| 15 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nicely done. So many good APs. A good document for anyone looking for what AP to run.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Much as I love Crimson Throne (and I REALLY love Crimson Throne), it's great to see a PF2 AP in Season of Ghosts take over the #1 spot. Shows that they're still putting out high quality APs even after all these years.
I've read it over to run and while I decided not to run it for that group (for group specific reasons), It looked amazing and I definitely want to run it one day.
I also think Kingmaker almost needs to be split into two entries next time: PF1 Kingmaker and PF2 Kingmaker. I don't know for sure, but my feeling from playing it and seeing other reactions to it is that these versions have not been received equally well. (I know anytime someone recommends Kingmaker and has actually run/played the PF2 one, its always caveated with "throw out or massively house rule the kingdom rules", and that's kind of a big problem.) Plus as you noted it's very polarizing in that people either love it or hate it. So there's some definite "know your group before starting this one" here, as some players just won't vibe with the open and largely freeform nature of this.
Also nice to see so many responses to the poll this time. Great work on putting it together!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also regarding Extinction Curse: "Once again the final villain is unexpected. "
I ran this one and that wasn't really true unless the PCs are skipping chances to know it.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
(I know anytime someone recommends Kingmaker and has actually run/played the PF2 one, its always caveated with "throw out or massively house rule the kingdom rules", and that's kind of a big problem.)
I don't think that's a difference between them -- I've constantly heard that about the PF1 version too.
I agree that it would be very useful to get information on the two versions separately, but given the methodology, I think disentangling that info would be difficult. (For that matter, I suspect it got some rankings based on the *video game* .)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
(I know anytime someone recommends Kingmaker and has actually run/played the PF2 one, its always caveated with "throw out or massively house rule the kingdom rules", and that's kind of a big problem.)I don't think that's a difference between them -- I've constantly heard that about the PF1 version too.
I agree that it would be very useful to get information on the two versions separately, but given the methodology, I think disentangling that info would be difficult. (For that matter, I suspect it got some rankings based on the *video game* .)
Probably. :)
It's too late to do it now, but next time I don't think it any change to the methodology. Just put it in twice: once for each edition. Then see if those ratings diverge significantly and make a note of that in the writeup if so.
I'm mostly just curious because my sense of where a lot of the higher rankings of this come from is the PF1 version specifically, but that could very easily be wrong. That said, it plummeted massively in the poll rankings between this result and the 2021 version, where it was #5. One potential explanation is that since the PF2 version wasn't out in 2021 the player reactions since then haven't been as strong. I doubt that people have suddenly soured this much on the PF1 version.
I also think the Kingdom rules problems are different between the two, where in PF1 one of the big issues what that players could break that system to really enrich themselves. In PF2, the problem is more along the line of "the Kingdom is really bad at most things and if you don't build for Practical Magic you're going to be critically failing a LOT of stuff by level 6", which just doesn't feel satisfying. (Also the way XP works it'll take an eon to get to level 6.)
Good to have some free 2025 Guide for the Pathfinder Adventure Paths stuff for both PF1e and PF2e+ (and even some 3.5 thrown in for completion's sake), Tarondor. ;)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
(I know anytime someone recommends Kingmaker and has actually run/played the PF2 one, its always caveated with "throw out or massively house rule the kingdom rules", and that's kind of a big problem.)I don't think that's a difference between them -- I've constantly heard that about the PF1 version too.
I agree that it would be very useful to get information on the two versions separately, but given the methodology, I think disentangling that info would be difficult. (For that matter, I suspect it got some rankings based on the *video game* .)
I would find this useful two. PF1 Kingmaker my players loved. PF2 was a mixed bag.
It was mainly due to the PF2 kingdom rules. They were not fun, overly complex, and hard to run.
Whereas the PF1 kingdom rules, my players enjoyed, had fun building the kingdom, a lot more flexible, and allowed lot more creative kingdom building that wasn't limited by excessively high DCs, limited by skills, and excessive complexity that led to a disconnect or collapse of interest.
The kingdom building rules really made for a bad experience in PF2 kingmaker whereas in PF1 they enhanced the PF1 kingmaker experience.
