I thought it might be fun and useful to know which games people have played, which they recommend and which they'd like to play:
Submitted!
Tarondor, it looks like you skipped Giantslayer.
Oh, thanks! It's fixed now.
Lol, this looks familiar. Way to ninja an experiment. Hopefully it will still produce the fruit I'm looking for. Stay classy
I'm sorry you see it that way.
I'm interested in 2e and you're evidently not. I don't think asking about a broader array of games in unclassy, is it? Particularly if they interest me more than 1e does?
I don't think that this has to be a zero-sum game, Mr. Clint. It's not like people can't answer both.
And hey, full credit to you for sparking the idea.
Hmmm, I don’t see Reign of Winter…
I... may need to have my brain checked. Thanks!
I fixed it.
lol the last question only allows you to select one answer.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm probably the only person who will have checked every box for the first question! :D
lol the last question only allows you to select one answer.
I -think- that's fixed? Not my forte.
I done did a thing!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lol, this looks familiar. Way to ninja an experiment. Hopefully it will still produce the fruit I'm looking for. Stay classy
You deliberately excluded 2E, so you can't be too mad when more people answer this survey.
which they'd like to play
I threw down an answer, but one of the things I don't really feel like is fully appreciated is that it really doesn't matter what players want to play.
The rate-limiting factor is GMs, not players.
I find it hard to believe there are GMs who are willing to commit 300 hours VTT / 3-5 years PbP, and leave it up to strangers to decide what they're running. They're either deciding what to run (and have more applicants than they can take), or they're asking their friends what they want to play.
The most accurate survey, I think, would be this: on a scale of -10 to 0, how much do you want to run each of these APs, -10 being "never, no matter what" to 0 being "I'd run it even without some incentive"?
I don't think what the players want has much to do with it, but if you wanted to Adam Smith it, you could create a player survey: on a scale of 0 to +5, how much do you want to play each of these APs? And then give players a limited pool of points (say, 5), which they can allocate between ALL the APs (so, they can mark one with all 5 points, or put 1 point in five different APs). The games with the highest scores (player demand minus GM reluctance) go, and the GM collects all the points and can reuse them. It'd essentially be a market for bidding on which games go.
Gave my responses.
Interesting stuff, Watery Soup!
While it's true that as a GM I'm not going to run an AP just because players want it, it does help shape my thinking to see what others are interested in. Moreover, as a gaming nerd, I'm just interested in what's on other's minds. I always find stuff in these polls that interest me.
For instance, I had no idea of the popularity of Skull and Shackles.
I'm probably the only person who will have checked every box for the first question! :D
Please tell me that's not humanly possible, Brainiac! You'd have to have been running three or four APs a week for the last 13 years!
Well, the first question does not ask if you Dmed the whole AP. Pathfinder 1e allowed you to play just the sanction content. So you could have Dmed the sanctioned part of MM book 1, the sanctioned part of Hell's Rebels book 1 and so on.
If I were to check only the ones I Dmed the whole AP, only Mummy's Mask would apply, but I had about five of them checked where I dmed 1 to 3 books worth of the AP, would have been six if Reign of Winter was up.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Please tell me that's not humanly possible, Brainiac! You'd have to have been running three or four APs a week for the last 13 years!
Longer than that...
I started running Shackled City for the first time when it was still coming out in Dungeon Magazine. That was 2003.
For years, I ran every AP for my weekly in-person gaming group. We played through all of them up through Hell's Vengeance. We stopped meeting regularly once I had kids, so I switched to running games on the Paizo boards in early 2017.
I've run every single AP in one form or another, some multiple times, and most to completion at least once. I haven't finished a 2E AP yet but some of them are close--we're on book 6 of Extinction Curse and book 5 of Agents of Edgewatch.
I may, in fact, be not fully human. :D
I done did a thing!You are a god to me. I don't do anything.
But, I swear that you did that same thing...lol!
Brainiac is not human. I have it on good authority.
