Greetings...
I'm mildly surprised that nobody has posted any feedback or thoughts on CORE1-11 "Drawing a Blank" yet (at least, as far as I can tell). The adventure's been available for a while, and it's one of the few Paragon-tier adventures currently available. I will state right up front that I am highly biased in favor of this adventure, because I was the reviewer and because I think the author did a great job with the atmosphere and tone, but I'm curious to know what others think. Has anybody played this one?
I hope it hasn't missed out on catching people's attention just because it didn't appear as the highest-numbered adventure available at the time it was released and people only look at the bottom of the list. 
(The reason the numbering got out of whack had nothing to do with any specific adventure, including this one, it was just an oversight on our part.)
The author rocks. The reviewer should be flogged.
Now I should probably go read it.
I sent you a private message.
I have played it and run it. The atmosphere is good, although it is hard to relay what is actually happening at times. I will say that many of the players I game with are less roleplaying more optimizers.
I really enjoyed it, from both a player and as a DM. I look forward to other mods in this vein.
More detail in the private reply.
I haven't played it yet, but I've heard the same feedback from two people:
Great atmosphere, combats are far too easy. I'll try to play it soon and post some feedback. Don't worry, I'll be brutally honest as usual.
I have played it. I'll be honest and say I found it a bit meh, I'm afraid. Spoilers below.
We played up with a party of all 11s, and facing a level 17 fight and a level 16 fight. We should have been made mincemeat of, but we prevailed. It was tough at points; the first fight we had a very nearly dead swordmage at the bottom of a pit facing down two enemies, but for an unlucky dice roll or two he'd have been facing one, or not fallen at all. The issue we had in both fights was a kind of inevitable one when playing up at low: it took such a long time. Six hours total, despite only two fights, with such a degree of grind. A lot of monsters, and a lot of HP.
We found the second combat scaling up for six to be pretty harsh, adding a second at-will dominator. It's very hard to get past the brutes to attack the artillery (I daresay that's the point), but when adding a sixth player you get a monster who can turn another party member against you (and with their attack bonus, they auto-hit fighters, rangers and the like).
The atmosphere was good, but it felt quite reminiscent of CORE1-7 to me, and the plot didn't feel particularly 'paragon', whatever that elusive quality is.
My final score would be 2 out of 5, but I daresay if we played low the reduction of grind may have improved matters.
There's no feedback because these boards are dead. The forums are painful and the wiki is crippled.
It's very sad. There used to be dozens of very active posters in the RPGA boards alone but now you are lucky to see a dozen posts a day.
I thought it was an interesting adventure. Both fights were unique, not too thrilled with the skill challenge in the 2nd fight, since most pc's faced with those adversaries are going to ignore the challenge in order to take out th emore immediate threat.
One complaint is that I felt like the hook was unique and intersting. Yet it was difficult for me to see how my character (a good aligned elf wizard) would, other than perhaps curiousity, follow the adventure hook.
Enjoyed the introduction with the spirits and the background of the Thing.
Combats were average. "Snap Out Of It" is in everyone's paragon stack, so the last encounter got nerfed a little. Enjoyed the skill challenge during combat, well thought-out - though increasing to rescue from every pilliar may have been better.
Overall, we enjoyed the mod. Nothing to complain about, but nothing "special" to get bonus points. Average score 3/5.
I'll be playing it this Saturday.
Overall a pretty good adventure. Played up with a party average level 12 or so, quite competent players. Specific comments:
Enjoyed very much the flavor of the adventure including the creative intro and hook, and where the trail led us.
1st combat was reasonably challenging. Our tactics may not have been the greatest.Our warlord/flamebrow commander got attacked by basically everything on the map and dropped in round 1 and down the pit. In the 2nd round my +14 athletics Paladin took a calculated risk, attempting a DC 20 athletics check to jump the pit without a running start. Success would have made the fight a fair bit easier for us, as the enemy artillery would have had a defender in their face. Failure left me at the bottom of the pit with our unconscious warlord. Climbing out was easy enough, but I tended to end up back in again (and again....) somehow. A fairly frustrating fight for a defender. Maybe next time I'll take a "That'll Do." When do we get Winged Boots?
2nd combat was also fairly tough. We ignored the skill challenge -- it simply was deemed not worth spending the required actions, compared to dropping the guy who could dominate us. We basically got lucky that all the innocents didn't die. Most folks had at least two "snap out of it" cards. A couple of folks still spent some time on Team Evil™. We won the fight but a party member died in the process.
