Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Boraxe 02-20-07, 04:37 PM	My gaming group is currently running two parallel games set 30 years apart in the same game world. We did this so that one DM can run old classic D&D modules in the past while I run the "Return to" modules in the "present." The problem is that the players, as they are wont to do, have buggered it up. This is all the worse cos I am one of the players. We are currently in Keep on the Borderlands and have claimed a dungeon complex near the keep for our own base. That is not a problem in an of itself, rather it is our plan to turn this into a grand trading outpost and inn. There is no real reason this can't work, but it will drastically change the dynamic of the "Return to KotB" module. We have a little while before I get back to DMing so it is not urgent, but I need to figure out what to do about this. I don't want to say "I burned down" or "it failed" or anything like that cos that will essentially create a "nothing we do matters" atmosphere when we return to this game. To transition between the two games/timelines I used the mechanism of a Bard recounting a tale. The "modern" PCs are in the Keep's inn listenting to the old Bard recount the tale of a previous band of adventurers in the region. With that in mind, I am thinking of simply ignoring the outpost in the current erra, essentially making it part of the Bard's dramatic license. This allows the two games to function within the same world but act as essentially self-contined - almost like a kind of alternate universe - at least in regards to major changes like this. The third option is, of course, to have the outpost up and flourishing but I don't really want to do that cos, as I said, it dramtically changes the dynamic and is potentially problematic in regards to PC actions and interactions. I could go with it, of course, but I'd prefer to find another option that allows me to circumvent it but not kybosh any actions or ambitions in the older era game. Which option would you go for and why? Also, can you think of any other options I may have missed? Thanks.
johnkretzer 02-20-07, 05:07 PM	My gaming group is currently running two parallel games set 30 years apart in the same game world. We did this so that one DM can run old classic D&D modules in the past while I run the "Return to" modules in the "present." The problem is that the players, as they are wont to do, have buggered it up. This is all the worse cos I am one of the players. We are currently in Keep on the Borderlands and have claimed a dungeon complex near the keep for our own base. That is not a problem in an of itself, rather it is our plan to turn this into a grand trading outpost and inn. There is no real reason this can't work, but it will drastically change the dynamic of the "Return to KotB" module. We have a little while before I get back to DMing so it is not urgent, but I need to figure out what to do about this. I don't want to say "I burned down" or "it failed" or anything like that cos that will essentially create a "nothing we do matters" atmosphere when we return to this game. To transition between the two games/timelines I used the mechanism of a Bard recounting a tale. The "modern" PCs are in the Keep's inn listenting to the old Bard recount the tale of a previous band of adventurers in the region. With that in mind, I am thinking of simply ignoring the outpost in the current erra, essentially making it part of the Bard's dramatic license. This allows the two games to function within the same world but act as essentially self-contined - almost like a kind of alternate universe - at least in regards to major changes like this. The third option is, of course, to have the outpost up and flourishing but I don't really want to do that cos, as I said, it dramtically changes the dynamic and is potentially problematic in regards to PC actions and interactions. I could go with it, of course, but I'd prefer to find another option that allows me to circumvent it but not kybosh any actions or ambitions in the older era game. Which option would you go for and why? Also, can you think of any other options I may have missed? . I would go with the third action...because the point in running game like that is to have thing like this happen...Though It will drive you nuts running them at the same time. It would probably be better to run the game in the past first then run the 30 year later game. While taking really good notes.
Jaaz 02-20-07, 05:08 PM	Anything worthy of being an outpost for peace-loving characters could just as easily be construde as worthy of a stronghold for creatures or characters hell-bent on gathering power. It strikes me that a level-draining ethereal creature (or hell, maybe just a tough group of phase-spiders) might be a decent way to threaten the livlihood of a permenant outpost in a previous dungeon crawl. (Since more than just the characters who cleaned it out will be needed - servants, merchants, etc.) A few level-draining deaths later and the place begins to be rumored cursed. While it is quite a blow to future ambitions, it presents the opportunity to have a really mean iron-fisted negative undead boss-monster to be taken out at the end of what could be a very satisfying struggle to end the curse (and finally make the outpost viable in the RtKotB campaign). Look over the Return to KotB and see if there aren't a few substitutions that can be made to accomadate something like this. I DM'd a large group of mostly optimizers running in Eberron. I was following the published adventure series for a while, and quickly learned that I had to make adjustments for the game to move as it should. So auxillery plots got woven in, enemy orginizations spent more resources against this group of tycoons, and a few NPCs really WERE vampires. Modules are good up to the point the PCs intervene, as you witnessed. After that, they should be slightly modified to fit the campaign, and where it's going. Given your format, I'd have no problems modifying the RtKotB module to reflect events that the PCs created in the previous module.
