New adventure path from ENP

[Insight]

I'd like to throw in a vote for a pirate-themed AP.

I'd also like to pitch a "half" AP (1-15) as a release and then the other "half" using the same basic plotline as another AP (16-30). It would help to reduce the immediate overhead for each release; in essence, you could release the first "part" when you'd be in the middle of the development cycle, instead of waiting until the end. That would certainly aid in getting the product to market faster.

Finally, and I don't know if this is the place, but I'd like to throw my hat in the ring as a possible developer. I have produced work for 3.5 SRD stuff (Skull & Bones) that has a pirate theme, if you go in that direction. Heck, even if you don't, I'd probably be interested in pitching in.

 

[Sepp]

Something like Kingmaker would get my vote for an AP...

I'd also love some Dark Sun modules.

 

[RangerWickett]

So a tier-splittable campaign saga with adventures you can play in any order? I've got some ideas about that.

And Eugenez, I don't know if we'd go for Jack Vance, but a friend of mine did once brainstorm an amazing image of a party of adventurers being attacked by a necromancer standing atop the pitted, decayed hull of a harrier jumpjet, painted with runes of blood to reanimate its long-dead power.

 

[renau1g]

And maybe with some pirates thrown in for good measure... everything's better with pirates

 

[TarionzCousin]

I would explode if it was set in the Outer Planes from start to finish.

... and that's a good thing!

 

[bert1000]

I'm certainly on board with doing things a bit differently. I'm also half on board with dumping or redesigning skill challenges.

Morrus,

I'm a big fan of skill challenges (although I prefer a looser Obsidian style execution). I'm also a big fan of WoTBS. However, 4e WoTBS skill challenges have frankly been pretty bad so far. It's not in the mechanical set up (skill uses, etc.) which is ok, but the reason they have been poor IMO is the stakes. The consequences for success and failure have been trivial.

Good skill challenges are not just a different means to the same end, but have emotional impact on the PCs and players, and consequences that are permanent (but of course not game ending). My thoughts are that every skill challenge should have a permanent story consequence.

For instance, in Shelter from the Storm there are a few travel skill challenges that result in loss of healing surges for failure and a combat that results before rest. So what? Unless that combat will result in the probable death of a PC because of the healing surge losses then it is just "a different means to the same end".

IMO, good stakes for a travel skill challenge would be something like: You need to quickly travel through the mountains to reach the village so you can join in the defense before the orcs attack. Success: "The PCs reach the village in time to help defend and there is a chance the village is saved". Failure: "The PCs are too late and the village is burned to the ground". Or "The PCs are too late and the village is already under attack with an NPC the PCs' like killed already".

In this example, the players (assuming they had some stake in the village) would actually care if they succeeded on the skill challenge. And it doesn't derail the adventure -- if they fail, now the PCs are even more invested in tracking down these orcs and avenging the loss. WoTBS (and many WOTC) skill challenges don't have meaningful stakes/ consequences to success and failure.

Here's a thread discussing this further:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...penalties-winning-losing-skill-challenge.html

So, I guess what I am saying is please keep skill challenges but try to make them a meaningful part of the story.

SC-Seaquen-3 — Rat Search is better in this regard. There are story consequences. I would take this one level further on failure: The fires continue and the violence increases, but also come up with some scene that makes it clear to the PCs that their failure led to X being killed in the violence, etc. Or perhaps Lorb loses power because he was "ineffectual in dealing with this arson business", and that has consequences later when...

Almost all RPGs assume that you can always continue playing if the DM and players want to: either you get resurrected, roll up new characters, etc. And combat is set up so that the PCs win. In this framework, the ability for PCs to not obtain some of their goals is priceless.

I would love to see this philosophy incorporated into the new AP as well as the remaining 4e WoTBS modules.

Thanks for listening!

 

[sfedi]

100% agree with bert1000.

Persnoally I'm doing that with the WotBS adventures I'm running.

 

[Morrus]

Morrus,

I'm a big fan of skill challenges (although I prefer a looser Obsidian style execution). I'm also a big fan of WoTBS. However, 4e WoTBS skill challenges have frankly been pretty bad so far. It's not in the mechanical set up (skill uses, etc.) which is ok, but the reason they have been poor IMO is the stakes. The consequences for success and failure have been trivial.

