Time to guess what next AP will be.


Pathfinder Adventure Path General Discussion

351 to 400 of 421 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
-Steve Johnston- wrote:

Killing a puppy?

One of the first things you do in the "Hellfire Compact" is kill a man's

puppy. If you're not evil, you SHOULD feel bad. #paizocon #fun?
I was interested, until I read this. I think this AP is not for me.

For all we know, they could be talking about a hell hound.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

1. Would there be any added value in playing Hell's Rebels and Hell's Vengeance in parallel?
2. Could someone be the DM on one and a player on the other without being too much spoiled?


Bestiary 5 is probably teeming with good-alignment creatures, so the evil-AP will have some things to slash about.

I still hope we still got to find evil things instead, beautiful humanoids with wings and metallic dragons bore me quickly.


Cydeth wrote:

As people seem to be chiming in on their opinions of Hell's Vengeance, I figured I'd give my own two cents. *chink*

I hate running games for evil characters. Utterly, completely despise it. For a one-off? Sure, I can manage that...but only barely. So from the word go, Hell's Vengeance is on thin ice with me.

The only way I will even bother maintaining my subscription through Hell's Vengeance is if Paizo is giving me a fair number of Good-aligned NPCs and monsters for the game. Otherwise...I will cancel, even if it is with a good deal of regret. By and large I agree with a good many design decisions of Paizo, and love most of their Adventure Path plot arcs. This one...is pushing my comfort zone enough that I am extremely hesitant about continuing.

On the other hand, a sufficiently awesome Adventure Path after Hell's Vengeance will likely get me back, so... *shrugs*

It is difficult I agree. It also depends on what kind of players you have. If it devolves in murderhobos or CE fests then it is just boring.

Subtle evil, planned grand schemes? This is awesome, but very very hard to pull off. I would really appreciate if Paizo did a section on how to bring out this part of the game. Some strong guidelines with examples and how to make it arch into other plots.

LE is best when it doesnt LOOK evil until the final moment, when the victim turns around and realises, all too late, how he's been played. (victim need not be good, in fact it is better if it is evil thinking he was getting the upper hand BWAHAAHA!)


Request for Hell's Vengeance, or what Id like to see:

A guide (whether in the AP, players guide or campaign setting) for playing with Evil characters (of the neutral and lawful spectrums, i ignore CE entirely in this post). Evil alignments are tricky and if you do an evil campaign, many folk could use a hand in troubleshooting.

Usable by/for: Players making evil pcs, GMing evil npcs realistically, GMs when handling evil pcs.

Building an evil pc
Goals, procedures (blatant open evil, subterfuge, appearing good), ambitions and flaws, stressing the importance that evil doesnt necessarily mean you dont care for people (some evil adore some people and/or are unwilling to sacrifice others), the scales of evil (what sacrifices these people are ready to make, what drives them, how they might also do good/neutral acts). Relations towards other pcs.

How to keep an evil party together!
The AP will surely have a catch (stray from your way and GODS/higher powers smite you..zzZzZZ), but it is not always the case. Some ideas, guidelines and inter character agreements so the party does not implode. Some guidelines/rules of actual betrayeal within the party (so long as the players know or have given their consent, without it being the point of the game).
The lack of such basic storytelling as betrayals, favoritisms, grey morale areas, are what an Evil campaign could give. Why is it so much fun to read Rival's Guide or Game of Thrones? Because the characters have meaningful relationships, some of which are banned strsight off in good aligned PC parties, killing much potential. This is a very fine line however, so focus on containment and clearness could be prioritised. (note:not for all players...then again evil AP is not for all either).

Different kinds of evil

Examples of evil/darker neutral grounds, who might these be, how they came to be, why they persist in their ways.

The greater good/lesser of two evils: a good course to follow, the fall of a great character from roghteousness into grey moral dilemas that necessitate evil acts, the nomad hero that is forsaken for having done a crime that he had no choice in carrying out to prevent a worse fate.

Environment: in evil environments acting evil/selfish is sometimes just survival. The misguided that never learnt anything else, those that wished they could chose brighter options but must survive, those that consider it a natural result.

Druids: Largely Neutral with possible E sprinkled; neutral and evil druids, getting a bit closer to the primal, instincts, heirarchical, order. From Skull and Shackles Master of the Gales is a perfect example, Ormandar a good evil-strongest of the psck example.

