Curse of the Crimson Throne, having a story that revolves around politics and ancient wars and involves any different cultures, religions and power groups. In both of these APs (and many others) the plot is not any less complex than that of Mummy's Mask, but it's way more engaging.
Then there's the problem of pacing. The entire first adventure has absolutely NOTHING to do with the rest of the AP. It sets up a location (Wati) that has mild importance, and it sets up the themes of Osirion. Except that in every other themed AP so far we had a first adventure that managed to pull double duty - introduce the themes AND the story. Think about Carrion Crown, considered to be one of the most scattered APs, one where most adventures are just long tangents from the main plot. One of the most beloved adventures in that AP was the first one, because it did such a fantastic job at providing creepy horror themes while also setting up the villains and a general direction for the story to go.
Then we get to the my problems with the way the individual first two adventures were designed. The first adventure is composed of three crawls and little else. While each delve is individually pretty great, when you think about the overall "adventuring" the party will go through in the (potentially) months it will take to play through the adventure... it's too repetitive. Not the game mechanic of dungeon crawling, Shattered Star proved you can do that for an entire campaign and not get repetitive - but the story element. The story is too stright forward. The adventurers are literally handed random locations to explore, and they have to make sure they do so in a tidy manner. That does NOT feel like adventure.
Think on Crypt of the Everflame (the module). It was emulating the same idea - you are beginner adventurers, and more serious people guide you to your first adventure, supervised and somewhat artificial. Those who read or played Crypt of the Everflame know what it did better than Half Dead City - it went off the rails. Very early in the adventure, things turned out to be not as they first seemed. The plot thickened. A very real since of danger and mystery was introduced. In Half Dead city? go there, crawl, loot. Rinse, repeat. There's a very mild surprise towards the end. Compose this as a story structure. What's the middle point? what's the conflict? Is the ending really a climax, or just a somewhat bigger fight that happened after all the rest of the stuff?
The second adventure handles THOSE issues better, but it has it's own baggage. My main problem with it is that it's a very jarring transition from the way the first adventure is set up.In the first adventure the PCs are literal adventurers - a group of people willing to take risks to get a chance to explore ancient tombs - be it for gold, knowledge, or just a good adrenaline rush. Most of them might be foreigners, people only coming to Wati for it's necropolis half.
Then, all of a sudden, the end of days come to Wati. Hundreds of monstrous undead rise up from the grave, the city is in panic and even walking the street is dangerous. Our heroes, the PCs, step in to save the day!... Oh. wait a minute. We never bothered to make sure the PCs are heroes, did we? why would even a good hearted archaeologist who only came to Wati for her research not only risk herself by sticking around that city, why would she so selflessly step up and initiate a plan to save the city? why would she tangle with local thugs, fight undead and even face off a cult of deranged evil, instead of just... leaving? It also gets way worse, when the authorities (captain of a temple guard) demand the PCs *earn the right* to defend the city by fighting his pet monsters. Would Rick Oconner have gone with that kind of nonsense? He wouldn't. What if I want to play a Rick Oconner character? the first adventure certainly implied I could. The player's guide did, too.
So while I usually enjoy the heroics of saving a city in need, this time around the theme is SO out of place that I actually really dislike it.
How Mummy's Mask should have been:
First adventure starts off in Wati very much like it really does - adventurers from all over the world flock to the city for a chance at it's ancient tombs. First crawl the PCs go through goes as planned - they explore an ancient tomb and get a taste for adventuring in Osirion. Then something unexpected happens - maybe when exploring the second location they find a long underground tunnel leading somewhere else. Following it, they emerge into another tomb, one nobody suspected even existed, buried as it was so deep beneath the earth.
The PCs are well and truly having an adventure now - the sense of discovery and wonder is much greater as what they see in this underground pyramid is nothing ever seen before. But their presence awakens something that slumbered for a long time, and a ka pulse is sent across Wati. The dead rise from their graves.
In the second adventure, that starts right after the first, the Cult of the Lost Pharaoh, which was looking for the location of the mask all over the city, feel the presence of the awakened artifact deep underground. They swiftly go there and learn of the PCs presence. They make the PCs their own personal enemies, convince that the PCs stole something from the temple. They kidnap that dude who was kidnapped in the second adventure as written, declaring that unless the PCs return what was stolen within a day, they will execute the man. From there on the PCs are personally involved - they have a reason to stay and find out more. This plays on the idea from the actual "The Mummy" movie - the reason that the heroes are the ones to step up and lead the fight against the bad guys is that they are directly responsible to the situation.
Now I don't mean that this is the only story that could have worked. I'm sure other, better variations on those ideas exist. However, what I was trying to do was to show what Mummy's Mask doesn't do - it doesn't engage, it doesn't draw the PCs in properly, and it's too slow and predictable. Any sense of pulp adventure is lost by those problems.