I would like to try to recall every module played since the Box sets; but, well, my memory has a hard enough time keeping my current games in order...lol.
Just a love for the Gaming!
@ Brainiac my weekly AoA game and weekly EC game are in Book 5 final chapter....almost.
An aside: we are just now battling The Pallid Mask in my SA PbP...lol.
I may, in fact, be not fully human. :D
That's impressive! I thought I had run a lot of stuff, but I take off my nerdy little hat to you, sir!
I would like to try to recall every module played since the Box sets; but, well, my memory has a hard enough time keeping my current games in order...lol.
Check out my Profile. I've listed all the big stuff going back to 1977!
Many for Strength of Thousands to play as a player.
I've got a question: a significant number of people would recommend Rise of the Runelords to other players and GMs. Why? I've never played it but (like all the APs) I have read it. What about that AP makes it stand out in so many people's minds?
Personally, I would point people towards Legacy of Fire, Kingmaker and Iron Gods!
Personally I feel that Rise is incredibly overrated and hasn't aged well but I understand its importance as the first major AP and how it introduced many people to Varisia and the Runelords which are well loved, so I get why its popular, I just think there are other technically better APs out there since its been many years since Rise was written and paizo has improved a lot since then
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think Rise is popular because it follows pretty standard fantasy themes and does it well. The others focus on different themes, like Egypt in Mummy’s Mask or add additional rules, like kingdom building in Kingmaker or mythic rules in Wrath. And then, of course, there are the ones that aren’t done well and need extra work on the GM to make work.
|
As I said to Tarondor in a game they're running that I'm in, it was hard for me to limit my answers and not yell "I WANNA PLAY *ALL* THE APS!"
It was honestly kind of a dream of mine to play through the APs in a grand "cinematic universe" sort of setup where I could cameo my PCs in later APs, something explicitly written into Return of the Runelords, but also doing things like playing the kid of a PC of a previous AP in a later one. That said, I realize now it'd be pretty much impossible to do this without GMing myself, which terrifies me, and I wouldn't be able to PLAY a PC in said APs.
I very much would love to play in more or less all the APs. I went through all the PF1 APs, and ranked them in tier 1-3(in groups).
However, one thing nobody seems to be talking about is:
How hecking freakin cool would it be for Owlcat to make either one epically massive game, or a trilogy of games for the Runelords APs?!?
Submitted.
How hecking freakin cool would it be for Owlcat to make either one epically massive game, or a trilogy of games for the Runelords APs?!?
Shut up and take my money!
So far 48 people have responded to the poll and I hope that many more will, but here's some quick returns on the data:
The most GM'ed AP is Rise of the Runelords with 14 (versus 7 each for Skull and Shackles and Wrath of the Righteous.)
The numbers are unsurprisingly similar for the most-played AP, except that Kingmaker leaps into second place with Skull and Shackles and Wrath of the Righteous tied for third.
GM's are most excited about Outlaws of Alkenstar (8), followed by Abomination Vaults (7) and a four-way tie between Rise of the Runelords, Hell's Rebels, Return of the Runelords and Tyrant's Grasp (6 each).
Players, on the other hand, are most excited about Strength of Thousands and War for the Crown.
By miles and miles the most recommended AP is Rise of the Runelords (15), trailed by Kingmaker (7) and Curse of the Crimson Throne (5).
People are jonesing for 2e versions of Rise of the Runelords, Iron Gods and War for the Crown, but want to see Owlcat/computer game versions of Rise of the Runelords, Skull and Shackles, Iron Gods and Hell's Rebels.
Tian Xia, Arcadia and the Five Kings Mountains are clear favorites for an AP setting, though I added the Darklands and First World late to the choices, so their low showing may be my fault.
The disconnect between what people want to GM and what people want to play is quite interesting.
Well, the first question does not ask if you Dmed the whole AP. Pathfinder 1e allowed you to play just the sanction content. So you could have Dmed the sanctioned part of MM book 1, the sanctioned part of Hell's Rebels book 1 and so on.