The petty: thieves, swindlers, smugglers. Those that do the small evils, or sometimes the not so small.

The greedy, the evil, those more typical of the alifment, i just gave some examples.

Evil, for whom?
How deities class evil (seems to be a very clear cut thing)
How people in the world class evil. Evil acts, when not under divine ordenance, might appear different to a variety of folk. Andoran freedom fighters might consider a relatively neutral sct to be evil. Just some scales as to how some specific folk might react. Big big caveat: dont want to fall into "what is evil" nor heavy alignment discussions; only that denizens metres might vary. Racial wars between old enemies might go beyond evil, dwarves vs orcs etc.

The plan
How to bring about a good machination with subtle manipulations or overt acts. Emphasising on how to carry out, fot GMs and players, a good evil betrayal/coupdeetat/con/bringing down an empire/government. This is one of the hardest and most important aspects for a successful evil campaign. AKA how to not just burn puupies, rape crops and murder churches, or How to avoid CE cliches.

Examples
Empires and races that are evil. What makes them such? Instincts, ambition, twisted magics...
Example npcs, a small codex. Rivals Guide is a fantastic product for example. The Chelaxian party there is a good standard with relationships within evil parties that would be very nice to be able to bring out in actual PC parties.

Just a few thoughts that could really improve how to run such a setting and perhaps pique the interest of those that only play good.
Playing/GMing evil is difficult, it is a very unexplored area that needs to be handled with finesse and tact. Give us a hand, Paizo :)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

I'm curious as to how people would handle an adventure or AP where incrementally the players are put on a path of Falling and becoming evil. Each step, the easier path is the one that increases the chance of becoming evil. The good path is the path of suicide.

You'd see a lot of groups go into the path of evil, more being annihilated, and a few lucky (or very tactically adept) ones somehow remaining Good.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Well did anyone hear the announcement at Paizocon? I heard the new hard backs, but not the AP.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
leo1925 wrote:
I have no problem with two back to back Cheliax APs, even if both have related themes, what really bothers me (and will make re-evaluate my subscription) is the evil party thingy.

Ah here it is. Well it will be interesting. I don't think it's my cup of tea. I was thinking Andoran, since the new re-release of the campaign guide. Any hints at the path after that one?


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Skeld wrote:

Cheliax isn't my cup of tea. An Evil campaign also isn't something I'm interested in running (after all, if I run an AP, I'm going to sink 2-3 years into it).

Both of those things I'm willing to chalk up to "not every AP is for me." However, part of the attraction of Pathfinder is the constant churn in theme/location. So I guess my question is, are we really going to dwell in Cheliax for a year?

-Skeld

We really are, yes.

It's arguably our most popular nation, and it's one we actually HAVEN'T done much with. It's past time, in my opinion, to explore Cheliax fully... that said, it's worth noting that the regions of Cheliax we focus on in Hell's Rebels are not what I'd call "classic Cheliax," since Kintargo is a much more free-thinking region than most of the rest of the nation.

Nothing against exploring and detailing Cheliax but... is there any chance you'll do something similar for Taldor in the near future? If Cheliax didn't get much focus Taldor had even less...


The main problem I have with an evil campaign is that within the Golarion setting evil is absolutely defined (thanks to numerous supplements). You can't use the argument that evil is defined by PC-kind's perception of evil deeds. In GolGolarion killing an intelligent evil monster is not the same, morally, as killing an intelligent, good monster,an intelligent evil monster is not the same, morally, as killing an intelligent, good monster. Its one of the few points of contention I have with the game system.


-Steve Johnston- wrote:

Killing a puppy?

I was interested, until I read this. I think this AP is not for me.

What if it's a Hellhound puppy bent on tearing out your PC's throats?

EDIT: Ninja'd by Samy.


Myth Lord wrote:
Bestiary 5 is probably teeming with good-alignment creatures, so the evil-AP will have some things to slash about.

There are plenty of good-aligned creatures in the previous 4 Bestiaries, so not really any more need for a disproportionate amount in B5.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:
Every single time they announce an AP, no matter what it is, people say "I'm cancelling my subscription!" By the time they've announced it, it's already way too late for them to change it because a few forum denizens threaten to cancel. I don't know what people are attempting to accomplish.

LOL. You don't possibly think the messageboards are actually for accomplishing things do you? LOL again.

