PF1 Adventure Paths - are any still popular?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 52 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

With more and more of the Table Top RPG community shifts to the Pathfinder 2E, are any of the Pathfinder 1E Adventure Paths still popular?

Just to Clarify, this is not about the quality of the APs per say. No one disputes that (at least) some of the PF 1E APs are very good.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So like, are you looking for current sales numbers?

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Mark Hoover 330 wrote:
So like, are you looking for current sales numbers?

I have all the 1st edition APs sitting on my self, and I would like to get some more use out of them.

So, this would be more about possible recruitment.


I'm pretty sure there's recruitment boards on other parts of these forums. In the meantime, I had a good time playing RoW, wish I could've finished it. Other than that and reading parts of the first book of RotRl though I don't know anything about 'em.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

As I've said on the forums before, I'm not switching to 2e because I have enough APs and other Pathfinder adventures to DM into my early 90s. We were late to Pathfinder (stayed on 3.5 for something like 17 years), so all the 1e APs are still popular with my group.


I'm running Strange Aeons right now. I may not be actively posting on these forums much anymore, but I'm still playing and GM'ing Pathfinder 1st edition.

No clue what our next campaign will be (we're in book 5 so the end is starting to loom) but another Paizo AP is definitely a possibility.


I have yet to play half of the adventure paths in first edition, and three (Reign of Winter, Giantslayer, and Tyrant's Grasp) that I have yet to get past the 3rd book. My interest in PF1 adventure paths is as high as its ever been.


Lord Fyre wrote:

I have all the 1st edition APs sitting on my shelf, and I would like to get some more use out of them.

So, this would be more about possible recruitment.

nice

You may need to run some stuff in between the chapters to keep the PCs leveled up. I know one group alternated between two compatible APs.
I think the VTTs are a great help as players may not be local but fleshies around a table is the best.
if you need wizarding help...


I check the LFG on Roll20 fairly often. These days it's mostly unofficial adventures, but you'll still see old APs often enough.

Rise of the Runelords, Mummy's Mask and Reign of Winter get ran somewhat often. A lot of people try to run Wrath of the Righteous, but those games tend to burn out a lot.

Personally, one of my groups is running War for the Crown, but the other is running a non-Paizo AP


currently on Roll20 (informal check). number of games[Pay2Play]
35[22] PF1. Many homebrew/mixed.
37[28] PF2. Many homebrew, several converted PF1.


I don't usually view the Pay 2 Play games, but a lot of those do seem to be official APs

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Melkiador wrote:
I don't usually view the Pay 2 Play games, but a lot of those do seem to be official APs

Really?

Given that you're paying, those are the ones that should be Homebrew.

Melkiador wrote:
A lot of people try to run Wrath of the Righteous, but those games tend to burn out a lot.

I can see that. The story is really good, but the encounter balancing in the AP (and Mythic rules in general) are not so much


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Since October 2019, I have been converting the 2017 PF1 Ironfang Invasion adventure path to PF2 rules. It is working so far: we are in the 6th module.

I was discussing Tarondor’s Guide to Pathfinder Adventure Paths in Discord with one of my players, mentioning that Ironfang Invasion rated 22nd out of 33 on both Tarondor's rating and in a poll Tarondor took. He read it and responded:

Quote:
Wow, my other campaign, Return of the Runelords, made #10 on Tarondar's ratings, but #29 on the poll list. And Tyrant's Grasp, that group's next campaign, is #13 on Tarondar's, but #24 on the poll. Quite the difference. Whereas Ironfang Invasion is #22 on both lists. The one I'm planning to GM, Outlaws of Alkenstar, is too new to be on the list, I guess.

That player in Oregon plays PF2 with me in upstate New York via Roll20 and plays PF1 with another GM in Seattle, Washington. He plans on GMing himself with a 3-module PF2 adventure path.


Lord Fyre wrote:
Melkiador wrote:
I don't usually view the Pay 2 Play games, but a lot of those do seem to be official APs

Really?

Given that you're paying, those are the ones that should be Homebrew.

I think it’s more a matter of demand. People are more likely to pay for an AP that they know is popular than take a gamble on how good some stranger is at full world building


Lord Fyre wrote:

With more and more of the Table Top RPG community shifts to the Pathfinder 2E, are any of the Pathfinder 1E Adventure Paths still popular?

