Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Ferol, Debtor of Torm 04-01-08, 02:13 PM	I ordered this mod so I can run it for some friends this weekend and I noticed that the judge who ran it for me and my group at DDXP ran it horribly wrong and robbed us from being able to finish it. After the second encounter in part 2 (the one with the elemental(s)) we said we were going to rest and he packed his stuff up and said we were done. He said that the mod ends if the party rests as the bad guys get away. At the time I didn't think to doubt him but reading it now it looks like he made the whole thing up. Am I missing something in the mod that says that that the bad guys leave after 24 hours?
Puggle Halfwine 04-01-08, 07:43 PM	Having not run it or read it, but played it, we were under that impression too.
TimRat 04-01-08, 07:55 PM	taking a rest at any time in any adventure is a difficult decision. though with the adventure still being able to be played i am not going to go into much details in the public forum b/c of metagaming. if you want to explain more just IM me. thanks!
Greyson 04-02-08, 03:11 PM	... we were under that impression too. Same here. I played it at D&DXP, and seemed like resting was not a good idea. It might have been an option, but it did not seem like one that would earn full story awards. Slamming your books shut at the and of an encounter and declaring an end to the adventure seems a bit harsh.
IXBN 04-02-08, 05:59 PM	Well, after I played it myself I agree - flat out ending the adventure at that point is probably to harsh. However, if you want more infos, PM me.
Surgebuster 04-02-08, 06:54 PM	Same here. I played it at D&DXP, and seemed like resting was not a good idea. It might have been an option, but it did not seem like one that would earn full story awards. Slamming your books shut at the and of an encounter and declaring an end to the adventure seems a bit harsh. Hmm. We didn't make it past the 'path and three bad guys' encounter but it seemed totally reasonable to suggest that you couldn't rest. You are chasing *spoiler* for Pete's sake. A judge just can't make up that *spoiler* decided to have a rest at the same time your party did just because the party's wizard ran out of his top level spells and the cleric was down to wands to heal. That's a party decision and one that must have been made knowing that *spoiler* could reach the destination first and do bad, bad things. Joe
Puggle Halfwine 04-03-08, 03:21 AM	Agreed with the Almighty Joe (of course). We would have loved to rest, but we chose to plod on. In the final fight my 7th level sorcerer was down to 0th level spells.
_metz_ 04-03-08, 06:33 AM	Hmm. We didn't make it past the 'path and three bad guys' encounter but it seemed totally reasonable to suggest that you couldn't rest. You are chasing *spoiler* for Pete's sake. A judge just can't make up that *spoiler* decided to have a rest at the same time your party did just because the party's wizard ran out of his top level spells and the cleric was down to wands to heal. That's a party decision and one that must have been made knowing that *spoiler* could reach the destination first and do bad, bad things. Joe Exactly (this agreeing has become a habit, mayeb I should convert to Joeism, or maybe jsut be an administrator that approves of it, and encourages it as the right sort of thing without actually being a beleiver) It is a core special, it is difficult to finish, and is run to a time limit. Stopping to rest would fail the module as much as resting in almost every other core speical fails the mod/gets you killed. It goes with the territory of the module unfortunately, and they are SUPPOSED to be like that, sounds like a reasonable decision to me, (and what I would have done, having since read the module) though the DM may have articulated it in a harsh or nasty way. We made it to the final encounter but did not fight it due to time issues in the slot, as for resources we where riding very high. (15th level sorcerors, etc really help!)
Puggle Halfwine 04-03-08, 07:11 AM	Exactly (this agreeing has become a habit, mayeb I should convert to Joeism, or maybe jsut be an administrator that approves of it, and encourages it as the right sort of thing without actually being a beleiver) One of us! One of us! One of us! Convert! :D I'll give you a :cookie: ?
Ferol, Debtor of Torm 04-03-08, 11:35 AM	I really can't believe the message I'm getting from some of you. It may have been within the "spirit of the mod", but since when is it alright for judges to make arbitrary additions to the mod? Would it be alright if the judge had given the mobs 8 extra strength or persistent Freedom of Movement? How is adding a time limit that is clearly not part of the written module any different? At one point the mod writer even encourages groups that are having trouble to retreat, rest up, and return at full strength. Unless someone can point me to somewhere in the mod where it says that after a certain amount of time the PCs lose I'm sticking to my guns and saying that the judge was cheating/an idiot.
_metz_ 04-03-08, 12:11 PM	I really can't believe the message I'm getting from some of you. It may have been within the "spirit of the mod", but since when is it alright for judges to make arbitrary additions to the mod? Would it be alright if the judge had given the mobs 8 extra strength or persistent Freedom of Movement? How is adding a time limit that is clearly not part of the written module any different? At one point the mod writer even encourages groups that are having trouble to retreat, rest up, and return at full strength. Unless someone can point me to somewhere in the mod where it says that after a certain amount of time the PCs lose I'm sticking to my guns and saying that the judge was cheating/an idiot. It most certainly is part of the adventure! What do you mean you do not understand it!!! There was nothing changed. I have read the module, I don't see where you are getting this leap of faith from. That point where you can retreat is NOT in the section you are talking about. Perhaps you should ask the mod writer instead of complaining. It was not an addition, but it is an assumption that a good GM would take. Mods don't need to explicitly say "Unless stated otherwise the monsters leave in ten minutes" for there to be a time frame in them. There is a clear sense of urgency, and there is something you need to prevent. Stopping to rest for twelve hours would give the *spoiler* more than enough time to exit and as such I don't see how you are having a problem with this. It is fully within the intent and spirit of the module. Very few parties finished that module when played in a con slot. (As is pretty standard really for a core special) Is this your first real core special? The judge was not cheating/an idiot and you have had several experienced GMs, writers, and circle members telling you otherwise. Sometimes you have to accept that bad decisions are made and you failed to complete your mission. IT HAPPENS. We all agree the judge may have been excessivily flippant, but then his fault is not imparting the sense of urgency to you, NOT in interpreting the module in the fashion that a sense of urgency exists. P.S: On this issue: All Hail Joe! I think he summed up the situation best from a GMs perspective.