It's late, but I wanted to briefly say that our group really liked it. The story, setting, and tone were all really, really good. I liked the way it played and the elements. I think both dark PCs (like my warlock) and good PCs had fun responding to the environment... like that door!
Combats were not very hard, but they were still very enjoyable for us. They had some interesting angles to them that kept things enjoyable. It was not a grind for us. We would have liked a harder end fight, but it was still a good time.
Overall, a 4 and we look forward to more from the author!
Four out of five. I ate it to run it at a local convention a month or two ago and I finally get to play it this week, and am looking forward to it.
Lets just say with the 3 strikers in the party critting on 18 19 20 nothing we fought lasted very long when we went after it, the dominator I believe died after his first round of actions, which no one was dazed at the time so no one ended up dominated. I managed to get in my first ever double free action crossbow shot's after a crit with a dagger, getting the free action hand crossbow shot and then critting that shot, allowing a second one =).
The only issue I had with the mod as well really was the lack of a useful milestone, But the mod is one of the few paragon mods that I'd feel comfortable at a con running without fear of going over time.
I liked how the adventure dipped into some of the weirder parts of the realms, especially the Plaguechanged thing. (Those minions of it amused me thoroughly).
The combats were good too. I prefer 2 challenging combats over more non-challenging fights. While I normally don't agree with the idea that PCs are somehow entitled to a certain number of action points, I do feel a milestone (and the AP with it) would significantly help a number of the tables that had trouble in the second fight. I do understand if this is seen as quibbling, though.
Furthermore, I liked that the author did their homework; the final scene was very reminiscent of the novels dealing with the Aboleths, so for those of us that read them, it was definitely appreciated.
I liked that the adventure just felt significantly different than the standard adventure. For those of us that play an excessive amount of LFR, different is very good.
Overall, I'd say it was a very good adventure, and I look forward for future adventures dealing with aboleths and other weird stuff.
That said, I thought it was a deeply disappointing and frustrating mod and is (along with Spec 1-3 paragon) one of the primary exhibits in my "paragon modules are no fun and I'm not sure why I keep giving them chances" experience.
Show
First, the intro and plot:
It is never a good sign when you get to the end of a mod and think, "what the heck was this all about? Apparently some people think that referencing aboleths or the far realms means that the story no longer needs to make sense." Now, I got that apparently some aboleths were getting kuo toa to kidnap people who were then sacrificed and turned into servitors. But what about the opening dream sequence? Other than messing with the players' minds, it didn't have anything to do with the plot that I could tell. And what about the blanks themselves? When we finished the mod, I didn't know anything more about what they were than I did at the start. (Maybe they are some kind of manifestation of the souls that were being transformed by the aboleth? But that's pure supposition without much of anything to support it). And they were the mystery that we initially set out to explore. So, our characters started out with a mysterious dream that was never explained but took half an hour of game time as we explored the pseudo-mystery, then grasped at the hook that the blanks presented only to be led into an ambush of kuo toa and then ran into some aboleth. We eventually killed them and still had no idea what the blanks were or what they were doing, but the module was over so we must have done something right. If memory serves me correctly, the plot of the Gen Con Delve was about as interesting--yeah, it didn't have one, but I can imagine that there was one based on the encounters there too.
In itself, the second encounter was actually pretty good. It was reasonably challenging to defeat without expending undue resources which is what I gather (from the module's structure) it was supposed to do. Unfortunately, while having one entertaining encounter does keep this from being the worst mod that you can play as a part of LFR, it doesn't make it a fun module.
The final encounter. All dazed and dominated, all the time. Who thought that would be fun? Guess what, it wasn't. Come to think of it, stuck in difficult terrain auras next to creatures with threatening reach who daze on OAs isn't much fun either. If you are a melee character, you can't move without getting dazed and losing the rest of your turn. You can't attack because you're not next to the monsters. You can't throw a javalin because they'll OA you and daze you anyway. It's a good thing the monsters dominate you, otherwise you'd never get to attack at all. (If I recall correctly, my cleric managed to use divine power, or fighter had a greatspear and managed one attack before spending the rest of the fight dazed or unconscious, and the paladin/warlord got to use stand the fallen when the monsters moved in to flank. On the other hand, our barbarian was not able to use a single power until the last round of combat). After several hours of frustration, we eventually beat the encounter because one rogue had a few encounter powers that let him shift multiple squares and actually attack the monsters and the other rogue was able to hide outside the room and sneak attack things with his crossbow until they eventually died. So it is obviously not an impossible fight, but it's not anything that remotely resembles fun either.
