Paizo Ends Pathfinder Adventure Path Softcovers, Switching to Quarterly Model

Paizo is ending its line of monthly Pathfinder Adventure Paths, with a new quarterly hardcover replacing the long-running product. Paizo announced the change yesterday on its blog, with the shift beginning next year. The new hardcover Adventure Paths will be a minimum of 256 pages and will have a retail price of $79.99, which is cheaper than the cost of purchasing four softcover adventure paths. Paizo also stated that they'll release one Adventure Path starting at Level 1, another ending at Level 20, with the remaining two falling somewhere in between. Each Adventure Path will cover 9-10 levels of play.

The first two Adventure Paths announced for this format are Hellbreakers and Hell's Destiny, which both cover the upcoming war between Andoran and Cheliax.

The Pathfinder Adventure Paths series started as an evolution of Paizo's monthly Pathfinder magazine series. To date, Paizo has released 222 Pathfinder Adventure Paths. Early Pathfinder Adventure Paths were for campaigns that lasted six issues and typically encompassed Level 1-Level 20 play. However, more recently, the Adventure Path structure has shortened and grown more flexible, with shorter length campaigns with more variable levels of play.

 

[Reynard]

Maybe, I know that supplemental material had its detractors because they felt like it was less adventure. Part of where the “APs meant to be read not played” meme nonsense comes from.

I'm not sure it was "meme nonsense." In an exchange on the forums where I said that the wordiness of the APs made them harder to run, James Jacobs replied directly and said that many customers only ever read them and so the prose was important.

 

[payn]

I'm not sure it was "meme nonsense." In an exchange on the forums where I said that the wordiness of the APs made them harder to run, James Jacobs replied directly and said that many customers only ever read them and so the prose was important.

Yes running every AP to a subscriber would be difficult in finding the time but reading them wouldn’t. I feel some context of this exchange is likely missing.

 

[Reynard]

Yes running every AP to a subscriber would be difficult in finding the time but reading them wouldn’t. I feel some context of this exchange is likely missing.

I said "Why are the APs so wordy? It would be easier to run there were more bullet points and fewer walls of text."

He said "A lot of our customers buy APs to read them so they are written for that purpose."

I don't think it is controversial to say that in general APs (and D&D adventures too) are not optimized for play in how they are written.

 

[SteveC]

I don't think it is controversial to say that in general APs (and D&D adventures too) are not optimized for play in how they are written.

I think this is a very good point. There are a lot of adventures published by smaller publishers that have really thought about how to make an adventure that's easier to run for the GM. I'm running Abomination Vaults and there are tons of resources out there for keeping track of different NPCs and plot beats for the game. I know that if I were just running it from the book (and Foundry module) I'd just be running it as a dungeon crawl, and not even an effective one at that. There has been a ton of development in adventure design, but modules by Paizo and WotC are still much the same as in days of yore.
'
And, with the idea of people buying the AP to read rather than run, I suppose I get that. It is kind of sad that the fans are the ones who put together the adventure (with suggestions for changes) to make it a coherent experience to run.

 

[Reynard]

I think this is a very good point. There are a lot of adventures published by smaller publishers that have really thought about how to make an adventure that's easier to run for the GM. I'm running Abomination Vaults and there are tons of resources out there for keeping track of different NPCs and plot beats for the game. I know that if I were just running it from the book (and Foundry module) I'd just be running it as a dungeon crawl, and not even an effective one at that. There has been a ton of development in adventure design, but modules by Paizo and WotC are still much the same as in days of yore.
'
And, with the idea of people buying the AP to read rather than run, I suppose I get that. It is kind of sad that the fans are the ones who put together the adventure (with suggestions for changes) to make it a coherent experience to run.

The most useful things I every found in the DMsGuild were GM toolkits for running WotC's modules. I have never looked but I assume the Pathfinder version has similar resources.

