Quote from: Obeeron;688614Paizo figured this out.  Their APs are a big ole situation ready for the PCs to muck around in, but there's a narrative throughout that is fun for people to read.

Actually, what I was saying is that you can create modules and products that represent the same game play value for gamers without having to give in to the story-line/narrative approach at all. Paizo's adventure paths with their "narratives throughout" are not representative of what I have in mind.

Quote from: One Horse Town;6885564e which they didn't like had good design

>>4e
>>good design
>>laughingGoyfs.jpg

Seriously which den of rabid 4rries did that one come from :?

4e had terrible design. Remember when they linked the entire non-combat game to a system they clearly never playtested and then failed to fix it like twenty times. Or the time the completely redid how monsters worked. Or how Rangers outdamaged others strikers (sometimes to the tune of 100% or more damage) throughout the lifespan of the edition. The idea that 4e was somehow "well designed" has never been anything but a 4rrie talking point -_-

Quote from: Benoist;688621Actually, what I was saying is that you can create modules and products that represent the same game play value for gamers without having to give in to the story-line/narrative approach at all. Paizo's adventure paths with their "narratives throughout" are not representative of what I have in mind.

Aren't you creating headaches for yourself by doing so, though?

Or, to flip it, isn't the relative ease of the narrative pretty compelling?

Take the AP.  Latter word there is 'path'.  How would you even do that?  And do so every other month for several years running?

Caution - if you have such an idea, you probably should run to the printers with it.  There's definitely a market.

Quote from: mcbobbo;688639Aren't you creating headaches for yourself by doing so, though?

Or, to flip it, isn't the relative ease of the narrative pretty compelling?

Take the AP.  Latter word there is 'path'.  How would you even do that?  And do so every other month for several years running?

Caution - if you have such an idea, you probably should run to the printers with it.  There's definitely a market.

I would call an alternative emergent plot. It similar to how comics manage shared universes.

What Paizo does is a Secret Wars all the time with each individual AP. What if you dialed it back and instead put in hooks to tie your modules together but mostly their focus is a standalone event or locale.

But if you do get the line and put them together you get something that hangs together and could be used as a basis for an entire campaign.

Quote from: mcbobbo;688639Aren't you creating headaches for yourself by doing so, though?

Or, to flip it, isn't the relative ease of the narrative pretty compelling?

Take the AP.  Latter word there is 'path'.  How would you even do that?  And do so every other month for several years running?

Caution - if you have such an idea, you probably should run to the printers with it.  There's definitely a market.

It is possible to have adventures which are linked to other adventures that don't dictate what the PC's have to do.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;688668It is possible to have adventures which are linked to other adventures that don't dictate what the PC's have to do.

Not in general, no it isn't.   You can't even do a site-based module series, for example, if you don't somehow dictate where the PCs go.  Otherwise what's to prevent them going and exploring the land of Module 6 before it gets released?

Some degree of being able to predict what to write next is absolutely required.

Quote from: gamerGoyf;688625>>4e
>>good design
>>laughingGoyfs.jpg

Seriously which den of rabid 4rries did that one come from :?

4e had terrible design. Remember when they linked the entire non-combat game to a system they clearly never playtested and then failed to fix it like twenty times. Or the time the completely redid how monsters worked. Or how Rangers outdamaged others strikers (sometimes to the tune of 100% or more damage) throughout the lifespan of the edition. The idea that 4e was somehow "well designed" has never been anything but a 4rrie talking point -_-

No, 4e is a well-designed game that achieves what it set out to do. That doesn't make it a good game, necessarily, particularly if you aren't interested in what it sets out to do or don't like the costs is pays to get there. But the design itself is pretty solid.

PS skill challenges are entirely optional, you can always just use the normal skill rules like previous editions and in fact that's what you're supposed to do for most non-combat things even when you like skill challenges. They did not completely redo how monsters worked, they made some fairly minor changes to the stat block formulas of certain kinds of monsters. Rangers are the best strikers but not overwhelmingly so and the level of imbalance is still a lot less than you get in previous editions and other games. But why let the facts get in the way of your little rant?

Quote from: mcbobbo;688639Aren't you creating headaches for yourself by doing so, though?

Not really. When you are in the right frame of mind, it's just as easy to come up with a compelling adventure setting waiting for the PCs to interact with as it is to create a compelling plot for a story. It's just not the same thing, to me. One I reserve for interactive role playing games, and the other I reserve for writing fiction, which I also do, btw.

Quote from: mcbobbo;688639Take the AP.  Latter word there is 'path'.  How would you even do that?  And do so every other month for several years running?

Caution - if you have such an idea, you probably should run to the printers with it.  There's definitely a market.

Precisely why I will not describe the specifics on this thread.