Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="S'mon" data-source="post: 6090353" data-attributes="member: 463">Well... I think that's an edition-independent issue with Adventure Path type play. I ran into this playing Rise of the Runelords (the updated, Pathfinder version) recently. Basically we get told we have to do the set encounters in order to progress the plot. So our PCs have to be tough enough to win the encounters. So we have to focus on charbuild, on min-maxing for combat. We're not really allowed to go 'around' the encounters - and even if we were, we wouldn't get the XP, so future encounters would become impossible. It's an issue I'm facing converting Curse of the Crimson Throne to 4e; I don't want it to feel linear, I think there's a lot of potential there which can be brought out if I can avoid railroading the adventure. One thing I've done a lot of is think of alternate ways scenes might play out.I think 4e adventures can suffer from this just as much as other editions, if 4e is better at all it's just that the fights are less swingy, so you don't need to min-max as much to win pretty reliably (pace Irontooth). My impression is that some of the Paizo AP boss fights run by an impartial GM will TPK all but the most min-maxed parties. I don't think min-maxing stops players from 'adding colour' to their characters via roleplay, though; it doesn't necessitate pawn stance.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="S'mon, post: 6090353, member: 463"] Well... I think that's an edition-independent issue with Adventure Path type play. I ran into this playing Rise of the Runelords (the updated, Pathfinder version) recently. Basically we get told we have to do the set encounters in order to progress the plot. So our PCs have to be tough enough to win the encounters. So we have to focus on charbuild, on min-maxing for combat. We're not really allowed to go 'around' the encounters - and even if we were, we wouldn't get the XP, so future encounters would become impossible. It's an issue I'm facing converting Curse of the Crimson Throne to 4e; I don't want it to feel linear, I think there's a lot of potential there which can be brought out if I can avoid railroading the adventure. One thing I've done a lot of is think of alternate ways scenes might play out. I think 4e adventures can suffer from this just as much as other editions, if 4e is better at all it's just that the fights are less swingy, so you don't need to min-max as much to win pretty reliably ([I]pace[/I] Irontooth). My impression is that some of the Paizo AP boss fights run by an impartial GM will TPK all but the most min-maxed parties. I don't think min-maxing stops players from 'adding colour' to their characters via roleplay, though; it doesn't necessitate pawn stance. [/QUOTE]

Verification