Oh, and apparently we were supposed to find actions to complete a skill challenge in the middle of that combat. Yeah, right. We made the mistake of spending a couple actions messing with the crystals to try and figure out what was going on (especially when there were no monsters on the board but we were in initiative). All it did was make things worse for us by adding minions and a trap to the fight. Maybe something would have made sense if we had completed the skill challenge, but playing "guess what skills are even applicable" is not a fun game even when there is no pressure; when aboleths are eating your brain, each guess costs you a standard action, and it's not clear what good it can possibly do for anyone, it's not even worth thinking about.
It is never a good sign when you get to the end of a mod and think, "what the heck was this all about? Apparently some people think that referencing aboleths or the far realms means that the story no longer needs to make sense." Now, I got that apparently some aboleths were getting kuo toa to kidnap people who were then sacrificed and turned into servitors. But what about the opening dream sequence? Other than messing with the players' minds, it didn't have anything to do with the plot that I could tell. And what about the blanks themselves? When we finished the mod, I didn't know anything more about what they were than I did at the start. (Maybe they are some kind of manifestation of the souls that were being transformed by the aboleth? But that's pure supposition without much of anything to support it). And they were the mystery that we initially set out to explore. So, our characters started out with a mysterious dream that was never explained but took half an hour of game time as we explored the pseudo-mystery, then grasped at the hook that the blanks presented only to be led into an ambush of kuo toa and then ran into some aboleth. We eventually killed them and still had no idea what the blanks were or what they were doing, but the module was over so we must have done something right. If memory serves me correctly, the plot of the Gen Con Delve was about as interesting--yeah, it didn't have one, but I can imagine that there was one based on the encounters there too.
In itself, the second encounter was actually pretty good. It was reasonably challenging to defeat without expending undue resources which is what I gather (from the module's structure) it was supposed to do. Unfortunately, while having one entertaining encounter does keep this from being the worst mod that you can play as a part of LFR, it doesn't make it a fun module.
The final encounter. All dazed and dominated, all the time. Who thought that would be fun? Guess what, it wasn't. Come to think of it, stuck in difficult terrain auras next to creatures with threatening reach who daze on OAs isn't much fun either. If you are a melee character, you can't move without getting dazed and losing the rest of your turn. You can't attack because you're not next to the monsters. You can't throw a javalin because they'll OA you and daze you anyway. It's a good thing the monsters dominate you, otherwise you'd never get to attack at all. (If I recall correctly, my cleric managed to use divine power, or fighter had a greatspear and managed one attack before spending the rest of the fight dazed or unconscious, and the paladin/warlord got to use stand the fallen when the monsters moved in to flank. On the other hand, our barbarian was not able to use a single power until the last round of combat). After several hours of frustration, we eventually beat the encounter because one rogue had a few encounter powers that let him shift multiple squares and actually attack the monsters and the other rogue was able to hide outside the room and sneak attack things with his crossbow until they eventually died. So it is obviously not an impossible fight, but it's not anything that remotely resembles fun either.
Oh, and apparently we were supposed to find actions to complete a skill challenge in the middle of that combat. Yeah, right. We made the mistake of spending a couple actions messing with the crystals to try and figure out what was going on (especially when there were no monsters on the board but we were in initiative). All it did was make things worse for us by adding minions and a trap to the fight. Maybe something would have made sense if we had completed the skill challenge, but playing "guess what skills are even applicable" is not a fun game even when there is no pressure; when aboleths are eating your brain, each guess costs you a standard action, and it's not clear what good it can possibly do for anyone, it's not even worth thinking about.
Show
Well, I read it and that part is -kinda- written into the mod. There is sort of a way to notice where they are, and a way to prevent them from appearing (see skill challenge) but there probably should have been a way to destroy the aboleth servitors before their initiative, not just a way to "save the townsfolk". The mod does state clearly "The aboleth servitors do not start out on the battle map" but with the SC you can try to stop the pillars from releasing new servitors. It is basically a monster generator a la many video games.
The -rest- of the creatures on the other hand -do- start on the map.
