Not only do the shorter ones sell better (in large part because there's twice as many opportunities to "get in on the ground floor" of the story), but they give customers twice as many opportuniteis to get excited about an Adventure Path (since we do four a year instead of two). The amount of time it takes the typical group to play through a 3 parter is generally more than 3 months, so by the time they're wrapping up, there's even MORE choices of where to go from there.
Also, while I do understand folks wanna play a pC from 1st to 20th level (that's my preferred method of play), many MORE folks are eager to always be building new PCs to try out new character concepts, in part because we continue to publish so many interesting and intriguing new options for new characters (ancestries in particular are VERY popular, and you can't easily switch your ancestry over on an established character). More opportunities to start a new campaign plays better into that sort of player mindset, I suspect.
For the time being, 3 part Adventure Paths are here to stay, in other words.
just kickstarter a 1-20 level campaign outside the 4 you are already doing when you are fully staffed up and release it in 2 or 3 years :) or contract it out to mark seifer and linda while granting them license to your full IP :P
Sometimes it's okay to start a high level Adventure Path with fresh characters. Sometimes it's a breath of fresh air to not have to do the grind through lower levels again just to get to the adventure you and your group REALLY want to play, especially if by the time you get there, the group has broken up for whatever reason. Which, judging by the sell-through rates of all previous 1st to 20th level Adventure Paths, happened a lot. Hence 3 part ones. People buy and play part 1 of an Adventure Path far more often than any other parts, regardless of what level that part 1 is for. And so it makes sense from a financial standpoint and a customer satisfaction standpoint to sell more part 1s in a year.
Well, as a possibility maybe it'd be possible to make two three-parters (not even consequently, but maybe one year apart?) which "rhyme", i.e. indirect sequels, as The Raven Black just pointed out? For the people who do prefer playing 1 - 20?
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
We do have some plans for more direct sequels in the works. I'd hoped Curtain Call's lead-in would help it be a sort of evergreen sequel, but it sounds like folks want more direct thematic follow-ups. So... yeah we have something like that in the works—in particular, the Seven Dooms for Sanpdoint and Revenge of the Runelords having strong thematic links.
Not only do the shorter ones sell better (in large part because there's twice as many opportunities to "get in on the ground floor" of the story), but they give customers twice as many opportuniteis to get excited about an Adventure Path (since we do four a year instead of two). The amount of time it takes the typical group to play through a 3 parter is generally more than 3 months, so by the time they're wrapping up, there's even MORE choices of where to go from there.
Also, while I do understand folks wanna play a pC from 1st to 20th level (that's my preferred method of play), many MORE folks are eager to always be building new PCs to try out new character concepts, in part because we continue to publish so many interesting and intriguing new options for new characters (ancestries in particular are VERY popular, and you can't easily switch your ancestry over on an established character). More opportunities to start a new campaign plays better into that sort of player mindset, I suspect.
For the time being, 3 part Adventure Paths are here to stay, in other words.
I can live with it, since the points you make are quite true. However, one thing I got to say, having AP's like Spore Wars, which pretty clearly is the "Elf AP", without an appropiate lead-in is a bit annoying.
I look at the 1-11 AP's on offer currently and we have Abomination Vaults (which I am already running and Fists of the Ruby Phoenix is the already agreed-upon follow-up), Gatewalkers (which is widely seen as one of the worst 2E AP's) and then Outlaw's of Alkenstar, Quest for the Frozen Flame, Sky King's Tomb and Triumph of the Tusk, which are all pretty inappropiate entries into an elf-centric AP. Warden's of Wildwood would probably be much more doable, but ends at level 13, which makes connecting it to Spore Wars quite hard (except if I would tell my guys that they don't level for the first module and rewrite all encounters, too).
Curtain Call also seems to have not really have an AP which leads...
I want to make a few comments here:
First, Gatewalkers. I have run this, and while I do have an issue in that there are not enough Deviant powers for a group of four, and they are so non-impactful that they don't get used much if at all, it is not a bad AP. In fact, outside of the deviant power issue, it's fun and flavorable and has some interesting twists.
The people that complain about it complain about Sakuachi, and 'It's her quest, not ours.', which is not true. Yes, she has a role to play, but the PCs have the biggest role to play as they can
Second: SKT. SKT is a great lead into Spore Wars. Why? Because as Highhelm points out, *Kyonin*'s Government approached Highhelm's with a 'Hey if you help us if Treerazer attacks, we will help you if Tar Baphon attacks.'
It makes absolute sense that heroes who have proven themselves in Highhelm are sent to a conference to help with Kyonin's security to show that Highhelm is serious about that offered alliance.