Ferol, Debtor of Torm 04-03-08, 01:40 PM	It most certainly is part of the adventure! What do you mean you do not understand it!!! There was nothing changed. I have read the module, I don't see where you are getting this leap of faith from. That point where you can retreat is NOT in the section you are talking about. Perhaps you should ask the mod writer instead of complaining. It was not an addition, but it is an assumption that a good GM would take. Mods don't need to explicitly say "Unless stated otherwise the monsters leave in ten minutes" for there to be a time frame in them. I guess we just have different opinions on how LG is meant to be played. I was under the impression that LG was meant to be a "tournament enviroment" where people can play on a level (or close to level) playing field. Without anything written into the mod on when the bad guys leave who's to say that the bad guys don't leave in 10 minutes, an hour, or three hours? Does anyone happen to know how to go about contacting David Christ? There is a clear sense of urgency, and there is something you need to prevent. Stopping to rest for twelve hours would give the *spoiler* more than enough time to exit and as such I don't see how you are having a problem with this. It is fully within the intent and spirit of the module. Very few parties finished that module when played in a con slot. (As is pretty standard really for a core special) Our judge conveyed no sense of urgency. If people can't finish that mod within the time slot that's fine. That is within the rules. Is this your first real core special? No, is it yours? The core specials I have played in the past punished you for resting/wasting time but never *ended*. The judge was not cheating/an idiot and you have had several experienced GMs, writers, and circle members telling you otherwise. Sometimes you have to accept that bad decisions are made and you failed to complete your mission. IT HAPPENS. We all agree the judge may have been excessivily flippant, but then his fault is not imparting the sense of urgency to you, NOT in interpreting the module in the fashion that a sense of urgency exists. P.S: On this issue: All Hail Joe! I think he summed up the situation best from a GMs perspective. That's the funny thing about the internet. I don't know who any of you are and as such your opinion doesn't mean anything special to me. What I do need is a citation from the mod that states that the PCs are on a strict in-game time limit. If no one can provide that when I run it this weekend I intend to run the mod as written.
nony2klerch 04-03-08, 03:14 PM	You also have the pleasure of not running under time constraints. Enjoy the luxury of taking your time.... Although being rushed may have also been some issues with people "blowing their wad" and then wanting to rest... when they "ran out of daily powers" and didn't do resource management properly. YMMV I've run it 5 times and the only table that succeeded was the table not under time constraints. Lynn
Arvagor 04-03-08, 09:10 PM	I've run it 5 times and the only table that succeeded was the table not under time constraints.And I'd like to confirm that even without time constraints, said table still nearly got our butts kicked... (OK, they actually were kicked -- several times in fact -- but we just accepted the bruises, sacked up, and soldiered on...) :fight!:
_metz_ 04-03-08, 10:33 PM	No, is it yours? The core specials I have played in the past punished you for resting/wasting time but never *ended*. IN one of them you just *died* if you hung around there... SO I don't know waht you are talking about...
IXBN 04-04-08, 07:42 AM	We played it and we made it to the final encounter and we did win.:D Yes, if you rest the badies will be gone. :( Thats reasonable. However this should not flat out end the complete adventure at the point of rest. :confused: Just my two cents.
dkay807 04-04-08, 11:10 AM	What I do need is a citation from the mod that states that the PCs are on a strict in-game time limit. If no one can provide that when I run it this weekend I intend to run the mod as written. Certain items within modules are oftentimes, if not always, up to DM interpretation. Speaking from experience, module authors are often unable to consider every possible action that the party may take and thus, must make the module clear enough to enable any judge to interpret how the module might support various PC decisions that were not considered during the writing process. Regardless of whether your judge imparted a sense of urgency upon your group when you played this particular module, there are many obvious clues within the module that suggest a high sense of urgency. When we played the module, it was pretty clear to us that resting was not an option. Furthermore, our judge, a Circle member directly responsible for many of the NPCs in the module, confirmed that had we rested, we would have failed. When you judge the module, by all means run the module as it is written. But use the information provided to you by the author to make fair and informed decisions when handling PC actions not covered in the module itself. In any case, that sucks that you had a tough break. Perhaps your judge did a poor job of illuminating the importance of your mission and who you were following.
nony2klerch 04-04-08, 01:26 PM	I guess what our submitter is neglecting to mention is that the "resting encounter" is in sight of the "spoiler" encounter....why wouldn't "spoiler" take off if they can see the party resting off in the distance.....(other situational modifiers unknown) Just a thought and a rationalization for why >this< idiot said the module was over if you rested after that particular encounter. Lynn who ran it the same way 4 times at DDXP...regardless only one time did a party "rest" to end the module...the other parties timed out...they spent too much time getting hammered by the module...and you have Mr Dave C. to thank for that...it was a rough module...and hobbled together parties will have a rougher go....
dkay807 04-04-08, 03:29 PM	I guess what our submitter is neglecting to mention is that the "resting encounter" is in sight of the "spoiler" encounter....why wouldn't "spoiler" take off if they can see the party resting off in the distance.....(other situational modifiers unknown) Just a thought and a rationalization for why >this< idiot said the module was over if you rested after that particular encounter. Lynn who ran it the same way 4 times at DDXP...regardless only one time did a party "rest" to end the module...the other parties timed out...they spent too much time getting hammered by the module...and you have Mr Dave C. to thank for that...it was a rough module...and hobbled together parties will have a rougher go.... Oh, had I known the famous Lynn Register was the DM of the table in question, I'd have told the OP I have every confidence that his judge ran the module correctly and must have certainly made it a fun experience. Dave C. definitely wrote an excellent core special for us... one of the best ever. The challenge level was appropriate and it was nice to have a core special that was more of a module than a long string of combats. I'm sure Tim Sech had something to do with the encounter design though :)
heirodule 04-04-08, 04:48 PM	Lynn who ran it the same way 4 times at DDXP Reverse Gravity was our friend :) Koheleth of Keoland :)
nony2klerch 04-04-08, 06:09 PM	I don't know if I was the OP's judge...but that's the way I also ran it....I didn't see any reason to stick around. Reverse Gravity...phshaw...not the charging paladin's friend if I remember correctly...when I grappled my way out of it and grabbed his bronze griffon...the expression on his face was nice. :evillaugh dkay...thanks for the vote of confidence..I do the best I can. Lynn
JohnduBois 04-04-08, 07:24 PM	You think the mod was hard, you should have seen the playtest...