Just to Clarify, this is not about the quality of the APs per say. No one disputes that (at least) some of the PF 1E APs are very good.

I am running two PF1 APs!

Under PF2 rules, of course, as they're far superior.

Dark Archive

I have enjoyed the playing the first 2 books of Ironfang, so far it has delivered well on the theme. I still have a bunch more to run or play that sound very appealing.


I've run all of RotR AE twice (two different groups, more or less simultaneously), and am currently running CotCT RE and JR.

I will be running MM for a third group (which is currently on hiatus for RL reasons). In about six months time I will have a fourth group starting an as of yet undecided PF1 or Dungeon 3.5 AP (all using PF1) - that AP will be mostly their choice, but I will insist that it's a different AP from the other ones that I have run/am running.

As for what I'd personally be really interested in running/playing myself (beyond the active APs listed above): RoW, ShSt, Return, SA, IG, and HR. My secondary list would likely be: SD, KM, II, RoA, and WftC, plus the STap. The rest would also be acceptable with the exceptions of HV and WotR. (I don't want Mythic headaches and I would hate to run an evil AP.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

we're les than halfway through the AP's, we love PF1, and figure it will take 20 more years to finish them, so yes, they are very popular with us, and we have no intention of switching systems.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I've run RotRL along with the Scenarios. Honestly the spellcaster's need work(spells, equipment, magic items) as they are simplistic. Part of it is the spell lists have expanded since conception. NPC strategies are also rather simplistic as they punish subordinates and wait around to be attacked rather than have a plan in case of adventurers.

just drop the old bag with PF2 cheeze bait rather than put your hand in it


PF1 adventures were never not popular, the shift more towards PF2 is more because PF1 is not getting any new material and people like going to new material.

You will still have people playing PF1 even if Paizo releases a PF4.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

We’re playing two PF1 APs under PF1 rules, and unless one of the PF2 ones really grabs me (so far all of the plots / settings have come across as a bit meh) we will probably play some more with our current groups, interspersed with other game systems.

But that’s across a loose confederation of older gamers who like the PF1 ruleset and aren’t inclined to go chase the new system just because it’s shiny. I suspect there are probably plenty of people like us who have the rulebooks and adventures already, but aren’t posting reviews or writing blogs because, well, what’s the point if it’s a home game of something published a decade ago?

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Neriathale wrote:
We’re playing two PF1 APs under PF1 rules, and unless one of the PF2 ones really grabs me (so far all of the plots / settings have come across as a bit meh) we will probably play some more with our current groups, interspersed with other game systems.

I too feel that the kinds of stories from the PF1 era APs are better. That may be more "generational" than an actual drop in quality. I grew up in a different time, with different stories (and social norms). Yes, I'm an old fart.

Mostly I was just looking at "sunk cost"

Before we just the PF2 stories too harshly, remember the PF1 APs include such winners as Second Darkness, Council of Thieves, and Serpent's Skull.

Neriathale wrote:
But that’s across a loose confederation of older gamers who like the PF1 ruleset and aren’t inclined to go chase the new system just because it’s shiny. I suspect there are probably plenty of people like us who have the rulebooks and adventures already, but aren’t posting reviews or writing blogs because, well, what’s the point if it’s a home game of something published a decade ago?

I don't think that the rule system is the problem. I can be argued that PF1 became bloated (but PF2 is racing to the same level of rules bloat).


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I've met multiple people that just have trouble moving from PF1 to PF2. And I'm one of them. Maybe it's a side effect of playing basically the same system for 20+ years, but I've tried multiple times and can't quite get into it. I have specific nitpicks about PF2, but I'm not sure if I'm being fair or if I just don't want change.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Melkiador wrote:
I've met multiple people that just have trouble moving from PF1 to PF2. And I'm one of them. Maybe it's a side effect of playing basically the same system for 20+ years, but I've tried multiple times and can't quite get into it. I have specific nitpicks about PF2, but I'm not sure if I'm being fair or if I just don't want change.

I'm not saying that I don't have nitpicks with PF2 also. But, I have played enough rules systems (I started in AD&D 1E) not to be too resistant to shifting to another one. I did say "Old Fart."

Dark Archive

I have also not found a lot of the hooks for the 2E APs all that interesting so far. I do like most of the Starfinder APs so far as well.