Even the hint of trying to stifle the expression of opinion on an internet messageboard is bad form - and reflects poorly on you. Stop that.

Rynjin wrote:
...and remember that imaginary people doing imaginary evil things doesn't hurt anything in reality.

Turns out, that's not an excuse. (And even Paizo admitted there are actual lines, and they wouldn't cross them.)


4 people marked this as a favorite.

So happy about the evil AP. Glad Paizo is finally supporting the “black hats” a bit more.

Now I better understand the exuberance of those who liked their fantasy with plenty of sci-fi when Iron Gods was announced...

-TimD

Paizo Employee Creative Director

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Samy wrote:
Yeah, I think the problem with this announcement, in part, was that for nine months or so, we've been chomping at the bit for "What's next, what's next, what's next??" and then it's, "oh the same". (I know there will be differences, but it's still two Cheliax in a row.) I think a quick one-two-punch announcement might have worked better here.

Runelords and Crimson Throne were both "The same" in that regard. Both were set in Varisia.

AKA: Despite the fact that these two are both set in Cheliax and both have the word "Hell's" in the title... they are going to play out VERY differently. There's more differences than good vs. evil going on here.

It'll take a year for all that to play out though... so in the meantime, patience is the key.


Samy wrote:
-Steve Johnston- wrote:

Killing a puppy?

One of the first things you do in the "Hellfire Compact" is kill a man's

puppy. If you're not evil, you SHOULD feel bad. #paizocon #fun?
I was interested, until I read this. I think this AP is not for me.
For all we know, they could be talking about a hell hound.

Well, that would be a different case. If I was playing evil, I wouldn't kill a hell hound puppy, I'd take it and raise it as my own. :)

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Adam Daigle wrote:
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
I'm more worried about HOW evil you'll have to be in Hell's Vengeance. I can handle playing someone who's ruthless and harsh, like Darth Vader, Lady or Julius Caesar (in my humble opinion the EPITOME of the Lawful Evil alignment), but I draw a line at sadistic stuff like rape, torture or systematic slaughter.
Ummm... didn't he blow up his daughter's home planet?

HE didn't. TARKIN did.


Darth Vader still killed a bunch of Jedi kids and I believe he helped to hunt down and murder the remaining Jedi. Also I believe he had Luke's Uncle and Aunt killed by Stormtroopers.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Odraude wrote:
Darth Vader still killed a bunch of Jedi kids and I believe he helped to hunt down and murder the remaining Jedi.

One could argue that's a Good act since Jedi are inherently Evil. ;)


CorvusMask wrote:

Really what confuses me about subscribers is that I'd stick around to first part at least before unsubscribing <_< Heck, I'd get them anyway even if I'm not planning to run them since I like reading material even if I don't get to use them

Its kinda like people who unsubscribed from Iron Gods without giving it a chance, saying "Nope, I won't have any interested in it no matter how well it is done" is kinda... Eh, you know.

Iron Gods was in no way my cup of tea. I'm a fantasy nut, but not overly big on sci-fi. However, I'll admit that their story and continuity in Iron Gods was great. Even more important than my appreciation that they created a great AP in a genre I'm not big on, though, is that I have players who would choose it as an option for a future game.

Hell's Vengeance, being an AP for evil characters, does not give me such an option. My players won't do evil. Period. Doesn't matter how great the story might be. You can criticize that all you want, CM, and tell me I'm being silly, ridiculous, unfair, or a whole host of other flavorful titles. What it comes down to in the end is: My players won't play such a game, and I don't enjoy running evil campaigns either.

Thus, there's no purpose for me to spend my money on this one and give it a chance. I hope it's fantastic! I want Paizo to make money because I enjoy the products Paizo puts out.

This one is a no-go, however. I'll look forward to Hell's Rebels and whatever AP follows Vengeance!


Arnwyn wrote:

Rynjin wrote:
...and remember that imaginary people doing imaginary evil things doesn't hurt anything in reality.
Turns out, that's not an excuse. (And even Paizo admitted there are actual lines, and they wouldn't cross them.)

Turns out that's not an excuse for what? Complete your thought.

The fact remains that playing an evil character does not make you evil. I'm pretty sure if you said something along those lies to someone like Anthony Hopkins he'd be pretty offended.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tangent101 wrote:

I'm curious as to how people would handle an adventure or AP where incrementally the players are put on a path of Falling and becoming evil. Each step, the easier path is the one that increases the chance of becoming evil. The good path is the path of suicide.

