I own all three parts of the Paths of the Damned campaign series but admit that I haven't read it very thoroughly. For those who have read it in depth (and especially those who have run it before), what are your impressions of it? Is it pretty cohesive and thematically-linked or does it feel like a string of encounters slapped together? Are the NPCs, plot and general motivations interesting and compelling? What do people feel are the strengths/weaknesses of the campaign? Would it be worth the effort to jury-rig it into 3rd Ed?

I actually have a similar question about the Doomstones campaign as well. Has anyone gotten to run it and how did it go over with your group?

Thanks!

I own, but never ran Doomstones. First of all, this was originally released as a "systemless" supplement (that in practice meant AD&D) as part of the Complete Dungeon Master series and was later adapted for WFRP 1e. It shows. The basic premise is a hunt for 4 powerful artifacts. Now having come off of the most excellent The Enemy Within campaign, the hunt for uber magic items was a little jarring to say the least. Also note that this is a high power campaign and is intended for characters already in their 2nd or 3rd careers. How they get there is up to you, but it's not a campaign intended for starting characters. If you are looking for a dungeon crawling, monster bashing, artifact hunting, high level D&D campaign set in the Old World, Doomstones may be right up your alley. It was not up mine. I'd sooner reverse engineer Doomstones and run it in D&D than use it for WFRP.

mac40k said:

Definately not for me then. This is sort of the impression I got from a couple of others when discussing it but I wanted to be sure.

That design seems to defy just about everything I think of when I think Warhammer.

Thanks for the input. Now for Paths of the Damned. Anyone have opinions on it?

I ran the first installment of PotD for my old group a few years ago. I made no major changes to the campaign as written, and my players *loved* it.

They said that they always felt a few steps behind the villains, that they were sure that there were better ways to accomplish their goals, and that they were certain that there was plenty of adventure that they missed.

Spoilers follow:
*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

The truth of the matter is that the first installment, Ashes of Middenheim, is a very straight forward railroad adventure. You go A->B->C->etc with little room for variation, but the players don't know that. The choices that are laid out in front of them are mostly obvious to them if described properly, and they will still look for other options. That is good; be sure to let them follow these red herrings of omission and improvise. It won't be too hard, because the fast pace and high stakes of the adventure help keep the players on track.

Be sure to read and understand the whole adventure, because there are several areas that reference earlier parts of the adventure and if the earlier part didn't play out as written you can run into continuity problems.

Overall this adventure was easy to run and fun for my players. I was skeptical at first while reading it, but it ended up being extremely enjoyable for all involved.

That said, in hindsight there are a few things I would change if I were to run it again. They are mostly cosmetic issues, though:

1. Overall adventure: I would have the players interact with a city watch sergeant, rather than Ulrich Schutzmann. He's just too important to be concerned with the characters at this point. Maybe later in the adventure he could interact with them. I'd definitely his name, though. "Orders from Schutzmann are...."

2. Chapter 1: Skaven... Skaven don't exist was a huge theme in second edition, and now in third. For them to be the first combat encounter in the first book of the first campaign for second edition was a mistake in my opinion. I like the encounter, but it didn't *have* to be skaven. If I changed this encounter I would be sure to use an adversary capable of breaking into the temple of Sigmar as uncannily as is described in the chapter.

3. There are a few other things I would change, but I've got to run off for dinner.

I liked the reading of Spires of Altdorf, and Forges of Nuln, but cannot give advice as I've not run them. Doomstones looked interesting, but a little out of theme for WFRP. Good luck, and have a great time whatever campaign you decide to run.

-Thorvid

Bloody Sun Boy said:

The general consensus re: PotD is that the adventures range from poor to awful. Exactly which are poor and which are awful vary from person to person. I attempted to run AoM but had to stop about a third of the way through due to the sheer boredom it induced, both in me and my players. SoA looked a little more interesting, as it was a non-linear social adventure, but many GMs dislike certain elements of it. The Nuln book is the most 'traditional' of the three adventures and I'd probably rate it as average.

I think all three books suffered from the city sourcebook-adventure layout used. Each was supposed to provide you with enough information on the city to serve as a good location for homebrew adventures, but didn't devote enough page count to pull it off well. Likewise that left insufficient space for the adventures, which have a somewhat incomplete, sloppy feel to them. AoM is, for example, extremely railroady, as there isn't enough space in the supplement to cover many of the possibilities the PCs could try out if left to their own initiative.

I really like PotD, but I never run adventures/campaigns as they a written. But I like the general story.

Paths of the Damned, and the Thousand Thrones both have excellent bits, meh bits, and some bits that just seem a bit daft to be in there.

I ran parts of PotD, and started TT but heavily tweaked the plots right from the start.
They are not bad as a start point for a plotline. But i would not follow them slavishly.

Not played Doomstones though.

Yje Enemy within campaign is a good one too.
Might need a big tweak/facelift, but nothing an ingenious GM couldn't handle.