So, this was a long rant... but that is only because I care, and because I'm truly disappointed. However, next AP is a James Jacobs one, which traditionally delivers awesomely on the things I feel are lacking in this AP. So in the long run, no worries :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Obviously with any campaign some people are going to like it and some won't, it's all about how each group likes to play. My players and myself are enjoying this AP greatly though. I've run 1 AP before and one of my players DMs for a large group and he's done 2 APs as well (he normally runs his own campaign).
My players are 4 veteran players and 1 new player.
We love the setting and we've found that it does a good job of creating the scenery. It's an AP that isn't Euro-centered which is nice but it also has a very old-school feel to it (at least myself and the other old-timers think so).
We are only about 2/3 through the first book so I can't say too much about playing through the AP.
But for reading it and being prepared, as others have said I like the I understand what's going on with the bad guys throughout the adventure so far. My only possible complaint/concern would be coming up in book 4:
I love the idea of a contested area where the PCs have to navigate through 2 different sets of bad guys who are also fighting each other. However, as far as I understand it, the main villain group is only at that site because of hubris...that seems weak. I've only skimmed that book once since I've gotten it but if there's no real reason other than "Hey I like this place and now I'm mad that someone else is there so I'm going to just keep trying to take it over until the PCs come here and defeat me..." well, um, I'll have to fix that. But, I really have only skimmed it, I'm hoping I'm missing something to that because so far I think the plot threads have been solid.
Specifically about the first book, again, loving it. All of my players are enjoying it.
We've also really enjoying the types of challenges. Most of my players have a lot of gaming experience and encounters with undead and orcs are too routine. I feel that there are some really good combat challenges mostly because of all of the saving throws. My players are all thinking of taking Iron Will and Great Fortitude because I constantly say "...and make a Will save" or "...and make a Fort save". My players have said that this campaign is really making their low level characters feel low level and they really appreciate that and it's not always easy to pull that off with players with a lot of experience.
We found it refreshing that it was a straight forward premise to start off with some dungeon crawling. Also, a nice mix of the dungeon crawl mixed with the city but still the threat of danger going between the two. The first tomb my players really enjoyed, they were expecting undead and didn't get any which was pretty funny but the liked all of the encounters and finding some special gear right away was very cool. We all thought it brought everyone into the "Egyptian" theme very well.
The second site was even better. No one felt railroaded in that place at all. They came in through the front gate, explored the outside, looked at the tomb, decided to go into the house through the side door. One person went to look at the silver goblets/plates, another went to go look at the pretty statue in the middle of the house, another went right and spotted the skeletons and then pretty much all hell broke loose because the beheaded swarmed and the statue was pissed quickly because no one spoke Terran. The Div hears the noises and is disappointed that people are smashing his toys he's made and starts messing with people mostly while invisible. It was great. And absolutely no one will ever forget the sorcerer becoming paralyzed and me describing how it starts making out with him in very graphic details.
As to the NPCs, I think there's enough information for the DM to make this work. What I did is I wrote down all of the other adventuring groups listed anywhere in either books 1 and 2 and then added a couple of more so that I had a dozen groups. Each time my party is in the regular part of the city, I randomly select a group and just tell them who they see, just so that they know other groups are working here. For the specific role-playing encounter listed I got enough miniatures to represent every NPC of each group and set them in groups around the table and asked who's talking with who, everyone got in some good moments with a couple of different groups and only one of my players spoke to the Scorched Hand group, however, it really stood out to that player. His character made a connection with Azaz but I had Velriana constantly interrupting and telling him not to speak with strangers, just being a bully. It really hit home with this particular player and though I plan on having them bump into the Scorched Hand one more time (only because I want my players to at least know about the 2 other members of that group) I already know that when they encounter the Scorched Hand later that there will be some moral decisions about fighting them. My point is that, even if a DM doesn't help out with a little bit more on the NPC part I still think it works just fine as it is. I had purchased the Serpent's Skull AP and I never got to play it but I always thought how they did the opposing NPC group(s) left a lot of work for a DM to do, I think this AP does it very well.
I, and I'm pretty sure my players will as well, like the fact that mostly the first book has nothing to do with the AP main plot thread other than some connections at the end of the book. An AP where every part is directly tied to the overarching plot thread would be way too much. And I can't recall any of the APs that I've played in, read, or ran where that was the case either. I like that this AP let's the players get established in the campaign and then bam kicks it up a notch in the second book. SO looking forward to getting to it in a couple of weeks.
His character made a connection with _____
Haha, I'll post to let you know how it goes down!
OP - are you just reading them through, or playing/running them? I'd suggest getting involved as a player. Otherwise, it's a bit like judging a meal by the utensils in the kitchen.
At this point I'm reading through. I'm already involved in three games as it is, and it seems unlikely that I have time to add more (and frankly, there are (thus far) more compelling stories I'd be interested in playing through first elsewhere).
I think Lord Snow actually hits on a lot of the points that jump out at me. There isn't a strong motivation to followup on the story, and while The Half Dead City is not a bad adventure on its own (on the contrary, I think it's actually quite well written) it doesn't feel like the start of an AP. There is no overarching plot introduced to the players. There is no grand adventure laid out in the long run. There are no villains that they will interact with meaningfully in the future (Empty Graves Spoiler
At the end of Half Dead City the party has no villain, no plot, no leads, and no enemies. The only hint that something larger is going on is the missing items from the last tomb and the writ about those items, which could easily be written off to past grave robbers.
