|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're talking to someone who loves high levels and runs them far more often than these boards imply are common.
I just feel that rather than 1-20 AP's, it would be far better to have... say... 1-7, 7-15 and 15-20 linked APs.
I was just thinking how this might be cool. I saw the current Starfinder APs where their second one starts at level 7.. right where the first finishes off. If each is built to be able to be played self contained but also with some threads that tie them together that would be very cool and I would definitely be down for supporting this over all model. Then a third AP that, like you said, goes from 15 to 20 to finish the whole thing off.
I think one of the more difficult steps of this approach may be making it flexible enough to support any kind of outcome that the previous sets had. Like if a key villain escaped, or perhaps more challenging, if a key NPC or villain got killed by some means.
|
|
Rule number one of key villains.
Never let the party gain direct access to them until they are no longer needed.
I just bring this up more because most stories culminate in some kind of face off with a villain. This doesn't mean they are necessarily the biggest villain, so the next story could be finding out that someone else was pulling that guy's strings or whatever.. or all kinds of other plot devices. It's just a general note that the stories have to be resilient enough as different groups may come up with different solutions, etc..
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would love a rotation. Something like a 1-20 AP and then 2 three volumes AP at different range. But I get why it would not be a good idea because I don’t think there is a good market for 10-20 AP only. On the other hand shorter adventures could please a lot of people, so as high leveled ones. If I am not mistaken I believe that AP are the bread and butter of Paizo so they have to be very very careful when experimenting on it.
But it would give us more adventures, and more adventures means more setting. A for the Golarion fans there are still so many places that could be worth a three tomes adventure!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For more than 10 years high levels have been mostly neglected, its only fair that to throw a bone to the people who like them, besides its not like low level are being hurt by it. Kudos to Paizo for supporting all levels of play.
‘Throwing a bone’ to them would mean making some APs be through level twenty, not making ALL AP through level twenty, thus eliminating all ‘complete’ AP of any lower level.
I'm with Ars on this one. And I'm almost never with Ars.
I’ve seen at least twice recently.
|
Id be more than happy for a mix. AP’s that span 3 issues and can tie into one another like the currect starfinder one (although theyre going back to 6 issues with the next) some that span 6. This would possibly easier to put together for writers?
This could allow for a few 3 volume ones for levels 1-7, and 8-14 and 15-20 so i can pick and choose how to weave them together into my own AP. The final issues of a three volume arc could also include a “continuing the campaign” section that details ways to use the main villain at later levels, or avoid her demise.
If they do go to 20, I hope we get to play at level 20 for more than a few token encounters.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Remind me what's the issue here?
The (main) reasons previous APs didn't go to 20th were:
1} Page-count.
2} Many groups didn't play high-level.
The (main) reasons why may groups didn't play high-level:
1} Too complicated.
2} Too slow.
With PF2 the plan is to eliminate high-level complexity, speed play up overall, and have monster statblocks smaller. So all the (main) reasons why groups weren't playing high-level go away. The whole game is meant to be in the "fun band". We'll see if that happens, but that's the stated intent. So I repeat... what's the issue here?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another reason is that, given the time that a Paizo AP takes to play out in the so-called Real Life by so-called Normal People, the chances of a group falling apart for various reasons are pretty high. Many of my groups never finished their APs because somebody moved away or a gaming couple split up or somebody had a baby.
I guess the odds are even higher in the US, because people there are very mobile and tend to move across the country several times in their life. Soldiers get deployed, people go to prison (a gaming convict is something virtually unheard of over here) and so the longer you game, the bigger odds are that you won't finish the game.
Of course, the fact the PF1 is slow and clunky at higher levels magnifies the issue, so if PF2 will be indeed sleeker and faster, chances are people will be able to get to end of a campaign quicker AND thus high level content will be more popular AND Paizo will make more of it.
This 3-book paradigm allows for more high level APs, and let them also succeed.
You can start at upper high and finish at lvl 20.