Maesto 04-05-08, 12:13 AM	I'm just looking forward to what John's going to do to the PDAToL* with this mod at APL 16 ;-) *PDAToL = Psuedonatural Dire Arcane Table of Legend. We have 3 15th level wizards, 2 15th level sorcerors, and a 13th level bard cohort. And we are going to break this module into tiny little bits =P
Redfist 04-05-08, 01:18 AM	It should be fun. I hope my normal assumptions of core specials holds true. Prep spells for battle after battle after battle. Oh yeah - and have a TON of pearls handy (as has been the case w/ prior core specials).
dkay807 04-05-08, 01:43 AM	I'm just looking forward to what John's going to do to the PDAToL* with this mod at APL 16 ;-) *PDAToL = Psuedonatural Dire Arcane Table of Legend. We have 3 15th level wizards, 2 15th level sorcerors, and a 13th level bard cohort. And we are going to break this module into tiny little bits =P I hope you fight nothing but golems with Great Cleave and Freedom of Movement as an extraordinary ability in a dimensionally locked area with 10-foot-high ceilings. Take that, biatches! Maybe we'll throw in some magically fortified adamantine walls so as to make sure you can't *somehow* dig any cubbies out for yourselves. ...yes, antimagic field is just too trite. No seriously... that's the second encounter! No, seriously seriously, the mod gets a LOT easier at higher APLs. I would presume that most APL 16 tables will piledrive the damn thing.
Newpaintbrush 04-05-08, 05:00 PM	I really can't believe the message I'm getting from some of you. Perhaps, but people do have the right to have and express their opinions, yes? If you ask for opinions, it is natural that some may disagree with you. It may have been within the "spirit of the mod", but since when is it alright for judges to make arbitrary additions to the mod? Would it be alright if the judge had given the mobs 8 extra strength or persistent Freedom of Movement? How is adding a time limit that is clearly not part of the written module any different? No, the examples you give simply show poor judgment and/or outright cheating. The action you are questioning, though is, I think, probably well within the scope of the DM's discretion. If a mod says that the villain continually casts spells, will the villain try to do so round after round regardless of the "silence" spell dropped on him by the party cleric? No, and even if the mod says the villain will continually cast spells, the DM is right to make the villain act otherwise given those circumstances. Although I am not familiar with the mod, if you were indeed chasing something and you decided to rest, then I am of the opinion that the DM very probably did the right thing by ending the mod, particularly if the villain was the only encounter remaining and the villain was aware of PC pursuit. At one point the mod writer even encourages groups that are having trouble to retreat, rest up, and return at full strength. Another poster familiar with the mod has stated that the rest break was at another point in the mod. As I am not in possession of the mod, I leave it to you to check the accuracy of this statement. Unless someone can point me to somewhere in the mod where it says that after a certain amount of time the PCs lose I'm sticking to my guns and saying that the judge was cheating/an idiot. I understand that you are unhappy over the incident, but I would encourage you to not use terms like "idiot", as justified as your position may be. Such terms are unsportsmanlike and do not shed a positive light on your subjectivity. I hope you will be kind enough to allow the DM the benefit of the doubt and allow the incident to pass without further recourse. I realize that you may well be justifiably angry at the DM, but even so, it's best that we all get along. Peace and love. :)
Arvagor 04-05-08, 06:32 PM	You think the mod was hard, you should have seen the playtest... Re: JohnduBois and playtests, I only have one thing to say... MINUS 2!!!
Drezden 04-06-08, 12:12 AM	[snip] No, seriously seriously, the mod gets a LOT easier at higher APLs. I would presume that most APL 16 tables will piledrive the damn thing. I am sure that is true. My APL16 blitzed through without too much trouble. We finished with a couple of hours to spare. I think the mod was harder than the last few Origins Core Specials, but not as hard as City of Brass. I also liked the story of the mod a lot. Of course, most groups that play this at APL16 are going to be pre-formed tables of power gamers (that was the case with my table). Daren
JamesMaissen 04-06-08, 02:46 AM	When you judge the module, by all means run the module as it is written. You might want to figure out what, if anything, you are going to do with the errors in the module. Some are fairly obvious.. but a correction to them is weird and not readily available. It would be nice if mods would get errors fixed when reported.. though that's more of a long standing LG problem (imho) than specific to this one, James
rpgdcj 04-06-08, 11:23 AM	*PDAToL = Psuedonatural Dire Arcane Table of Legend. We have 3 15th level wizards, 2 15th level sorcerors, and a 13th level bard cohort. And we are going to break this module into tiny little bits =P I thought Maesto was now 14th level. How'd you get back to 15th so quickly?
Maesto 04-06-08, 12:15 PM	Stiiiilll working on that one ;-) His power increase at 15 isn't all that large anyway though, so if things go awry, I'm not all that worried.
RanielK 04-06-08, 01:30 PM	I guess what our submitter is neglecting to mention is that the "resting encounter" is in sight of the "spoiler" encounter....why wouldn't "spoiler" take off if they can see the party resting off in the distance.....(other situational modifiers unknown) Just a thought and a rationalization for why >this< idiot said the module was over if you rested after that particular encounter. Lynn who ran it the same way 4 times at DDXP...regardless only one time did a party "rest" to end the module...the other parties timed out...they spent too much time getting hammered by the module...and you have Mr Dave C. to thank for that...it was a rough module...and hobbled together parties will have a rougher go.... Did they get to see you break out your special mini for the mod? If not then they were twice the fools!
Cpttylorx 04-06-08, 03:04 PM	The module isnt as hard as some people seem to think. It was designed to be a challange but after a certain point in you couldnt rest. Its how it is. We even had fortified bedrolls for 2 hour rests to recover spells but it didnt help. We got told, we knew, we went on. We made it to the front gates before our cleric failed his fort save irl and had to leave and we fought through and managed to get inside the tower with only two out of five people up. But then we saw the spoiler and decided not to engage and end the slot. But yeah without a cleric its a pretty tough module hehe. Skip W. For more on the Hijinks of Furyondy come visit our upcoming Mayhem Con! 5-9-08 The day the Sin strikes back!
Ferol, Debtor of Torm 04-06-08, 06:19 PM	I suppose I'll have to settle for the knowledge that the letter of the mod as well as all of the judges in my area agree with me. I ran the mod yesterday and I let them rest. I did learn a few things from this whole situation (and DDXP as a whole). 1. Don't be afraid to walk away from a table if you have a bad feeling about the judge. Others I had spoken to before sitting down for the core special had warned me that my judge had a certain "reputation". I should have just walked away and waited to play this mod with someone else. 2. Ask for clarification/a senior judge at the event rather than waiting 2 months to read the mod yourself. If you feel a judge has made a mistake or is just plain wrong don't be afraid to call him/her out at the appropriate time. 3. People in other regions have very different philosophies on what LG is. I understood LG to be an environment where everyone had a level playing field on which to have fun others enjoy a "survival of the fittest" atmosphere more. Anyway, no hard feelings. I don't hate my DDXP judge, he was a cool guy. Thanks for all the replies.