 

[payn]

I think this is a very good point. There are a lot of adventures published by smaller publishers that have really thought about how to make an adventure that's easier to run for the GM. I'm running Abomination Vaults and there are tons of resources out there for keeping track of different NPCs and plot beats for the game. I know that if I were just running it from the book (and Foundry module) I'd just be running it as a dungeon crawl, and not even an effective one at that. There has been a ton of development in adventure design, but modules by Paizo and WotC are still much the same as in days of yore.
'
And, with the idea of people buying the AP to read rather than run, I suppose I get that. It is kind of sad that the fans are the ones who put together the adventure (with suggestions for changes) to make it a coherent experience to run.

I disagree quite a bit with this. I dont see much of anything that resembles old school module design in the adventure paths. There is a lot of setting info, mechanical info in items, NPCs, monsters, maps, etc.. What it really resembles is a kit to build an adventure that yes does take a lot of effort by the GM. What it isnt, is a page to page instruction manual on how to run a dungeon. Its not a simple town, with a mayor info dump, and neon sign that says "dungeon this way" with tables for random encounters.

 

[Green Onceler]

I think the move to hardcovers is great and the three part adventure paths are much more real life friendly. Unfortunately, I haven't felt inspired to run a Paizo adventure path since Ruins of Azlant several years back. The company really seemed to lose its adventure writing mojo IMO.

 

[Staffan]

I think the move to hardcovers is great and the three part adventure paths are much more real life friendly. Unfortunately, I haven't felt inspired to run a Paizo adventure path since Ruins of Azlant several years back. The company really seemed to lose its adventure writing mojo IMO.

I thought Strength of Thousands seemed really interesting, but I kind of lost my taste for PF2 in general before getting around to running it. I did think Fists of the Ruby Phoenix was a really cool idea, until I realized the whole first third is supposed to take place over three days with the PCs taking on a full level's worth of encounters on each of those days.

 

[Morrus]

That's the issue, really. You have a more modest price, monthly, and a new model where each book is more expensive but they're larger and less frequent. The question is, will people adapt to the new price point? It's a question, because a lot of people will take more frequent, yet individually smaller purchases. Will this new model work? Don't know. I do know that picking up an $80 book is something I won't do casually. I have one-offs from several APs over the years that I didn't decide to get the whole series of. When my group decides what they want to play, I can pick up the remainder of the package. That won't be the case now.

It may very well be time for a change, but the net result is likely (for me) to be buying less.

But... it costs less.

What if they took the same amount as before monthly and then sent you the hardcover quarterly? Would you be more comfortable with that? Because I imagine they could do that if there was a demand for it. Continue to charge $90 per AP, charged monthly, rather than $80 charged quarterly. Or is the multiple softcover format important?

 

[SteveC]

But... it costs less.

What if they took the same amount as before monthly and then sent you the hardcover quarterly? Would you be more comfortable with that? Because I imagine they could do that if there was a demand for it. Continue to charge $90 per AP, charged monthly, rather than $80 charged quarterly. Or is the multiple softcover format important?

For me, it doesn't cost less. For someone who is highly irresponsible, I have my finances pretty squared away. After everything is done, I have 30-40 dollars per month that I can spend on stupid stuff. And by that I mean I don't care or plan it ... it could be a big foam cheese head for all I care. Pathfinder modules (or gaming stuff I don't plan for) go into that bucket. I have a bunch of APs that I purchased the first "issue" of. I read them, and if they were decent, I pitch them to my players. Sadly, I have a few that didn't make the cut.

In the future, I'm looking at an 80-dollar purchase for an AP. It doesn't matter that it's once every three months, I'm looking at that purchase and it has reached the point where it matters. Where I need to account for it. And that means it will 100% not be an impulse purchase. I'll have to read reviews, maybe even check out an actual play to buy it.

And I know that I'm more organized in my finances than a lot of people (which makes me feel odd to type out...). So people who subscribe or pick up every AP will come out ahead. However, anyone who just sees an impulse purchase is looking at $80. And that, as my doctor told me about the chicken alfredo, is too rich for my blood.

Now this is only my opinion, of course. Maybe this will be a good thing for Paizo. I hope so because I like them as a company. But it sounds like "let's change things up" as a strategy, which I'm questioning.