Pathfinder 1E Recommend me Some Paizo adventurers

[Pepster]

At the FLGS our DM is running Rise of the Runelords for us. So far it's been good (about mid-way through #1). We have taken a break for holidays and one of our players is adjusting to having a newborn in the household, so we have been playing Crown of the Kobold King. It is good as well.

The Paizo adventures are well done. Our DM is questioning whether Runelords #2 & #3 are too dark and may tone them down for us. The mapwork that I have seen is fantastic.

Pepster

 

[Treebore]

Tone down issues 2 and 3? Are you guys young? If there was ever an adventure to make your players feel like they are bringing down evil, vile, rabid dogs these issues are it!

I see issue 4 as a change of "type" from the previous 2 issues, but its got giants, ogres, dragon types, and all presented in fresh new ways. I think its got "comedic" elements too. I think its also intentionally trying to lighten things up after the darkness of 2 and 3.

 

[Pepster]

Tone down issues 2 and 3? Are you guys young? If there was ever an adventure to make your players feel like they are bringing down evil, vile, rabid dogs these issues are it!

I see issue 4 as a change of "type" from the previous 2 issues, but its got giants, ogres, dragon types, and all presented in fresh new ways. I think its got "comedic" elements too. I think its also intentionally trying to lighten things up after the darkness of 2 and 3.

No, we are mostly 30+ years of age. From my understanding, the question was whether the darkness of the adventures was essential or just meant to shock. Our DM is active on the Paizo boards, and he said #4 was toned down due to the controversy surrounding the subject matter of #2 and #3.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

I can't get my head around the mindset that cares whether or not "darkness" in a roleplaying game is "essential" or "just for shock value", but it certainly wouldn't be hard to tone down "The Skinsaw Murders" or "The Hook Mountain Massacre". It would, quite honestly, just be a matter of leaving out certain descriptive elements - not going into detail, as it were.

 

[Treebore]

I can't get my head around the mindset that cares whether or not "darkness" in a roleplaying game is "essential" or "just for shock value", but it certainly wouldn't be hard to tone down "The Skinsaw Murders" or "The Hook Mountain Massacre". It would, quite honestly, just be a matter of leaving out certain descriptive elements - not going into detail, as it were.

Yea, its easy to tone down. Leave out descriptions, certain "acts" by the bad guys, and its toned down.


I'm "active" on the Paizo boards too. I could see people getting upset if young people were running the modules, but adults? Tone it down if you wish, but if you want a horror type adventure with all the ugliness and vileness of what horror is, Pathfinder 2 and 3 give you excellent material to run with it.

You always have to adjust things to what your players are comfortable with in terms of "content". So if you don't like horror flicks you'll likely want to clean up PF 2 and 3.

If you like to feel like your really making a difference, and bringing down mad vicious monsters, then you'll want your DM to run it as is, and even embellish a bit. You'll definitely have an extra sense of satisfaction when you bring down the freaks in these parts of the Runelords.

 

[Ryltar]

No, we are mostly 30+ years of age. From my understanding, the question was whether the darkness of the adventures was essential or just meant to shock. Our DM is active on the Paizo boards, and he said #4 was toned down due to the controversy surrounding the subject matter of #2 and #3.

While I can't speak for Paizo, I think this is something of a misunderstanding. James Jacobs has stated on several occasions that PF #4 was never intended to be as dark as #2/#3, and that the impression of "Paizo going to the dark side" was not intended, but rather an 'unfortunate' consequence of their releasing several horror-themed adventures in a row. My understanding is, that they want to explore several kinds of adventure styles, and the horror part is done with PF #2/3 and Carnival of Tears. So, no toning down #4, as far as I know, as that was intentionally written with a wholly different 'feel' in mind- that is, more of a retro, Against the Giants-type adventure.

Feel free to correct me, if I'm wrong, though.

 

[hazel monday]

Entombed with the Pharoahs by Micheal Kortes. Best single Paizo module to date. I actually felt smarter after running that adventure. Highly recommend it.

 

[megamania]

Too much here that I now want to buy........

 

[James Jacobs]

No, we are mostly 30+ years of age. From my understanding, the question was whether the darkness of the adventures was essential or just meant to shock. Our DM is active on the Paizo boards, and he said #4 was toned down due to the controversy surrounding the subject matter of #2 and #3.

Pathfinder #4 was already in the can well before the big thread about "torture porn" started up over at our messageboards, so it wasn't "toned down" due to the controversy at all. Horror is the most popular genre in adventures (at least, according to reader feedback over five years of working on Dungeon, it was), so we wanted to put some horror into Pathfinder early on. Also, one of the themes of Rise of the Runelords is sin, so it's gonna go in some dark and creepy places no matter what.

BUT: Pathfinder 4, "Fortress of the Stone Giants" was indeed intended to lighten the mood a bit, and to move away from the gothic horror (AKA English horror from the '60s) of "Skinsaw" and the exploitation horror of "Hook Mountain" (AKA American horror from the '70s). The darkness in those adventures were essential in order to get the point across that the bad guys are symbols for the seven deadly sins, essential in order to make a haunted house scary, an essential in order to give our ogres a distinctively bestial and "fresh" look, like we did with our goblins. Ogres are kind of the pushovers in the giant type, and by making them really vile and onerous, I hoped to elevate them at least back into the "THESE GUYS ARE REALLY TERRIBLE" category, even though they're only CR 3.

That said... each GM should absolutely adjust and adapt Pathfinder to his or her campaign. I just wanted to point out why we went with the choices and themes we did for the adventures themselves.

 

[Pepster]

Thanks for that clarification, James. We'll start up again after the first of the year and our DM is anxious to continue.

To stay on track, the Paizo adventures have some fantastic artwork to show your players. At key points in Crown of the Kobold King, our DM will show us one of the NPC's or monsters. The art adds flavor to the adventures and visuals are always helpful.

Pepster