Begging for a "Criteria For Favors" section in Mods!!! [Archive] - Wizards Community

Begging for a "Criteria For Favors" section in Mods!!! [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Bob_the_Theurge
03-27-07, 12:12 PM Guys,

Seriously, there is one thing we need for new mods, something I figure should be standard: a section in the mod conclusions (similar to the gold/xp calculator that lists them by encounter) that takes each Favor/Curse/Whatever from the "Play Notes" section, and lists the criteria by which they are to be given.

I played a mod recently where a DM screwed up, and didn't read one line in the mod, where an NPC was supposed to appear and ask for the players to return something they'd found in an "abandoned" temple (she lived there).

Because he never had the NPC appear and ask for it back, but we "took her stuff", he ruled we all got a major curse that equates to 1 point of CON drain for all arcane casters, every mod, for a full year.

We found it out later, after reviewing the mod, and he refused to fix his error.

I'm living with it on my AR, but that's a serious problem that a simple "how did they get this" in the wrapup section would have fixed.
kenobi65
03-27-07, 01:05 PM An excellent idea.
Madfox11
03-27-07, 01:09 PM I already do so in the Conclusion section of an adventure (or at least I strife to). DMs are still bound to make errors.
vvincent
03-27-07, 02:16 PM In all Year 6 and Year 7 Verbobonc regional mods, we have been including a "Reward Notes" section, which specifies exactly how the awarding of each "reward" is determined.

For example:

Favor of the Mounted Borderers: This reward is awarded to all characters that succesfully complete their assigned mission.

Ire of the Family: This is awarded to any character that steals the trinket from Algernon Took, lies to Algernon Took, or fails to provide the Family with the trinket.

This has, in my opinion, cut down on the confusion on whether or not a character receives a particular entry on the AR.

Vernon L. Vincent
Verbobonc Triad

Guys,

Seriously, there is one thing we need for new mods, something I figure should be standard: a section in the mod conclusions (similar to the gold/xp calculator that lists them by encounter) that takes each Favor/Curse/Whatever from the "Play Notes" section, and lists the criteria by which they are to be given.

I played a mod recently where a DM screwed up, and didn't read one line in the mod, where an NPC was supposed to appear and ask for the players to return something they'd found in an "abandoned" temple (she lived there).

Because he never had the NPC appear and ask for it back, but we "took her stuff", he ruled we all got a major curse that equates to 1 point of CON drain for all arcane casters, every mod, for a full year.

We found it out later, after reviewing the mod, and he refused to fix his error.

I'm living with it on my AR, but that's a serious problem that a simple "how did they get this" in the wrapup section would have fixed.
trollbill
03-27-07, 02:48 PM I completely agree, which is exaclty why, in the last two mods I have been working on, I listed what had to be done to get each item on the AR not only when the 'trigger event' occured, but also in the Conclusion section. Each conclusion path I have lists exactly what the PCs are getting the AR favors for.
trollbill
03-27-07, 02:52 PM We found it out later, after reviewing the mod, and he refused to fix his error.

I'm living with it on my AR, but that's a serious problem that a simple "how did they get this" in the wrapup section would have fixed.

Just email your Triad about it. If he truly made a mistake, they can over-ride him on the AR ruling.
clannagh
03-27-07, 07:04 PM I am not sure if it will always help.

I just ran a game where the mod quite sensibly details a number of ways the party can obtain the major favors (one of which was needed to get any item access from the mod at all).

Unfortunately the AR proceeds to specify each favor as being obtained only by doing one specific impossibly difficult thing (the AR states for doing xxx you recieve yyy). I doubt any party ever playing the mod achieved the outcome the AR requires.

Hence due to the hard and fast " AR takes precedence" rule the party lost most of the access on the AR despite clearly fulfilling the requirements listed in the mod.
bitznarf
03-27-07, 07:07 PM Perhaps the AR can get errata'd clannagh?
MeepoTheMighty
03-28-07, 07:22 PM Ire of the Family: This is awarded to any character that steals the trinket from Algernon Took, lies to Algernon Took, or fails to provide the Family with the trinket.