_metz_ 04-06-08, 10:25 PM	3. People in other regions have very different philosophies on what LG is. I understood LG to be an environment where everyone had a level playing field on which to have fun others enjoy a "survival of the fittest" atmosphere more. Well thats just asking for all of us to shut you down. It is a difficult core special, it is meant to be, and is designed for experienced high level adventurers. Experienced high level adventurers accept that occasionally they cannot rest, and conserve their spells appropriately. It is NOT a level playing feild, wizards beat fighters at level 15 and fighters are more useful at lower levels. It is NOT a wargame. I don't know what you are talking about with 'survival' of teh fittest, in home games, and in good LG mods, you don't know that there will be only one encounter a day. If you design your PCs to not be able to deal with a core special than expect to fail core specials. Not every LG mod can be won through the same tactics, and moreover, you don't win every LG mod. Otherwise there would be no challenge if there wasn't a chance of failure. Thus it is a level playing feild - the NPCs are as intellignet and competent as the PCs, and if you can't handle that then don't accuse other regions of not playing LG well. Finally, if you walk away form Judges you are being immature, those people putin a lot of effort to run things for people, so when YOU travel to DDXP and run mods for people instead of playing maybe you can be so arrogant as to walk off and ruin musters like that based on arbitrary biased info. Most cons are run by semi competent folk who usually only recruit good GMs.
Ferol, Debtor of Torm 04-06-08, 11:03 PM	Well thats just asking for all of us to shut you down. It is a difficult core special, it is meant to be, and is designed for experienced high level adventurers. Experienced high level adventurers accept that occasionally they cannot rest, and conserve their spells appropriately. It is NOT a level playing feild, wizards beat fighters at level 15 and fighters are more useful at lower levels. It is NOT a wargame. I don't know what you are talking about with 'survival' of teh fittest, in home games, and in good LG mods, you don't know that there will be only one encounter a day. If you design your PCs to not be able to deal with a core special than expect to fail core specials. Not every LG mod can be won through the same tactics, and moreover, you don't win every LG mod. Otherwise there would be no challenge if there wasn't a chance of failure. Thus it is a level playing feild - the NPCs are as intellignet and competent as the PCs, and if you can't handle that then don't accuse other regions of not playing LG well. Obviously you misunderstood what I was referring to when I mentioned level playing field. In LG and RPGA in general the idea is that the same mod being run by two different judges in two completely different parts of the world will be run exactly the same way. Of course there will be minor variations table to table. Ask yourself this: Without any information to go off of within the mod what kind of time limit should the players have? Five minutes, an hour, or eight hours? What makes your opinion on what the time limit should be any more valid than the next judges and how fair is it to the players at your table when the players at the next table got twice the time limit? Finally, if you walk away form Judges you are being immature, those people putin a lot of effort to run things for people, so when YOU travel to DDXP and run mods for people instead of playing maybe you can be so arrogant as to walk off and ruin musters like that based on arbitrary biased info. Most cons are run by semi competent folk who usually only recruit good GMs. My opinion is biased, all opinions are. My opinion is based off of my personal experience with this judge. Based on this experience I will likely never play at his table again. Lastly, if you really must know, I did run mods. I didn't run any of the premier stuff but I did run a couple midnight madnesses over the course of DDXP.
garyjohnson 04-07-08, 12:05 AM	It is a difficult core special, it is meant to be, and is designed for experienced high level adventurers. First time I've seen APL 6 called high level ... :) Thus it is a level playing field - the NPCs are as intelligent and competent as the PCs, and if you can't handle that then don't accuse other regions of not playing LG well. NPCs are as intelligent and competent as the author directs and the DM is capable of making them - not all DMs are as competent as the players, not all DMs follow the author's instructions to make the NPCs less competent than the DM can make them. DMs are not created equal. In any case, Ferox was talking about play style and play preferences - not play content. For example, how significant is PC death? Is it a tragedy to be role-played by the PCs, or is it something to be recorded on the convention's Victory Board on the DMs' side of the ledger? Both have the same play content (a PC died), but the groups involved are playing out the consequences of that content in distinctively different ways. Cheers, Gary Johnson
_metz_ 04-07-08, 03:36 AM	Obviously you misunderstood what I was referring to when I mentioned level playing field. In LG and RPGA in general the idea is that the same mod being run by two different judges in two completely different parts of the world will be run exactly the same way. Of course there will be minor variations table to table. This is impossible, and it is naive to think otherwise, The module wirters cannot account for every regional change. For Example, Heart's Desire, a extremely well edited module that followed along a nice linear fashion that I rate as one of the better written modules to have come out recently, did not survive contact with several parties in my region due to regional fluff! To say more would be a spoiler and has been said elsewhere. There is intent behind the module, and as such the author relies on the strength of the GM to take these interpretations into account. Most high level modules including core specials have intent and backstory but rely on the DM to adapt to the party. A specific timeframe or set of responses NEVER survives contact with the players and GMs. Whilst new to module wirting myself, that is the most important lesson to learn, that you cannot set somethings in stone and leave others open, it needs to be a question of intent and whetehr or not the GM carries out that intent. For example, a tactic that says "Casts summon monster X" on an Int 26 wizard who spellcrafts several magic circles on the PCs may reconsider their plans if the GM is playing the overall intent (kill the PCs to the best of his ability) correctly, rather than using redundant tactics. Ask yourself this: Without any information to go off of within the mod what kind of time limit should the players have? Five minutes, an hour, or eight hours? What makes your opinion on what the time limit should be any more valid than the next judges and how fair is it to the players at your table when the players at the next table got twice the time limit? That always happens, but THAT is not the situation you described. You informed us that you rested in a precarious position when your task was to pursue **spoiler** to prevent **spoiler** from doing **spoiler**. Pausing to rest overnight when you were in the climactic final area where you are merely a short distance from catching **spoiler** is more than reasonable to assume that **spoiler** finishes their mission and leaves. If you take a moment to even READ the tactics of what you were chasing, their intent was to escape, even when confronted they attempt to. The module assumes that you catch up to them BECAUSE you have been moving as swiftly as possible in an attempt to prevent their escape. Resting overnight is NOT moving as swiftly as possible. I have the module open in front of me, and I cannot see where you are getting a conflicting intent. Lastly, if you really must know, I did run mods. I didn't run any of the premier stuff