DrakePD 02-20-07, 05:19 PM	Maybe they are in the past but on a diffrent Time Line? Remember Back to the Future? Or the TV show Sliders? They are in a diffrent Dimension? All kinds of stuff could be worked in with this thought. Perhaps the time line got flubbed up and the PC's will have to travel back to the past or something.....(Evil Grin)..;)
demonic_dante 02-20-07, 08:27 PM	I am not familiar with the adventures but if you cannot remove something from RtKotb and replace it with this new place then you can use it as a plot hook for the other DM. Make the place abandoned, cursed, or occupied by evil then give a reason. The reason would be the hook to your next adventure in the past. The ramblings of Demonic_Dante
Novabomb 02-20-07, 08:46 PM	Your going to have to split the timeline or drop one of the campaigns. Personally i would recommend putting off the "return to" campaign until the current one is complete.
revnk 02-21-07, 12:57 AM	I don't want to say "I burned down" or "it failed" or anything like that cos that will essentially create a "nothing we do matters" atmosphere when we return to this game. It seems to me that you might use this as a way to produce some tension or drama. I agree that "It burned down" is lame. But something like this isn't: The trade outpost and fort prospered for many years, and a great town grew over a score of years. Then, one day, it is said a trader arrived in the town to find it almost completely empty--although the houses and buildings were intact, he saw no man, woman or child in the streets or public places. At first he thought there must be some illness, and wondered why the clerics had not called upon their gods. The trader became increasingly unnerved as he realized he had not heard a bird nor beast since entering the town. He passed by an open door and looked in to see breakfast still on a table, left untouched; no flies buzzed around the plate of food, he thought he saw a wisp of steam as if the plate of meal was still warm. I say it was almost empty, because there was one other person in the whole town--at least the trader thought it was a person at first, although later he wasn't certain. In the town square was a ragged-looking figure in a cloak with a hood pulled over so his face could not be seen. The man's clothing was torn and dirty, and the trader could smell an unpleasant odor wafting from the man when the breeze changed direction, and was frightened to notice how thin and pale the man's fingers were where they clutched the cloak close to his throat. "What happened here?" the trader whispered. The man answered in a voice that was like a rusted gate creaking in a storm, "There was heroism here, and betrayal here; one lived who shouldn't have, and another died too soon. Of all who are gone, only one shall return, at the unlikely hour." The strange figure began to cackle and the merchant fell to his knees and tried to pray to his god, but found himself whispering one word, a name, over and over until the laughter stopped--when he rose, the mysterious figure was gone. Eventually the Old Town was torn down, and the New Town built here, on the same site, over the course of the past ten years; few know what happened here, but some have claimed to see a mysterious cloaked figure in the shadows now and again, and to have felt an eerie chill down their backs.... Sorry if I got carried away. (That was fun!) But you get the idea (I hope). It doesn't have to be anything along those lines--perhaps there are statues of the old PCs in the village green and a detailed plaque explaining how they lived happily ever after or died heroically or whatever. Hope that helps. Good luck!
Boraxe 02-21-07, 09:38 AM	Thanks for the suggestions, guys. As much as I like the plot device of "somethign happened to the town" I don't think I'll go that route. The pre-canned modules are just a diversion from the core storyline meta-plot we're playing. I think I'll go with the "dramatic license" parallel timeline idea. That allows me to include some influences and effects from the earlier timeline but mitigate or ignore others that don't fit as well. Cheers. :)
Germytech 02-21-07, 02:18 PM	I'd like to repeat something akin to revnk's suggestion. "It burned down," is indeed lame. But perhaps have the outpost successful for 29 years, and burned down only recently. In fact, I'm sure there might be some way to weave the reasons for its destruction into the plot for your "Return to..." adventures. Discovering who burned it down can be a fulfilling subplot.
Myree 02-22-07, 02:38 AM	Revnk -- Great writing! I like the idea of merging that with what Germytech suggested -- use the lone survivor as a hook to the new adventure -- especially if you can do a little chronomancy and/or send one of the current ones back or the past ones forward to meet the "prophesy" as it were.
Boraxe 02-22-07, 03:50 PM	Your going to have to split the timeline or drop one of the campaigns. Personally i would recommend putting off the "return to" campaign until the current one is complete. That is the plan. We will finish the KotB than bounce back to the "present" where the other party are sitting in the Keep itself, recently arrived, listening to a Bard tell them the tale and ready to take on Return to KotB. Once we're back in the "present" I'll run them through Return… and then carry on with the larger meta-plot (the modules are just short-term diversions). Next time I need a break from DMing I'll set them up for another Return… module, dust off the old Bard*, and hand off to the other DM to pick up the "past" game where we left off. I think I'll feel out the other players about the outpost options. If it will totally kybosh the enthusiam in the "past" game I'll go with the "dramatic license" parallel timeline idea, otherwise I'll go with a recent disaster or attack that ties it in to the "Return…" game. Even though the PCs in the two timelines have no connection, that players will have a perosnal motivation to see justice served. You know, I am liking this idea more and more. Thanks, guys. *The "Old Bard" mechanic worked quite well, actually. The players really got a kick out of it. It has the added benefit of giving the PCs a valid reason to be aware of a lot of stuff that the players will know from playing the original module so we don't have to worry about constantly fighting against player knowledge.