I think whether or not you like horror affected a few AP ratings too. I really enjoy horror, so I liked Carrion Crown a lot. I had fun running it and was able to build the atmosphere and story. I love a good horror AP.
I do agree with Agents of Edgewatch. The last book the characters were far too powerful to feel like city watch agents any longer. They were so powerful they should have been running the city. Agents probably would have been better as a three or four book AP stopping around level 10 to 12.
Book 1 through 5 I had a great time running. Book 6 the characters were so powerful that they crushed everything and no one could stop them.
I disagree with "Blood Lords is for evil characters". This is an "evil characters welcome" AP not an "evil characters mandatory" AP. Being a good person in Blood Lords is an interesting RP challenge that's not for everybody, but it can be great if both the player and the GM are up for it. Our Blood Lords party was mostly Neutral, but we did have a Lawful Good Paladin (of Erecura whose edicts include "Manipulate dangerous beings and opportunities to your benefit, thrive in hostile conditions") in it. You should have a conversation as a group as to how the "positive/vitality energy is illegal in Geb" thing is going to be handled, since a valid take on it is "there's no way to distinguish after-the-fact whether life energy was magical or just a byproduct of living things" so it's only going to be a problem insofar as someone observes you doing it and survives to report you.
It's really more of a Lawful AP than an Evil one in the old Alignment sense. The thing about Geb is that Geb, however improbably, works. It works in large part due to daily atrocities, but you can make a strong case that this is somehow better than the alternative, and the PCs essential goal in Blood Lords is "keep the whole system from tumbling down." You have to buy into "Geb's society and system of governance is better than complete societal collapse but with vampires", but you don't have to buy into "evil."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I also think Kingmaker almost needs to be split into two entries next time: PF1 Kingmaker and PF2 Kingmaker. I don't know for sure, but my feeling from playing it and seeing other reactions to it is that these versions have not been received equally well. (I know anytime someone recommends Kingmaker and has actually run/played the PF2 one, its always caveated with "throw out or massively house rule the kingdom rules", and that's kind of a big problem.) Plus as you noted it's very polarizing in that people either love it or hate it. So there's some definite "know your group before starting this one" here, as some players just won't vibe with the open and largely freeform nature of this.It's definitely love or hate. The rest of my group seems to love it, I rate it a 2/10 only because I enjoyed before we got our charter.
I actually like freeform stuff and hexcrawls, I just hate the kingdom rules, including the popular alternative ones, and having spent much more time thinking about what about it I don't like I've realized that I just find the premise absurd.
I mean, the kingdom rules are absurd. I remember one point where we had a level up that came at the same time as a size increase, and suddenly the DC of almost EVERYTHING went up by 3. Including building a farm in a hex right next to one where we had just built a farm.
You'd think our kingdom would get better at that having done it a few times, but we actually get significantly worse at it instead. It makes no damn sense at all since it's the same terrain. Hell, had we failed to build it the first turn, it would have been literally the same hex!
Scaling basic tasks like this by the Control DC makes no sense whatsoever and just left us all frustrated that our level 3 kingdom was somehow better at several basic tasks than our level 6 kingdom, because that's how PF2 math works... except in normal PF2 you don't get worse at wrestling a goblin by gaining levels: you're expected to be wrestling stronger opponents. Kingdom rules forgot that second part.
And of course you have a party to back you up and thus don't need to be good at literally everything. One of the worst kingdom rule experiences I had was getting an event that required us to roll something the kingdom is untrained in, because you can't be trained in everything at low level without using house rules. It was something ridiculous like we'd get a critical failure in the event on an 8 on the dice, which results in really bad outcomes. This wasn't at all fun and just felt like the system setting us up for failure and then punishing us for not rolling a nat 20 and not still having a Supernatural Solution available.
The popular homebrew rules can only fix some of this because they are working within the system, and its the system itself that is flawed. Truly fixing it would require replacing the entire system. They do a good job of making the rules actually playable, but they can only do so much.
