Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Scott Christian" data-source="post: 9376713" data-attributes="member: 6901101">If you believe there are modern audiences (see the thread about modern audiences going), then adventure paths are doomed to fail for them. If you believe older audiences need modules like The Keep on the Borderlands with their open airy feel, then adventure paths are doomed to fail. I really don't feel either of those things are true. I think there are DMs that put in the work needed to run a good campaign, and often, those DMs find players that congeal as a table. It only takes one player to run an adventure off the rails. This is true for any style of play: hexcrawl, sword and sorcery, epic, sandbox, linear, etc. It only takes the DM to not read the book or supplement the book based on their table's needs to make an adventure feel bad.The published adventures are long. Skull &amp; Shackles for Pathfinder took us forever. But we had a table that trusted the DM. The Crimson Crown went well too. We just finished Candlekeep, and because of the extra work our DM did, it turned out great. I played part of Saltmarsh. It went great. I played two campaigns that were the DM's creation. Those went great. It's up to the DM to make it work, and sometimes, just sometimes, it's up to the group to help out a little.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Scott Christian, post: 9376713, member: 6901101"] If you believe there are modern audiences (see the thread about modern audiences going), then adventure paths are doomed to fail for them. If you believe older audiences need modules like The Keep on the Borderlands with their open airy feel, then adventure paths are doomed to fail. I really don't feel either of those things are true. I think there are DMs that put in the work needed to run a good campaign, and often, those DMs find players that congeal as a table. It only takes one player to run an adventure off the rails. This is true for any style of play: hexcrawl, sword and sorcery, epic, sandbox, linear, etc. It only takes the DM to not read the book or supplement the book based on their table's needs to make an adventure feel bad. The published adventures are long. Skull & Shackles for Pathfinder took us forever. But we had a table that trusted the DM. The Crimson Crown went well too. We just finished Candlekeep, and because of the extra work our DM did, it turned out great. I played part of Saltmarsh. It went great. I played two campaigns that were the DM's creation. Those went great. It's up to the DM to make it work, and sometimes, just sometimes, it's up to the group to help out a little. [/QUOTE]

Verification