Observations on Adventure Paths

[Nathal]

Great thread.

If players are unwilling to Explore the Story, looking for the bread crumbs, then running a traditional adventure just won't work. It's best if players admit this in the beginning, before the GM wastes his efforts on prepared story-arc material. Constant plot rejection is just no fun.

It's only railroading when the GM pays no attention when the players say "we don't want any plot other than what our actions might dictate from one session to the next". For that sort of group, if that's the only style they enjoy, the "sand-box" type of adventure may be best.

 

[amethal]

Hey, thanks! The one I'm working on now is even more "sand-boxy," I think.

--Erik

I'm looking forward to it.

Personally, The Whispering Cairn didn't really "do it" for me because these days I like my dungeons a bit smaller. However, I'm glad that the comment in the Dungeon editorial that "that hack" wouldn't be asked to write another adventure wasn't true.

 

[Dedekind]

I ran my players through Shackled City and here are some specific observations:

1) The first 4-5 adventures were virtually standalone. That is not like a railroad, even though they were all in the same path. I liked it (a lot), and my players seemed OK with it. But others on the Paizo boards didn't like how the arc didn't really begin until 6th or 7th level and you didn't know the bad guys until 12th or 13th. My understanding was that Paizo changed this approach for later APs.

2) The way the hardcover was done for SC was very nice, with extra "sand" for the "sand box." My players liked have a flushed out city to explore and I liked having hooks for my players to take advantage of. Plus, the individual adventures could leave out general material useful for the whole campaign.

3) Practical campaign management issues appeared here just like anywhere else. Perhaps I had some irrational belief that xp and treasure would take care of itself. For whatever reason, I occasionally had to make adjustments to keep the players where they ought to be. I suppose 4e's treasure packet and fixed xp philosophy might make this a little easier to guide the DM. (For example, rooms and encounters can be clearly described in terms of treasure packets, experience, and plot points. The DM then sees exactly what was missed by players and the impact that it had on player power.)

4) I really enjoyed the online community that developed around SCAP. I may not have been a big contributer, but the fact that I could compare my experiences to others was really useful for my prep. (The comments on Zenith Trajectory were particularly useful.)