BTW, the skill challenge in no way is required but does mean that the minion spawner continues to work. and there is a limit to the number of creatures to be spawned so this isn't an infinite generator. Nor does the trap require that you begin the skill challenge. The trap seems to be there at all times.
... (specifically that none of the monsters were visible or able to be interacted with until they faded into existence on their initiatives) was not written into the mod.
Well, I read it and that part is -kinda- written into the mod. There is sort of a way to notice where they are, and a way to prevent them from appearing (see skill challenge) but there probably should have been a way to destroy the aboleth servitors before their initiative, not just a way to "save the townsfolk". The mod does state clearly "The aboleth servitors do not start out on the battle map" but with the SC you can try to stop the pillars from releasing new servitors. It is basically a monster generator a la many video games.
The -rest- of the creatures on the other hand -do- start on the map.
BTW, the skill challenge in no way is required but does mean that the minion spawner continues to work. and there is a limit to the number of creatures to be spawned so this isn't an infinite generator. Nor does the trap require that you begin the skill challenge. The trap seems to be there at all times.
If you experience was that bad, and you already know part of it was due to the DM, wouldn't it be better to at least read it? I know you mostly want to rant, but it does not cost that much time and at least you know what part was the DM and what part the adventure.
Really? So, in order to be qualified to tell other people about our experiences with a mod or provide feedback, we should have to create a fake event in the RPGA database and download the mod and read it? Do you apply that standard to people who want to praise the mod too? A good DM can often make a poorly written mod enjoyable. I note that you have not asked anyone who posted praising the mod whether they read it and found that it was actually good or whether they just had a good DM.
And, incidentally, before you dismiss everything I wrote as a rant, you might want to consider that there are only two other mods that I rate in this category of "I'd skip my game-night rather than play it again" (Barrow of the Ogre King and Spec 1-3 paragon, and I can see playing Spec 1-3 again as a party optimization exercise). True, I don't have much of anything positive to say about the mod, but I've had the same DM for other mods and I don't think that many of them are half as bad as this one. The miserable experience that this mod offered cannot be wholly blamed on the DM any more than my initial positive experience with Dancing Shadows can be wholly credited to the DM.
Really? So, in order to be qualified to tell other people about our experiences with a mod or provide feedback, we should have to create a fake event in the RPGA database and download the mod and read it?
Well reading the mod and seeing what's written there before complaining is the considerate, decent thing to do. (If you need the adventure, just ask someone to email to you; I'd be willing to as I'm sure numerous others would be.) Otherwise scheduling an event then canceling it seems to be what these people are suggesting.
You should realize that the mod authors and global admins are really busy, working very hard on their normal full time jobs, and numerous adventures. It's a giant pain for them if people are complaining at them about things not written in the adventure or things run incorrectly, because that's not in any way their fault, nor can they do anything about it. Mostly, that kind of behavior is only going to encourage these people to stop reading the forums, and I think most people would agree we don't want that.
Are people saying these things aren't valid complaints? Not really- merely that they're not valid complaints to lay at the feet of the authors/admins; if you really need to complain about it, go find that GM that did a terrible run of the adventure.
Really? So, in order to be qualified to tell other people about our experiences with a mod or provide feedback, we should have to create a fake event in the RPGA database and download the mod and read it?
Well reading the mod and seeing what's written there before complaining is the considerate, decent thing to do. (If you need the adventure, just ask someone to email to you; I'd be willing to as I'm sure numerous others would be.) Otherwise scheduling an event then canceling it seems to be what these people are suggesting.
You should realize that the mod authors and global admins are really busy, working very hard on their normal full time jobs, and numerous adventures. It's a giant pain for them if people are complaining at them about things not written in the adventure or things run incorrectly, because that's not in any way their fault, nor can they do anything about it. Mostly, that kind of behavior is only going to encourage these people to stop reading the forums, and I think most people would agree we don't want that.
Are people saying these things aren't valid complaints? Not really- merely that they're not valid complaints to lay at the feet of the authors/admins; if you really need to complain about it, go find that GM that did a terrible run of the adventure.
And there you go again--assuming that it is all the fault of the DM and the module cannot possibly be to blame.
