Pathfinder 2E (WIP) Secrets of Old Pandora, Drafting my vision for a Pathfinder 2e West Marches

[The-Magic-Sword]

So I was thinking about it and I realized that my upcoming west marches campaign (which is still a good 5-8 months out) would probably be of interest to some of the users here. This document is a work in progress, and mainly functions as a place for me to store my ideas, work through some pitfalls, and establish solutions as I come to them. I will eventually be creating a formal rules document for this campaign with a cleaner presentation, detail on how these systems are actually implemented (a table for leveling, for instance, and it remains to be seen if we're going ot restrict gold and item hand offs at all), other house rules (including the rarity designations for the campaign) and so forth. Expect this to change from time to time as it is a living document. I have some experience running these kinds of games reaching back to 4e, and they're my white whale for game design, so if this seems ambitious know that I'm fairly passionate about it. My already-known players (and assistant GMs) for this have already had some input, and they'll likely have more as we go.

Its the product of all my experiences as a GM up to now, and in some ways it embodies the kind of designer and Game Master I'm trying to become, with the help of sources like The Alexandrian, Ben Robbins, and Matt Collville. I enjoy the self-improvement side of GMing, it's something I take great pride in, and my journey over the last decade has brought me to appreciate the idea of networks of adventuring characters and players, player-neutral content to allow them to feel a consistent world to explore, environmental storytelling for them to uncover and piece together instead of big in your face plots, and adventurer slice of life as the main plot, all still done in the kinds of character option infused systems, player empowered, and highly strategic systems that I love.

Anyway, here it is, Secrets of Old Pandora!

 

[Porridge]

Very cool. Especially interested in hearing how the your ideas for "Downtime" activities (like your suggestion to require them to spend money to train, etc) ends up shaking out.

I was originally lukewarm about the PF2 Downtime stuff, but listening to some Blades in the Dark podcasts (the "Blood & Glass" shows GCN has been doing) have turned me 180 on this. It was amazing to hear a show where the "downtime" part of the game was as fun as the "action" part. And I've been turned on to the idea that PF2's downtime mechanics might support something similar...

Anyway, I'd be interested in hearing how it goes!

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

Yeah downtime is a little on the difficult side because its potentially infinite even in a normal campaign if you don't either hard frame the characters choosing to get back to adventuring, throw them time sensitive hooks and inciting incidents, or have a party that self-regulates (which can feel at odds with a game where the players try their hardest.)

In the context of this game the real issue is that since tracking an actual date would be painful with adventure pacing and different groups doing things, so there needs to be something to set the amount of downtime you have to work with, it has to be somehow limited, which is why I'm thinking of just giving them out as a baseline reward per session spent playing-- so even if a voyage is a bust treasure wise, you at least get downtime as a consolation. Its funny because while I had the idea in mind of players paying for training to level, it didn't occur to me that it would also take downtime days for them to actually experience the training, I have to see how the costs and the downtime actually shake out.

I love the downtime rules in the system itself, the only real modification I've made in more traditional campaigns was to use lifestyle as a measure of what resources you put into longer term intangible goals. For instance, a character who becomes the leader of an organization will do better or worse at the management of that organization based off how extravagant their lifestyle cost is, and this was of course separate from the actual tasks like retraining and earning income. It was a nice rules-lite addition to support things like kingdom management, army gathering and such that took place in that campaign during certain long downtime sections.

 

[transmission89]

I’m really curious about this. How do you intend to effectively run a westmarches in pf2 (where players drop in and out and so can vary massively with xp and have different levels) with the tight monster maths (where perhaps a difference in level can mean a decent fight or getting one shotted?)

For example, I’m currently running a westmarches in Ad&D 2e, and level difference isn’t a major issue there (and encounters aren’t really as “tuned” I suppose). I’d be really interested in your thoughts on this.