I'll comment that;
1) Starfinder has totally different goals than PF1. It's much lighter and fluffy skittermanders at a Star Sugar Heartlove concert. IMO it's a good fit for PF2 actually. LoL. When I mention this to Starfinder players I just get looks of angst & despair.
2) PF1, PF2, DnD{various} all model a (medieval) FRPG. DnD4, PF2, GURPS, Hero, RuneQuest all go about it differently than some d20 variant. I think it's key as to how they try to model the "common experience" or Reality(as it were).
My old saying is if you want a good model of Reality choose Physics (LOL). Yeah, clearly that's not practical as a game or video/computer game.

I'm going to stop meandering as going into themes and styles is well documented elsewhere.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Starfinder Charter Superscriber

For the OP, I'd suggest it's not really meaningful to think about how "popular" PF1 APs are in general. It doesn't really matter if there's a million people who like them or a hundred: as long as you can find a few folks to join you in a game, you'll have the same amount of fun. (And if you look around the Internet, there are active campaigns for the most obscure gaming systems imaginable.)

As for me, I love PF1. I've finished GMing Rise of the Runelords and Curse of the Crimson Throne, and I'm now doing my prep on Second Darkness that will start in a few months. PF1 thrives :)


Melkiador wrote:
I've met multiple people that just have trouble moving from PF1 to PF2. And I'm one of them. Maybe it's a side effect of playing basically the same system for 20+ years, but I've tried multiple times and can't quite get into it. I have specific nitpicks about PF2, but I'm not sure if I'm being fair or if I just don't want change.

the biggest issue is cost. I spent hundreds on AD&D 1, low thousands on 2.0, and a few thousand on 3.0/3.5. then I spent at least that much again on PF1. Considering PF1 has way more adventuring material that we want to play through, and considering the cost, we see no need to spend that kind of money again.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The cost is pretty cheap if you use the online sources. I assume the big money maker is APs and other adventures, since those aren’t freely available.


TxSam88 wrote:
the biggest issue is cost. I spent hundreds on AD&D 1, low thousands on 2.0, and a few thousand on 3.0/3.5. then I spent at least that much again on PF1. ...

wow... I can see where economic incentives keep folks in PF1. I was fortunate and have all the PF1 material except 2 late PPC products which I chose not to purchase. After previewing and playtesting PF2 then participating in debuts I opted out as it was not to my tastes. Don't get me wrong, it's a good game system with tighter & systemic modeling with a far lower learning curve for most classes. Like Linux let's just say that DnD3.0/3.5 & PF1 are guru friendly systems.

I find that critical/fluff details are often absent from official online sites and it may be a matter of the OGL. You see that in the Rules forum. There are unofficial sites and the non-legit sites which we don't talk about.
I'd suggest shopping used libraries, online(FB, seller sites, list sites, etc), used bookstores(not the cheapest option but TX has many). Creators should get a cut of resales but it's a business problem.


While the PF1 APs are good, I think in general the NPCs need some tweaking as the writers tended to be overly simple as I believe it was unwritten policy and it avoids thorny corner cases. Alas there was the First two years of Scenarios and Eyes of the Ten, many with obvious errors (lol...).
I'd say post "improvements" in the AP's GM forum sections or look there for advice.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Azothath wrote:
While the PF1 APs are good,

… usually …

Azothath wrote:
I think in general the NPCs need some tweaking as the writers tended to be overly simple as I believe it was unwritten policy and it avoids thorny corner cases.

Not a bad thing. Remember, the writers do not actually know your player group.

Azothath wrote:

Alas there was Eyes of the Ten and the obvious errors (lol...).

I'd say post "improvements" in the AP's GM forum sections.

Which, is their primary purpose.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lord Fyre wrote:
Azothath wrote:
While the PF1 APs are good,
… usually …

hey I'm being nice and don't want to throw any stones, bricks, or cement trucks.

Lord Fyre wrote:
Azothath wrote:
I think in general the NPCs need some tweaking as the writers tended to be overly simple as I believe it was unwritten policy and it avoids thorny corner cases.
Not a bad thing. Remember, the writers do not actually know your player group.

true, but it also speaks to system expertise. I also understand that some builds are clearly questionable and incorporating some flair does make it harder to understand. I've had some professional experience with that topic. It's a issue of wanting it ALL; great dramatic writing, realistic plot development, memorable NPCs, and well designed builds. Generally that costs more and takes more time & effort. Ooops! Did I answer my own question?! I'm gonna go with Margaret Atwood's advice.