but I did run a couple midnight madnesses over the course of DDXP. Then you should know how frustrating it is for people to shift musters and walk away from Tables. Such issues should be taken up with the Senior GM as per the RPGA guidelines, throwing a temper tantrum will not strengthen your arguements. As I said, the GM probably did NOT run the module right, but I think what he did was in the intent of the mod, albeit he may have conveyed this in an innapropriate manner. Without further info on the situation I cannot agree/or disagree on what he did in that respect, but based on your primary complaint - that resting was comepletely viable at that point and did not violate the mission, I have to side with the udge in question, based on facts alone. First time I've seen APL 6 called high level ... :) I forgot that this core special did not have a high level option and a low level option, my bad, I assumed that since he was talking about what we saw at APL 16 that he was playing the high level option. A mistake in expression. The module explicitly states that it is designed to push the players to thier limit, be rough, and that player death is something that happens. THAT IS THE INTENT. It is no mere mission, it is dangerous, and that is supposed to be conveyed to the PCs taking part. It is the end of one arc and the beginning of the final arc It is no random 'save the little girl' module, it is supposed to be tough, and ideally run over ten hours (see the intro). Hence time is an issue, but REAL time, in the module urgency is most defintely imparted in the intent and encounter summaries. I consider that a module designed to be difficult and thus I placed it within that sphere of modules I refer to as "for experienced players" these are ususally higher level PCs that I am talking about. In any case, Ferox was talking about play style and play preferences - not play content. For example, how significant is PC death? Is it a tragedy to be role-played by the PCs, or is it something to be recorded on the convention's Victory Board on the DMs' side of the ledger? Both have the same play content (a PC died), but the groups involved are playing out the consequences of that content in distinctively different ways. Perhaps, but complaining about module wirters and your judge does not alleviate that issue, In Australia itself I like to think we have varying styles of gaming based on what area we game in, and I wholeheartedly agree that differing areas have differing views. Fore example, I have noticied significantly different gaming styles between Brisbane, Melbourne, Sydney and the giant Mall (sorry, Canberra) However that is irrelevant to the intent of the module and the OPs assertion that the judge violated it, which he clearly did not. Perhaps he did it in the wrong way, but the OP is not adressing that issue, rather claiming that this intent needed to be qualified in a set time schedule. As an author yourself (and a respectable one at that) Do you not agree that intent is not set by dilineated rules? If that where the case, intent would not be intent... It would be the rule iteself. This is not a question as to whether or not a certain playing style is superior, but rather a claim to bad judging, which has not be sufficiently supported, especially via a side claim that the intent in the module was unclear. That is why I have bitten the proverbial bait. It is often too easy to criticse bad module wiritng, and whilst a critical cynic myself, I don't like it when things are criticised without facts or evidence. Despite the fact that I often do it myself (ask Samwise as to how stubborn I can be, and how I make sweeping generalisations that get me in trouble). Its something I am working on, both internally and externally ;)
garyjohnson 04-07-08, 06:53 AM	The module explicitly states that it is designed to push the players to thier limit, be rough, and that player death is something that happens. THAT IS THE INTENT. It is no mere mission, it is dangerous, and that is supposed to be conveyed to the PCs taking part. That all sounds fine to me - and personally, I have no issue with the PCs failing to catch up with *spoiler* if they rest instead of pursuing *spoiler*. What I'd personally be disappointed about if I'd been a player in Ferox's situation is the DM's decision to end the scenario instead of trying to give the players a chance to have more fun and to play more of the scenario. For example, the DM could have asked the players, "Are you sure you want to rest? Keep in mind you're chasing *spoiler*, and they may get away if you delay too long." Perhaps, but complaining about module writers and your judge does not alleviate that issue, In Australia itself I like to think we have varying styles of gaming based on what area we game in, and I wholeheartedly agree that differing areas have differing views. Fore example, I have noticied significantly different gaming styles between Brisbane, Melbourne, Sydney and the giant Mall (sorry, Canberra) I agree. I haven't gamed much outside Brisbane, but the visitors to Brisbane conventions often have distinctive play styles. For example, IME Brisbane DMs don't have NPCs target PCs who are unconscious and negative hit points: I've only seen out-of-towners do that. I'd go even further, actually: I see notable differences in play styles between player groups in Brisbane. For example, the UQ gamesdays and the Fastbreak gamesdays draw on an overlapping but different mix of players, and gaming at the two venues feel different to me. However that is irrelevant to the intent of the module and the OPs assertion that the judge violated it, which he clearly did not. Perhaps he did it in the wrong way, but the OP is not adressing that issue, rather claiming that this intent needed to be qualified in a set time schedule. As an author yourself (and a respectable one at that) Cool - I'm respectable! :D Do you not agree that intent is not set by dilineated rules? If that where the case, intent would not be intent... It would be the rule iteself. Well, we're getting into murky areas now ... I'll do some thinking aloud and see where it leads me. In general, I think that you can't draw conclusions about the author's intent from the absence of information. I think you can draw conclusions about what the author specifies in their scenario - both from direct advice to the reader in sections like Preparation for Play, and from indirect information such as opponent tactics, development, and troubleshooting sections. I also think that, in general, you can't draw conclusions about the author's intent from your experience as a player of the scenario. In my experience, how a scenario plays is much more influenced by the DM's personal style, preferences, idiosyncracies, and so on. For example, there are scenarios that I've really liked reading and DMing, but didn't really enjoy playing. The former is down to the author; the latter is down to the DM. Not having read the scenario, I'm therefore loathe to be too prescriptive about what the author should or should not have done. However, as an author, I think that when doing a chase scenario it's important to decide whether the scenario has a discrete timeline, and if the PCs don't get to a location in time they miss the event; or has encounters triggered by the PC's arrival, so it doesn't matter how long the PCs take to get to a location. I've written scenarios both ways, and both ways have strengths and weaknesses. The former rewards players for good decision-making, task prioritisation, and so on; the latter avoids having unhappy players because, for example, everyone had speed 20 and thus couldn't reach the location on time. This is not a question as to whether or not a certain playing style is superior, but rather a claim to bad judging, which has not be sufficiently supported, especially via a side claim that the intent in the module was unclear. Well, Ferox has been reasonably insistent that the scenario doesn't explicitly say or indirectly imply that "the *spoiler* gets away if the PCs rest", and if that's the case I'd personally say the author's intent is unclear. However, until I read the scenario, I don't have enough information to meaningfully contribute to the "dispute about the details" between you and Ferox, so I'll bow out at this point. :) Cheers, Gary Johnson