 

[kenada]

Just because a system is conventionally used to run balanced encounters doesn’t mean it has to be used to do that. You can run the same kind of unbalanced encounters in PF2 that one did in older editions, and they’d work about the same (picking fights with the wrong creatures will get you killed). Whether one should do that comes down to the social contract of the game and expectations at the table. If everyone understands that combat for its own sake isn’t the point, and they should be careful and clever in how they go about things, then it ought to work fine.

I ran a hexcrawl in PF2. Though it was not a Westmarches game, we did have someone new join us mid-way through. That player’s character was able to contribute as long as she was careful about it. It helped that we used Proficiency Without Level, so the gulf in expected modifier was not so large, but I think at least a few level difference in core PF2 should be okay. One thing that helps out lower level characters quite a bit is they receive double XP when they are below the party’s level. I determined party level by eyeballing it. I’d normally take the average, but it was moderated by what felt right, so I’d tweak the value as it made sense.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

Honestly? Our plan is to place the level the lead is designed for on the leads themselves so the players can plan who to ask to come accordingly. We're also designing for a party of four so taking more people could give you some wiggle room. Players being at different levels can just be a thing that happens, but spending treasure to level gives them control to an extent as well since they can choose to wait. This meshes with what Ben suggests about more dangerous pockets being hard to stumble into in his own west marches.

Finally, the system gives me some mechanics I can use to mitigate the problem, one dungeon I have planned revolves around a central treasure room with a very powerful Dragon sleeping in it like Smaug. When the players enter the dungeon, they'll be too low level to take him on and know it, so the dungeon is designed to involve sneaking around him fighting weaker monsters in multiple excursions. Instead of his perception, I'm planning it around the infiltration and (if necessary) chase subsystems in the GMG. In other words, I'm exploring the possibility of letting the relative strength difference just dictate the kind of encounter it is-- is this a fight scene or is it a scene where the characters have to get away from something too strong for them.

Ben Robbins West Marches was in 3rd edition, so I don't think you need an OSR mentality toward balance.

 

[transmission89]

Honestly? Our plan is to place the level the lead is designed for on the leads themselves so the players can plan who to ask to come accordingly. We're also designing for a party of four so taking more people could give you some wiggle room. Players being at different levels can just be a thing that happens, but spending treasure to level gives them control to an extent as well since they can choose to wait. This meshes with what Ben suggests about more dangerous pockets being hard to stumble into in his own west marches.

Finally, the system gives me some mechanics I can use to mitigate the problem, one dungeon I have planned revolves around a central treasure room with a very powerful Dragon sleeping in it like Smaug. When the players enter the dungeon, they'll be too low level to take him on and know it, so the dungeon is designed to involve sneaking around him fighting weaker monsters in multiple excursions. Instead of his perception, I'm planning it around the infiltration and (if necessary) chase subsystems in the GMG. In other words, I'm exploring the possibility of letting the relative strength difference just dictate the kind of encounter it is-- is this a fight scene or is it a scene where the characters have to get away from something too strong for them.

Ben Robbins West Marches was in 3rd edition, so I don't think you need an OSR mentality toward balance.

These are some really cool thoughts actually on the approach, combined with Kenada’s campaign rulings of boosters for the lower characters.

I did really weigh up using pathfinder 2 for mine, I instantly saw how those downtime rules could feed into building and expanding your character and home base. I can definitely see the potential.

Ultimately, I decided on AD&D2e because I was concerned enough about the tightness of the monster maths (we know how much even a +1 can be godsend in some encounters) and because my sessions are generally short weekday evenings, I wanted to focus more on exploration and getting as much done as possible in the limited time we have (as older school games have blisteringly fast combat, my players can blast through so many of them).

Interestingly, I’ve found (as this is my first westmarches game) that even though I’d planned out a lot of how I’d expect things to work (again basing it off Ben’s articles and others experiences), I’ve had to update my campaign guidelines quite regularly. A lot of my assumptions of play needed tweaking and such based on the needs my players, so I’d be curious if you find yours evolving and taking on a life of its own in the same way!