As for Curtain Call: Every adventure leads into it. AP. Homebrew. Whatever. Your group is literally asked to make a play about *their own adventures!* What can be easier as a lead-in? Your very own actions directly lead into the AP and it does not matter what those actions even are.
We do have some plans for more direct sequels in the works. I'd hoped Curtain Call's lead-in would help it be a sort of evergreen sequel, but it sounds like folks want more direct thematic follow-ups. So... yeah we have something like that in the works—in particular, the Seven Dooms for Sanpdoint and Revenge of the Runelords having strong thematic links.
Believe me, I look forward very much to Xan-Xan's revenge for us letting him burn on that scale. And Seven Dooms for Sandpoint does seem like the perfect lead-in. :)
I want to make a few comments here:
First, Gatewalkers. I have run this, and while I do have an issue in that there are not enough Deviant powers for a group of four, and they are so non-impactful that they don't get used much if at all, it is not a bad AP. In fact, outside of the deviant power issue, it's fun and flavorable and has some interesting twists.
The people that complain about it complain about Sakuachi, and 'It's her quest, not ours.', which is not true. Yes, she has a role to play, but the PCs have the biggest role to play as they can <spoiler>
Second: SKT. SKT is a great lead into Spore Wars. Why? Because as Highhelm points out, *Kyonin*'s Government approached Highhelm's with a 'Hey if you help us if Treerazer attacks, we will help you if Tar Baphon attacks.'
It makes absolute sense that heroes who have proven themselves in Highhelm are sent to a conference to help with Kyonin's security to show that Highhelm is serious about that offered alliance.
As for Curtain Call: Every adventure leads into it. AP. Homebrew. Whatever. Your group is literally asked to make a play about *their own adventures!* What can be easier as a lead-in? Your very own actions directly lead into the AP and it does not matter what those actions even are.
To address those points:
1.) Gatewalkers is also widely seen as a bit of a misdirect, since the group is supposed to be paranormal investigators and that plot is resolved in the middle of book one (source: Tarondor's Guide to AP's 2025). The AP veers into a completely different direction then. The general recommendation for the AP is to rewrite it completely, which is the exact opposite reason why I buy AP's in the first place.
2.) Sky King's Tomb quite clearly is the "dwarf AP". Yes, you prove yourself in that AP as competent, but that the (probably) dwarf heroes are then sent to Kyonin where they (pretty arbitrarily, I might add, by winning one battle) are chosen as diplomats for the elves by the elf queen to help organize the outside nations help to battle Treerazer is thematically very difficult for me to personally work with. I mean, to me "let's play the elf-AP with an all-dwarf party" sounds like the beginning of an RPG Horror Stories reddit thread.
3.) The problem with Curtain Call is that the theme of the AP is, by its nature, very theatrical, i.e. you'd expect characters with an large emphasis on skills and performance to show up. Few 1-11 AP's really feature that. Most focus on fighting and maybe a bit of problem solving of the mystery kind. Having a low-level AP with a more entertainment/theatrical focus would really help with that particular AP follow-up.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, to me "let's play the elf-AP with an all-dwarf party" sounds like the beginning of an RPG Horror Stories reddit thread.
This is basically* what we're doing, and it's fun. This just happened organically since SKT seemed like the most natural lead-in to Spore War. It's not like Golarion has the whole "elves and dwarves hate each other for generations" thing you see in other fantasy settings, these are just different people with a common cause who see things differently.
*we have one gnome in the party.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
3.) The problem with Curtain Call is that the theme of the AP is, by its nature, very theatrical, i.e. you'd expect characters with an large emphasis on skills and performance to show up. Few 1-11 AP's really feature that. Most focus on fighting and maybe a bit of problem solving of the mystery kind. Having a low-level AP with a more entertainment/theatrical focus would really help with that particular AP follow-up.
The specific solution here, and one I should have, in retrospect, put in big font in a sidebar in the Curtain Call Player's Guide, is that in a case like this, the GM is encouraged very strongly to let the players do revisions and retraining and changes to PCs. That's probably just good advice across the board if you're moving from one Adventure Path to the other. Any amount of time you want can pass between them, after all, which is all the time you need for each player to read the Player's Guide and make adjustments as needed to their characters so they'll be better suited for the new adventure.
But again, that said... the days of 1st to 20th all-the-way through themed adventures is pretty much behind us these days. We may at some point do one again... but it'll be a special event that we'd make a big deal about (and behind the scenes would require a lot of schedule stuntwork to make happen since our current process works for 4 three parters and not for six-part ones anymore).