And having some of them go all the way like that would be absolutely awesome. But it shouldn’t be all of them.
And having some of them go all the way like that would be absolutely awesome. But it shouldn’t be all of them.
Disagree, it should be all of them, after all all begin a level 1, and most AP already can be ended early at 6 points.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And having some of them go all the way like that would be absolutely awesome. But it shouldn’t be all of them.
You're pre-emptively assuming that high level play in PF2 will put you off as much as it does in PF1. But they are very aware how much of a problem this is and fixing it is one of their key design goals for PF2. If it turns out they failed, then sure, maybe they'll go back to the paradigm of lower level APs. But it's worth trying out for the next few years to see how it sticks.
I do think they should intentionally design the APs though in such a way that they have a natural break point that forms a complete story within the first 3 or 4 installments. They can have a sidebar at the start of each installment and especially the break point installment, giving advice for little tweaks to make to the story to make it feel complete for those GMs that don't intend to run it all the way through.
And actually... it might be interesting to see an AP where it is actually directly split into two sub-APs, where the first three installments are level 1-10 with one title, and the next three are level 11-20 with another title. Where each is a self-contained plot with lots of threads to link them together.
He's expressed in other threads his issue is less with 'high levels become difficult to manage' or 'party imbalance becomes a greater issue at high levels' but rather that he dislikes the tone of high level adventures. [More specifically he dislikes martial characters that fit into that narrative without magic.]And having some of them go all the way like that would be absolutely awesome. But it shouldn’t be all of them.You're pre-emptively assuming that high level play in PF2 will put you off as much as it does in PF1. But they are very aware how much of a problem this is and fixing it is one of their key design goals for PF2. If it turns out they failed, then sure, maybe they'll go back to the paradigm of lower level APs. But it's worth trying out for the next few years to see how it sticks.
I dislike jumping 100 feet unaided and the like. I am perfectly fine with movie action hero physics.
Your description of the issue is unhelpful, really.
That is superhero, not action hero.
I don't get the problem with "all APs are from level 1 to level 20". APs are supposed to tell you a long story, and it's really frustrating when it stops at level 14 ("Sweet, I just unlocked this cool new ability, or my favorite ability is in one or two levels... Aaaaaand the BBEG is dead =/").
The only way you have to keep playing to level 20 nowadays is to make your GM expend the campaign after the climax, which is really hard : for exemple, there is a chapter in the Carrion Crown's final book which tell you how to continue the adventure, but I find the ideas there kinda "meh" after the final events.
If you want to play shorter adventures, then go for the modules. They are supposed to be shorter stories. Crypt of the Everflame/Masks of the living god/City of golden death is a triple module set from level 1 to level 6-7. The Dragon's Demand goes through level 1 to 7 as well, in only one book.
They could still make shorter AP from time to time, but my problem right now is that there are only two APs covering every level in PF1, and they are not accessible to everyone because :
- Wrath of the Righteous is heavily based on mythic rules. I don't have any problem with them, but they can make the game pretty difficult to manage (swift action to everything, strange interactions with other normal/mythic rules, etc etc...)
- The next Runelords AP follows two of the most beloved APs of Pathfinder Players. But, if you're new, you probably never played those. I find it weird to start from the end : so, in order to play this AP, I would have to play the first two. Which would take me 2-3 years each. I don't feel like dedicating 6 years of my life on this. (I don't say you can't play the next Runelords AP without playing the first two, but I find this weird)
I don’t think anyone has a problem with having there be 1-20 ap. It just shouldn’t be every single last one. People should be able to have complete campaigns that don’t go to twenty. And I think it’s a very big mistake to completely abandon serving that part of their customer base...
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don’t think anyone has a problem with having there be 1-20 ap. It just shouldn’t be every single last one. People should be able to have complete campaigns that don’t go to twenty. And I think it’s a very big mistake to completely abandon serving that part of their customer base...
Absolute statements are almost never true. Especially in the long run.
