A problem with Adventure Paths/Campaign Sagas/etc...

[RangerWickett]

I ran my first playtest of the adventure yesterday, trying to set it in the Forgotten Realms, in the Unapproachable East, which required some . . . unusual alterations. My players, all big FR fans (which was why I decided to set the playtest there), were a little shocked when I told them, "Oh yeah, Simbul's dead, so's that undead guy with all the z's in his name. Szazz something. They killed each other."

FR just has too many durned high-level NPCs. Trying to find a pair of nations that might want to go to war wasn't hard, but I wanted to use the core NPCs of the campaign. I suppose I could have swapped villains around a bit, and chopped off a dozen or so levels from all those epic NPCs, but it felt like too much work.

The actual session was way too brief. I told the players they could use whatever they wanted that was WotC, so we ended up with some janky PCs. A warmage, a knight, a beguiler, a cleric, and an elven generalist substitution level wizard who swapped out his familiar for an alternate class feature unique to the campaign. Character creation took these guys two hours, for first level characters. We only got through two encounters. *grin*

Still, I learned some valuable info. Namely that sleep is broken when two PCs can cast it in the same round.

I'm considering offering a play-by-post playtest of the first adventure in WotBS. But it would have to be in a private forum. Hmm. I ought to see if that's possible.

 

[Psion]

Still, I learned some valuable info. Namely that sleep is broken when two PCs can cast it in the same round.

Hmm... I find that the hard level limit curtails sleep pretty harshly. I 4th level character with a 1 HD bodyguard is immune to the spell, as is a 3rd level bad guy with 2 1-HD bodyguard, etc.

 

[RangerWickett]

Hmm... I find that the hard level limit curtails sleep pretty harshly. I 4th level character with a 1 HD bodyguard is immune to the spell, as is a 3rd level bad guy with 2 1-HD bodyguard, etc.

Yes, but against a set of four 1-HD badguys, it's pretty much flawlessly good.

I don't think I'll put any 4 HD baddies in the first encounter just to mitigate sleep. I'll just have to make the bad guys approach in waves.

 

[Psion]

Yes, but against a set of four 1-HD badguys, it's pretty much flawlessly good.

Fair enough. Is it really that crucial that the PCs don't kick four 1 HD flunkies' tails around their ears, though? They'll get theirs soon enough...

 

[RangerWickett]

Nah. It was just a little underwhelming way to begin the campaign, whereas it was supposed to be capital-A Awesome. Thankfully, the feedback I'm getting will perhaps even manage to make it be capslock AWESOME.

 

[McBard]

My problem with The Age of Wyrms AP (and with its ilk thusfar) is how quickly the plot progresses each episode/issue: painfully (and confusingly) slow. I DM'd Shackled City up to 12th level and was a PC in Age of Wyrms through 7th, and both campaigns died out because everyone just kept losing track of just what the heck was going on with the story.

After each 30-some-odd-page section and the two 4-hour hackfest sessions required to slog through them (and I'm a hackmaster, btw) we always were left a bit perplexed by how the story was supposed to have just progressed: "let's see, this jar with the little green worm might point to something...but you'll have to slog through another multi-session 10 hour grind to uncover...yet another hair-thin plot point."

These APs make great bedtime reads, sort of like novels (and that's how I finally enjoyed AoW the most: just read the issues), but not great games.

Keep up the APs, fine. Speed WAY up the plot progression.

 

[Wik]

Well, I haven't run the first two APs, but we're not having the problem with Savage Tide. While the group has missed a few points (namely, they forgot who Rowyn was by the time the 2nd episode was finished - but really, they had just forgotten the name and remembered her character), everyone loves the plot. And it's not painfully slow, either.

I really like Savage Tide so far, except for some of the longer dungeons. From here on in, everytime I see a dungeon that has more than ten rooms, I'm boiling out a few rooms and just making my own encounters to compensate for the XP the PCs would lose.

 

[VirgilCaine]

The introductory BW scenario "The Sword" picks up where most D&D adventures leave off -- PCs are dividing up the loot from a quest and there is only one magical sword. . . who gets it?

The meat of the scenario is deciding (in-character, via actual game mechanics) who gets what, and who gets a big, fat, goose egg. You know, the stuff we usually decide out-of-character in D&D **

[**The Sword, while it looks like great fun, isn't my idea of a full-blown adventure -- most of the other Burning Wheel stuff tends to fall into the "Expedition" range in terms of scope, and that's more of what I have an interest in. That new Ravenloft looks very, very, sexy.]

What is the point of this "adventure"? Is there a larger goal involved, is the magic sword bound to one person once they choose it, is it intelligent and wants to choose who it's new owner is, is it special and changes depending on the user...or is it just a everyday magic sword the PCs arev arguing over?
What's the point?

 

[Crothian]

I think they can tend to get to attached to the need for constant dungeons. But I think that can be a problem with just adventures these days.

 

[Pants]

If you can place those monsters in the core Monster Manual so that every GM who buys the campaign saga has access to them, which will allow us to save on the word counts for the adventure by not having to reprint monster stats, then sure, suggest away.

He'll only be interested if Orcus is in every adventure, it takes place in the Scarred Lands, and if it's being published by Necromancer Games.