Pathfinder 1E WotC desperately needs to learn from Paizo and Privateer Press

[Garmorn]

This pretty much sums it up for my experience. I still enjoy playing 4E for 1-shot games at cons and such, but so far none of my local group are willing to dive into it for campaign play after our test run of it (which is largely due to the 'meh' feeling from the first few WOTC modules we ran. I absolutely love Paizo's stuff and use a lot of it for my Castles & Crusades game.

Are modules that important to you and your group? Your statement that modules make or break a system for you seems extreme.

I have posted a poll about module use, would you mind posting a response on that thread also? http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...at-precentage-they-make-up-your-campaign.html

I can't see how modules would be deciding factor on using a system or not. If it was for me, I would never have played 1e or 2e AD&D.

 

[Hussar]

This thread really puts in my mind a split in RPG product buyers.

On one hand (which is a camp I find myself firmly in), some gamers want books to be reference material. They are what you start with. They aren't there to be read, they're there to be played with.

On the other hand, you have gamers who want to read the books. They really like the idea of a game book which informs their game.

As far as modules go, I prefer modules with less backstory. For one, it makes it easier to slot them into my own campaigns. I found the Savage Tide just so full of fluff that I just didn't care about, and, even worse, couldn't learn about easily, that it made the modules less fun for me. I spent hours on Canonfire! and reading old Greyhawk magazines trying to learn the backstory for the modules.

And, when I learned all that, I tried to include it into the game, only to find that my players really couldn't care less about 99% of it because they had no link to it at all.

For me, a barebones module with nothing but interesting combats is great. I can ADD the roleplay parts, tailored to my group much easier than I can make statblocks.

I guess that's why I loved the World's Largest Dungeon so much. The backstory and setting details were pretty minimal, easily summed up on a page or so for any given section of the module.

So, yeah, I agree 100% with SteveC. It all comes back to what you want. YMMV totally. It doesn't make the other kind of module bad, just bad for you.

 

[billd91]

As far as modules go, I prefer modules with less backstory. For one, it makes it easier to slot them into my own campaigns. I found the Savage Tide just so full of fluff that I just didn't care about, and, even worse, couldn't learn about easily, that it made the modules less fun for me. I spent hours on Canonfire! and reading old Greyhawk magazines trying to learn the backstory for the modules.

There's relevant stuff about Savage Tide on Canonfire? Savage Tide pretty much had all you needed to run it. In the main GH campaign books (the folio and the LG Gazetteer), there's very little or no info about that particular region.

I can't say that spending time on Canonfire would necessarily be wasted, but it was certainly not necessary for Savage Tide. Age of Worms would benefit more from such research because it served as a tour of the Nyr Dyv region in some ways, the heart of Greyhawk. But ST is in the periphery, even fringe. About the only thing I'd really find useful is info on Iggwilv and I though the ST modules covered her well enough.

I can't begrudge you wanting to make use of the material out there to add depth and texture to an adventure path you want to run, but I can't say that the modules compelled it.

 

[FATDRAGONGAMES]

Are modules that important to you and your group? Your statement that modules make or break a system for you seems extreme.

The modules weren't a 'make or break' for the system, but they definitely were a factor in the overall experience/lack of enjoyment we had testing the game, enough so that the rest of the group gave a thumbs down on it.

 

[Rechan]

Man. If modules were the deciding factor/impression maker for a system, For Me, then I'd never game. I've not played in a module that I've enjoyed, ever.

 

[Garmorn]

The modules weren't a 'make or break' for the system, but they definitely were a factor in the overall experience/lack of enjoyment we had testing the game, enough so that the rest of the group gave a thumbs down on it.

Thanks, I had the feeling I was misunderstanding something there.

 

[Hussar]

There's relevant stuff about Savage Tide on Canonfire? Savage Tide pretty much had all you needed to run it. In the main GH campaign books (the folio and the LG Gazetteer), there's very little or no info about that particular region.

I can't say that spending time on Canonfire would necessarily be wasted, but it was certainly not necessary for Savage Tide. Age of Worms would benefit more from such research because it served as a tour of the Nyr Dyv region in some ways, the heart of Greyhawk. But ST is in the periphery, even fringe. About the only thing I'd really find useful is info on Iggwilv and I though the ST modules covered her well enough.

I can't begrudge you wanting to make use of the material out there to add depth and texture to an adventure path you want to run, but I can't say that the modules compelled it.

Much of the Canonfire material on the Amedio region stems from The Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan. A large chunk of one of the modules is a direct homage to that module. The Sea Barons, The Scarlet Brotherhood, and the Crimson Pirates are all very much part and parcel of the Greyhawk setting. There's a huge amount of backstory there if you want to incorporate it.

Do you have to? No, I suppose not, but, the modules reference these things time and again.

Note, while I criticize here, I liked the AP. I enjoyed it and I would consider the campaign to be quite successful (we hit the eject button after the defense of Farshore, but that was my decision rather than any dissatisfaction with the AP.) I just found the inclusion of so many Greyhawk elements rather distracting since I was not familiar with the setting particularly.

I think if I was a big Greyhawk fan, I might have a different reaction.

 

[AllisterH]

Man. If modules were the deciding factor/impression maker for a system, For Me, then I'd never game. I've not played in a module that I've enjoyed, ever.

*Shrug*

My favourite module was Castle Ravenloft.

Needless to say, that type of module was a rarity. I never really fell in love with the 1e classics even though I played a lot of them...

 

[rjdafoe]

WotC's published well over a hundred modules in the last year and a half. Granted, they could do a better job of publicizing this...

Did they actually create all those themselves? Or are you counting LFR and DDI?

Unless I am missing something, there just are not alof of modules outside of those areas. Maybe that is where it is at now? I don't know.

 

[carmachu]

I can't fault Paizo for designing adventures that don't fit well into game worlds than Golarion, because their campaign world is so well done that I'm happy to use the setting and just utilize 4E mechanics instead.

I keep seeing that meme and dont quite see it. ,amy of the U series modules fit quite well into something like Ptolus.

As for the others, I can see them fitting quite well, but takes a touch of work. The AP's on the other hand, dont really, butthen again, their AP's....