Tsk, tsk...you should know better than to discuss the affairs of a legitimate businessman on a public forum like this.
Puggle Halfwine
03-28-07, 09:48 PM Tsk, tsk...you should know better than to discuss the affairs of a legitimate businessman on a public forum like this.

Yeah! He's a legitimate businessman, he is. Honest and true.

... *stab*
JohnduBois
03-28-07, 09:59 PM In all Year 6 and Year 7 Verbobonc regional mods, we have been including a "Reward Notes" section, which specifies exactly how the awarding of each "reward" is determined.

For example:

Favor of the Mounted Borderers: This reward is awarded to all characters that succesfully complete their assigned mission.

Ire of the Family: This is awarded to any character that steals the trinket from Algernon Took, lies to Algernon Took, or fails to provide the Family with the trinket.

This has, in my opinion, cut down on the confusion on whether or not a character receives a particular entry on the AR.

Vernon L. Vincent
Verbobonc Triad

Furyondy is using a similar system starting with FUR7-03.
Akhamshyy
03-28-07, 10:12 PM What I find here that sounds bad is the actions of the judge.
Okay, you slipped up. It's not an irrevocable thing like a PC death. All you have to do is own up and sign new ARs or edit and sign the ARs already issued.
Do we have players so proud that they can't admit they made a mistake? And in doing so screw over other players?
Where I in your shoes I'd get in touch with my local triad.
Timlagor
03-29-07, 10:27 AM What I find here that sounds bad is the actions of the judge.
Okay, you slipped up. It's not an irrevocable thing like a PC death. All you have to do is own up and sign new ARs or edit and sign the ARs already issued.
Do we have players so proud that they can't admit they made a mistake? And in doing so screw over other players?
Where I in your shoes I'd get in touch with my local triad.

The point of the thread is to make it easy for judges to know which favours to award to PCs. This can't possibly be a bad thing.

I have certainly run tables where I wasn't sure if certain favours were earned or not.
Bob_the_Theurge
03-29-07, 10:29 AM What I find here that sounds bad is the actions of the judge.
Okay, you slipped up. It's not an irrevocable thing like a PC death. All you have to do is own up and sign new ARs or edit and sign the ARs already issued.
Do we have players so proud that they can't admit they made a mistake? And in doing so screw over other players?
Where I in your shoes I'd get in touch with my local triad.

Official response of said local triad (or at least the Triad member who wrote the mod, haven't been in contact with the other two) is "we don't care. You took her stuff, suffer. You should learn not to go taking everything even if it IS an abandoned place."

So based on that, the wizard of the party is going to have to either fork over for a casting of Restoration every mod (not exactly cheap) or not be played for a full year.
trollbill
03-29-07, 10:49 AM Official response of said local triad (or at least the Triad member who wrote the mod, haven't been in contact with the other two) is "we don't care. You took her stuff, suffer. You should learn not to go taking everything even if it IS an abandoned place."

So based on that, the wizard of the party is going to have to either fork over for a casting of Restoration every mod (not exactly cheap) or not be played for a full year.

It seems part of the problem with this particular instance isn't that the DM erroneously gave you something bad on your AR, but rather he erroneously neglected to give you the opportunity the mod author intended to realize you might be doing something wrong.

In other words, the qualifications for getting the bad thing on the AR is "Did the PCs keep the NPCs stuff?"

Seems you did.

But there is nothing on the AR sections about, "Did the DM remember to have the NPC show up and ask for his stuff back?"

Of course, I am also a victim (I think) of something similar. My Sorcerer lost his left hand in a mod a while back. Due to the way he lost it, the AR says I can only get it back with a wish or miracle, regeneration doesn't work. I had tried to get it regenerated before the module was over but was told by the DM it wouldn't work. I was then later told by someone else who had DMed that mod that the module actually says that if they get it regenerated before the end of the mod it works and they don't have to get the wish or miracle to do it. I thought about writing the Triad about this, but I wasn't able to verify which DM was right and missing a hand has not actually handicapped that character greatly, but naturally is adding a lot to his flavor. It is now very questionable who he hates more, Tiamat or Vecna.
_metz_
03-29-07, 11:05 AM most mods actually have a section for this. Occasionally DMs make a mistake, it happens.