You'd see a lot of groups go into the path of evil, more being annihilated, and a few lucky (or very tactically adept) ones somehow remaining Good.

My group would be all about going that difficult path to suicide if it meant doing the right thing. They're awesome that way! =D


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

My two cents: playing an evil campaign is possible if your players are mature people and the GM is experiences. Is more about trying a different prospective on adventuring than "being evil" per se. If your players enjoy roleplaying and deeply complex characterizations and you are good at curbing excesses and situation with the potential to ruin fun for everyone then an evil AP is a great opportunity. If you don't have that kind of human material or experience then evil APs are probably not the right choice for you.

P.S.

I'd really love to hear something about a Taldor AP...

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Superscriber

Okay. I got the Evil AP(Hell's Vengeance), the Tech AP(Iron Gods), and the Goody-Goody AP(Wrath of the Righteous) I wanted and there is also more We Be Goblins in the works. Now a time travel and/or worlds spanning AP and most of my list of most wanted APs will be done.


Waiting on the Neutral AP, where the PCs sit around and play hopscotch every day :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rogar Valertis wrote:
My two cents: playing an evil campaign is possible if your players are mature people and the GM is experiences. Is more about trying a different prospective on adventuring than "being evil" per se. If your players enjoy roleplaying and deeply complex characterizations and you are good at curbing excesses and situation with the potential to ruin fun for everyone then an evil AP is a great opportunity. If you don't have that kind of human material or experience then evil APs are probably not the right choice for you.

Nope. I'm not buying.

All of my players are incredibly mature . . . mature enough to know beyond all reasonable doubt that playing evil characters is not something they're interested in. Also, mature enough to know that to desire evil to gain victory isn't their cup of tea at all.

I would also argue that playing evil is quite easy, actually. It doesn't involve a great amount of depth at all, as evil is very much engrained within human nature. Unwillingness to lie, cheat, steal, or even bend the rules to get what you want or desire (lawful evil characters do this according to the society they wish to uphold, as well, though they do it in a fashion that would be logical, with loopholes -- think lawyers!) isn't easy to play. If you don't believe that good would be more difficult, look at all the Paladin alignment threads out there! People can't seem to grasp how good can even be quantified in-game!

I've also been running games for over 20 years, so I've got plenty of experience doing it. My friends would say I'm pretty good at it. ;)

For us, it's a question of morality and ethics, even in the characters we're portraying. I run evil characters as GM with the knowledge that such characters will get defeated by my players. It's not about evil winning with us. Evil is there to be defeated, not to be the stars of the show.

Thus, I disagree with your two cents. But, I will not argue with your play style! If you enjoy evil, have fun with it RV! I wish you many happy hours of gaming!

The Exchange

I thought on it a bit, and there *is* one scenario in which I play the AP: I want Joe Abercrombie as the GM.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Sub-Creator wrote:
Rogar Valertis wrote:
My two cents: playing an evil campaign is possible if your players are mature people and the GM is experiences. Is more about trying a different prospective on adventuring than "being evil" per se. If your players enjoy roleplaying and deeply complex characterizations and you are good at curbing excesses and situation with the potential to ruin fun for everyone then an evil AP is a great opportunity. If you don't have that kind of human material or experience then evil APs are probably not the right choice for you.

Nope. I'm not buying.

All of my players are incredibly mature . . . mature enough to know beyond all reasonable doubt that playing evil characters is not something they're interested in. Also, mature enough to know that to desire evil to gain victory isn't their cup of tea at all.

I would also argue that playing evil is quite easy, actually. It doesn't involve a great amount of depth at all, as evil is very much engrained within human nature. Unwillingness to lie, cheat, steal, or even bend the rules to get what you want or desire (lawful evil characters do this according to the society they wish to uphold, as well, though they do it in a fashion that would be logical, with loopholes -- think lawyers!) isn't easy to play. If you don't believe that good would be more difficult, look at all the Paladin alignment threads out there! People can't seem to grasp how good can even be quantified in-game!

I've also been running games for over 20 years, so I've got plenty of experience doing it. My friends would say I'm pretty good at it. ;)

For us, it's a question of morality and ethics, even in the characters we're portraying. I run evil characters as GM with the knowledge that such characters will get defeated by my players. It's not about evil winning with us. Evil is there to be defeated, not to be the stars of the show.

