D&D 5E (2014) PotA Worth Buying?
- Thread starter Zardnaar
- Start date
Honestly, it really depends on what adventure style you like.
The two Tyranny of Dragons adventures, taken as a whole, are in my Top 5 All Time Best D&D adventures. Huge variety of encounters, and the second part manages to have it feel like the rest of the region is paying attention to the threat without undermining the PC's actions.
Princes of the Apocalypse... isn't on that list. I find the sandbox style has significant problems with PCs wandering into areas way before they're ready for them, and it's very hard to see how the PCs could ever go through the areas in anything like an order that will allow them to survive. And, honestly, I'm not sure if the threat of the cults is ever properly expressed through their actions.
The two Tyranny of Dragons adventures, taken as a whole, are in my Top 5 All Time Best D&D adventures. Huge variety of encounters, and the second part manages to have it feel like the rest of the region is paying attention to the threat without undermining the PC's actions.
Princes of the Apocalypse... isn't on that list. I find the sandbox style has significant problems with PCs wandering into areas way before they're ready for them, and it's very hard to see how the PCs could ever go through the areas in anything like an order that will allow them to survive. And, honestly, I'm not sure if the threat of the cults is ever properly expressed through their actions.
Our taste in adventures could not be more opposed!
They probably could be.
Did you like the Starter Set adventure... because I thought that one was awesome!The reasons I'm not that fond of Princes have a lot to do with the problems inherent in writing a sandbox environment for such a large range of levels. The group I've been running through Princes began by investigating the Monastery (with a detour to Feathergale Spire) and then with the Monastery cleared wandered down into the depths of the temple. At 5th level, into a portion of the adventure written for 8th or 9th level PCs. And that they have to retreat and explore somewhere else "to gain XP" makes for a very artificial way of telling the story.
Now, this doesn't mean there isn't a lot of excellent material in Princes. For there is. My problems with the adventure come much more from how it all links together and how the PCs progress through it, rather than the individual encounters.
Cheers!
They probably could be.
The reasons I'm not that fond of Princes have a lot to do with the problems inherent in writing a sandbox environment for such a large range of levels. The group I've been running through Princes began by investigating the Monastery (with a detour to Feathergale Spire) and then with the Monastery cleared wandered down into the depths of the temple. At 5th level, into a portion of the adventure written for 8th or 9th level PCs. And that they have to retreat and explore somewhere else "to gain XP" makes for a very artificial way of telling the story.
Now, this doesn't mean there isn't a lot of excellent material in Princes. For there is. My problems with the adventure come much more from how it all links together and how the PCs progress through it, rather than the individual encounters.
Cheers!
It sounds like the metagame interests you more than it does me; whereas I'm happy with a Gygaxian game which can be dangerous from the outset. One thing I've discovered playing through a Paizo AP over the last year or so is that being able to accurately predict challenges and plot beats robs the experience of any wonder.
Jester David
Hero
I wrote a review here: http://www.5mwd.com/archives/2680
That sums up my thoughts on the adventure. But I'm super hard on it. And I'd still consider it worth buying as a resource, being a dozen small dungeons that can be run separate or together.
And while HotDQ started well and plummeted, that was the result of aggregate reviews that trickled in over time. The more reviews, the more accurate the overall response to the adventure is. (Hence why Morrus has a minimum number of reviews for things to become "certified".) With 24 reviews under its belt, PotA is pretty well received, and it's been five months since its release, which is plenty of time to have given the adventure a shakeout.
At this point it would take a lot of reviews to really drag down its score.
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
Something I'm noticing in the sandbox-y LMoP is that there's a bit of an issue with the Orcus On His Throne style villains, where they just sort of sit in their lairs being ambiguously evil until the party is yanked into their dungeon and start shakin' up the joint. I'm finding it not the most fun in play - it seems like there's no real consideration given to the possible failure state, which means that the adventure as a whole is rather frustratingly un-fail-able. Oh, sure, you could have a TPK, but then nothing changes and the next group doesn't, STORY OVER.