I disagree with "Blood Lords is for evil characters". This is an "evil characters welcome" AP not an "evil characters mandatory" AP. Being a good person in Blood Lords is an interesting RP challenge that's not for everybody, but it can be great if both the player and the GM are up for it. Our Blood Lords party was mostly Neutral, but we did have a Lawful Good Paladin (of Erecura whose edicts include "Manipulate dangerous beings and opportunities to your benefit, thrive in hostile conditions") in it. You should have a conversation as a group as to how the "positive/vitality energy is illegal in Geb" thing is going to be handled, since a valid take on it is "there's no way to distinguish after-the-fact whether life energy was magical or just a byproduct of living things" so it's only going to be a problem insofar as someone observes you doing it and survives to report you.
That sounds like the diet-coke of "good", TBH. Manipulating people for your own benefit is not really "good". So you're not making a strong case for how workable this is.
It's really more of a Lawful AP than an Evil one in the old Alignment sense. The thing about Geb is that Geb, however improbably, works. It works in large part due to daily atrocities, but you can make a strong case that this is somehow better than the alternative, and the PCs essential goal in Blood Lords is "keep the whole system from tumbling down." You have to buy into "Geb's society and system of governance is better than complete societal collapse but with vampires", but you don't have to buy into "evil."
Good aligned heroes don't tend to go along with daily atrocities because they keep things running smoothly. Lawful ones might, but again, this sounds pretty evil.
It's totally fine that evil campaigns exist for people that want them, but trying to sell them as being not-that is just going to lead to people having a very bad time when they don't realize what they're signing up for.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thank you for the guide. As usual I got some disagreements about the rankings, but that's par for the course.
For the most strong disagreement: I've run CotCT two times at this point (in fact it was the first AP I ever ran and I changed to PF1E rules in the middle of it from 3.5 rules) and found both times that the second half of the AP is way worse than the first half. Scarwall is too long and the last module is just more dungeons with a minimal interaction section with the city. Hell's Rebels was the way better version of this AP, so I'm happy that I get to run it again in a few months for another group of friends.
Also Jade Regent (which I've run twice, too) is much better than it is rated. Except the hobgoblin module. ^^ And Shattered Star suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuucks . Also, you should give a GM trauma warning for WotR, if run with mythic RAW.
Here it is!
Tarondor's 2025 Guide to the Pathfinder Adventure Paths
Please enjoy.
Super guide, thanks a lot!
Just one thing: Your values for math nerds, especially the median, seem wrong. Having a mean of 8.1 and a median of 5.5 (Curse of the Crimson Throne) doesn't look possible if 10 is the max.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Extremely worthy guide. Thanks A LOT.
I am surprised that you did not mention the troublesome loot system for Agents of Edgewatch as something to be fixed.
As is, it actively punishes PCs who try to be honest agents of the law.
I also feel Blood Lords is not ONLY for evil characters, which your introduction leads to. I think being strongly Lawful works too, as hinted by the player's guide BTW.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you have to buy into atrocities that seems to really weight the scales towards evil.
The way to play non-evil in Geb for Blood Lords is:
- You are from Geb, and you have always lived in Geb.- You recognize things could be better, and you want them to be better.
- You understand that things could be a lot worse, and you work to prevent them from getting worse.
- You have lines you're not going to cross.
It's about setting achievable goals for the character- you are not in position to drive all the undead out of Geb, and indeed that isn't obviously a good thing (Geb's agricultural exports feed most of the region, after all.) You can only affect what you can personally touch, and the PCs are in position to stop a total societal collapse due to stumbling upon it, and are allowed to upend some of the deeply entrenched power structure as a result.
What I'm arguing mostly is "how do I play a good person in Blood Lords" is a much more workable RPing challenge than "how do I play a good person in Hell's Vengeance" or "how do I play a Hobgoblin in Ironfang Invasion?". There's always an impulse to want to "do the opposite" and what I'm advocating for is that Blood Lords is actually a fun opportunity to do this.
Just one thing: Your values for math nerds, especially the median, seem wrong. Having a mean of 8.1 and a median of 5.5 (Curse of the Crimson Throne) doesn't look possible if 10 is the max.
If 100 people gave the AP a "9", but one guy gave it a 1 and one gave it a 10, the median would be 5.5.
I agree that it's a nearly useless statistic, but people asked for it.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If 100 people gave the AP a "9", but one guy gave it a 1 and one gave it a 10, the median would be 5.5.
I agree that it's a nearly useless statistic, but people asked for it.
What you are describing is the midrange, not the median.