Thus, I disagree with your two cents. But, I will not argue with your play style! If you enjoy evil, have fun with it...

Notice that Rogar Valertis wasn't saying that mature players should want to play this, he seems to be saying that only mature players *could* play such a campaign well. Thus you and your players can be very mature and still have zero interest in an evil campaign without contradicting him.

The Exchange

Samy wrote:
Lord Snow wrote:
In a more serious tone, I think the location of an AP is not what defines it. The first three Pathfinder APs have all been Varisia, and you can't really say they are the same in any meaningful way.

I agree that the location of an AP does not *necessarily* have to define it, and that there is absolutely the possibility to tell different stories within the same country, yes. However,

1) At the time of the first three APs we didn't really know much about Golarion as a whole. Since then, we've gotten a whole new world opened up to us, and over the last 5+ years we've gotten accustomed to country-hopping to provide variety. It's not 2007 anymore, and Golarion is a much bigger place now. Three consecutive APs in Varisia was done once, but it would definitely feel odd now.

2) From the little we *do* know of HR vs HV so far, they do seem to be the same in various meaningful ways *past* the country. Dealing with devils and House Thrune seems to be a very major theme in both. They both take place during the same rebellion as a backdrop. It's as if Crimson Throne and Second Darkness had been about Thassilon and the Runelords. They weren't; they came up with their own plotlines. Hopefully, whenever more details are published about HR and HV, they will focus on saying what is *different* about them, because right now, other than the Evil AP angle, they sound very similar.

You raise good points as to why the announcement would initially sound offputting. As for the APs being similar - Shattered Star and Rise of the Runelords are very close thematically yet play out extremely differently, and I don't think fatigue would have applied had they come one after the other.

We know HR is very Kintrago specific and has themes of rebellion and city management. We know HV is going to be an exploration of many locations in Cheliax and will be an evil campaign. Devils will clearly feature in both, though probably mostly as enemies in the first and as allies in the second.

While I have no interest in playing HV (HR actually sounds like the Cheliax AP I wanted since CoT disappointed), I must say that the concept itself doesn't sound bad at all. I have been, for some time, thinking that APs need to stop being primarily about regions and focus more on telling good stories in the areas of Golarion that could support them best, and this seems like a step in the right direction to me. So does Giantslayer, by the way.


Evil AP in Cheliax? Know what this calls for? Dynasties and Demagogues!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

HV coming on the heels of HR is an interesting choice on Paizo's part, but no more so than making an Evil AP. Neither CoT nor HR have been in Cheliax proper, being set in outlying areas relatively free of House Thrune, so I imagine that seeing a more representative Cheliax is in order. I will pay close attention to every bit of info about this one. I doubt I'll be subbed for the first month or two, but if I hear that it's otherwise stellar... well, if anybody can pull that off, it's Paizo.


Sub-Creator wrote:

Nope. I'm not buying.

All of my players are incredibly mature . . . mature enough to know beyond all reasonable doubt that playing evil characters is not something they're interested in. Also, mature enough to know that to desire evil to gain victory isn't their cup of tea at all.

I would also argue that playing evil is quite easy, actually. It doesn't involve a great amount of depth at all, as evil is very much engrained within human nature. Unwillingness to lie, cheat, steal, or even bend the rules to get what you want or desire (lawful evil characters do this according to the society they wish to uphold, as well, though they do it in a fashion that would be logical, with loopholes -- think lawyers!) isn't easy to play. If you don't believe that good would be more difficult, look at all the Paladin alignment threads out there! People can't seem to grasp how good can even be quantified in-game!

I've also been running games for over 20 years, so I've got plenty of experience doing it. My friends would say I'm pretty good at it. ;)

For us, it's a question of morality and ethics, even in the characters we're portraying. I run evil characters as GM with the knowledge that such characters will get defeated by my players. It's not about evil winning with us. Evil is there to be defeated, not to be the stars of the show.

Thus, I disagree with your two cents. But, I will not argue with your play style! If you enjoy evil, have fun with it...

Man, I wonder what you think of reading gritty fantasy...part of the allure there is that nobody is good by definition. I'm curious, is it a genre you dislike?


