Had a chance to review Age of Worms by Paizo over the weekend. Sweet (though not for my players hehe). I've ordered the Shackled City compendium and am now considering either purchasing Rise of the Runelords or War of the Burning Sky by EN Publishing. Any opinions favoring one or the other?
Rise of the Runelords versus War of the Burning Sky. Which one?
- Thread starter joela
- Start date
ShadowDenizen
Explorer
OOH!
Tough call.
Both are quite excellent.
My answer would be that it depends on what your players tastes are, honestly.
"Burning Sky" is refereshingly non-Dungeon-Crawly, and allows players to really play out the tactical side of things, along with some cool political intrigues. (It's also a tad bit cheaper if you buy the PDF, if finances are a concern.)
"Pathfinder" will run in a shorter time-frame (Six issues as opposed to 12), and allows you to be in on the ground floor of a brand new campaign setting, which is also quite cool. There's also supplemental material in addition to the adventure in each issue to enhance the setting. (And yes, it's a bit more expensive, but still a good deal Note that if you get the ongoing subscription, you save about 1/3rd off the cover price AND get a PDF copy to boot. )
The good news? You can't go wrong either way.
Tough call.
Both are quite excellent.
My answer would be that it depends on what your players tastes are, honestly.
"Burning Sky" is refereshingly non-Dungeon-Crawly, and allows players to really play out the tactical side of things, along with some cool political intrigues. (It's also a tad bit cheaper if you buy the PDF, if finances are a concern.)
"Pathfinder" will run in a shorter time-frame (Six issues as opposed to 12), and allows you to be in on the ground floor of a brand new campaign setting, which is also quite cool. There's also supplemental material in addition to the adventure in each issue to enhance the setting. (And yes, it's a bit more expensive, but still a good deal Note that if you get the ongoing subscription, you save about 1/3rd off the cover price AND get a PDF copy to boot. )
The good news? You can't go wrong either way.
Last edited:
I just thought you might not realize how long they were going to take, because I didn't realize you were stocking up on as many adventure paths as possible.joela said:
I've looked at Rise of the Runelords, and I must say it's really really beautiful. Can't say anything about the other, as I don't even know what it's about.
Arnwyn
First Post
I'm not sure if adapting to a favored campaign world (published or homebrew) is a concern for you, but I'll comment anyways. Both are more difficult than the Dungeon APs to adapt, so that should be taken into consideration if that sort of thing is important to you. Of the two, it looks like Rise of the Runelords is far easier to do so than War of the Burning Sky (regardless of what the authors try to spin; I own RotRL, and have read all the [freely available] material for WotBS).
Psion
Adventurer
Arnwyn said:
I don't know if it's all that hard.
The scope of Dungeon AP's adaptation material was only "where to set it in Greyhawk/FR/Eberron", which is nice if you are playing one of those CSes, not so helpful otherwise. The GM's guide to the Burning Sky campaign has a little section that boils down the situation to its basic elements so you can find a place to set it in your game.
War of the Burning Sky really should be used in its own setting, or on a new continent of an existing setting.
I've set my War of the Burning Sky campaign in the distant past of the continent of Sarlonna, in Eberron. Check out my story hour for how its gone so far.
However, you could squeeze it into another setting. Basically you all you need is a powerful kingdom dominated by its autocratic ruler, some neighbouring states and a sea coast.
However, since its going to take you from 1 to 20, why not just use it in its own setting?
I think Pathfinder is great, but after Shackled City, and all those Dungeon adventures, I've got pretty used to Paizo's (excellent) style. As a result, I'm finding WotBS a nice change.
I've set my War of the Burning Sky campaign in the distant past of the continent of Sarlonna, in Eberron. Check out my story hour for how its gone so far.
However, you could squeeze it into another setting. Basically you all you need is a powerful kingdom dominated by its autocratic ruler, some neighbouring states and a sea coast.
However, since its going to take you from 1 to 20, why not just use it in its own setting?
I think Pathfinder is great, but after Shackled City, and all those Dungeon adventures, I've got pretty used to Paizo's (excellent) style. As a result, I'm finding WotBS a nice change.
RangerWickett
Legend
Rechan said:
War of the Burning Sky is about a war.
Paizo is awesome, and I will say nothing bad about them, but War of the Burning Sky is different from what they're doing. WotBS is not a campaign about defeating one villain's plot to do something evil with a secret nefarious goal, so that you have no idea who the real enemy is or what he's doing until nearly the end of the series. I've played lots of campaigns like that (Night Below, for one), and I love them, but that's not what War of the Burning Sky is about.
War of the Burning Sky is about daring missions, fighting armies, banding together heroes from many nations to defeat an evil empire set on conquest and subjugation. You know who the villain is from the start, and you cannot win simply by getting to high level and picking a fight. You've got to rise as living legends, the greatest heroes in the known world.
If you liked The Red Hand of Doom, Lord of the Rings, the original Star Wars trilogy, Dragonlance, or the Allies kicking the butt of the Nazis in World War II, you'll want to play War of the Burning Sky.