It's not as though I don't know how much goes into writing a module. I wrote a fair amount of mods for LG and I've written a number of MYREs for LFR. I haven't tried writing regionals or cores for LFR specifically because I don't like the (IMO ridiculous) requirements and restrictions that WotC places on LFR writers. Yeah, authors are busy. Yeah, admins do a lot. And, yes, they have to put up with a lot of garbage. But that doesn't mean that they are entitled to the a priori assumption that they did a good job and that any bad experiences are a result of rogue DMs so no-one should criticize their work unless he downloads and reads the module first in order to get his criticism credentials. (Credentials, which, of course, are not required to praise the mod to the skies).
Like I said, I've written modules before. I've run them. I know that authors sometimes make poor decisions and sometimes write mods that make perfect sense when they run them or when run for players who actually enjoy WotC novels enough to read all of them but which fail entirely when taken outside those strict confines. Editors and admins have also been known to screw up modules that were perfectly fine before they got their mitts on them. It is precisely my experience as a writer and as a judge that convinces me that writers are not entitled to the kind of presumption of innocence that you are proposing. If I know that the judge in question is not a terrible judge but that the module in question was a terrible play experience, then it is reasonable to think that the module had a lot to do with the terrible play experience.
Likewise, if I play a mod that is a great experience, but my prior experience with the judge indicates him to be merely mediocre and his run does not betray unusually thorough preparation, it's reasonable to credit that to the mod. On the other hand, if I know the judge always manages to create a consistently excellent experience no matter what mod he's given, my excellent experience does not necessarily reflect on the mod. (Yet I'll notice that none of the posters praising the mod were asked whether their judges were good).
Perhaps more to the point, if you expect those who criticize the mod to evade the system in order to read the mod before posting but do not expect the same of those who praise it, the thread might as well be titled "Any Brownnosing for Mod XYZ." If that's really what you all want, perhaps you should ask the original poster to re-title the thread. I'm certainly not going to fake an event in order to prove to you that I can walk and chew gum at the same time.
That said, I thought it was a deeply disappointing and frustrating mod and is (along with Spec 1-3 paragon) one of the primary exhibits in my "paragon modules are no fun and I'm not sure why I keep giving them chances" experience.
I think this is the thing to note. Just stop playing paragon tier adventures. Don't play the game if you don't like it. If someone else has fun in an adventure and want's to let others know, be quiet and just leave them alone.
In speaking to other authors, we often feel like adventures get 2+ negative comments on the boards for every positive one, and not necessarily because that is deserved, but because it is what draws posts. I would probably venture the ratio is much worse, given what I witness (I DM and play often, and the ratio of good to bad experiences is more like 5+ good for 1 bad).
So, for me, in viewing posts, I often wish the negative ones were a bit more respectful. Ideally, they are honest but also respectful. There isn't a need to label something as not worth playing or almost the worst or anything of the sort. You can just say that too much control is really frustrating and that the combat prevented players from enjoying their capabilties.
Show
In this case, the mod played really well for us. The plot had as much mystery as any before but the answers were provided as we went. The mystery up front resulted in a lot of RP and a good setting. Once we got into the heart of it, it was like getting to be inside Aliens. Our party had some strong ranged, so it was not much of an issue to overcome terrain limitations. We also had some utilities that allowed for good movement. The concept of being surrounded was actually really fun, in that it felt like Aliens where they pop out of the walls and corridors that you think are safe. The pillars were cool and we took turns doing things with them out of RP necessity. Dominate was less of an issue when we granted saves to end the effect before it caused much harm. Our party has decent will, and I suspect we were missed a few times, though this was a while back.
Just stop playing paragon tier adventures.
I'm not a big fan of that. We want feedback. But, feedback is best when it is constructive. When a player or DM has a hugely negative experience, it often takes time for them to be able to think a bit more clearly and figure out what went well and what went poorly.
For example, one of my friends hated the second combat of CORE1-14 because his PC was nerfed in a few ways. The next day he wrote to say he liked it in retrospect, because it was the first real challenge he had. Now, I know he's my friend, so I think both things are true. In the moment, it was not fun for him. If he could have stepped back and seen the tactical challenge, he might have been able to have a good/better time - and that might happen next time he has such an experience. But, it is regardless for me a warning about how players act to being controlled. It doesn't mean I give up on control, but it is something that can happen. 3rd edition just killed you or completely removed you (Maze). 4th takes you out for a round or two, but that feels huge just because PCs can do so much in each round and the fun is in deploying these amazing super powers.
No one wants to stop playing. When you get there, things have gone wrong. EB has really good 4E smarts. He should be enjoying his LFR play. I'm sorry to hear he has felt nerfed by paragon play. I would be curious what EB thinks if he runs this adventure for others.