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

Mixed feelings about this one but let's see. If it takes you all over Cheliax getting the accompanying gazetteers detailing the different places you'll visit might be worth it alone!

James Jacobs wrote:

[...]

AKA: Despite the fact that these two are both set in Cheliax and both have the word "Hell's" in the title... they are going to play out VERY differently.
[...]

As long as "hell" is not the new "carrion" *grins*

Ruyan.


Well, the one after HV is more traditional, perhaps the one after that is with Vudra and the Occult or maybe they'll have a Goblin AP?

Of course after that they'll do one more traditional again so they can match it up with the big 10 year AP end....Or I'm guessing they might do it that way...


I'm going to say that it will be a traditional AP after a Evil AP, but the question becomes how can they make a traditional AP that will sell? Most players have not played all the AP's so Paizo is now competing with it's own AP line. For me the last "traditional" AP that moved me enough to get excited was Reign of Winter, since then the Traditional AP's for me have left me with a pretty bland taste.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Wow! If RoW is traditional for you I would love to see your off the wall ideas:-D


The only thing non-traditional about RoW was part-5. But that's not really the point, the point is Paizo is competing against it's own AP's. How can they attract people to a new AP over a old AP. Especially if it's traditional. In my circles through PFS I'm in touch with about a dozen different home groups. Iron Gods, and Wrath of Righteous generated interest but there is absolutely no interest in any of the groups for Giant Slayer. 2 groups are thinking about running Mummy's Mask but are undecided.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just gonna say this now; while I have warmed up to the idea of this dual Cheliax AP, even the evil PC thing, I would absolutely despise a Goblin AP. Six months of that? Nope.

Dark Archive

Starfinder Superscriber
Neongelion wrote:

Just gonna say this now; while I have warmed up to the idea of this dual Cheliax AP, even the evil PC thing, I would absolutely despise a Goblin AP. Six months of that? Nope.

I personally would love to see a Goblin AP. I'm looking forward to We Be Goblins Free for Free RPG day too.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
roysier wrote:
the point is Paizo is competing against it's own AP's. How can they attract people to a new AP over a old AP.

That's exactly why they let old APs go OOP. (And yes, the PDFs remain in-print, but a significant audience is still print-first.)


Rynjin wrote:


The fact remains that playing an evil character does not make you evil. I'm pretty sure if you said something along those lies to someone like Anthony Hopkins he'd be pretty offended.

Some actors would... some would not. I've seen a few interviews that talk about how disturbed some actors got after reaching down into that 'dark place' to fully understand their character.

Heath Ledger and Joker is one of the biggest ones. He had journals filled with 'Stuff he thought Joker would find funny' and his friends and family were concerned about him before he died...

It depends on how serious you take you 'acting'. Some take it to far and really aren't the same afterwards. Hence all the drinking and depression in Hollywood.


roysier wrote:
The only thing non-traditional about RoW was part-5. But that's not really the point, the point is Paizo is competing against it's own AP's. How can they attract people to a new AP over a old AP. Especially if it's traditional. In my circles through PFS I'm in touch with about a dozen different home groups. Iron Gods, and Wrath of Righteous generated interest but there is absolutely no interest in any of the groups for Giant Slayer. 2 groups are thinking about running Mummy's Mask but are undecided.

Isn't that really how it's always been with modules? Did anyone, anywhere actually play EVERYTHING that was written?

Having traditional games and weird fringe games at the same time is really a good strategy. It gives something for everyone. We've finished up with Serpent skull and are getting really close on Kingmaker and Jade Regent... We just sat down as a group and looked over everything we had available (or would have by mid summer/early fall) and picked out a couple to fill in the slots. We ended up with Carrion Crown and Shattered Star. Iron Gods, Mummy's Mask, Giant slayers, Reign of winter were all in the 'maybe' pile... but doesn't look likely.

One thing about their 2 paths a year mentality is that we absolutely will NOT get caught up... ever. So really, having one or two far out things that some people have been hoping for... and I have no interest in... REALLY is a good thing in my book. We could use a window to work on what we already have :P

Personally, I'm hoping that there'll be some Occult Adventures love in the future. I love that play genre. But if they stick with spaceship and evil cowboys, I'm still set for a while.


Actually for awhile I had a group on Sunday and some of those players also played on a Wednesday game and between the 2 groups we played all the AP's, but now we are down to 1 group and some players are burned out on Paizo AP's so we are branching out to more 3pp adventure stuff.