It's quite possible that the first AP won't go all the way to 20 because they'll still be getting the pacing down (this is what happened in PF1 with Council of Thieves being shorter, level-wise, than later APs), and they will then certainly be doing them to 20 for a while, as that's something they haven't gotten to do much in PF1 (by the end of PF1 there will be two APs that did this), and something there's a lot of demand for.
But Starfinder is already doing a pair of shorter APs at least once. If those succeed, they'll probably do at least a couple of them for PF2 as well. I wouldn't expect that in the next few years, but at one normal AP per 6 months, that might well be only 4 or 5 APs into PF2.
And if the 3 part APs in Starfinder don't do well, they likely won't do that. Which is unfortunate for people who want them, but Paizo is a business, and will simply not be doing things like this that don't have good odds of making them more money than the alternative.
They've also stated very specifically that they feel the AP format somewhat limits the kind of stories they can tell and in PF2 they'll be leaning a little harder on Modules to tell the kind of stories ill-suited to an AP. So maybe that'll be more your speed if you don't want the full 1-20 experience.
Except the statement was literally made about ALL ap being 1-20.
If you want a long term story that say spans fifteen levels you are SOL.
|
|
Except the statement was literally made about ALL ap being 1-20.
I've heard the statements made by Paizo employees. They said things like 'we're going to try to make them all 20 levels', it's absolutely true. And I'm sure they mean that, too. Nobody is lying here.
But my point was that, inevitably, time makes absolute statements like that cease to be true eventually.
If you want a long term story that say spans fifteen levels you are SOL.
Just like you were if you wanted one that went to 20 (and didn't use Mythic) before. Inevitably, given that Paizo does not have unlimited authors or resources, not every possible style of game will be catered to. Add in that they're a business and they're gonna go with what they think most people want.
Given how many people seem to want 1-20 level games, that's what Paizo is going with, at least right now.
Except the statement was literally made about ALL ap being 1-20.I've heard the statements made by Paizo employees. They said things like 'we're going to try to make them all 20 levels', it's absolutely true. And I'm sure they mean that, too. Nobody is lying here.
But my point was that, inevitably, time makes absolute statements like that cease to be true eventually.
If you want a long term story that say spans fifteen levels you are SOL.Just like you were if you wanted one that went to 20 (and didn't use Mythic) before. Inevitably, given that Paizo does not have unlimited authors or resources, not every possible style of game will be catered to. Add in that they're a business and they're gonna go with what they think most people want.
Given how many people seem to want 1-20 level games, that's what Paizo is going with, at least right now.
It is quite obviously not what just about everyone wants. There is blatantly a large section of people who aren’t that interested in high level play. It doesn’t require extra writers and resources to have some APs go to level fifteen and then others to twenty, say.
|
|
It is quite obviously not what just about everyone wants. There is blatantly a large section of people who aren’t that interested in high level play.
Sure, but all you need for it to be a good business decision is for more people to want it than not. I've seen quite a lot of people asking for this over the years, and Paizo has better market researchers than either of us and they seem to think it'll be more popular.
It doesn’t require extra writers and resources to have some APs go to level fifteen and then others to twenty, say.
It requires fewer APs that go to level 20 (since they only do one AP every 6 months). If 20 level APs are more popular that directly costs them money.
The question is whether they are actually more popular, and it's not one we can answer until a couple have come out.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If Ars gets to whine about AP's reaching the capstone can I whine about AP's starting at level one? There's really nothing more dull than that first level when you can't do any of the cool stuff you had in mind when you built the character. I'd love an AP that, say, starts at 6 and goes to 20.
If Ars gets to whine about AP's reaching the capstone can I whine about AP's starting at level one? There's really nothing more dull than that first level when you can't do any of the cool stuff you had in mind when you built the character. I'd love an AP that, say, starts at 6 and goes to 20.