If you have real offence with it Triad is the best option, or the senior GM after the game.

THough I don't see why all mod writers can't include this at the end.

I would like to point out a well prepared DM should be on top of such htings.

I always check every favour and how the PCS get it/stuff it up prior to a game if I can, to make it run more accurately and smoothly.
Akhamshyy
03-29-07, 06:05 PM The point of the thread is to make it easy for judges to know which favours to award to PCs. This can't possibly be a bad thing.

I have certainly run tables where I wasn't sure if certain favours were earned or not.

You've missed my point. The judge made a mistake and now the players are suffering for it. Said judge should have been lenient and edited the ARs at least.
For the record, I agree, there should be a summary of all favors gained and items found, along with the where and how. If I ever write a mod with a favor I most surely will include such a section.
pedr
03-29-07, 06:51 PM For what it's worth, the problem which has prompted this, it would help to also put this information at the beginning of the module as well. If the DM missed the opportunity for the PCs to return the item, and only later reads (re-reads?) the criteria he could still say 'well, you didn't give it back so you don't qualify.' Putting it up front, and at the section where you could earn it, and at the end might seem like over-kill, but it would give the DM a reminder of the significance of that moment in the module.
Timlagor
04-03-07, 12:40 PM You've missed my point. The judge made a mistake and now the players are suffering for it. Said judge should have been lenient and edited the ARs at least.
For the record, I agree, there should be a summary of all favors gained and items found, along with the where and how. If I ever write a mod with a favor I most surely will include such a section.

I wasn't addressing your point. I was pointing out that your point was not the point of the thread. Your point that I (pointedly) chose not to respond to your point is beside the point since I was trying to get back to the main point which is that there should be such a section in all modules.

I hope that's nice and clear ;)
Hariman
04-04-07, 11:43 PM Having an easy reference list for criteria for favors makes sense.

I can't see it as a bad idea, so Kudos to the writers that include such lists already.

An adventure flowchart with page number references would probably help DMs who, for whatever reason, don't have time to prep fully. And since I'm at it: Clearly labeled and well separated encounter statblocks, so that DMs don't get them mixed up.
gomeztoo
04-05-07, 04:09 AM Unfortunately the AR proceeds to specify each favor as being obtained only by doing one specific impossibly difficult thing (the AR states for doing xxx you recieve yyy).

I almost always remove this from AR entries when editing a mod. AR entries should not list why you got a favor - not only for the reason above, but also as they act as spoiler material for DMs that have to check the AR.
The Conclusion should list when and why you get an AR entry.
Britt
04-05-07, 04:20 AM I almost always remove this from AR entries when editing a mod. AR entries should not list why you got a favor - not only for the reason above, but also as they act as spoiler material for DMs that have to check the AR.
The Conclusion should list when and why you get an AR entry.
I usually remove that kind of text for space reasons as well.
Cardinal Teplin
04-05-07, 01:23 PM I'm putting such a section in the mod I'm writing (nearly finished!.. ^%&Ł! stat blocks).

Obviously, someone may later edit it out, but it seemed an obvious step when I came to review it
Hariman
04-08-07, 01:55 AM I almost always remove this from AR entries when editing a mod. AR entries should not list why you got a favor - not only for the reason above, but also as they act as spoiler material for DMs that have to check the AR.
The Conclusion should list when and why you get an AR entry.

But having the list OFF of the ARs is what is needed to prevent confusion. Then not having the why you earned it conditions on an AR wouldn't matter as much, because the DM would have had an easy reference to get it right.

Although, yeah, I've got one AR that has a spoilertastic favor on it. (For doing x or x, you gain y.) And it's one hell of a favor too. The kind you want a character to have.
jpchapleau
04-09-07, 04:12 PM The County of Urnst has been using an "AR Rewards" section since mid-year 6.

