I have a question for those of you who have pathfinder society experience, especially GMs. As the vast majority of the published adventures are PF Society Scenarios, I was wondering how suitable these scenarios are for non-PFS play?
Do they really cry out for everyone in the party to be in PFS? How hard do you all think that it would be to modify it to avoid that issue? Is their format conducive to home play or is the structure really expecting PFS play/players/GM?
Does any one have suggestions of what scenarios are good to start with?
|
I run PFS adventures for non-PFS groups all the time. I sometimes also run them for PFS groups. I also run Pathfinder PFS scenarios in other game systems, such as 5e. This works well.
When inserting any published module into a home play environment the GM must do some plot stitching to fit things together. This works best if the GM plans way ahead, as then the GM can place the various adventure hooks and NPCs long before they are needed.
I plan on using a bunch of them for a campaign I'm designing set in Thuvia. They're mostly just adventures, but 9/10 the party is sent their by the Pathfinder Society for some reason. It's pretty easy to swap out who is handing out the quest. And the faction related content mostly boils down to side quests within the adventure. I say go for it!
|
We have tried running scenarios without restriction, for no credit. It works out just fine and you are able to make adjustments as needed. I ran all of Devil We Know for a restricted barbarian archetype (I forget the name) as well as a Dreamscarred Press psionic character, a Vitalist. It was great fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They work great -- so long as you're not passing yourself off as a PFS judge and handing out certs.
Advice: most (emphasis: not all) PFS adventures are much too weak (especially at low/mid-tier) for newer parties full of optimized hybrid-class characters, who will utterly smoke the mods, especially the older ones made before 90% of the splat-bling went to the printers. Many of them will feature solitary opponents in certain fights, and such encounters are usually problematic (i.e., they're either total cakewalks, or a veritable death-sentence for one randomly-selected PC who's mauled from full-up to dead before they get an action, and then a total cakewalk).
@ Slim Jim: in that case, would you recommend that the party be one level lower than the scenario requires? Or made on 15-point builds instead of 20 points?
(I too have been eyeing up the PFS scenarios with the idea of running them for a non-PFS group in a semi-home-brew campaign.)
Or made on 15-point builds instead of 20 points?
I would advise against that, as it can very easily have the opposive effect: As the classes that work best under low(ish) point buy are the classes that are already the strongest (especially full casters and Summoner), lowering the point buy often leads to players picking stronger classes, and the party's overal power actually increases rather than decreases. Limiting magic items or limiting what books are usuable has a similar effect.
@ Slim Jim: in that case, would you recommend that the party be one level lower than the scenario requires? Or made on 15-point builds instead of 20 points?
Neither. Just realize that you'll need a good nose for altering encounters as need-be.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Many of them will feature solitary opponents in certain fights, and such encounters are usually problematic (i.e., they're either total cakewalks, or a veritable death-sentence for one randomly-selected PC who's mauled from full-up to dead before they get an action, and then a total cakewalk).
Here's an example of a PFS character death that illustrates Slim Jim's statement. The final fight was against a single foe. It was way too easy, and the PC death was due entirely to incompetence. The adventure was designed to be balanced for a party of iconic PCs, but the actual PCs were optimized to be much stronger than iconics. Despite poor cooperation, and poor party balance such that the cleric had to step up as main tank, the group was vastly overpowered for the adventure as written.
An party of experienced players playing cooperative optimized Pathfinders will destroy appropriate-level PFS encounters by a 2x to 6x ratio, depending on encounter difficulty. E.g. The party referenced above could have easily handled three identical BBEG yetis bursting out, even after the Bard was dead. My PC alone could have taken two.
The GM must assess the PC party, and how tough they are, then adjust difficulty based on a best guess. If you estimate down a bit in difficulty it gives you the later option to gradually and safely adjust difficulty upward.
@ Slim Jim: in that case, would you recommend that the party be one level lower than the scenario requires? Or made on 15-point builds instead of 20 points?Neither. Just realize that you'll need a good nose for altering encounters as need-be.
Slim just said in 1 sentence what took me 3 paragraphs.
it's my understanding that each scenario can be run on different tiers, is that correct? how does that work? Do they have plot arcs across multiple scenarios or are they very isolated?
|
|
Most of the scenarios are self-contained, with a few that link together into a defined arc. All of the scenarios build on the story and plotlines of the Pathfinder Society however, so you will see recurring NPCs and organizations along with callbacks along the way. The tiers have different enemy stats but don't change the plot appreciably between them, just alter the threats faced.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Many of them will feature solitary opponents in certain fights, and such encounters are usually problematic (i.e., they're either total cakewalks, or a veritable death-sentence for one randomly-selected PC who's mauled from full-up to dead before they get an action, and then a total cakewalk).Here's an example of a PFS character death that illustrates Slim Jim's statement. The final fight was against a single foe. It was way too easy, and the PC death was due entirely to incompetence. The adventure was designed to be balanced for a party of iconic PCs, but the actual PCs were optimized to be much stronger than iconics. Despite poor cooperation, and poor party balance such that the cleric had to step up as main tank, the group was vastly overpowered for the adventure as written.
An party of experienced players playing cooperative optimized Pathfinders will destroy appropriate-level PFS encounters by a 2x to 6x ratio, depending on encounter difficulty. E.g. The party referenced above could have easily handled three identical BBEG yetis bursting out, even after the Bard was dead. My PC alone could have taken two.
The GM must assess the PC party, and how tough they are, then adjust difficulty based on a best guess. If you estimate down a bit in difficulty it gives you the later option to gradually and safely adjust difficulty upward.
Slim just said in 1 sentence what took me 3 paragraphs.@ Slim Jim: in that case, would you recommend that the party be one level lower than the scenario requires? Or made on 15-point builds instead of 20 points?Neither. Just realize that you'll need a good nose for altering encounters as need-be.
BTW, your post in that thread immediately following the linked one above is a case of great module design that I would not modify, as it's meticulously constructed to punish outright stupidity. So, no need to do anything (except add monsters, if necessary) unless you're running it for very impulsive young children and don't want things to be too grimdark.