Melkiador wrote:
The cost is pretty cheap if you use the online sources. I assume the big money maker is APs and other adventures, since those aren’t freely available.

there's still many people who like to have hard copies of items to use when the power is out or the internet is down, we happen to be among them.

but aside from cost, there's the idea of relearning a game we have already been playing for almost 30 years and have yet to try everything it has to offer. IMO there's still tons of money that could be made simply by producing AP's (easily could be made for PF1 and PF2, or ruleset agnostic).

There was good reason to switch game system in the past, mainly because we had played all the major modules as there weren't as many back in the day, and we wanted to be able to play the new modules, we haven't had that issue with PF1 yet.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mathmuse wrote:

Since October 2019, I have been converting the 2017 PF1 Ironfang Invasion adventure path to PF2 rules. It is working so far: we are in the 6th module.

I was discussing Tarondor’s Guide to Pathfinder Adventure Paths in Discord with one of my players, mentioning that Ironfang Invasion rated 22nd out of 33 on both Tarondor's rating and in a poll Tarondor took. He read it and responded:

Quote:
Wow, my other campaign, Return of the Runelords, made #10 on Tarondar's ratings, but #29 on the poll list. And Tyrant's Grasp, that group's next campaign, is #13 on Tarondar's, but #24 on the poll. Quite the difference. Whereas Ironfang Invasion is #22 on both lists. The one I'm planning to GM, Outlaws of Alkenstar, is too new to be on the list, I guess.

That player in Oregon plays PF2 with me in upstate New York via Roll20 and plays PF1 with another GM in Seattle, Washington. He plans on GMing himself with a 3-module PF2 adventure path.

There's definitely a huge Your Mileage May Vary effect with quality of APs. Tyrant's Grasp is probably my favorite AP from 1E but its themes and game type are not going to be for everyone.

Either way, to answer OP, our group hasn't moved onto 2E and likely won't for a while, if for the simple reason that there's so many good 1E APs out there.


The Dandy Lion wrote:
Mathmuse wrote:
Since October 2019, I have been converting the 2017 PF1 Ironfang Invasion adventure path to PF2 rules. It is working so far: we are in the 6th module. ...

...

Either way, to answer OP, our group hasn't moved onto 2E and likely won't for a while, if for the simple reason that there's so many good 1E APs out there.

That is one reason I converted a PF1 adventure path to PF2 rules. I wanted to try out the PF2 rules, especially since I had participated in the PF2 public playtest, but I didn't want to leave all those good PF1 APs behind. Since at the time, PF2 had only the Age of Ashes AP, PF1 APs also offered more choice.

Regardless, at one game session a week an adventure path runs for at least two years. That means I have time to play only one out of four APs. I lack the energy to conduct two sessions a week.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Dandy Lion wrote:
There's definitely a huge Your Mileage May Vary effect with quality of APs. Tyrant's Grasp is probably my favorite AP from 1E but its themes and game type are not going to be for everyone.

100% on this. I've got several ... choice words for some of the encounter designs in Tyrant's Grasp and have thrown many narrowed eyed looks towards the designers, but the story is really, really good. And the character I played in it was one of the most memorable I've ever made.

Iron Gods is my favorite AP of PF1 though that has more to do with the players and choices we made along the way.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Sometimes the APs are really uneven because of the change of designer from book to book or even just the challenges associated with writing for different level ranges. I feel like a lot of writers have trouble associating with high level play


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Melkiador wrote:
Sometimes the APs are really uneven because of the change of designer from book to book or even just the challenges associated with writing for different level ranges. I feel like a lot of writers have trouble associating with high level play

I have an interesting comparison in Ironfang Invasion.

The third module, Assault on Longshadow, by Benjamin Bruck and Thurston Hillman is excellent. The party gets to scout around the city of Longshadow to assess the military might of the mostly-hobgoblin Ironfang Legion, improve the defenses of Longshadow, sabotage some Ironfang plans, and finally defend Longshadow in full-sized assault (okay, the gigantic battle plays as slow as molasses, but the authors tried to put some speed into it).