That said, I thought it was a deeply disappointing and frustrating mod and is (along with Spec 1-3 paragon) one of the primary exhibits in my "paragon modules are no fun and I'm not sure why I keep giving them chances" experience.
I think this is the thing to note. Just stop playing paragon tier adventures. Don't play the game if you don't like it. If someone else has fun in an adventure and want's to let others know, be quiet and just leave them alone.
The sad thing is that I'm actually really close to doing this. Paragon looks like it should be lots of fun and I still want to play paragon mods because choosing a paragon path and getting access to all of the cool and interesting paragon feats and abilities looks like fun. It is certainly the greatest opportunity that you have to create a mechanically distinct and interesting character. (The mechanical aspect is obvious, but I don't think it quite stops there. While you don't need any mechanics to create a distinct and interesting role-playing aspect to your character, I would argue that mechanical abilities also provide a lot of help in that regard because if you are going for subtle characterization rather than cartoonish schtick, it helps to have mechanics that lets you define your character by what you do rather than simply how you talk. If you can do something that other people can't do, that gives you a tool to distinguish yourself from them more clearly).
On the other hand, the only paragon mods that I've actually enjoyed was Waterdeep 1-6 (which was reasonably challenging despite playing low tier with a mostly level 12 pre-errata party) and half of them (Core 1-11 and Spec 1-3 paragon) being miserable experiences that I'd rather not repeat. So, like I said, I'm kinda on the fence about playing paragon mods at all now. And given that the prevailing opinion on these boards (which is my only contact with the administrators and writers of the campaign who actually are responsible for creating paragon mods) appears to be that paragon tier mods like Spec 1-3 and Core 1-11 are ridiculously easy, those odds seem likely to get worse rather than better.
But it seems like a waste to play lots of heroic tier characters and then just abandon them when the system is finally starting to get mechanically interesting. There's only so much you can do with heroic tier characters to make them mechanically distinct without deliberately gimping them. If I were going to quit playing paragon, it seems like I'd do well to consider quitting entirely and devoting my time to Pathfinder Society or something. I don't really want to do that so I cling to the faint and perhaps misguided hope that the next mod will actually be fun.
WRT the DM's role, I'm pretty sure that the DM is partially responsible for the situation. But I'm smart enough to walk and chew gum at the same time and, like I said, I know the DM in question--it wasn't all his fault by a long shot. (Though it's probably fair to say that the weaknesses of the mod dovetailed with his weaknesses as a DM. He'll give us the story if it's there, but if it isn't there, he won't extrapolate a story and DME the mod into making sense). Keeping the aboleths untouchable until their initiative came up in the final battle probably made a pretty big difference in the performance of our 2 rogue party, but even if the battle had been easier, it wouldn't have been much more fun. (Thinking about it now, I remember that the primary reason that I was able to make a few attacks with my cleric was my snap out of it cards). And he read us the box text and gave us our skill checks. At the end of the mod, we still didn't know what had been going on. Both the design of the final encounter and the lack of a well communicated and coherent story seem to be failures of the mod.
As for describing the mod as not worth playing and almost the worst, I could probably have left them out, but the post would have been a less honest reaction for having done so. I really would rather skip a session than play this again and Barrow of the Ogre King really is the only mod I would say is worse (and I did actually advise the guy who organizes one of our local game days that he and everyone else would probably have more fun if he (preferably) scheduled something else or canceled the game day rather than run barrow of the ogre king--he found someone else to run and ran it anyway; I don't think it worked out very well). I tried to be detailed in what went wrong because that's the only way that negative feedback will be useful. (And even non-constructive criticism can be useful).
This is already a bit of a scattered post, but I will add that there is another, very important difference between 3rd edition control and and 4th edition control. First, 3rd edition status control generally failed. The most likely result was usually that you succeeded on your save and nothing happened. Secondly, the more powerful versions were usually very limited. You might be dominated once, but it was unusual for the bad guy to be tossing out the same status condition every round. And finally, there was usually something that your party could do about it--possibly also pre-empting future attempts--whether it was a potion of lesser restoration, a dispel magic, or freeom of movement spell. By contrast, in 4th edition, it is not uncommon for control effects to be nearly automatic (monsters hitting NADs on a 2-7 is the norm in LFR, not the exception), repeatable every round, and only a few characters can do anything about it. (End of next turn conditions can only be cured with virtue's touch and a few items; save ends conditions can be cured by some (though not all) leaders but those abilities are all encounter powers or hit dependent, often both). So it's not that 3rd edition control was not present but 4th edition control takes you out for a round or two. Rather, 4th edition control--particularly in the recent paragon mods--is close to 100% effective and is often re-applied every round (sometimes more than once) such that you are far more likely to spend an entire combat unable to meaningfully contribute in LFR 10-14 mods than you ever were in LG 10-14 mods. (IME, death rates are actually pretty similar between the campaigns so I don't count characters who can't contribute because they are dead).