JP

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Bob_the_Theurge 03-27-07, 12:12 PM	Guys, Seriously, there is one thing we need for new mods, something I figure should be standard: a section in the mod conclusions (similar to the gold/xp calculator that lists them by encounter) that takes each Favor/Curse/Whatever from the "Play Notes" section, and lists the criteria by which they are to be given. I played a mod recently where a DM screwed up, and didn't read one line in the mod, where an NPC was supposed to appear and ask for the players to return something they'd found in an "abandoned" temple (she lived there). Because he never had the NPC appear and ask for it back, but we "took her stuff", he ruled we all got a major curse that equates to 1 point of CON drain for all arcane casters, every mod, for a full year. We found it out later, after reviewing the mod, and he refused to fix his error. I'm living with it on my AR, but that's a serious problem that a simple "how did they get this" in the wrapup section would have fixed.
kenobi65 03-27-07, 01:05 PM	An excellent idea.
Madfox11 03-27-07, 01:09 PM	I already do so in the Conclusion section of an adventure (or at least I strife to). DMs are still bound to make errors.
vvincent 03-27-07, 02:16 PM	In all Year 6 and Year 7 Verbobonc regional mods, we have been including a "Reward Notes" section, which specifies exactly how the awarding of each "reward" is determined. For example: Favor of the Mounted Borderers: This reward is awarded to all characters that succesfully complete their assigned mission. Ire of the Family: This is awarded to any character that steals the trinket from Algernon Took, lies to Algernon Took, or fails to provide the Family with the trinket. This has, in my opinion, cut down on the confusion on whether or not a character receives a particular entry on the AR. Vernon L. Vincent Verbobonc Triad Guys, Seriously, there is one thing we need for new mods, something I figure should be standard: a section in the mod conclusions (similar to the gold/xp calculator that lists them by encounter) that takes each Favor/Curse/Whatever from the "Play Notes" section, and lists the criteria by which they are to be given. I played a mod recently where a DM screwed up, and didn't read one line in the mod, where an NPC was supposed to appear and ask for the players to return something they'd found in an "abandoned" temple (she lived there). Because he never had the NPC appear and ask for it back, but we "took her stuff", he ruled we all got a major curse that equates to 1 point of CON drain for all arcane casters, every mod, for a full year. We found it out later, after reviewing the mod, and he refused to fix his error. I'm living with it on my AR, but that's a serious problem that a simple "how did they get this" in the wrapup section would have fixed.
trollbill 03-27-07, 02:48 PM	I completely agree, which is exaclty why, in the last two mods I have been working on, I listed what had to be done to get each item on the AR not only when the 'trigger event' occured, but also in the Conclusion section. Each conclusion path I have lists exactly what the PCs are getting the AR favors for.
trollbill 03-27-07, 02:52 PM	We found it out later, after reviewing the mod, and he refused to fix his error. I'm living with it on my AR, but that's a serious problem that a simple "how did they get this" in the wrapup section would have fixed. Just email your Triad about it. If he truly made a mistake, they can over-ride him on the AR ruling.
clannagh 03-27-07, 07:04 PM	I am not sure if it will always help. I just ran a game where the mod quite sensibly details a number of ways the party can obtain the major favors (one of which was needed to get any item access from the mod at all). Unfortunately the AR proceeds to specify each favor as being obtained only by doing one specific impossibly difficult thing (the AR states for doing xxx you recieve yyy). I doubt any party ever playing the mod achieved the outcome the AR requires. Hence due to the hard and fast " AR takes precedence" rule the party lost most of the access on the AR despite clearly fulfilling the requirements listed in the mod.
bitznarf 03-27-07, 07:07 PM	Perhaps the AR can get errata'd clannagh?
MeepoTheMighty 03-28-07, 07:22 PM	Ire of the Family: This is awarded to any character that steals the trinket from Algernon Took, lies to Algernon Took, or fails to provide the Family with the trinket. Tsk, tsk...you should know better than to discuss the affairs of a legitimate businessman on a public forum like this.
