Kingmaker, In Hindsight

[Liquidsabre]

SO does Kingmaker really having anything in it, mechanics-wise, that couldn't possibly be converted to another system? Is it just a matter of changing encounters around to fit into your system of choice? Are there any skills, items, special rules that absolutely require use of Pathfinder or 3E? I have to admit I regret not keeping up my Adventure Path subscription but at the time I just didn't have the money and now they have so many (35? 36? books - yikes!) it seems daunting to try and decide which one(s) to pick up.

The Kingdom Building rules itself aren't at all tied to the game system at all. In fact, there is even a pdf release of just the kingdom building rules that can be found here.

No need to fret over the number of books. Since each AP is only 6 books you can pick them up in small groupings per AP. Each AP has their own summaries/themes that you can choose from. Myself I picked up Rise of the Rune Lords, Second Darkness, and Kingmaker when I decided to break into the APs and I didn't worry about any of the others as they didn't interest me yet. In fact, I've coordinated with my game group of GMs and everyone is picking out their favorite APs to run so I have no need to pick them all up except to collect them and to read the non-adventure sections.

If you are having trouble deciding (understandable that) you can read more about folk's experiences running/playing the various APs on the Paizo boards. There is a forum for each AP as well as general discussions of folk's favorite APs! Besides, missing out on the APs makes for some most excellent Amazon orders at discount. That's how I originally got mine (except for Kingmaker)!

 

[Neonchameleon]

I'm converting it to 4e and finding it nice. I also think that it's easier to DM in 4e complete with conversion than it would be in PF. (The Tazelwyrm became a Dark Sun Silk Worm - a nice level 3 solo monster that I can then play off...)

It's a nice open world with some excellent seeds for the DM and players to use.

On the other hand, like pretty much all Paizo offerings it has issues mechanically. The kingdom building rules ... work if you don't really care about it. And to take a really obvious example, in the start of module 4 the PCs are invaded by a small army (6 trolls, 10 barbarians, 25 longbowmen IIRC). It's assumed that the PCs stay to defend Tazleford and must fight the trolls. I - and the rest of my gaming groups - would first go out to delay the invaders to buy time to fort up (making the defence much easier) and second might decide we can take them. Which we ... might well be able to given that they have no casters and their leader has a will defence of +3 when we have fifth level spells. Hell, the whole fourth module reads similarly to me; no appreciation of what high level spells used strategically can accomplish.

 

[deinol]

I have read kingmaker but not run or played it yet. I think it is a great adventure path for GMs that want a campaign framework. It is a great introduction on how to run a sandbox game. So for a GM that doesn't want to do any outside work, it isn't the path for them. For a GM who wants to be able to add their own sidequests (Tales of the Margreve and Realm of the Fellnight Queen are on my list to incorporate, perhaps aspects of Into the Haunted Forest or Bloodsworn Vale as well) Kingmaker is a great game.

There is nothing particular to Kingmaker that would prevent a conversion to 4E (or 1E). A lot of work, but kingmaker lends itself to GMs tweaking or inventing encounters anyway. One thing I really like is that since it has a defined base area, it is easy to keep recurring NPCs around. Early allies can become advisors and officials and give the game a real sense of growth and accomplishment.

 

[MortonStromgal]

Its got a couple railroad points where it assumes the PCs care about or did something, but otherwise its a fairly good sandbox to play in. The rules for the town management can be fairly broken if you look at it from min/max standpoint rather than reality (specifically look at graveyards IIRC). I also found the mechanics fun in the beginning but less fun to irritating toward the end (just another micro-management system).

 

[Crothian]

Its got a couple railroad points where it assumes the PCs care about or did something, but otherwise its a fairly good sandbox to play in. The rules for the town management can be fairly broken if you look at it from min/max standpoint rather than reality (specifically look at graveyards IIRC). I also found the mechanics fun in the beginning but less fun to irritating toward the end (just another micro-management system).

So far we haven't ran into any severe railroad points. The players do have to buy into the adventure path and the goings on but that's true for running anything published. The kingdom making rules aren't bad and I've always found the easiest way to avoid the min maxing problems is don't play with those kind of players. But even if one does build a lot of Brothels (better then graveyards imo) it's easy to make it work in reality; Vegas baby!

 

[Scott DeWar]

Brothels vs Graveyards

to any but a necromancer, it is a no brainer (BRAINZZZZ!) As for the necromancer, .. .. .. lets just not go there.

 

[Holy Bovine]

Thanks for the feedback guys! I am now very interested in Kingmaker. Sadly my FLGS only has #5 & 6 in stock at the moment - but they are great about getting stuff ordered.

 

[Alaxk Knight of Galt]

I wonder how much conversion work would be required to run this as under 2nd Edition?

 

[Crothian]

I wonder how much conversion work would be required to run this as under 2nd Edition?

You might be able to borrow some Kingdom rules from Birthright for that end. Otherwise it shouldn't be to difficult.

 

[Reynard]

You might be able to borrow some Kingdom rules from Birthright for that end. Otherwise it shouldn't be to difficult.

It always seems easier to down-convert. Taking a module or AP and running it in, say, LL or AD&D would be tons easier than trying to run KotBL in PF, I expect.