I liked how Curtain Call was handled as an indirect sequel. The problem with direct sequels is just like you guys had with the 6 book APs -- if I'm not interested in the first set, then I'm not going to be interested in the second set. And it seems like Runelords/Sandpoint-adjacent is the most likely for this to happen with. I avoid all those APs as they just don't appeal to me, unfortunately.
|
Creative Director
|
I liked how Curtain Call was handled as an indirect sequel. The problem with direct sequels is just like you guys had with the 6 book APs -- if I'm not interested in the first set, then I'm not going to be interested in the second set. And it seems like Runelords/Sandpoint-adjacent is the most likely for this to happen with. I avoid all those APs as they just don't appeal to me, unfortunately.
No worries and completely understandable—and also one of the PRIMARY reasons we have moved away from 6 part Adventure Paths, as I've said so many times before.
We can do more of them in a year if they're shorter, and if they're shorter, they have an overall wider appeal and thus sell better.
|
I have sometimes read that 3-parters felt a bit rushed and could have been developed more.
Maybe 3 4-parters a year would hit the good balance point between 4 3-parters and 2 6-parters.
BTW I am just starting Kingmaker 2E with the lady and our kid and it saddens me a bit to read that players will no longer be able to seamlessly elevate their starting character to level 20.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My players would definitely go for four book APs. Having a variety of lower level adventures to start with followed by a [7-9] to 20 AP indirect sequel would be wonderful, but I see the appeal of 1-12 and 5-17 ones as well.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since the primary point of switching to 4 Adventure Paths a year was to give folks additional chances to like one enough to want to buy it, swtiching back to 3 would erode that goal while not appealing to folks who want full 1–20 level six-part Adventure Paths. Seems like a solution that would disappoint everyone but also give us on the Narrative team another dose of disruptions to the workflow, so I don't see this happening.
I do think there's value in an adventure that starts at like 5th-7th level, and continues on for three volumes. It's just that you couldn't chain that into another 3 part AP, it would have to stand on its own.
Since one of the holdups for me with a lot of 3 part APs is "I find the first few levels of a character's career pretty dull" (having characters with very few tools is primarily useful for onboarding new players to a system), but jumping straight into 11th level can turn the knob a bit far towards "gonzo".
Especially since creating a 6th level character from scratch is much easier than creating an 11th level character from scratch.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
At this point, my goal is to do at least one "Starts at 1st" every year, one "Ends at 20th" every year, and then have the other two be "developer's choice." Which means we will continue to now and then have Adventure Paths (like Seven Dooms for Sandpoint or Wardens of Wildwood already do) that start at whatever level makes sense for the story.
Since the primary point of switching to 4 Adventure Paths a year was to give folks additional chances to like one enough to want to buy it, swtiching back to 3 would erode that goal while not appealing to folks who want full 1–20 level six-part Adventure Paths. Seems like a solution that would disappoint everyone but also give us on the Narrative team another dose of disruptions to the workflow, so I don't see this happening.
I already have a backlog of adventure paths that I want to run--Wardens of Wildwood, Curtain Call, and Spore War--so I don't care how many adventure paths are published per year. My weekly game sessions require six months to get through a single module. And I am buying standalone modules in order to add more missions to Strength of Thousands as class field trips, which further slows down progress.
That brings up a question: how well do the standalone modules integrate with the 3-module adventure paths?
|
Creative Director
|
Since the primary point of switching to 4 Adventure Paths a year was to give folks additional chances to like one enough to want to buy it, swtiching back to 3 would erode that goal while not appealing to folks who want full 1–20 level six-part Adventure Paths. Seems like a solution that would disappoint everyone but also give us on the Narrative team another dose of disruptions to the workflow, so I don't see this happening.I already have a backlog of adventure paths that I want to run--Wardens of Wildwood, Curtain Call, and Spore War--so I don't care how many adventure paths are published per year. My weekly game sessions require six months to get through a single module. And I am buying standalone modules in order to add more missions to Strength of Thousands as class field trips, which further slows down progress.
That brings up a question: how well do the standalone modules integrate with the 3-module adventure paths?
They generally don't. We usually make the standalone adventures stand alone, with plots that are pretty self-contained; making one that you can't fully enjoy unless you also buy a different adventure or Adventure Path kinda goes against their whole point. There are some that work well with others, thematically—Rusthenge into Seven Dooms for Sandpoint, for example. But even then, the GM is going to need to do a bit of work to link them together. Which is kinda one of the fun parts about being a GM I think!