While I don't see anything wrong with APs reaching 20th level, I'm unsure how I feel about this. For most APs, I'm not against introducing later leveled PCs, but for certain cases, I'm not sure that even PF2e PCs are right fits, even at first level, given the fact that they get HP from their class and ancestry. Now, I can't say that I dislike that aspect of PF2, and I'm generally in favor of increasing PF2e first level characters' power over PF1e, but I'm unsure as to how PF2e will handle characters in cases such as the APs of Carrion Crown or Strange Aeons.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If Ars gets to whine about AP's reaching the capstone can I whine about AP's starting at level one? There's really nothing more dull than that first level when you can't do any of the cool stuff you had in mind when you built the character. I'd love an AP that, say, starts at 6 and goes to 20.
Is this ‘whines’ thing really appropriate? So you are saying that your preference should be the only one presented and presenting any other preference is ‘whining’. That is ... an interesting perspective. I don’t think I’m being disrespectful of people who wish to have twentieth level APs and fully understand what they want. On the other hand, the reciprocal of that hardly seems to be being returned.
I like that generally speaking Paizo has structured APs that reach the level that makes sense for the story they want to tell. So while I enjoy high-level play, I'm not 100% behind a blanket statement that they intend/want _all_ 2e APs to go to 20. I'm happy if that's the default assumption for the next couple, just to make sure high level play gets stressed tested and they can course correct if needed before things get too entrenched.
I know my group wont be playing any of the 2e Adventure Paths if they're none of them end up starting above level 4. So adventure paths aren't really suited for my group. This is fine. Adventures that go to level 20 are fine, even if they're not suited to everyone.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have to put my vote in for broader variety of APs which include ones which don't reach high level.
Apparently Paizo itself recognizes their current approach doesn't allow the range of stories they'd like to tell.
A "slow advancement" AP that doesn't get above 10th should be on the table if it fits a desired story concept.
I also think APs that start out at higher level (e.g. 5th) should be valid story concept.
Shorter APs is also a concept worth exploring more IMHO, and those can be low or high level focus.
I could see them deciding to do two half-length APs instead of one in the same schedule period.
I'd love an AP that, say, starts at 6 and goes to 20.
People who dislike high-level play can sometimes drop the final chapters of an AP. ("That level 9 wizard you just fought was the ultimate villain and now that you've defeated him their evil plan has been foiled!")
But it's generally easier to skip the first chapter or two, since you don't have to deal with unresolved plot threads. ("You stumble upon the corpses of a murdered adventuring party; you find a diary on one of them, revealing that they were on a quest to defeat an evil organization called The Whispering Way, and they were looking for a powerful artefact hidden in a nearby forest...")
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If Ars gets to whine about AP's reaching the capstone can I whine about AP's starting at level one? There's really nothing more dull than that first level when you can't do any of the cool stuff you had in mind when you built the character. I'd love an AP that, say, starts at 6 and goes to 20.
If it helps at all, my experience with the new edition so far is that the feel of the level 1 experience seems a lot closer to about the current edition's level 3 (or so, depending on class and character) experience, at least as far as characters having things to do and feeling like the character you set out to play. Broader functionality in the skills department for a lot of characters, the natural flow of the three action system, and the ability to do something like move up to twice your speed in any pattern/direction, make an attack, and still have an action available really helps bring that low level experience to life where I think the current edition can kind of fall flat.
If Ars gets to whine about AP's reaching the capstone can I whine about AP's starting at level one? There's really nothing more dull than that first level when you can't do any of the cool stuff you had in mind when you built the character. I'd love an AP that, say, starts at 6 and goes to 20.If it helps at all, my experience with the new edition so far is that the feel of the level 1 experience seems a lot closer to about the current edition's level 3 (or so, depending on class and character) experience, at least as far as characters having things to do and feeling like the character you set out to play. Broader functionality in the skills department for a lot of characters, the natural flow of the three action system, and the ability to do something like move up to twice your speed in any pattern/direction, make an attack, and still have an action available really helps bring that low level experience to life where I think the current edition can kind of fall flat.
That's really good to hear. A lot of us have been worried about lower level features being backloaded and spread throughout the character's lifespan.