Sad to see that PotA has that issue, too! I was hoping it was growing pains.
Active villains don't seem to be a major issue with the Tyranny of Dragons adventures. Seems like from the first episode, they're pretty pro-active in their goals, based on my small experience.
The villains in Tyranny of Dragons are definitely active. One of the interesting things about how Rise of Tiamat is designed is that it isn't "the villains do this, stop them" again and again. No, it's "the villains are doing lots of things. We can't stop them all. We're stopping the ones we can. This situation needs your attention - can you give our guys some help?" You don't have to wonder at where the NPCs are - they're fighting the fight on other fronts. But your actions are really important.
Rise also does the fantastic job of providing time pressure. Each council gives you two situations to resolve. If you do nothing about them, they fail and you move onto the next council. At the end of the final council, you gain help to stop the summoning of Tiamat based on how well you did in the previous missions (including things you did in Hoard). The one problem with this is that the adventure doesn't explicitly detail the exact effect of unneutralised forces - but I'm happy enough with the rest of the adventure to not be worried. I can make up this stuff based on the material that came earlier.
Princes doesn't have that same feeling. The adventure provides a number of side-quests and notes on how the cults react to the players' actions, but at no time when reading it do I get the feeling that there's a time-limit on the players. I think it's a much better designed adventure than (say) the original Temple of Elemental Evil, but it doesn't give me a sense of rising tension.
That said, I haven't finished running it yet. I may be missing things.
I have run Lost Mine 2.5 times (currently running it for the third time), and I really like how that adventure is structured.
I've run Hoard 1.5 times (will be resuming the second run through shortly), and Rise once. So, I'm speaking from actual play experience.
Cheers!
Rise also does the fantastic job of providing time pressure. Each council gives you two situations to resolve. If you do nothing about them, they fail and you move onto the next council. At the end of the final council, you gain help to stop the summoning of Tiamat based on how well you did in the previous missions (including things you did in Hoard). The one problem with this is that the adventure doesn't explicitly detail the exact effect of unneutralised forces - but I'm happy enough with the rest of the adventure to not be worried. I can make up this stuff based on the material that came earlier.
Princes doesn't have that same feeling. The adventure provides a number of side-quests and notes on how the cults react to the players' actions, but at no time when reading it do I get the feeling that there's a time-limit on the players. I think it's a much better designed adventure than (say) the original Temple of Elemental Evil, but it doesn't give me a sense of rising tension.
That said, I haven't finished running it yet. I may be missing things.
I have run Lost Mine 2.5 times (currently running it for the third time), and I really like how that adventure is structured.
I've run Hoard 1.5 times (will be resuming the second run through shortly), and Rise once. So, I'm speaking from actual play experience.
Cheers!
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
It's interesting you say that, because I'm seeing the same issue you're pointing out with Princes in Lost Mine. There's no sense of urgency, no agenda that will get realized if the players do nothing, no time limit, no rising tension. The main villain of Lost Mine is another "sit there and wait" kind of villain, as are the lower rungs on the totem pole.
The group I'm running it with (spoilers)
[sblock]
let Sildar die, so he wasn't around to direct them at the Redbrands, and they presumed that the Rockseeker dwarf had met some unfortunate fate as well, so they went a little aimless in the middle of the adventure, not seeing Cragmaw Castle as their next destination clearly. I was casting about to see what would happen if they didn't uncover Cragmaw Castle and...well....nothing happens, really. If the players never arrive on the scene, maybe at some point the Nezznar gets some magic items? Maybe some more drow show up? Nothing's really in flux, and if the villains get everything they want....no big deal.[/sblock]
I do agree with your assessment - it doesn't bother me as much because of the smaller scale (and timescale) of the adventure.
Cheers!
Similar Threads
D&D 5E (2014)
Thoughts on bonus action potions?
