Sept 2nd News - I wont be doing Scales of War

[Jhaelen]

I have to agree with the general sentiment. For me to even consider running an AP I need an outline. It doesn't have to cover all the details, just give some directions on what to expect.

Every adventure starts with a synopsis. Without a rough onverview it's simply incomplete.
If there's no outline for the AP it's no more than a series of loosely connected adventures.

When I read this reply over at WotC I immediately thought 'Wow, what a weak excuse.' What I would have expected to see is an explanation why they didn't give a synopsis right at the start of the first adventure for SoW and an assurance that it'll soon be made available.

Expecially after the initial reactions to the first few adventures:
The two major complaints I've seen were the lack of an overview and the low-res maps.

 

[Drkfathr1]

Is Lorraine Williams back in charge over there?

I'm really sick to death with WoTC telling me how to have fun.

I've been playing D&D for over 20 years, I have 7 dedicated players with more always trying to join, and you know what, we have TONS of fun. Editions haven't mattered.

 

[El Mahdi]

. . . I don't think starting early is necessarily a bad idea, just that waiting for the whole thing to come out before starting, if you can, is a better idea. . .

I don't completely disagree with you. If you are willing to wait, that's cool. I would probably assume you are getting a DDI subscription anyways (which is by no means a bad thing - I hope you find it enjoyable and worthwhile).

Personally though, for me, I'm not willing to pay for 16 months of Dungeon (or 12-14 months of DDI sub after the free preview), sight unseen, for an adventure path that I may or may not want to run (based on whether the path features are good enough or intrigue me), before I get to see it in it's totality and decide whether it's worth it. Dungeon and Dragon are the only reasons I would want a DDI sub. Without an AP synopsis, I won't be getting a subscription.

 

[TerraDave]

Who are you and what have you done with the optimistic Merric?

stupidest, weakest, absolute failure, lost their way, very very unimpressed…sacked…

Personally, I am liking this new Merric more and more.

 

[The Little Raven]

Gamers, we know how to big enormous mountains of little tiny molehills! We are even able to be "insulted" by things that are in no way insulting. Sigh.

Indeed. A statement that says "We don't want to tip our hand early" immediately gets recast as "They're insulting us" or "They're telling us how to have fun" or "It's like Lorraine Williams all over again." Gamers twist people's words in a way that would make politicians green with envy.

What gets me is that I don't see the same "we need an overview" outcry directed towards Paizo, as I cannot find a single overview of any of the three Pathfinder APs they've released so far (though this may be because of their site; point me to one if it exists).

 

[Uzzy]

A four page overview of Curse of the Crimson Throne can be found in Pathfinder 6: Spires of Xin-Shalast. Pathfinder 13: Shadow in The Sky, has a two page overview of the Second Darkness adventure path. So the lack of nerd rage against Paizo is probably because they actually supply the goods.

Also, Rise of the Runelords has an overview in Pathfinder 1: Burnt Offerings, in the form of a series of sidebars in the Thassilon article. So, three AP's, three overviews. One more reason why Paizo make the best products in the industry.

 

[Fenes]

Indeed. A statement that says "We don't want to tip our hand early" immediately gets recast as "They're insulting us" or "They're telling us how to have fun" or "It's like Lorraine Williams all over again." Gamers twist people's words in a way that would make politicians green with envy.

As the thread shows, their statement "Providing an outline would spoil the surprises, so we don't do it" is not twisted into an insult by most posters, but quite correctly interpreted as "we do not support those DMs who need/want an outline to run their game". There is no other reason not to provide a "spoiler tagged" outline.

 

[The Little Raven]

A four page overview of Curse of the Crimson Throne can be found in Pathfinder 6: Spires of Xin-Shalast. Pathfinder 13: Shadow in The Sky, has a two page overview of the Second Darkness adventure path. So the lack of nerd rage against Paizo is probably because they actually supply the goods.

So, to get an overview of the second AP in the series, I have to spend $14 (nearly 3 months of DDI) on the last adventure in the first path? And this doesn't even help me with an overview of the first AP (#1-#6)? And I spend more per month ($10 with subscription, as opposed to $5 with subscription on DDI) for less content (1 96-page adventure, as opposed to 2 100+ page magazines plus a rules compendium that features rules from products I don't own)?

 

[Dausuul]

A four page overview of Curse of the Crimson Throne can be found in Pathfinder 6: Spires of Xin-Shalast. Pathfinder 13: Shadow in The Sky, has a two page overview of the Second Darkness adventure path. So the lack of nerd rage against Paizo is probably because they actually supply the goods.

Also, as far as I know, Paizo has not given some lame-ass justification for the times when they didn't have plot outlines. It's one thing to not have a plot outline because you didn't think of it, or didn't have time to write one, or want to leave yourself some wiggle room as you develop the story. It's quite another to act like your customers' ability to get the most out of your product is less important than keeping spoilers off the Internet.

 

[Fenes]

Also, as far as I know, Paizo has not given some lame-ass justification for the times when they didn't have plot outlines. It's one thing to not have a plot outline because you didn't think of it, or didn't have time to write one, or want to leave yourself some wiggle room as you develop the story. It's quite another to act like your customers' ability to get the most out of your product is less important than keeping spoilers off the Internet.

Indeed. Something missing from a product is one thing, claiming the missing thing is actually a feature is another thing. And claiming that people are better off not having spoilers is claiming that they can't handle spoiler tags.

Sorry, but I take a dim view of people who try to tell me that I am better off not knowing the outline, or that I could not handle spoiler tags.