Council of Thieves or Kingmaker?

Gorrath · May 16, 2010

I wanna run one of the Pathfinder APs but I'm not sure which one to buy.
They both look interesting but I may have 1 or 2 new players in my group for it (one with zero experience in RPG and one who hasn't played anything since D&D 2nd ed).
Any suggestions on which one of those 2 APs would be better for new players?

Thanks

SoldierBlue · May 17, 2010

Gorrath said:
I wanna run one of the Pathfinder APs but I'm not sure which one to buy.
They both look interesting but I may have 1 or 2 new players in my group for it (one with zero experience in RPG and one who hasn't played anything since D&D 2nd ed).
Any suggestions on which one of those 2 APs would be better for new players?

Thanks

Both are great - but remember that Kingmaker is only half done.

Council of Thieves is probably a little more advanced, and the "sandbox" nature of Kingmaker probably allows players to learn the game as they go a little easier than Council of Thieves. Council of Thieves thrusts the PCs into a pretty deep storyline very quickly. Kingmaker allows the PCs to set their own tempo a little more...

Thanks

Haffrung Helleyes · May 17, 2010

Kingmaker

With new gamers, you should definitely go with kingmaker. It's a much better introduction to D&D, in my opinion, unless your players also happen to be amateur thespians.

Ken

Steel_Wind · May 17, 2010

SoldierBlue said:
Both are great - but remember that Kingmaker is only half done.

Council of Thieves is probably a little more advanced, and the "sandbox" nature of Kingmaker probably allows players to learn the game as they go a little easier than Council of Thieves. Council of Thieves thrusts the PCs into a pretty deep storyline very quickly. Kingmaker allows the PCs to set their own tempo a little more...

Thanks

While I don't disagree with your observations, I must disagree with your conclusion. Kingmaker is the more advanced of the APs in my view.

It is relatively easy for PCs to react to a metaplot where the bad guys are constantly moving the story forward and presenting plot hooks and a narrative for the PCs to react to and pursue.

The nature of a reactive Adventure Path is that it presents the players with a generally more obvious series of choices to make about "what to do next". That strucutre is what makes it "easier" for a new player.

While Kingmaker is not devoid of story, the PCs are more instigators at several points in the AP and far less reactive. While that may sound like a fine idea for an experienced gamer, to new payers, the existence of a reactive metaplot draws them in with an obvious storyline which encourages them to become engaged and to play with a sense of purpose.

Nostalgia for wilderness treks and wandering encounters from 1st edition days can be misleading here. The fact is, the invention of an Adventure Path with a clear overarcing metaplot with a strong storyline that emerged in the middle of the 1st edition era with DragonLance fundamentally changed the nature of all subsequent adventure designs. It also drew many players into the game in a way that prior hack and slash play never did.

I'm not saying that Kingmaker is just hack and slash, but I am saying that the wide open nature of "well, what do you do next?" can be a rather befuddling question to a new player. The existence of a reactive metaplot in the traditional APs lends a great deal of structure to that question in a comforting way. Don't dismiss this simply because notalgia may be tinting your spectacles to a rosy pink hue.

Now... as to whether or not Council of Thieves would be the preferred "reactive AP" to start new players with? That's a very different question

MortonStromgal · May 17, 2010

Kingmaker is more work to DM but if your players aren't into some hefty roleplaying the first part of the second Council of Thieves adventure is going to be pretty rough and probably not a lot of fun.

SoldierBlue · May 17, 2010

Steel Wind,

Legitimate point, and I agree. A plot-driven AP like "Council of Thieves" may in itself pose less choice to players and therefore be easier for new players than "Kingmaker".

However, I continue to believe Kingmaker is a better choice for new players, for the fol reasons:

1) Pace - "Council of Thieves" thrusts players into a lot of action early. This may overwhelm new players, whereas "Kingmaker" allows players to pick their own pace.