Having been playing and DMing D&D for 29 years, even in previous editions of D&D it can be really hard to tell what was the impact of the DM (positive or negative; harder or softer challenge, etc.) versus the adventure words on paper, without reading the adventure when the play experience is still fresh in your mind. I think that is where Pieter was coming from.
What is really valuable IMHO is the DM feedback--was the adventure easy or hard to make a fun (challenging if that was called for) adventure, which was easy to prep, etc.
If something did not work for your play group, please try (using spoiler blocks) to be specific. That helps us to understand the basis for the complaint, and perhaps we might see if the DM did not understand what we (as authors and editors) were trying to communicate or recommend, or we screwed something up.
Once one has read the adventure, it becomes easier (in theory) to offer constructive criticism, where you diagnose where the problem was, and recommended a fix either for DMs, or for future consideration of the author and editor.
Reading the adventure is not a requirement to post if you enjoyed, disliked, hated, or whatever your play experience. Please go right ahead. Just realize, it is hard to derive diagnostic value from general statements. Also, please include your preferences. If someone stated, "Normally I don't enjoy extensive role playing with NPCs, but, wow, while playing this adventure, we had a ball." that draws a second look.
Thanks for sticking with LFR.
Keith
If you experience was that bad, and you already know part of it was due to the DM, wouldn't it be better to at least read it? I know you mostly want to rant, but it does not cost that much time and at least you know what part was the DM and what part the adventure.
Really? So, in order to be qualified to tell other people about our experiences with a mod or provide feedback, we should have to create a fake event in the RPGA database and download the mod and read it? Do you apply that standard to people who want to praise the mod too? A good DM can often make a poorly written mod enjoyable. I note that you have not asked anyone who posted praising the mod whether they read it and found that it was actually good or whether they just had a good DM.
Erm... you are the one who starts your post by stating that you know that at least parts of your experience are the result of your DM doing things wrong. So I find it odd how you jump to the completely wrong conclusions based on those two sentences. In the first sentence I ASK you whether or not it would be a better idea to read the adventure. In the second I tell you that it helps you understand the adventure better. I NEVER said that your opinion is invalid or useless, nor did I say a rant is a bad thing (I love good rants and so do a lot of people considering how many popular columns and blogs are rants). Rants can actually be quite useful as long as they provide examples (and the more specific the better), it is still useful to me since I can then check what was the adventure and what was the DM.
Note: Yes, I think a person's opinion on the actual written part of the adventure has a better foundation when that person read the adventure and even more when they run it, regardless of whether it is negative or positive. If the positive post would start with the same broad statement about not reading the adventure, knowing the DM changed parts, I would also ask why he did not read the adventure.
(And no, I was not involved in this particular adventure.)
Loved the adventure. That said, here were my own issues:
***spoilers***
1) The session I attended as a player took far too long, so I shortened it when I DM'd it by handling the dream scenes as a handout.
2) Falling damage made the first combat tough and interesting. Well done.
3) There was very little PC movement in the final encounter due to all the effects. Wherever they are when the combat starts, that's probably where they'll play out the combat.
3) The skill challenge in the final combat didn't seem intuitive. The DM that ran me had a tough time (even though he had run the encounter once before). Even after I studied it thoroughly myself I still had questions:
- Is there more than one victim in each pillar? If so, how are they stacked, and how would the PC's know that the pillar is deactivated once one victim is pulled free?
- Why does the pillar initial flavor text say that a servitor attacks, even though that is not yet the case?
- There was no indication to the PC's that all the pillars could be shut down after the 4th one was deactivated
- The PC's could easily shut down 4 pillars before the trap is sprung. The Aboleths seem unlikely to have the opportunity to wait until the PC's reach the midway point.
Again though, loved the adventure.