Puggle Halfwine 03-28-07, 09:48 PM	Tsk, tsk...you should know better than to discuss the affairs of a legitimate businessman on a public forum like this. Yeah! He's a legitimate businessman, he is. Honest and true. ... stab
JohnduBois 03-28-07, 09:59 PM	In all Year 6 and Year 7 Verbobonc regional mods, we have been including a "Reward Notes" section, which specifies exactly how the awarding of each "reward" is determined. For example: Favor of the Mounted Borderers: This reward is awarded to all characters that succesfully complete their assigned mission. Ire of the Family: This is awarded to any character that steals the trinket from Algernon Took, lies to Algernon Took, or fails to provide the Family with the trinket. This has, in my opinion, cut down on the confusion on whether or not a character receives a particular entry on the AR. Vernon L. Vincent Verbobonc Triad Furyondy is using a similar system starting with FUR7-03.
Akhamshyy 03-28-07, 10:12 PM	What I find here that sounds bad is the actions of the judge. Okay, you slipped up. It's not an irrevocable thing like a PC death. All you have to do is own up and sign new ARs or edit and sign the ARs already issued. Do we have players so proud that they can't admit they made a mistake? And in doing so screw over other players? Where I in your shoes I'd get in touch with my local triad.
Timlagor 03-29-07, 10:27 AM	What I find here that sounds bad is the actions of the judge. Okay, you slipped up. It's not an irrevocable thing like a PC death. All you have to do is own up and sign new ARs or edit and sign the ARs already issued. Do we have players so proud that they can't admit they made a mistake? And in doing so screw over other players? Where I in your shoes I'd get in touch with my local triad. The point of the thread is to make it easy for judges to know which favours to award to PCs. This can't possibly be a bad thing. I have certainly run tables where I wasn't sure if certain favours were earned or not.
Bob_the_Theurge 03-29-07, 10:29 AM	What I find here that sounds bad is the actions of the judge. Okay, you slipped up. It's not an irrevocable thing like a PC death. All you have to do is own up and sign new ARs or edit and sign the ARs already issued. Do we have players so proud that they can't admit they made a mistake? And in doing so screw over other players? Where I in your shoes I'd get in touch with my local triad. Official response of said local triad (or at least the Triad member who wrote the mod, haven't been in contact with the other two) is "we don't care. You took her stuff, suffer. You should learn not to go taking everything even if it IS an abandoned place." So based on that, the wizard of the party is going to have to either fork over for a casting of Restoration every mod (not exactly cheap) or not be played for a full year.
trollbill 03-29-07, 10:49 AM	Official response of said local triad (or at least the Triad member who wrote the mod, haven't been in contact with the other two) is "we don't care. You took her stuff, suffer. You should learn not to go taking everything even if it IS an abandoned place." So based on that, the wizard of the party is going to have to either fork over for a casting of Restoration every mod (not exactly cheap) or not be played for a full year. It seems part of the problem with this particular instance isn't that the DM erroneously gave you something bad on your AR, but rather he erroneously neglected to give you the opportunity the mod author intended to realize you might be doing something wrong. In other words, the qualifications for getting the bad thing on the AR is "Did the PCs keep the NPCs stuff?" Seems you did. But there is nothing on the AR sections about, "Did the DM remember to have the NPC show up and ask for his stuff back?" Of course, I am also a victim (I think) of something similar. My Sorcerer lost his left hand in a mod a while back. Due to the way he lost it, the AR says I can only get it back with a wish or miracle, regeneration doesn't work. I had tried to get it regenerated before the module was over but was told by the DM it wouldn't work. I was then later told by someone else who had DMed that mod that the module actually says that if they get it regenerated before the end of the mod it works and they don't have to get the wish or miracle to do it. I thought about writing the Triad about this, but I wasn't able to verify which DM was right and missing a hand has not actually handicapped that character greatly, but naturally is adding a lot to his flavor. It is now very questionable who he hates more, Tiamat or Vecna.