Compare that to past APs and you see a huge difference. There is always a sense of something greater. A feeling of adventure and purpose by the end of the first chapter that isn't present here. Even if the party doesn't know the villian, they can see the problem.
Empty Graves in many ways only makes this worse, since it kicks off a 'save the city' mission that goes very much against the grain of the first adventure, which was about tomb diving, grave robbing, and fighting off rival adventurers. It's like someone slammed the car into reverse without evening breaking to a complete stop.
I don't mind heroic APs where the party is saving the city and chasing down ancient evils and plots (Reign of Winter, Wrath of the Righteous). I also don't mind APs where the party is a little more mercenary and self interested (Shattered Star). The thing is, this AP had no clear identity at all for me after two chapters. Then we jump into Shifting Sands... which picks up in a new city, with the assumption that the PCs just upped and went at the suggestion of a couple of NPCs. They spend this entire chapter looking for information in one way or another. There is never really a feeling of tension here, and in a lot of ways we're back to the Half Dead City pace.
There is also a lack of tension in the story as a whole, given that the PCs in theory have the item the cult needs by the end of Chapter 2 - all they have to do is play keep away as far as the PCs know - which also immediately gave me the feeling that you are giving the PCs this artifact only to later take it away from them to fulfill the plot. That it instead goes another direction at the end of Chapter 4 (where defeating the enemy reanimates the BBEG for some reason? Why bother with the mask at all if that is all they needed to do?) helps, but doesn't defeat what is a lack of drive and narrative structure in the adventure.
Plus, frankly, the last two chapters sounds dull and repetitive in their blurbs. I'm sure the writers will do a good job with them as individual adventures but you've got back to back delves into flying pyramids. I feel like this adventure path could have been so much more.
Again, this isn't so much a "this one adventure is bad, boring, or poorly written!" as much as it is an "This AP as a whole doesn't fit together well, there isn't a party hook, and the overarching story isn't that interesting. There isn't simply a lack of heroic motivation, there is a lack of any motivation to push through with the plot other than not screwing with your GM. I'm happy to be railroaded, but IC heroic characters probably aren't as interested in delving just for profit (and the first AP suggests you are playing a tomb raiding type), while profit driven players are probably less interested in saving the city rather than fleeing and chasing down leads about a weird cult.
Edit Jim, thanks for involving yourself in the discussion. One of my favorite bits about Paizo is the ability to interact with authors and get their feedback on my feedback.
Actually, the end of the first book of Runelords doesn't have a grand adventure laid out or a motivation to follow up on the story. And the end of the first book of Second Darkness likewise doesn't lay much framework for going into the second book. You may have been spoiled by the previous two APs which did (Reign of Winter has you having to save the world halfway through Book 1, and Wrath of the Righteous does something similar at the very start of Book 1, though technically someone could say "no real motivation for going into Book 2 outside of a queen telling them to").
Let's consider something first: We're starting out with 1st level characters. They're easily killed and will have a high turnover in many situations. Total Party Kills are not unheard of among 1st level groups - and a few bad die rolls can easily result in everyone dead.
Why would you expect someone so fragile to save the world, or to be part of a huge quest?
You could pull something off like that if you ran the AP going from levels 6-20, and assume the GM runs random adventures leading up to that. (In fact, that might be rather interesting - a module for levels 1-6 which is tangentially-related to the actual AP which goes on to level 20 - the GM can use that module if he or she so desires, or level up a group with his own adventures, or even just have the group start at level 6.) But assuming that these low-level nobodies will remain in the story the entire way? Unless you have a lenient GM, that probably won't happen. And then you need to figure out the motivation as to why new characters would be a part of this.
The first book of Mummy's Mask does two things. It establishes the setting, and allows the heroes to grow attached to the city so that when Book 2 comes around, they don't just flee and go elsewhere. It succeeds quite well with that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, the end of the first book of Runelords doesn't have a grand adventure laid out or a motivation to follow up on the story.
I dunno, having just played through that part of Runelords not long ago, I'd have to disagree. We ended that chapter with a great deal of mysteries involved - all the Thassilonian ruins in the area, the Runewells being active, and a handful of other things I can't recall at the moment that definitely got my character at the least interested in a more full-scale investigation of the local ruins (which admittedly was her entire reason for being in Sandpoint anyway) and was barely enough to keep another party member - who has gained an ever-increasing dislike of Sandpoint and everyone in it except for Ameiko and most of the other PCs - from catching the next ship back home.
There was definitely without a doubt an impression that there was more going on here above and beyond the immediate mastermind behind the goblin attacks - someone or something higher on the food chain.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're welcome, Peter. If I am not saying much.. I will argue a few points, but some I think part of my role is to just listen and consider. I'm aware of my own bias.
Also, I firmly believe you don't invite people to discuss something and then attack them for it.
CARRY ON!