The Exchange

roysier wrote:
The only thing non-traditional about RoW was part-5. But that's not really the point, the point is Paizo is competing against it's own AP's. How can they attract people to a new AP over a old AP. Especially if it's traditional. In my circles through PFS I'm in touch with about a dozen different home groups. Iron Gods, and Wrath of Righteous generated interest but there is absolutely no interest in any of the groups for Giant Slayer. 2 groups are thinking about running Mummy's Mask but are undecided.

Paizo is far from the only company that is competing against its own product. The reason this works is

a) Subscription based business model - many of the sales that AP score are from the loyal subscribers who want their monthly fix. Those people will just get everything because they love the product. I can say I will never run a fraction of the Paizo modules I own, but reading them has always been a great time for me.

b) People like the new and shiny. Your group may not be interested in Giantslayer, but other groups like the "good ol' fashion" vibe it offers. For many it brings to mind classics like "against the giants". So essentially people want to buy the newest thing, and if there is a constant flux of APs with different styles everyone is sure to find something reasonably new that fit them reasonably well.

c) And finally... to be honest... if Reign of Winter seems even remotely traditional to you,

Reign of Winter spoiler:
with its Russian/fearie-tale influence, with the planet hopping (to a planet full of dragons!), with the hut... and all of that before we ever reach actual Russia and fight Rasputin...

Then you are not the typical Pathfinder customer. Far from it. Not saying this as criticism, just pointing out that you seem to be looking for something other than what most of the AP crowed are.


I have to dispute your point A, considering the deluge of people, Youtube style, coming onto the boards to say "Unsubscribed" every time a new AP is released.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, I'd fall into group A at this point. For me, the APs have basically replaced Dragon and Dungeon (more Dungeon than Dragon though) in what they monthly release. Even those I may never run, I've read them like a magazine, which is how I see the APs in many way. An upgraded version of the magazine product that used to be released, but higher grade and hence more costly.

On the goblin AP, they might never do one (after all, they haven't done a Darkmoon Vale AP either really), but I think it could be great fun. They've done some fun stuff with their other goblin modules, and in some ways their goblins are just as iconic (if not more) than anything else they put out.

Celebrating it and putting it forward as something to focus on for six months, plus the hilarity and humor as well as the fun of the modules extended for that period could actually be rather fun.


Rynjin wrote:
I have to dispute your point A, considering the deluge of people, Youtube style, coming onto the boards to say "Unsubscribed" every time a new AP is released.

I don't work for Paizo, so I could hardly say for certain... BUT, I doubt the "deluge" (I hope that doesn't come of as too sassy, but it just doesn't seem like that many people to me) of people saying "unsubscribed" is very many compared to the overall number of subscribers. I also don't think they all actually unsubscribe. Plus, even if they do, they'll resubscribe on the path after that probably, and that means that people are resubscribing to this path after unsubscribing for Giantslayer. Personally, I like having all the other totally sweet material in the volumes, even if I don't get to play them all. I have a subscription despite having never finished an AP. I'm working really hard to remedy that with Skull & Shackles, so we'll see.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

"Deluge" was meant to be sassy anyway, so no offense taken.

It just tickles me that every time a new AP comes out there are quite a few people that chime in (sometimes as like their only forum post ever) to say "Wow, I hate this idea. This will be the first AP ever I've unsubscribed for."

Almost those exact words, every time.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

When We Be Goblns came out there were several calls for a goblin AP. Paizo don't generally say "never" but one of the staff (James Jacobs, from memory) made the point that part of what made the module a success was both its differentness and its silliness - both elements that would be difficult to pull off over six months.

I like the goblin modules in isolation and hope they continue, but I think "goblin zaniness" over an AP would wear a little. Personally, I'd much prefer they try a full-on monstrous AP with a wider choice of potential races (like any bestiary 1-5 monster of less than five hit die or something).


I want an AP on Triaxus.

Played And Madness Followed recently and it was some of the most fun I've had. It feels very fresh after all the stuff on Golarion. You basically know jack s%&! except everything's kind of weird and cool, and the main race are weird seasonal people, with others like flying whales, snake priests, and construct guards.

It was a ton of fun, and I'd like to see the place expanded on more.

351 to 400 of 421 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Path / General Discussion / Time to guess what next AP will be. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.