You’ll definitely have to keep us updated as this seems really cool!

As an aside, If you recall the article though, Ben went for third not necessarily for balance, but because of the precision it offered to make it clear it was fair (rather than DM fiat or the “fluffiness” of grid less combat. He didn’t want any ambiguities)

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

These are some really cool thoughts actually on the approach, combined with Kenada’s campaign rulings of boosters for the lower characters.

I did really weigh up using pathfinder 2 for mine, I instantly saw how those downtime rules could feed into building and expanding your character and home base. I can definitely see the potential.

Ultimately, I decided on AD&D2e because I was concerned enough about the tightness of the monster maths (we know how much even a +1 can be godsend in some encounters) and because my sessions are generally short weekday evenings, I wanted to focus more on exploration and getting as much done as possible in the limited time we have (as older school games have blisteringly fast combat, my players can blast through so many of them).

Interestingly, I’ve found (as this is my first westmarches game) that even though I’d planned out a lot of how I’d expect things to work (again basing it off Ben’s articles and others experiences), I’ve had to update my campaign guidelines quite regularly. A lot of my assumptions of play needed tweaking and such based on the needs my players, so I’d be curious if you find yours evolving and taking on a life of its own in the same way!

You’ll definitely have to keep us updated as this seems really cool!

As an aside, If you recall the article though, Ben went for third not necessarily for balance, but because of the precision it offered to make it clear it was fair (rather than DM fiat or the “fluffiness” of grid less combat. He didn’t want any ambiguities)

Yeah absolutely, I was just alluding to their choice of system as a note that it can be done with a 'balance-centric' system with scaling math.

As for the rest it will be interesting to see how it evolves, especially since this is already an evolution on our 5e 'guild game' that one featured no treasure at all, and instead you got money to spend as a part of your build every level. The game didn't use player scheduling at all, as GMs just posted sign ups for sessions, the players had very little freedom. Part of the idea was supposed to be that we'd run multiple excursions into an 'adventuring area' (a dungeon, but abstracted) until it was completed, but in practice they were just very pick up game type things the GMs (mainly me) ran on the weekly. We had very little investment in it, though some players enjoyed it, and massive turnover.

This is me tackling the fundamental problems of that game with a vengeance-- player scheduling means more investment in character relationships and players deciding what they're interested in. Logistics will give players goals and such, and the game being treasure centric was the missing ingredient to make the exploration feel worthwhile-- its worth finding all the secret doors because that'll likely net you more cash. Rushing the sessions felt bad, so I moved away from having to be back in town at the end of one session, but addressed the player scheduling elephant in the room by forcing players to abandon an adventure or go on without the full party, or get everyone together, if they want to use that character again. Paying to level solves the issue where regular exp would make some players level into a range there were very few active players who could participate in, players can now hold off on that in-definitely and are technically rewarded for doing so as they'll be better equipped, if people REALLY want they can give their friends gold to train them up to join in on treasure hunting at whatever level (I'll need to make sure the prices don't make this too easy.)

All the things you might want to pay for (your ship, hirelings to crew it, all of the magic items you might want, a permit for a valuable port, etc) also create both an incentive to adventure, to explore well, and for us to bypass the WBL table in adding the possibility of getting quite rich, without just giving them everything, which in turn creates a feeling of earning it.

Finally, moving to a hexmap of a specific region of the world was intentional, because the previous game basically involved hand waving long distance travel and teleporting gimmicks to put adventures all over the world, which again made the game feel too floaty and indistinct. The Pandoran Islands is ideal because its at the center of the world and you can run into anything there, or even naturally travel far enough to access the coasts of several lands, all without handwaving. Players will really feel that they've accomplished something when they go from adventuring on the relatively large landmass they started on, to being able to sail after rumors and such on their own power.

I'm also going to get to do so much 'Object-Oriented' storytelling, which is my word for sandboxing that emphasizes the nature of picking a thing to interact with, and the GM fleshing it out as you go there-- you're picking what story is going to unfold. I'm super excited about this because I think its an opportunity for me to explore new styles of game (though obviously, I won't be the first one to do it) in a conscious way that seeks to exploit all of its benefits.

