Sounds Worse than it Was [Archive] - Wizards Community

Sounds Worse than it Was [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
ubersmurfs
09-23-07, 05:03 PM I don't want to give any spoilers, but I gotta ask this question before I post the results for EXP-5 Shargon's Rage. I ended up running the quest with an entire group of Cabal of Shadows group. At some point during the adventure (I won't say where or what), the party felt it was more beneficial to encourage the events and not stop them. It seems to me that letting things play out the way they did or even encouraging them would be more beneficial to the faction.

Now I am stuck with the dilemma, using the multiple choice questions as the only option for reporting this quest, it sounds like they botched the whole thing and were driven away, broken and defeated. Instead they shrugged off the shackles of "what's right" or "what's expected" and furthered their own goals and those of their faction. How do you portray that in the mission report with the multiple choice questions?

Has anyone else had this problem, not necessarily with this quest, but in general? Where the goals of this faction don't exactly lead to the expected conclusion, or even make it sound as if it failed. A couple Children of Xoriat could succeed in their goal by by not saving the entire continent or Eberron Itself from burning. How does one recognize this success?
warfteiner
09-23-07, 08:28 PM I would still mark it as a mission failure to be honest - and I love my Cabal character.

The Cabal wants to run Xen'drik (and of course the rest of the world) and unfortunately the end mission thingie (ah, you precious spoilers!) could interfere with that... you know, by slaughtering and subjugating everyone. Or something. ;)
Nolwelen
09-23-07, 10:50 PM Wow, somehow the topic of this thread boils down to one question:" Is selfishness equivalent in meaning with failure?" It just presents a paradox to the Cabal of Shadows players, since pursuing their goals could eventually cause them to fail in the attempt to accomplish them. That just happens where you try to get what you want by force what you couldnt get without it, ending up destroying it in the process. Lucifer's "unaccomplishability", the selfdistructive nature of evil, isnt it?

May be you should ask yourself, what point of view the Adventure journal takes rather than asking for the cosmic truth about the term "success".
Garden_State_Gamer
09-24-07, 10:16 AM Cabal of Shadows is my preferred faction to Judge, and I'm intrigued at the aspect of evil fitting into the grand scheme of a campaign. That said:

I'm going out on a limb here and say that the heads of the various sub-factions do not consider "Subjugation by an Evil Outsider" as a Win for the Cabal of Shadows.

Not to mention how upset the Cabal would be if they found out a PC could get a Coin Lord in their pocket, but made an executive decision to let the crazy drow burn the city to the ground instead.

Even if they want the whole world to burn, the Xoriat Kids aren't so maniacally sociopathic to allow the finale to happen. If one uses that logic, they should have set themselves on fire as well, to accelerate the chaos. In which case, the could've gotten the "win scenario" answers, but had to suffer level loss from death.

My impression of the CoS is that they are cunning evil, not selfish-damn-the-consequences evil.
kiddoc
09-25-07, 10:24 PM I don't want to give any spoilers, but I gotta ask this question before I post the results for EXP-5 Shargon's Rage. I ended up running the quest with an entire group of Cabal of Shadows group. At some point during the adventure (I won't say where or what), the party felt it was more beneficial to encourage the events and not stop them. It seems to me that letting things play out the way they did or even encouraging them would be more beneficial to the faction.

Now I am stuck with the dilemma, using the multiple choice questions as the only option for reporting this quest, it sounds like they botched the whole thing and were driven away, broken and defeated. Instead they shrugged off the shackles of "what's right" or "what's expected" and furthered their own goals and those of their faction. How do you portray that in the mission report with the multiple choice questions?

Has anyone else had this problem, not necessarily with this quest, but in general? Where the goals of this faction don't exactly lead to the expected conclusion, or even make it sound as if it failed. A couple Children of Xoriat could succeed in their goal by by not saving the entire continent or Eberron Itself from burning. How does one recognize this success?

Guilty as charged. I'm the author and this is a GREAT question/issue.

