| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
So I got my copy of pactbreaker today, and overall, it is exciting to see the first ORC adventure path rollout with the remastered rules. I am still close reading through 7 dooms of Sandpoint so I haven’t looked closely at the whole adventure yet, but something that jumped out at me with alignment being gone is that you really have to read all the text around an NPC to get a sense of their purpose in an encounter and what their initial disposition to the party is going to be.
I know it might work against word count, but it could be helpful for GMs if initial attitude for NPCs was either a trait tag, or if a line could be added in the stat block. With NPCs that have highly variable attitudes towards the party, something like “varies, see text above” would at least serve to help flag the NPC as one with complex motivations or roles in the encounter.
The other reason I think this would be helpful to GMs is because I don’t think many GMs are as familiar with the rules for making an impression and how all of that interacts with the built in game mechanics, and thus many just default to hostile or friendly without really knowing how the party could otherwise approach them. Calling out other attitudes in stat blocks could help GMs think about broader ways for PCs and NPCs to interact in a way that I think alignment did pre-remaster.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The real value of alignment always was describing in two letters the very basic likely behaviour of any creature the PCs met. It was a great help as a prompt for GMs.
Removing alignment was necessary because of both IP matters and all the angry arguments using it for PCs created through the years.
We definitely could use something that fills the hole you describe.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The real value of alignment always was describing in two letters the very basic likely behaviour of any creature the PCs met. It was a great help as a prompt for GMs.
Removing alignment was necessary because of both IP matters and all the angry arguments using it for PCs created through the years.
We definitely could use something that fills the hole you describe.
I think they did something like that, at least at the Tian Xia new book. Like describing a person 'an aloof mage for hire' or 'hard-headed stone giant clan leader'. It's a step to the right direction after forgoing alignments imo.
Creative Director
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
The method you mention in the Tian Xia book is indeed our method going forward for giving that sort of information to the GM. It's something we've been tinkering with and will continue to refine (and which might not be fully utilized in the first few remastered Adventures). The loss of those super-convenient 2-letter abbreviations hits hardest here, I think... at least from an adventure-writing standpoint, but I feel like our solution might work as well or better... even if it does take up a little bit more space with each NPC.
Feedback is, of course, always welcome!
The method you mention in the Tian Xia book is indeed our method going forward for giving that sort of information to the GM. It's something we've been tinkering with and will continue to refine (and which might not be fully utilized in the first few remastered Adventures). The loss of those super-convenient 2-letter abbreviations hits hardest here, I think... at least from an adventure-writing standpoint, but I feel like our solution might work as well or better... even if it does take up a little bit more space with each NPC.
Feedback is, of course, always welcome!
Hopefully, you were already thinking about this change before WoTC thrust it upon you.
I think they did something like that, at least at the Tian Xia new book. Like describing a person 'an aloof mage for hire' or 'hard-headed stone giant clan leader'. It's a step to the right direction after forgoing alignments imo.The real value of alignment always was describing in two letters the very basic likely behaviour of any creature the PCs met. It was a great help as a prompt for GMs.
Removing alignment was necessary because of both IP matters and all the angry arguments using it for PCs created through the years.
We definitely could use something that fills the hole you describe.
That is interesting, but I still think, for adventures and adventure paths specifically, that those kinds of descriptions are not enough to help GMs identify the assumed attitude of the NPC towards the party, which is a mechanical feature of PF2 that is heavily underdeveloped. If we have conditions to cover friendly, helpful, hostile, indifferent, I think firguring out how to use those more directly in the stat block would really help GMs think about whether an enemy is supposed to be blatantly hostile, or perhaps just unfriendly and skeptical of the party in their first interaction.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my campaigns the initial disposition of an NPC to the party is more complicated than hostile, unfriendly, indifferent, friendly, or helpful and their nature is more complicated than good, evil, lawful, chaotic, or inbetween. My players like roleplatying with NPCs who have some goals and personality.
For example, a guard on the city gates who is NG and friendly is not going to bend the rules about entry simply because he is not Lawful. Instead, he would give the party friendly advice about who is allowed inside and maybe ask them to wait outside while he sends a messenger to fetch an official. A different guard who is NE and unfriendly is not going to turn them away because they have no authorization papers. Instead, he would ask for a bribe to let them pass. And the details of the guard's attitude are based on the story. The interaction at the gate will tell the players something about the city and its people. I could give a brief interaction to hasten their entry and proceed quickly along the plot, or I could give a more flavorful interaction to illustrate the culture of the city.
And really, most gate guards have generic guard stat blocks borrowed from a Bestiary or NPC Codex. Their alignment does not match up accurately to the city. I would pay more attention to whether the city is described as corrupt capital or a center of trade or an outpost surviving against hostile neighbors for figuring out the initial disposition of the guards.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I understand how that generally works with NPCs like city guards, and obviously the GM has to read the adventure and know a fair bit about the motivations of the various characters in any scene.
At the same time, in an adventure like Pactbreaker is full of weird creatures with pretty complex motivations, but that occur in scenes where their motivations in the encounter are much less complicated, at least as the "Default setting" for the encounter. Honestly, I don't think alignment itself is a great mechanic for such an AP as the vast majority of creatures are probably in the Neutral category, but the GM has to do a lot of work to interpret those attitudes that most of the social skills key off to arbitrate characters that are not just going to fight the PCs on sight. It feels like underutilized space in the game currently, especially for pre-written adventures that do make assumptions about NPCs starting attitudes.