default header

Roleplaying

Paizo's Adventure Paths

Moderator: JC Denton

Paizo's Adventure Paths

Unread postby icycalm » 23 Jun 2021 23:17

Anyone Else Not Like the AP Format?
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs439an?Anyo ... -AP-Format

Harles wrote:I realize I'm likely in the minority, but I'd prefer adventure content of a mega adventure along the lines of what is put out by other companies that focus on, well, the adventure. Approximately half the content of each AP is stuff I don't use, and I end up spending around $150 per campaign (when you can get similar material from other companies for less than half that).
Does anyone else agree? Like could we get adventures without all the setting "filler?" Just some good, "meat and potatoes" adventuring? (Especially now that Paizo seems to be the sole content creators for PF2).


https://paizo.com/threads/rzs439an?Anyo ... P-Format#4

Harles wrote:I want adventure content. Dungeons to explore, dangerous wilderness encounters. Good, classic content. Not "read this 10 pages of historical treatise on the history of an elven society that's never going to come up in play."


https://paizo.com/threads/rzs439an?Anyo ... -Format#10

Harles wrote:The AP format just doesn't appeal to me. I can certainly ignore the stuff I don't want to use, but the storylines are too complex for me to get a handle on. By the time I got to the huge info dump at the start of Part 3 of Age of Ashes, I was ready to throw in the towel. I couldn't even explain it to myself, much less try to create a believable world for the party to explore.


DMing aint easy, and DMing Paizo's monster six-parter campaigns may well be the toughest DMing challenge ever apart from WRITING these six-parters yourself. And note that this guy is complaining about the actual adventure books: he's not even talking about buying all the supplemental sourcebooks and integrating those too in your play, let alone what I am doing, which is running three APs at the same time and overseeing a fourth, and then letting the consequences of each ripple across the world and affect each other lol.

The dude isn't getting much traction in the thread. Everyone loves the APs. And this guy nailed it in his response:

https://paizo.com/threads/rzs439an?Anyo ... -Format#24

Skeld wrote:The thing about APs is that they aren't just adventures. They're also functional world-building, harkening back to the day with Pathfinder was nothing other than the AP. Since it's been a successful format, Paizo has (rightly) been hesitant to mess with it too much.


There is NOTHING more exciting being released each month in the world of TTRPGs than Paizo's new Pathfinder (and now also Starfinder) APs. And it has been this way since 2007, pretty much, with a handful of exceptions. E.g. the Curse of Strahd release, or new VTTs like Foundry and TaleSpire, and updates to these etc.

Really the biggest TTRPG advance that's happened in the time since I bowed out of the genre, in the 25 years I was out, is the Paizo AP. Unless we're counting VTTs. In which case it's VTTs.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Re: Paizo's Adventure Paths

Unread postby icycalm » 24 Jun 2021 07:36

It just hit me that PF1 has exactly 24 official campaigns. Isn’t that the standard number of episodes in a TV show season?
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Re: Paizo's Adventure Paths

Unread postby icycalm » 12 Mar 2022 13:34

Don’t follow the link, it’s a wide-ranging discussion full of spoilers.

https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43h7u&page ... on-APS#294

At the end of the day, Pathfinder is a tactical combat system - your Class is basically a big bundle of mechanics that describe how you fight. Pathfinder games can stray away from that, but it’s still ultimately that’s the skeleton everything else hangs on. If your group likes lighter games and more RP-heavy play, there’s a good chance even the most acclaimed Adventure Path would be a miss for them.

EDIT: For what it’s worth, I’m here because I’m a fan of the setting; I personally struggle with games as mechanically-complex as PF2. I’m the usual GM for my home group, but Pathfinder is one I’d only really be able to handle as a player, and even then it’s outside of my comfort zone. I think this sounds less like an issue with the APs chosen, and more a pretty fundamental disagreement with what the system is interested in - if my group didn’t want a pretty hefty game with a strong focus on tactics and mechanical character customization (rather than something more narrative that doesn’t center combat), it’s not one I’d ever pitch.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands


Return to Roleplaying