You have to keep in mind that we all have our strengths and weaknesses as writers. From the perspective of an author and DM, Shargon's Rage is the best I've ever written--but it shows off both my greatest strengths and my biggest flaws.

Obviously the ultra-fast, high intensity pace of the adventure lends itself toward linearity. It's probably just the Blackwheel in me. ;)

On the other hand, I loathe the fact that any DM might feel compelled to dismiss the possibility of interpreting this according to how he or she sees the faction. To me, the best thing about the XE campaign is the flexibility it allows to a DM. The Cabal is perhaps the most "morally flexible" of the factions, and I can't stand stripping much of that away at the cost of writing a concise adventure.

What'd I'd do is answer the adventure questions given the "spirit" of the mission, but try and interpret the fact that the Cabal is STILL an 'organization.' They have a hierarchy and as despotic as they may be, there is an understanding of common purpose, however varied the actualization of that common purpose may be. I could imagine that as a DM running this adventure I might be a little more "firm" with Cabal players with an order from high above or a secret mission from far below (think cloud giant brain locked in a jar)--but decisive.

"We need to put on the face of 'driving away' the pirates while we get rid of their leader." Of course, once their leader is gone, you have thousands of relatively "morally ambiguous" pirates milling about waiting for a cause. Hmm... I wonder what the Cabal might make of that. Alliance? Domination? Curse? Mass Murder? Scapegoats? Any of these are possibilities. If that's not enough to get them motivated to "play the game" in the adventure, then I'd say just score them on the sheet as what they score, but go OUT OF YOUR WAY to hook up their adventure journals with notes about their creative thinking, extraordinary contribution to the faction, and dedication to cause. From there, I'd follow that up with a DM's Mark that fits a more appropriate follow-up to give closure to this adventure.

Don't limit your creativity or your players--just channel them a little more fluidly: Either through the "hierarchy" of the Cabal or through the Adventure Journal + DM's Mark option.

