Pathfinder 2E Another Deadly Session, and It's Getting Old

[Thomas Shey]

Also, I've consistently seen people saying Age of Ashes is more difficult on the average (sometimes notably so) than the later adventure paths.

 

[Retreater]

Look at the GMG’s dungeon crawl recipe: 6 moderate and 6 severe encounters (in addition to 2 trivial and 4 low). If I followed that recipe, my PCs would have died repeatedly in the first dungeon. We ought to be the ideal audience (former PF1 group that shifted 5e somewhat begrudgingly), but my players were never hardcore builders or tacticians. We had one TPK early in my PF2 campaign, and I got some static for that. Multiple TPKs would have prompted us to find a different game.

That is the kind of thing I was jokingly said made my eyes bleed - how they have an exploration activity listed with defined rules of what a "dungeon crawl" is. There are things you don't have to codify, which should be the purview of the GM. Having advice on how to create a dungeon - that's a valuable resource; however, making rules about it, how many sessions it should last, etc., just borders on ridiculousness to me.

 

[Thomas Shey]

That is the kind of thing I was jokingly said made my eyes bleed - how they have an exploration activity listed with defined rules of what a "dungeon crawl" is. There are things you don't have to codify, which should be the purview of the GM. Having advice on how to create a dungeon - that's a valuable resource; however, making rules about it, how many sessions it should last, etc., just borders on ridiculousness to me.

Can I say I find the idea having a set of rules you can use to structure something "ridiculous" seems like its really privileging a certain approach to the game as all that's acceptable.

 

[kenada]

That is the kind of thing I was jokingly said made my eyes bleed - how they have an exploration activity listed with defined rules of what a "dungeon crawl" is. There are things you don't have to codify, which should be the purview of the GM. Having advice on how to create a dungeon - that's a valuable resource; however, making rules about it, how many sessions it should last, etc., just borders on ridiculousness to me.

Having procedures for dungeon crawling is pretty old-school. Both OD&D and B/X have them. It’s not like GMs are born knowing how to properly run a dungeon. They need to learn it from somewhere. If you’re not lucky enough to start playing in a group that does those things, or you don’t find a stream that does (or a blog that teaches them), then you’re left emulating what you know: linear storytelling.

The Alexandrian has a pretty good article on this issue (which I’m pretty sure I’ve linked here before, but it’s worth sharing again).

It’s not perfect. We’re probably not being prescriptive enough with our exploration activities, so things don’t always go smoothly. I expect that’s true for many groups with prior experience in other systems (particularly 3e and newer). In spite of that, I think PF2 did a good thing for trying to bring forward old-school structures into a modern system.

 

[Retreater]

Can I say I find the idea having a set of rules you can use to structure something "ridiculous" seems like its really privileging a certain approach to the game as all that's acceptable.

If you look at my quote, I ended it with "to me." So that's my opinion, not that I am saying it's the only acceptable way of looking at it.

The "dungeon crawl" activity is just far more than the amount of detail that I need in any aspect of my life. It feels to me like they created a downtime activity called "play role-playing game" that detailed how long sessions last, how many players could come, and who brings the Doritos.

 

[kenada]

The "dungeon crawl" activity is just far more than the amount of detail that I need in any aspect of my life. It feels to me like they created a downtime activity called "play role-playing game" that detailed how long sessions last, how many players could come, and who brings the Doritos.

Perhaps there’s a misunderstanding. The dungeon crawl recipe I linked is in the section on designing adventures in the GMG. My point was if we had followed that recipe, I’d have probably TPKed my group repeatedly (because the default tuning is too hard for us).

As for whether it’s ridiculous, I think having suggestions for designing adventures in a book targeted at GMs is a pretty reasonable thing to do. These recipes aren’t even heavily prescriptive. You’re encouraged to use them as a starting point and then tweak them.

 

[Retreater]

Having procedures for dungeon crawling is pretty old-school. Both OD&D and B/X have them. It’s not like GMs are born knowing how to properly run a dungeon. They need to learn it from somewhere. If you’re not lucky enough to start playing in a group that does those things, or you don’t find a stream that does (or a blog that teaches them), then you’re left emulating what you know: linear storytelling.

The Alexandrian has a pretty good article on this issue (which I’m pretty sure I’ve linked here before, but it’s worth sharing again).

It’s not perfect. We’re probably not being prescriptive enough with our exploration activities, so things don’t always go smoothly. I expect that’s true for many groups with prior experience in other systems (particularly 3e and newer). In spite of that, I think PF2 did a good thing for trying to bring forward old-school structures into a modern system.

I can agree with procedures and advice for how to run a dungeon, but to have it distilled to a paragraph using delineated game terms seems artificial, almost to the point of parody.

 

[kenada]

I can agree with procedures and advice for how to run a dungeon, but to have it distilled to a paragraph using delineated game terms seems artificial, almost to the point of parody.

Is it really all that different from e.g., OSE? On some level, these things are just games, and we have to engage them as such. I’ll leave the greater discussion of aesthetics to the thread over in the D&D section of this site.

 

[Retreater]

Is it really all that different from e.g., OSE? On some level, these things are just games, and we have to engage them as such. I’ll leave the greater discussion of aesthetics to the thread over in the D&D section of this site.

I guess the differentiation I see is in OSR games (like OSE) is that the design and crafting of the dungeon (or other adventure) is done by the experience of the GM (obviously referring to advice provided by the game or other sources). Sure, many systems might have the player-facing elements codified (how long does a torch burn, how much area can I search in ten minutes, etc.), but the design of the adventure isn't laid out like a recipe card stating: 1 session to walk to the dungeon, 3-4 sessions to explore the dungeon, with X # of fights at each of the following challenge levels - A, B, C, and D, with Y # of roleplaying encounters and Z # of traps. And that recipe is presented as a formatted stat block as if you were looking at an ironclad rule of the game.
And perhaps it is the presentation looking at it out of the context of the rest of the GMG, but to me (and YMMV) it is very off-putting and seems an attempt to restrict the creativity of GMs by giving them a Procrustean Bed in which their adventures must fit.

 

[kenada]

And perhaps it is the presentation looking at it out of the context of the rest of the GMG, but to me (and YMMV) it is very off-putting and seems an attempt to restrict the creativity of GMs by giving them a Procrustean Bed in which their adventures must fit.

Thanks for the rest of your explanation. That helped me understand better. I just wanted to respond to this part because I think it’s the lack of context.

These recipes are part of a larger section on putting together an outline of an adventure. GMs are told at several points that these are just seeds, a framework, something they should customize as they see fit.

There’s a perception that creating one’s own adventure is something that’s difficult. Having a set of steps to put something together, even if it’s a bit ham-handed in places, is a boon if it helps demystify that.

Some of it is just plain good advice. Story arcs? “Imagine a logical end point the arc would reach if nothing else changes. Then, adjust it based on events in the game.” It’s like someone read “Don’t Prep Plots”.