Wavester 04-08-08, 10:07 PM	Oh, had I known the famous Lynn Register was the DM of the table in question, I'd have told the OP I have every confidence that his judge ran the module correctly and must have certainly made it a fun experience. Dave C. definitely wrote an excellent core special for us... one of the best ever. The challenge level was appropriate and it was nice to have a core special that was more of a module than a long string of combats. I'm sure Tim Sech had something to do with the encounter design though :) Glad you enjoyed it. I was very happy with how it came out and the reception it received at the show. Said Dave C person
Wavester 04-08-08, 10:12 PM	I am sure that is true. My APL16 blitzed through without too much trouble. We finished with a couple of hours to spare. I think the mod was harder than the last few Origins Core Specials, but not as hard as City of Brass. I also liked the story of the mod a lot. Of course, most groups that play this at APL16 are going to be pre-formed tables of power gamers (that was the case with my table). Daren and if I write for those pre-formed APL 14 (wussy 14-15's) or 16 (heroic 14-15's) tables I'll wipe all the others off the map. Some people enjoy making uber-powerful character builds and breaking things. This is what they find fun and it's not my place to decide what is or is not fun for a group playing my adventure. If being done in 5 hours if fun for them then rock on. Now if they want a challenge then sit down with me running it and permission to challenge you at a suitable level for your characters. Then I'll wring a bucket or two of sweat out of ya. Dave C
dkay807 04-08-08, 11:04 PM	and if I write for those pre-formed APL 14 (wussy 14-15's) or 16 (heroic 14-15's) tables I'll wipe all the others off the map. Some people enjoy making uber-powerful character builds and breaking things. This is what they find fun and it's not my place to decide what is or is not fun for a group playing my adventure. If being done in 5 hours if fun for them then rock on. Now if they want a challenge then sit down with me running it and permission to challenge you at a suitable level for your characters. Then I'll wring a bucket or two of sweat out of ya. Dave C Dave, this challenge is too little to late, man!!! There is nothing I like more in LG than a serious challenge and I'd have LOVED to take you up on that... however, you did give us a SERIOUS run for our money in the MVC interactive of 2004 when Mitrik was taken. I don't know if you remember, but we were the APL 16 table that refused to retreat until you threw 20 Cornugons and a Bone Ooze at us. I hope you'll be involved in writing for LFR and I hope to catch you as a judge sometime soon, especially for something you write. If you ever get my table (and I'll let you know if you do), you have my immediate permission to change what you'd like to give us a challenge and/or to make it fun!
katrick 04-13-08, 09:36 AM	It would appear a lot of people consider the BG getting away means the mod/slot is over. You are still on the trail, still have many places to loot, info to find and at the point the OP's talking about still have at least two fights.(we had fights that others didn't) For the judge to say you fail may be correct, but doesn't mean the slot is over, especially in this case as over half the Xp is reliant on a situation which does not have a time limit and hasn't happened yet. If you turned back sure, if you rested NO way jose! This Mod was nowhere near as difficult as we expected(APL8, though it worked us real hard) a young fighter 9, a ranged Cleric 8 frontline, backed by two warmages 7, a fighter/wizard 11 and a sixth cleric. When my cleric died keeping the fighter alive, the party decided to go on(with all my items) rather than return so i could use a cert etc... we spent a good hour discussing the "dilemma" and the dilemma dilemma to go on and easily finished in 8 hrs with a break. And they had little trouble, our problems were more noticeable in the first half. Yes i lost a huge chunk of Xp for not being alive at a certain point. At my third or fourth LG game, at Spring Revel; we overreacted to a faux par from the DM and several members died. One dead player whilst wandering the halls approached the Senior GM and had a chat, they then returned to the table and during a pause in play said politely in the Dm's ear their wish to discuss events after the slot, to which the DM had what can only be described as a hissy fit and ended the slot. We still had 2 hrs to loot, explore, continue to fight to the death or run, no option was given, this was truly my saddest moment in 25 years of playing DnD. I believe in enjoyment potential not goals, so we didn't break the mod, so we are outcast from our society(certed), we all had fun thats what really matters and any supposed GM that finishes the game early, thereby limiting the enjoyment of players is a Schmuck!!(there are 7 people playing the game suck it up and share the fun) katrick P.S. Dave C runs writes and plays a great game, in Oz anyways
Ferol, Debtor of Torm 04-13-08, 05:50 PM	When I asked the DM who ran the mod for my table if we could finish the second to last encounter, since the final encounter leaves after his arbitrary amount of time, he said no. As I said before, I will chock this one up to experience and know that next time something like this happens to go straight to the top of the chain of command.
Timlagor 04-14-08, 10:21 AM	When my cleric died keeping the fighter alive, the party decided to go on(with all my items) rather than return so i could use a cert etc... Not 100% certain it's still there but the LGCS used to explicitly disallow this. I would let people keep using items you handed out before you died but they can't take stuff off your body unless it's a plot item. [text in LGCS said something like "the death of a comrade is a cause for lamentation not a yard sale"] ..not that I agree that people shouldn't be able to borrow stuff (with permission) after you die but that's what the LGCS says. EDIT: LGCS7.5 pg13 under Death ('yard sale' text is gone though)
TetsujinOni 04-17-08, 02:41 PM	Not 100% certain it's still there but the LGCS used to explicitly disallow this. I would let people keep using items you handed out before you died but they can't take stuff off your body unless it's a plot item. [text in LGCS said something like "the death of a comrade is a cause for lamentation not a yard sale"] ..not that I agree that people shouldn't be able to borrow stuff (with permission) after you die but that's what the LGCS says. And this is a piece of prescriptive roleplay that, frankly, makes no sense, and creates stupid situations, to wit:in the strange circumstance that a cleric had scribed a scroll of Raise Dead, if they hadn't handed it to another player, a strict reading of the LGCS would not allow the party to use it to raise you. A truly strict reading of the LGCS would not allow the party to continue to use items you had passed out at all. Ah well, magic mart of 3.5 ends in four months anyway.
stonebasher 04-17-08, 05:08 PM	sorry, have to post this. I didn't get the disfavor!!! Yay me!!! :cheer: Wes
brettdm 04-18-08, 01:02 AM	It is perfectly reasonable and appropriate for a DM to not offer the last two encounters if the party rests after part 1 is over; however, he should have let the party trudge through to the end to discover they were too late.
stonebasher 04-18-08, 09:35 AM	My DM has found me! I must flee!!! :eek: Wes
Maesto 04-20-08, 02:00 PM	Ok, the PDAToL has played and survived. Things were... interesting, shall I say? I was impressed by the amount of plot in a core special, and the party had large scale arguments at least twice ;) (Oh the angst; will the PDAToL ever see eye to eye again?) Bravo, Dave Christ, and bravo John du Bois - that was a marathon effort!