The fourth module, Siege of Stone, by Thurston Hillman switches to a travelogue of the Darklands and the Dwarven Sky Citadel Kraggodan without a hobgoblin soldier in sight. Hillman also wrote the Darklands Revisited sourcebook, so he is an expert on the setting. But my players were extremely focused on defeating the Ironfang Legion and had little interest in researching the secret past of enemy General Azaersi. They lost some motivation until they could view the adventure as recruiting Kraggodan to help against the Ironfang Legion.

Yet this is understandable. If the party faced even stronger Ironfang troops in the fourth module, then they would be wondering why those troops had not been sent against Longshadow. Thus, for verisimilitude the narrative needed a break from the Ironfang Legion in a new setting that could provide fresh level-appropriate monsters.

The fifth module, Prisoners of the Blight, by Amanda Hamon Kunz continued the break from the Ironfang Legion with a fey-based adventure in the Fangwood. A two-module break was too long. One player asked, "Could you remind me why we are here?" The module set up the journey from Kraggodan to the Fangwood as a time skip, but my players asked me to generate new material for the journey through Ironfang-conquered territory so that they could feel like their characters were still busy battling the Ironfang Legion. On the other hand, the first two modules were located in the less dangerous parts of the Fangwood, so I can imagine other groups of players caring more about the Fangwood than about the Ironfang Legion.


Lord Fyre wrote:
Melkiador wrote:
I don't usually view the Pay 2 Play games, but a lot of those do seem to be official APs

Really?

Given that you're paying, those are the ones that should be Homebrew.

I'm running an AP at the moment.

The party have arrived at a big castle that they can explore in any order. If I want to run it smoothly, I have to study up on about nineteen different stat-blocks for the various creatures in the castle, find out what their spells do, etc. And if I want it to be anything other than a meatgrinder I have to think of things for them to say or do other than just attacking the party on sight.

I'm not getting paid, but I feel like for all this effort somebody should be paying me.


a lot depends on what goes on in the castle. Maintenance, maids cleaning, cooks preparing meals, weapon practice, grooms in the animal stalls, merchants and peasants in the courtyard with the local lord hearing complaints...
course it could be abandoned or occupied by monsters... making a mess of it as it falls into disrepair.

there's historical castle design, historical church design, and FPRG castle design. Different criteria. siege weapons, guns and cannons made an impact.
You might want to look at Ft. Ticonderoga.


Azothath wrote:
it could be abandoned or occupied by monsters... making a mess of it as it falls into disrepair.

This one. It's

Spoiler:
Brinewall
from Jade Regent.
Azothath wrote:

there's historical castle design, historical church design, and FPRG castle design. Different criteria. siege weapons, guns and cannons made an impact.

You might want to look at Ft. Ticonderoga.

My complaint was that running an P1e AP is too much effort, and you're giving me extra homework?


Matthew Downie wrote:
Azothath wrote:

...

You might want to look at Ft. Ticonderoga.
My complaint was that running an P1e AP is too much effort, and you're giving me extra homework?

LoL, no. I'm giving a good example of a spell resistant fort design for PF1 & DnD (due to embankments & very thick walls, stone bldgs, tunnels, basements & vaults).


@ Matthew Downie
okay - I went and read AP-49. Complex but detailed.
My suggestion is to;
 1) separate the maps into pictures.
 2) annotate on the maps who/what is in each room and Prcptn check IF they move about, like (4) DCorb Prcptn +5 or StonGolem.
 3) print the maps on tracing paper, stack and staple.
 4) You can print tokens of each group with easy release tape on the bottom to reposition them on your GM map stack.
This will let you see who can go where and make the rolls as needed. Some paths of travel are not known to various groups.
You'll have to print pages from bestiaries if you want paper copies as you are likely to need several types in encounters.
I'd ensure any buildings with lower floors are on an embankment(above the water table) as water seepage is a real issue and what's 10-20ft of dirt among fiends?...


Matthew Downie wrote:
Azothath wrote:
it could be abandoned or occupied by monsters... making a mess of it as it falls into disrepair.
This one. It's ** spoiler omitted ** from Jade Regent.

Ah. I have run Jade Regent and that castle is complicated.