The median is the value separating the sample in 2. At least 50% of the people voted 9 or more and at least 50% of the people voted 9 or less so 9 is the median.I agree that the midrange is useless, but the median is very interesting to determine the note of the average player. With the mean, it gives a good idea of the sample repartition.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nope, you're right. Well, a fix for another day, then! Soon, but probably not today!
Would you believe I got an "A" in statistics? It's been a while, but I did!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, fixed the median thing.
For the most strong disagreement: I've run CotCT two times at this point (in fact it was the first AP I ever ran and I changed to PF1E rules in the middle of it from 3.5 rules) and found both times that the second half of the AP is way worse than the first half. Scarwall is too long and the last module is just more dungeons with a minimal interaction section with the city. Hell's Rebels was the way better version of this AP, so I'm happy that I get to run it again in a few months for another group of friends.
True story: how much you like the back half of Curse is 1/3rd determined by how much you enjoy playing Castlevania in your PF game.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Really enjoyed reading the breakdown, and honestly happy to see Season of Ghosts take #1 spot. I'm holding off on running it because I ran Jade Regent so recently, but if I run a 2e Adventure path in the future this will be high on the list.
Also interesting to see Age of Ashes starting to get some more love and traction. If anyone has been playing Dragon Age: The Veilguard recently, Age of Ashes makes for an interesting tabletop reflection of it.
I also love a world-hopping adventure where you can regularly return to your home-town and build a base.
As always I'll defend Kingmaker and Jade Regent to the death!
But I am a person who likes doing prep, enjoys using Modules as scaffolds to tell my player's stories and my players love interacting and getting to know the NPCs in adventure paths!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nope, you're right. Well, a fix for another day, then! Soon, but probably not today!
Would you believe I got an "A" in statistics? It's been a while, but I did!
Yes I believe it ;)
The median shows a few interesting things. Like Kingmaker where the median is significantly higher than the average, suggesting that a few people really hated it when most people rated it around 8.
There's something similar with Wrath of the Righteous, so I wonder if popular campaigns generate such polarization.
Season of Ghosts got a median of 10 Oo
It doesn't sound legitimate. I hardly see a campaign that would be a 10 for most players having played it. I'm expecting it to drop significantly in the coming years.
It's also interesting to see that most APs got a median of 7 or 8, which means that the average player is liking them (I consider a 7 an "ok score"). Only 12 APs scored under that and as such didn't deliver for the majority of their players.
Thank you for a well-needed update to your wonderful 2021 survey! The results indicating that time provides a more accurate read of the pros and cons of an AP is fascinating. I’m hoping you will have the fortitude and time for another update in four years once we have a new batch of APs and some distance from the Remaster.
Your two surveys have inspired me to take a pause between books on my Extinction Curse campaign to talk with my players. You mention management of player expectations in many of the APs you cover, so it seems having a discussion as we enter the tail end of EC will be critical for finishing it. Also, I want to get their current impressions to write a review that might be useful to future GMs.
The median shows a few interesting things. Like Kingmaker where the median is significantly higher than the average, suggesting that a few people really hated it when most people rated it around 8.
Because it is a good campaign and has lots of material but if you bought it expecting well balanced kingdom building rules then you would be disaapointed. But you can tell that from reading Tarandors comments.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This was a blast to read, thanks for updating your guide!
A few miscellaneous thoughts:
- I wonder if the discrepancy between your own thoughts on GW and WoW and the polling results is because a lot of the problems in those adventures are their myriad small errors not obvious on an initial read. I know the first time I read through GW in preparation for running it I didn't notice a huge number of small issues that became persistently annoying in play.
- I feel like popular perception of AV has swung too far in the opposite direction. AV is very group dependent and not very newcomer friendly, but if you like dungeon crawling and tough combats it's an absolute blast that easily merited its previous high rank.
- I miss 6 book APs so much. 3 bookers just don't have the same gravitas or sense of long term adventure. It doesn't help that the 2 best 6 book APs for PF2E, Age of Ashes and Strength of Thousands, don't have Foundry modules so playing them online is a big pain.
A comment on the text under Mummy's Mask: I think you misinterpreted a post about the cultists.
It's not an actual thrown bomb, it's Troth of the Forgotten Pharaoh.