_metz_ 03-29-07, 11:05 AM	most mods actually have a section for this. Occasionally DMs make a mistake, it happens. If you have real offence with it Triad is the best option, or the senior GM after the game. THough I don't see why all mod writers can't include this at the end. I would like to point out a well prepared DM should be on top of such htings. I always check every favour and how the PCS get it/stuff it up prior to a game if I can, to make it run more accurately and smoothly.
Akhamshyy 03-29-07, 06:05 PM	The point of the thread is to make it easy for judges to know which favours to award to PCs. This can't possibly be a bad thing. I have certainly run tables where I wasn't sure if certain favours were earned or not. You've missed my point. The judge made a mistake and now the players are suffering for it. Said judge should have been lenient and edited the ARs at least. For the record, I agree, there should be a summary of all favors gained and items found, along with the where and how. If I ever write a mod with a favor I most surely will include such a section.
pedr 03-29-07, 06:51 PM	For what it's worth, the problem which has prompted this, it would help to also put this information at the beginning of the module as well. If the DM missed the opportunity for the PCs to return the item, and only later reads (re-reads?) the criteria he could still say 'well, you didn't give it back so you don't qualify.' Putting it up front, and at the section where you could earn it, and at the end might seem like over-kill, but it would give the DM a reminder of the significance of that moment in the module.
Timlagor 04-03-07, 12:40 PM	You've missed my point. The judge made a mistake and now the players are suffering for it. Said judge should have been lenient and edited the ARs at least. For the record, I agree, there should be a summary of all favors gained and items found, along with the where and how. If I ever write a mod with a favor I most surely will include such a section. I wasn't addressing your point. I was pointing out that your point was not the point of the thread. Your point that I (pointedly) chose not to respond to your point is beside the point since I was trying to get back to the main point which is that there should be such a section in all modules. I hope that's nice and clear ;)
Hariman 04-04-07, 11:43 PM	Having an easy reference list for criteria for favors makes sense. I can't see it as a bad idea, so Kudos to the writers that include such lists already. An adventure flowchart with page number references would probably help DMs who, for whatever reason, don't have time to prep fully. And since I'm at it: Clearly labeled and well separated encounter statblocks, so that DMs don't get them mixed up.
gomeztoo 04-05-07, 04:09 AM	Unfortunately the AR proceeds to specify each favor as being obtained only by doing one specific impossibly difficult thing (the AR states for doing xxx you recieve yyy). I almost always remove this from AR entries when editing a mod. AR entries should not list why you got a favor - not only for the reason above, but also as they act as spoiler material for DMs that have to check the AR. The Conclusion should list when and why you get an AR entry.
Britt 04-05-07, 04:20 AM	I almost always remove this from AR entries when editing a mod. AR entries should not list why you got a favor - not only for the reason above, but also as they act as spoiler material for DMs that have to check the AR. The Conclusion should list when and why you get an AR entry. I usually remove that kind of text for space reasons as well.
Cardinal Teplin 04-05-07, 01:23 PM	I'm putting such a section in the mod I'm writing (nearly finished!.. ^%&Ł! stat blocks). Obviously, someone may later edit it out, but it seemed an obvious step when I came to review it
Hariman 04-08-07, 01:55 AM	I almost always remove this from AR entries when editing a mod. AR entries should not list why you got a favor - not only for the reason above, but also as they act as spoiler material for DMs that have to check the AR. The Conclusion should list when and why you get an AR entry. But having the list OFF of the ARs is what is needed to prevent confusion. Then not having the why you earned it conditions on an AR wouldn't matter as much, because the DM would have had an easy reference to get it right. Although, yeah, I've got one AR that has a spoilertastic favor on it. (For doing x or x, you gain y.) And it's one hell of a favor too. The kind you want a character to have.
jpchapleau 04-09-07, 04:12 PM	The County of Urnst has been using an "AR Rewards" section since mid-year 6. JP