JohnduBois 04-20-08, 02:44 PM	Ok, the PDAToL has played and survived. Next time, Gadget... Next time...
nony2klerch 04-20-08, 03:31 PM	Bad dice rolls by the main antagonist always helps...:D
Lomiat 04-20-08, 06:13 PM	As a belated answer to the original poster's original question (having now just played the adventure), I think that table's DM was right to say the party failed the adventure. Whether or not the DM handled the politics of the moment with that particular group of players as well as he could have isn't for me to say. And while it may be fair for the OP to run the adventure as he did if the mod doesn't explicitly state "if X, then Y," I think he did his table a disservice. If the PCs are foreordained to cut a wide swath of success through every adventure with no potential for failure -- or even lesser degrees of success -- it becomes rather difficult to sustain the illusion that the PCs are actually doing anything "heroic." They wouldn't be doing anything heroic if they knew that no matter what decisions they made, the world was going to warp to accomodate them, would they? Especially as PCs reach higher levels, they have a huge advantage over most encounters -- to the point where most encounters, even those with ELs well above the APL, fail to challenge them very often. However, if you string together a good number of them and force the PCs to make some tough decisions about resource conservation, the difficulty of each encounter measures partly by what it leaves a party for the next encounter. The OP significantly altered what most people on this thread have suggested was the intended sequence of events and, in doing so, significantly watered-down the adventure for his table. (And, really, if you come to a thread with a question and decide you don't like the answer you were given and are going to discount everyone's opinions because you don't know these people personally, why do you post the question on the thread in the first place?) If there are judges reading this and trying to decide how to run this adventure for their tables, I strongly recommend that you go with the thread consensus. Yes, it makes things significantly more difficult. Yes, it leaves the PCs with a real potential for failure. Yes, it better suits the PCs designed to play COR specials. Yes, it seems to be the way the adventure was intended to run... ...And, yes, that is part of the reason the adventure will be awesome and memorable for your table -- rather than a "X-many encounters per day, wash and refresh, go smash more encounters" formulaic module.
Lomiat 04-20-08, 06:14 PM	Ok, the PDAToL has played and survived. Things were... interesting, shall I say? I was impressed by the amount of plot in a core special, and the party had large scale arguments at least twice ;) (Oh the angst; will the PDAToL ever see eye to eye again?) Not likely. ;)
Wavester 04-20-08, 10:47 PM	Ok, the PDAToL has played and survived. Things were... interesting, shall I say? I was impressed by the amount of plot in a core special, and the party had large scale arguments at least twice ;) (Oh the angst; will the PDAToL ever see eye to eye again?) Bravo, Dave Christ, and bravo John du Bois - that was a marathon effort! You are most welcome. If you had arguements then mission accomplished.
katrick 04-21-08, 08:58 AM	I believe it is well fair to say you have (failed) not succeeded in the mission that was provided, written into the mod with the heavy assumption of a time limit.(or that you didn't get the urgency concept) not necessarily DM's fault. I also believe that char's could pay for such failure. It is a standard of Cor mods for 4hrs(8) tough bikkies. Cor mods are often run by the senior GM/other organisers who haven't eaten slept etc... for days. The OP's post infererred a quick exit before real time game limit, which, excluding personal circumstances, would appear unreasonable, IMO, and it would appear that at least the OP was unaware of any mitigating circumstances,(if not the whole table) thereby feeling putout. (completely reasonable). There were reasonable suggestions,within the frame of the mod, to say, choose which way. Neither of which changes before or after failure. Point A still exists and Point Z still exists, though B-Y are encountered in a different context, does not mean they cannot be traversed. I try, when i Dm(and really good DM's can) tell the story, as it happens, leaving the failure aspect until the AR part.after 8hrs/4 Yeah we screwed the pooch, but don't kill our fun. Look at he OP, did they ever mention lack of XP, did they mention Access, no they got gypped on FUN, nothing else. And at the end of that 8hr slog if you take away their fun, well who's turning up for the next session?? katrick fine purveyor for the academy of bums on seats!
Nutation 04-21-08, 12:52 PM	Played it this weekend and hence read the thread. I was hearing ugly rumors about this one beforehand, but I now think the danger in the module was fair. It seemed typical of those core specials in which the writer doesn't turn the rules set into a pretzel. My druid as the main healer managed to keep everyone alive. He's built for it, though a cleric would have likely had an easier time. We had a partial success at the end. A table with a better character mix should have done better, but the uncertainty that is table formation is one of the features of LG. The plot hook was weak for us, but that's also a function of character mix. On the original point: The original judge's decision seems reasonable from what I saw. I would have issued a warning, but then, I have found that major plot points sometimes need extra emphasis. Such is LG
nony2klerch 04-21-08, 01:05 PM	How many times does the judge get to say.... Are you sure you want to do that? Then ask how many times should the judge get to say that at apl 12+ when they should know better? Actually I guess the question I'm asking....indirectly... should higher apl tables be considered "heavyweights" and not given as much leeway? I mean they've been playing these characters for at least (or should have) 2 years...or has this been discussed before??
Redfist 04-21-08, 01:13 PM	My party played it this weekend also and loved it. (Lomiat and Maesto above included). I would agree with the same sentiments everyone else had about urgency and failure for resting. It was fairly obvious to us that we had to keep pushing on or fail. I can see how an inept DM could fail to convey the sense of urgency, but it would take effort I think to do so. We ran at APL16 without a cleric. If not for some well planned war weaver cheese and a healthy supply of healing belts, we would have likely lost a PC or 2 but as it is, we survived just fine and beat every encounter. (I tried my best not to spoil... I wanted to say SO MUCH MORE. hehe)
Argonnite 04-21-08, 04:58 PM	MASSIVE SPOILERS . . . . . If the party takes 3 days instead of 2 days of rest, as written in the mod, before re-meeting up with Kendyra, does the mod end? If the party violates the rules laid out by Kendyra and gets set back 6 hours, does the mod end? Edit: In other words, when does the chase proper begin?