Matthew Downie's Castle:
I was running The Brinewall Legacy with 7 players and I had swapped out 5th-level Ameiko Kajitsu and replaced her with her half-sister 2nd-level Amaya as an 8th party member. The PCs sneaked up the west wall and avoided akerting guards as they walked atop the wall and entered the castle by room U15 on the 2nd floor. Meanwhile, I was busy calculating which guards would rush them if they were discovered.

I used the mute harpy oracle Zaiobe to give them focus. The goblin alchemist had a tumor familiar that was flying around scouting. Zaiobe spotted it and grabbed it. Since Zaiobe can communicate telepathically with any creature she
is in physical contact with, and the tumor familiar counts as part of the alchemist's body, I let her communicate secretly at a distance with the goblin alchemist. Who kept this secret for a few minutes, sigh. But eventually he arranged for the party to meet Zaiobe, whose agenda was more in line with the party's goals than Lord Kikonu's agenda. Thus, they had a helpful guide, but had to humor Kikonu. This let me direct them to rooms that I was ready to run.

And I was on a deadline, because some players would leave in two months. I skipped section V entirely to save time by sending Zaiobe to fetch the Brinewall crest from room V10, so the party never went there.

Fundamentally, I used a technique that has served me well in several campaigns. I fed the party useful information that made their actions more predictable. It also let them play with more sophistication than combat in every encounter.

I chronicled my Jade Regent campaign at Amaya of Westcrown. However, I started the chronicle after that castle, and mentioned nothing about the encounters there.

Matthew Downie wrote:
I'm not getting paid, but I feel like for all this effort somebody should be paying me.

I was running my Jade Regent campaign at the Family Game Store in Savage, Maryland. They gave GMs who ran a campaign at the store for other customers a 10% discount on purchases. Thus, I guess I was paid. The owners of the store retired, but their son and daughter-in-law run Three Gear Games and Studio in nearby Laurel, Maryland.


It's actually going quite well. I compiled the stats for all the creatures, except for the ones I forgot about and had to look up mid-game. I wrote a scene from Kikonu's play and had one of the party play a part in it. I mixed two rooms around because I got confused by which stairs connect to each other between floors, and ended up with a Haunt in a major thoroughfare that made no sense. I added a prophecy (that the bad guys know and are hoping to take advantage of) about a group of strangers who would reveal the castle's final secret, to justify giving them a bit more latitude to explore.

Mostly it didn't matter. I ended up improvising a lot, based on the party's good diplomacy rolls, letting them avoid battles with enemies who are supposed to attack immediately, etc.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Hoover 330 wrote:
I'm pretty sure there's recruitment boards on other parts of these forums.

Yeah, there are some PF1 APs in the recruitment section, with a varifying degree of modification.

I am running Curse of the Crimson Throne right now, after a homebrew campaign. Ironically, it doesn't really reduce my prep time, because I spend a lot of time at getting familiar with story details and sometimes mechanics I wouldn't use otherwise.

I will be back to homebrew afterwards, using APs only for inspiration. PF2 APs usually don't appeal to me, only Abomination Vaults piques my interest.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am playing Shattered Star and Curse of the Crimson Throne, and there are at least a couple more I would like to play or run (Return of the Runelords because it wraps up the 'Runelords Trilogy' and Iron Gods because I looks cool and already have it thanks to Humble Bundle).

I am also playing Savage Tide which, while Paizo is pre-PF1, and the original AP from 2000 which predates Paizo entirely.

OTOH, I am also running Abomination Vaults (again, partly thanks to Humble Bundle).


I'm currently into book 3 of Mummy's Mask and everyone's having a great time. I'm also playing in a Jade Regent game (Hi Matt, I see you upthread) and I'm definitely having a fantastic time. I think the PF1 AP's are a damn good product (largely) and I don't see that changing any time soon. Even if I was to switch up to PF2, I'd probably want to adapt one of the PF1 AP's or modules I have. Or maybe run Abomination Vaults, it looks fun.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hell's Rebels is great, Ruins of Azlant is as well but its definitely not popular because people are biased towards water ;D, Iron Gods was metal, Crimson Throne and Rise of the Runelords are beloved classics, I really like War for the Crown but I don't know if its popular

1 to 50 of 52 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / PF1 Adventure Paths - are any still popular? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.