2) Complexity - The overarching plot of "Council of Thieves" is a complex one - this is no "Caves of Chaos", or even Hommlet's "Moathouse." The last few APs have been brave in that they have strayed from the "beat up monters/take their stuff" conceit at the heart of older modules. However, I would argue that such an AP may be too much too fast for new players. "Kingmaker" works on an iceberg principle - push a little further south, and things get more interesting (and dangerous). Had enough? Go back north...

Anyway, I buy your point, and either AP could work for new players. I do think the staged play in the 2nd or 3rd part of "Council.." may be a bit much for new players....

Cheers

Haffrung Helleyes · May 17, 2010

What do you do next

Steel Wind,

Are you really suggesting that beginning roleplayers have a problem answering the 'what do you do next' question? I've never experienced this.

Certainly, when I was 12, that was how just about everyone I knew played D&D. I have a hard time buying the idea that people today are less sophisticated in this regard. Heck, isn't 'what do you do next' at the heart of World of Warcraft?

Let's not forget that Kingmaker is replete with adventure hooks -- posters with reward for tracking down monsters, etc. The PCs begin the game with a mission -- deal with the bandits. It's a fair bit like 'Keep on the Borderlands', which a whole generation of 12 year olds had no trouble at all with.

Contrast this with Chapter 2 of Council of Thieves, which asks the players to act out a play! I've seen this roleplayed once, and it wasn't pretty. If such a game had been my first experience of D&D, I might have taken up golf.

Ken

Haffrung Helleyes · May 17, 2010

Oh

And if the _DM_ was the beginner, rather than the players, I might agree that a plot-based campaign like Council of Thieves was more appropriate. I am gearing up to run Kingmaker now, and I can already tell it is going to be a lot of work.

Ken

Steel_Wind · May 17, 2010

Haffrung Helleyes said:
Steel Wind,

Are you really suggesting that beginning roleplayers have a problem answering the 'what do you do next' question? I've never experienced this.

Yes I am. It can be even more of a problem as people get older. They can often become embarassed far more easily about doing the "wrong" thing than a youngster would be. Yes. Really. Sometimes being 12 doth hath its advantages

Contrast this with Chapter 2 of Council of Thieves, which asks the players to act out a play! I've seen this roleplayed once, and it wasn't pretty. If such a game had been my first experience of D&D, I might have taken up golf.

I'm not arguing with you on this point. As I said in my original post, whether or not Council of Thieves is the preferred AP to start with (of the reactive APs) is a very different question. I happen to agree with you. Council of Thieves is not the best AP to start out the noobs with

There are seven other reactive APs to choose from of course. SCAP, Age of Worms, Savage Tide all from the Dungeon era, together with Rise of the Runelords, Curse of the Crimson Throne, Second Darkness and Legacy of Fire from the OGL phase of Paizo's APs.

If the OP is absolutely insisting upon a PFRPG statted AP then I guess the options really are down to two. Or ... none, perhaps.

I also suggest that the new mini AP trilogy Crypt of the Everflame, Masks of the Living God and City of Golden Death for a mini APath from 1st to 5th/6th level or so is a completely viable option -- and perhaps a little less ambitious than starting out new players on a massive year long AP. The modules are not without their problems, but a well prepared GM can see those coming if forewarned.

If forced to choose between Council of Thieves and Kingmaker, I would agree that Kingmaker probably makes the most sense.

Except... it's not finished yet and I would caution most GMs from starting to run an AP they have not read through to the end. It's not a disaster in the making if you don't -- but there is pretty much NO SCENARIO where the quality of the overall campaign is not improved with the additional GM foresight a finished AP provides.

End Result: There are more options available than an A or B, "heads or tails" choice here.

SoldierBlue · May 17, 2010

Try "Rise of the Runelords"

Steel Wind always speaks wisely.

If I had a choice, I'd start with "Rise of the Runelords."

It is perfect for new players, in that it combines player choice with clever hooks and the ability to gear back and go to Sandpoint if required.

Just because I TPK'd it as an experienced gamer - "Come on, let's just try one more room, even though our cleric is out of spells and we're all below half hit points..." - doesn't mean that the newbies will make the same mistake...

I just think it is such an evocative and cool way to start @ 1st level. I loved it.