If I were to check only the ones I Dmed the whole AP, only Mummy's Mask would apply, but I had about five of them checked where I dmed 1 to 3 books worth of the AP, would have been six if Reign of Winter was up.
That's what I intended, DG. Check it if you've had significant experience with it. Thanks for taking the survey.
I wonder if anyone is taking credit for Kingmaker if they've played the video game. I didn't select Kingmaker as an AP that I've played, though I have made it a decent chunk of the way through the digital version.
Are GMs and PCs selecting 1e and 2e pretty evenly for ones they are interested in playing/running? I’m curious to the interest in run/playing 2e v. 1e.
Are GMs and PCs selecting 1e and 2e pretty evenly for ones they are interested in playing/running? I’m curious to the interest in run/playing 2e v. 1e.
I'm sure it's difficult to pick evenly as we're only allowed up to 3 choices.
I wanna play in Strength of Thousands(though preferably via a 1e conversion. 2e just doesn't appeal to me), but I wanna play and complete my 3 choices(Rise, and I think Legacy of Fire, and CoT? I forget, LOL) a lot more.
As I said above, awhile ago, I went through all of the PF1 Adventure Paths and grouped them all by how much I wanna play each.
Ones I wanna play the most:
Rise of the Runelords
Council of Thieves
Carrion Crown
Wrath of the Righteous
Ironfang Invasion
Secondary group:
Curse of the Crimson Throne
Second Darkness
Legacy of Fire
Jade Regent
Shattered Star
And finally all the rest in the third group:
Kingmaker(I actually have a friend who is gonna solo run this for me)
Reign of Winter
Mummy's Mask
Giantslayer
Hell's Rebels
Hell's Vengeance
War for the Crown
Return of the Runelords
Tyrant's Grasp.
As much as I absolutely love Varisia and all the awesome Runelord stuff, I want to hopefully play and complete their APs in order. Rise, Shattered Star, then Return, hence them being in their respective groups.
I've got a question: a significant number of people would recommend Rise of the Runelords to other players and GMs. Why? I've never played it but (like all the APs) I have read it. What about that AP makes it stand out in so many people's minds?
Personally, I would point people towards Legacy of Fire, Kingmaker and Iron Gods!
Your question requests to have played or GMed at least half of what you recommend, so the answer is skewed towards APs that have been played the most. Rise of the Runelords is the first Pathfinder AP and the first one to have an Anniversary edition, and it is the most played one (223 campaigns just in this forum). Conversely I expect the more recent ones to be less marked, just because less people has had the chance to play them. If most people is taking between 3 and 8 years to complete APs, then I expect you find very little people able to qualify to recommend anything after Giantslayer.
In my case I wanted to recommend Reign of Winter for example, but I am only starting 3rd book, and thus I cannot mark it.
That said, Rise is a very well balanced AP, in the sense that it might be OK to most of the people playing, plus at least the Anniversary Edition is pretty complete, making it more easily to prepare and GM than other APs.
I may, in fact, be not fully human. :D
I can say your job with our Iron Gods has been outstanding! One day I will ask you for your tricks on how you achieve to run just so many games successfully!
Are GMs and PCs selecting 1e and 2e pretty evenly for ones they are interested in playing/running? I’m curious to the interest in run/playing 2e v. 1e.
Many more people have played the 1e games because they've been out longer. I mean, 30 people out of 51 have played Rise of the Runelords. 25 have played Kingmaker and 20 each have played Skull and Shackles and Wrath of the Righteous, whereas only 5 have played Age of Ashes. I'm guessing some of those are my Age of Ashes home game! But 5 is also the number for Second Darkness, Hell's Vengeance and War for the Crown. Some 1e games have fewer than that.
I find it significant that GMs want to run Abomination Vaults and Outlaws of Alkenstar in somewhat bigger numbers than any of the 1e games (though taken as a whole the gravity is still definitely with 1e).