Good skill challenges are not just a different means to the same end, but have emotional impact on the PCs and players, and consequences that are permanent (but of course not game ending). My thoughts are that every skill challenge should have a permanent story consequence.

For instance, in Shelter from the Storm there are a few travel skill challenges that result in loss of healing surges for failure and a combat that results before rest. So what? Unless that combat will result in the probable death of a PC because of the healing surge losses then it is just "a different means to the same end".

IMO, good stakes for a travel skill challenge would be something like: You need to quickly travel through the mountains to reach the village so you can join in the defense before the orcs attack. Success: "The PCs reach the village in time to help defend and there is a chance the village is saved". Failure: "The PCs are too late and the village is burned to the ground". Or "The PCs are too late and the village is already under attack with an NPC the PCs' like killed already".

In this example, the players (assuming they had some stake in the village) would actually care if they succeeded on the skill challenge. And it doesn't derail the adventure -- if they fail, now the PCs are even more invested in tracking down these orcs and avenging the loss. WoTBS (and many WOTC) skill challenges don't have meaningful stakes/ consequences to success and failure.

Here's a thread discussing this further:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...penalties-winning-losing-skill-challenge.html

So, I guess what I am saying is please keep skill challenges but try to make them a meaningful part of the story.

SC-Seaquen-3 — Rat Search is better in this regard. There are story consequences. I would take this one level further on failure: The fires continue and the violence increases, but also come up with some scene that makes it clear to the PCs that their failure led to X being killed in the violence, etc. Or perhaps Lorb loses power because he was "ineffectual in dealing with this arson business", and that has consequences later when...

Almost all RPGs assume that you can always continue playing if the DM and players want to: either you get resurrected, roll up new characters, etc. And combat is set up so that the PCs win. In this framework, the ability for PCs to not obtain some of their goals is priceless.

I would love to see this philosophy incorporated into the new AP as well as the remaining 4e WoTBS modules.

Thanks for listening!

What I've noticed from running it is that the new content skill challenges in the 4E version tend to work well; but the ones which are an update of the 3.5 content in the original do not - mainly because the concept of a skill challenge didn't exist in the same way back then, and so those areas *weren't* critical - because that's just how 3.5 worked. We coudn't suddenly make things plot critical just because 4E demanded a "skill challenge" without changing the actual plot.

In a new adventure path, everything will be original content, which means the skill challenges would be designed from scratch as part of the plot development process.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

I like the idea of a tier based 'adventure path', and I think a very good option would be to really, in depth detail a city/surrounding area. WoBS is great partly because of the depth of the story line outside the heroes path, and in the involvement by the PCs in the wide scope of literally a battle between nations. One of the issues I have with WoBS is, due mainly to the lack of session time I get, my players never really get involved in the great background set-pieces of the campaign. They are too busy moving on to the next published adventure {We have been playing for 2 years now.. which makes 24 sessions }

I would like to see a narrowed down scope from the half-continent WoBS covers to a port city, something like Stormhold, Sanctuary, Valenar, or London. The adventures could be scattered in, around, and under the city.. with pirate options, ninja options, diplomancy and guild plot-lines.

This could set the adventures in whatever order the players chose to go to, allow DM's to flesh out the city and area more in between adventures, and give the PCs a place to really settle into.

Perhaps take Seaquin, or a port city out of Ostalin and jump ahead of the WoBS by 50 years. Or break completely and use a fairly generic city-site that could be dropped in as any of the above mentioned places.

I would also recommend using the Obsideon skill challenge rule-set.. and I am off to read bert1000's thread on good rewards..

 

[Amphimir Míriel]

I agree that Skill Challenges should remain a part of EWP 4E adventures and I agree that they must have tangible rewards or penalties for their outcomes.

I disagree that Skill Challenges must be "life-or-death" however

Just like a combat that ends in TPK, a Skill Challenge that ends with "game-over" for the adventure is bad form on the part of the DM and the designer