 

[transmission89]

Yeah absolutely, I was just alluding to their choice of system as a note that it can be done with a 'balance-centric' system with scaling math.

As for the rest it will be interesting to see how it evolves, especially since this is already an evolution on our 5e 'guild game' that one featured no treasure at all, and instead you got money to spend as a part of your build every level. The game didn't use player scheduling at all, as GMs just posted sign ups for sessions, the players had very little freedom. Part of the idea was supposed to be that we'd run multiple excursions into an 'adventuring area' (a dungeon, but abstracted) until it was completed, but in practice they were just very pick up game type things the GMs (mainly me) ran on the weekly. We had very little investment in it, though some players enjoyed it, and massive turnover.

This is me tackling the fundamental problems of that game with a vengeance-- player scheduling means more investment in character relationships and players deciding what they're interested in. Logistics will give players goals and such, and the game being treasure centric was the missing ingredient to make the exploration feel worthwhile-- its worth finding all the secret doors because that'll likely net you more cash. Rushing the sessions felt bad, so I moved away from having to be back in town at the end of one session, but addressed the player scheduling elephant in the room by forcing players to abandon an adventure or go on without the full party, or get everyone together, if they want to use that character again. Paying to level solves the issue where regular exp would make some players level into a range there were very few active players who could participate in, players can now hold off on that in-definitely and are technically rewarded for doing so as they'll be better equipped, if people REALLY want they can give their friends gold to train them up to join in on treasure hunting at whatever level (I'll need to make sure the prices don't make this too easy.)

All the things you might want to pay for (your ship, hirelings to crew it, all of the magic items you might want, a permit for a valuable port, etc) also create both an incentive to adventure, to explore well, and for us to bypass the WBL table in adding the possibility of getting quite rich, without just giving them everything, which in turn creates a feeling of earning it.

Finally, moving to a hexmap of a specific region of the world was intentional, because the previous game basically involved hand waving long distance travel and teleporting gimmicks to put adventures all over the world, which again made the game feel too floaty and indistinct. The Pandoran Islands is ideal because its at the center of the world and you can run into anything there, or even naturally travel far enough to access the coasts of several lands, all without handwaving. Players will really feel that they've accomplished something when they go from adventuring on the relatively large landmass they started on, to being able to sail after rumors and such on their own power.

I'm also going to get to do so much 'Object-Oriented' storytelling, which is my word for sandboxing that emphasizes the nature of picking a thing to interact with, and the GM fleshing it out as you go there-- you're picking what story is going to unfold. I'm super excited about this because I think its an opportunity for me to explore new styles of game (though obviously, I won't be the first one to do it) in a conscious way that seeks to exploit all of its benefits.

Yup. I’ve definitely found this running my westmarches campaign. It’s definitely an approach that I’ve fallen in love with.

I think, that, even were I to go back to a more traditional campaign model where I had guaranteed players for every session, it would still be a sandbox incorporating what I’ve learnt from this.

Ive found it so liberating as a GM, that I can’t see myself returning to the “linear story” approach (exemplified by APs). No knock on them, I just think my tastes have definitley changed.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

Yup. I’ve definitely found this running my westmarches campaign. It’s definitely an approach that I’ve fallen in love with.

I think, that, even were I to go back to a more traditional campaign model where I had guaranteed players for every session, it would still be a sandbox incorporating what I’ve learnt from this.

Ive found it so liberating as a GM, that I can’t see myself returning to the “linear story” approach (exemplified by APs). No knock on them, I just think my tastes have definitley changed.

A GM after my own heart! I find the idea of an emergent story arising out of a 'simulated world' represented by an object oriented approach super compelling. I want to see players feel immersed by the sense that they're driving the action by choosing what to follow up on and how, and by a sense that the narrative really is emergent from those choices.