Interestingly, far FEWER people want to play RotRL than want to run it! Twice as many people want to play Return of the Runelords (me, too!). The largest single group wants to play Strength of Thousands.
I'm not suggesting we have either a statistically meaningful set of answers or a statistically useful set of questions. It's just interesting.
It's interesting how few people have played Paizo's old non-Golarion APs. I got a fair way into Savage Tide once and it was a good time! I hear Age of Worms is a little grimdark for my taste, but I'd be down to try Shackled City. Or another trip into Savage Tide, it's been years since that campaign and I'd like to see how it ends.
Well I am running SoT Ap. Nov 7th is the last recruitment day.
It's interesting how few people have played Paizo's old non-Golarion APs. I got a fair way into Savage Tide once and it was a good time! I hear Age of Worms is a little grimdark for my taste, but I'd be down to try Shackled City. Or another trip into Savage Tide, it's been years since that campaign and I'd like to see how it ends.
I think the three Dragon Magazine AP's suffered from being so many chapters. Certain parts of Savage Tide felt repetitive, for instance. But the set pieces were marvelous and the overall plot was very interesting.
lol the last question only allows you to select one answer.I -think- that's fixed? Not my forte.
I wanted to clarify, that "lol" was meant to be lighthearted.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No problem! That's the way I took it.
|
It's interesting how few people have played Paizo's old non-Golarion APs. I got a fair way into Savage Tide once and it was a good time! I hear Age of Worms is a little grimdark for my taste, but I'd be down to try Shackled City. Or another trip into Savage Tide, it's been years since that campaign and I'd like to see how it ends.
They are in 3.5 and are old, old, old. You have to buy a buncha outta print magazines...
I'm sure many of the people who have run RISE are doing it in the Pathfinder edition.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They are in 3.5 and are old, old, old. You have to buy a buncha outta print magazines...
Unless you happen to have that beautiful Shackled City Hardcover that still makes me mourn for the fact that Paizo couldn't give AoW and ST the same treatment.
Brings back great memories when I started to run SC and AoW in Eberron. Unluckily, those games died due to me having a major case of GM burnout, so I never got to finish them.
|
|
They are in 3.5 and are old, old, old. You have to buy a buncha outta print magazines...Unless you happen to have that beautiful Shackled City Hardcover that still makes me mourn for the fact that Paizo couldn't give AoW and ST the same treatment.
Brings back great memories when I started to run SC and AoW in Eberron. Unluckily, those games died due to me having a major case of GM burnout, so I never got to finish them.
bust'em out again.
That Shackled City hardcover was so beautiful back then that it inspired me to start my first campaign here when I got my hands on it.
It is an old beast and you feel it after you have GMed through a few more modern APs, but still, it has plenty of interesting stuff within, if you and your group are able to adjust or endure through the clunky parts. It is great when you think it set the ideas that drove APs development through this decade, and comparing it to other products of that time, it is outstanding, with some moments truly hilarious, and others memorably epic.
The art and adventure design has been luckily refined though, the plot has potential in the right hands, but it is too convoluted and complex to follow for most people. Most dungeons are unnecessarily long and some of them feature repetitive combats, and the idea to reach level 20 seems attractive when you start at level 1 but maintaining that high level character sheets is not pleasant and the campaign becomes unnecessarily long. I think they learned because newer APs do this better nowadays.
I think Rise is popular because it follows pretty standard fantasy themes and does it well. The others focus on different themes, like Egypt in Mummy’s Mask or add additional rules, like kingdom building in Kingmaker or mythic rules in Wrath. And then, of course, there are the ones that aren’t done well and need extra work on the GM to make work.
This is my reason for recommending Rise of the Runelords. The other adventure paths I have run or played are more thematic: the wilderness survival of Serpent's Skull, the Asian lore of Jade Regent, the technology of Iron Gods, and the war of Ironfang Invasion--and more subject to individual taste.
Also, I only recommend adventure paths that I have tried myself. Since more people have played Rise of the Runelords, more people have the experience to recommend it.