Good Luck, feel free to PM me or Uber-Mastermind of the Diabolical (UMD) Greg Marks with any further questions/issues.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
ubersmurfs 09-23-07, 05:03 PM	I don't want to give any spoilers, but I gotta ask this question before I post the results for EXP-5 Shargon's Rage. I ended up running the quest with an entire group of Cabal of Shadows group. At some point during the adventure (I won't say where or what), the party felt it was more beneficial to encourage the events and not stop them. It seems to me that letting things play out the way they did or even encouraging them would be more beneficial to the faction. Now I am stuck with the dilemma, using the multiple choice questions as the only option for reporting this quest, it sounds like they botched the whole thing and were driven away, broken and defeated. Instead they shrugged off the shackles of "what's right" or "what's expected" and furthered their own goals and those of their faction. How do you portray that in the mission report with the multiple choice questions? Has anyone else had this problem, not necessarily with this quest, but in general? Where the goals of this faction don't exactly lead to the expected conclusion, or even make it sound as if it failed. A couple Children of Xoriat could succeed in their goal by by not saving the entire continent or Eberron Itself from burning. How does one recognize this success?
warfteiner 09-23-07, 08:28 PM	I would still mark it as a mission failure to be honest - and I love my Cabal character. The Cabal wants to run Xen'drik (and of course the rest of the world) and unfortunately the end mission thingie (ah, you precious spoilers!) could interfere with that... you know, by slaughtering and subjugating everyone. Or something. ;)
Nolwelen 09-23-07, 10:50 PM	Wow, somehow the topic of this thread boils down to one question:" Is selfishness equivalent in meaning with failure?" It just presents a paradox to the Cabal of Shadows players, since pursuing their goals could eventually cause them to fail in the attempt to accomplish them. That just happens where you try to get what you want by force what you couldnt get without it, ending up destroying it in the process. Lucifer's "unaccomplishability", the selfdistructive nature of evil, isnt it? May be you should ask yourself, what point of view the Adventure journal takes rather than asking for the cosmic truth about the term "success".
Garden_State_Gamer 09-24-07, 10:16 AM	Cabal of Shadows is my preferred faction to Judge, and I'm intrigued at the aspect of evil fitting into the grand scheme of a campaign. That said: I'm going out on a limb here and say that the heads of the various sub-factions do not consider "Subjugation by an Evil Outsider" as a Win for the Cabal of Shadows. Not to mention how upset the Cabal would be if they found out a PC could get a Coin Lord in their pocket, but made an executive decision to let the crazy drow burn the city to the ground instead. Even if they want the whole world to burn, the Xoriat Kids aren't so maniacally sociopathic to allow the finale to happen. If one uses that logic, they should have set themselves on fire as well, to accelerate the chaos. In which case, the could've gotten the "win scenario" answers, but had to suffer level loss from death. My impression of the CoS is that they are cunning evil, not selfish-damn-the-consequences evil.
kiddoc 09-25-07, 10:24 PM	I don't want to give any spoilers, but I gotta ask this question before I post the results for EXP-5 Shargon's Rage. I ended up running the quest with an entire group of Cabal of Shadows group. At some point during the adventure (I won't say where or what), the party felt it was more beneficial to encourage the events and not stop them. It seems to me that letting things play out the way they did or even encouraging them would be more beneficial to the faction. Now I am stuck with the dilemma, using the multiple choice questions as the only option for reporting this quest, it sounds like they botched the whole thing and were driven away, broken and defeated. Instead they shrugged off the shackles of "what's right" or "what's expected" and furthered their own goals and those of their faction. How do you portray that in the mission report with the multiple choice questions? Has anyone else had this problem, not necessarily with this quest, but in general? Where the goals of this faction don't exactly lead to the expected conclusion, or even make it sound as if it failed. A couple Children of Xoriat could succeed in their goal by by not saving the entire continent or Eberron Itself from burning. How does one recognize this success? Guilty as charged. I'm the author and this is a GREAT question/issue. You have to keep in mind that we all have our strengths and weaknesses as writers. From the perspective of an author and DM, Shargon's Rage is the best I've ever written--but it shows off both my greatest strengths and my biggest flaws. Obviously the ultra-fast, high intensity pace of the adventure lends itself toward linearity. It's probably just the Blackwheel in me. ;) On the other hand, I loathe the fact that any DM might feel compelled to dismiss the possibility of interpreting this according to how he or she sees the faction. To me, the best thing about the XE campaign is the flexibility it allows to a DM. The Cabal is perhaps the most "morally flexible" of the factions, and I can't stand stripping much of that away at the cost of writing a concise adventure. What'd I'd do is answer the adventure questions given the "spirit" of the mission, but try and interpret the fact that the Cabal is STILL an 'organization.' They have a hierarchy and as despotic as they may be, there is an understanding of common purpose, however varied the actualization of that common purpose may be. I could imagine that as a DM running this adventure I might be a little more "firm" with Cabal players with an order from high above or a secret mission from far below (think cloud giant brain locked in a jar)--but decisive. "We need to put on the face of 'driving away' the pirates while we get rid of their leader." Of course, once their leader is gone, you have thousands of relatively "morally ambiguous" pirates milling about waiting for a cause. Hmm... I wonder what the Cabal might make of that. Alliance? Domination? Curse? Mass Murder? Scapegoats? Any of these are possibilities. If that's not enough to get them motivated to "play the game" in the adventure, then I'd say just score them on the sheet as what they score, but go OUT OF YOUR WAY to hook up their adventure journals with notes about their creative thinking, extraordinary contribution to the faction, and dedication to cause. From there, I'd follow that up with a DM's Mark that fits a more appropriate follow-up to give closure to this adventure. Don't limit your creativity or your players--just channel them a little more fluidly: Either through the "hierarchy" of the Cabal or through the Adventure Journal + DM's Mark option. Good Luck, feel free to PM me or Uber-Mastermind of the Diabolical (UMD) Greg Marks with any further questions/issues.