Ferol, Debtor of Torm 04-21-08, 06:15 PM	MASSIVE SPOILERS . . . . . If the party takes 3 days instead of 2 days of rest, as written in the mod, before re-meeting up with Kendyra, does the mod end? If the party violates the rules laid out by Kendyra and gets set back 6 hours, does the mod end? Edit: In other words, when does the chase proper begin? I asked a similar question earlier in the thread. No one was able to answer the question. I'm glad many of you agree that it is within the spirit of the mod to put a time limit on the players, but the author never lays such a time limit out or even suggests that. Many people have posted in this thread about their success or failure but no one has been able to point out anything written in the mod suggesting that there is a hard time limit or that PCs who rest automatically fail the mod. When I ran it I ran the mod in such a way that the PCs arrived just in time regardless of how long it took them to get there. I may have been carebearing it up, but as far as I can tell that is exactly how the mod is written. I'm sorry if that isn't heroic enough for you but that is the letter of the mod. As far as I'm concerned anything else would have been cheating.
Argonnite 04-21-08, 07:12 PM	I asked those questions because I ran the mod yesterday and didn't have answers to those questions in case the party ventured into those circumstances. Furthermore, I was a player at your DDXP table where L.R. shut the books on us unceremoniously.
nony2klerch 04-21-08, 07:25 PM	does that mean you've retracted: At one point the mod writer even encourages groups that are having trouble to retreat, rest up, and return at full strength. Or did you find the reference because you never did send it to me. I can't find it. Look, you've never come out and said it was me. BUt that was the way _I_ ran it. SO, if it ruined your experience, sorry about that I ran it how I saw it. The bad guys ain't gonna stay around when they can see an enemy camp two hours away but visible by BBEG. Yeah I made a mistake about the *paperwork*...but I think it's nowhere near the magnitude of what you guys did. I dont know if you remember, but I left the table while you guys were contemplating whether or not to rest. I went up and asked what would be an appropriate action.. "would the bad guys bug out?" the answer was Sure. Module over. My "Reputation" comes from playing the bad guy like bad guys. If they are automatons I play them like they have their orders and strictly from those orders...once those are complete I go back to my predesignated area... and others can back me up on this when I slammed doors in their face... if they have a 26int/26wis I try to take my time and figure out the best tactics that the smart/wise guy would have...makes it more "realistic" in this case they'd leave..no reason to expose themselves to needless combat when they'd got what they'd come for.... If you can't handle a judge that attempts to play bad guys like bad guys and rolls his dice out in front of everyone to show that all of his dice rolls are legitimate..announces how much he's power attacking when he does and actually tries to entertain his players with miniatures that he takes the time to make (when I have time) and other props...then <shrug> I guess I won't be your judge. And as Forrest Gump says..(paraphrase) And that's all I have to say about that. Lynn Register
Argonnite 04-21-08, 07:29 PM	The "see the enemy camp two hours away" was addressed by the mod differently as I read it.
katrick 04-22-08, 01:35 AM	Whoops i thought it was after that point, it makes a lot more sense now and is utterly reasonable. If it was after the next bit then you're kinda stuck there, regardless of the mission. katrick
Ferol, Debtor of Torm 04-22-08, 02:04 AM	*SPOILERS* I really didn't want to discuss the specifics about how you ran the mod, as that isn't really relevant to my question, but since you brought it up. Under development (page 20 Part 2, encounter 4). a) We didn't do any flying around (which of course if why we had so much trouble with this encounter). b) Spells and buffing doesn't seem to include "leaving". Even if they did leave they would have to leave the same way the PCs do. c) Concealment =/= 50% miss chance (this one is unrelated, but read the mod again and you'll know what I'm complaining about). The part I mentioned about retreat and returning at full strength is on page 20 under development for Part 2, encounter 3. The mod author explicitly states that retreating is an option. Nowhere in this statement does it mention anything about the wasted hours being a problem aside from the fact that the giants will have time to heal.
nony2klerch 04-22-08, 02:13 AM	That's why I mentioned I sent you a private post...check your private messages in the upper right hand corner....now you can delete the really spoileriffic stuff. and resend..
Redfist 04-22-08, 02:39 AM	There are spoilers and then there are ***SPOILERS***. You *know* people are reading even if they haven't played the mod. You really shouldn't be as BLATANT as you're being. Please remove the oh-so-explicit spoilers... Ugg.
solbergb 04-23-08, 01:47 PM	My party played it this weekend also and loved it. (Lomiat and Maesto above included). We ran at APL16 without a cleric. If not for some well planned war weaver cheese and a healthy supply of healing belts, we would have likely lost a PC or 2 but as it is, we survived just fine and beat every encounter. (I tried my best not to spoil... I wanted to say SO MUCH MORE. hehe) Actually I think that the fact that we used counterspell instead of delay death was key to victory. It certainly is why Burke didn't die in spite of some very clever bad guy tactics. We had all those arcanists, we made ruthless use of action-advantage. We even had one guy who kept rolling low inits, so in the final battle he had most of his big guns left, and it really made things easier for us in wrapping it up. Have a Maze left to cast at the final battle of a 2 round core special is a darn nice thing! With respect to the topic of the thread - we did have a discussion with the GM (and the NPC) about how it was faster to rest and cast phantom steeds than to trudge toward the destination immediately without rest. There was a period where we couldn't use the steeds to gain speed, but the time we wanted to rest was not one of those times. *IF* the party had similar means of speeding transport (eg, wind walk) there is a rest opportunity if the GM is flexible enough to allow it. (this is without reading the mod, just based on how it was run for us). If they don't though, yeah, they can fail. From the above description though, the point the GM closed the books was later, in the period where you really couldn't stop pursuit at least from a plot standpoint.
AugdenKhos 04-23-08, 05:15 PM	Next time, Gadget... Next time... Does that thing seriously exist? And I thought Eberron was bad...
Redfist 04-25-08, 02:28 AM	Have a Maze left to cast at the final battle of a 2 round core special is a darn nice thing! I did enjoy casting that. :D
nony2klerch 04-26-08, 11:27 PM	That spell was really annoying to the leveled Pit Fiend during a Veluna interactive...kept him busy for 3 rounds.... *sigh*