My biggest problem with it was:
1. The complete and utter lack of Editing. get a third person who knows a thing or two about writing to look over your worldwide games day for heavens sake.
2. The format was completely ridiculous:
- I have never been a fan of the delve format. If there is an encounter in the room, it should be on that PAGE. not several pages later. Splitting info like boxed text, features of the room back and forth is unnecessary.
- Rewards etc should come AFTER the encounters.
- We need all the relevant info in an encounter summary at each part. This is what happened in LG, and it worked pretty well. The GM had to read the combat pages to work out some of the plot of the mod!
- WoTc seem to just be hiring graphic designers these days, we get it, pictures are nice, but please this format is making it downright hard for the GM. (See Sceptre Tower of Spellguard as a classic example of S**T module formatting with beautiful pictures.)
3. The combats theoretically were interesting, but mechanically a nightmare for the GM who had a constrained time slot.
4. Arbitrary decision as to go left or right dictated rewards. (Again this is clearly evident of bad module editing)
5. NO overall map. Every module should have one of these. This is EXACTLY what is wrong with having to use dungeon tiles, mods get lazy and don't give us, the GM a sequence of events with labelled rooms.
6. Too many monsters that were incongruous with each other. Put some effort in and have monsters that make sense for your plot, not because they are easy to stat out lazy mod writers. (Metz is sick of Drakes EVERYWHERE mixed with other stuff like Shadowhunter bats)
7. People are saying that folk died because they are new to 4th edition. WELL DUH. It is 'weekend in the realms' and is designed to encourage new players to come see what LFR and 4th edition is all about. WE got heaps of new Players, and if the mod doesn't cater to them, then that's just a stupid argument.
8. One of the encounters had 'arbitrary amount of monsters' and no map. Ridiculous, optional or not.
9. The reporting was horrendous. See here.
All in all, most people had fun because of the GM and players, not because of the MODULE.
Plotline/Difficulty aside, this module was a pain in the ass for GMs and this sort of lack of editing and idiotic formatting needs to stop if people are going to continue to run modules.
4. Arbitrary decision as to go left or right dictated rewards. (Again this is clearly evident of bad module editing)
On the whole I agree with your points -- particularly the horrible delve format. However, the above point seems more a point of DMing than module writing. The choice is completely arbitrary, so it shouldn't matter which the party chooses -- the first choice ALWAYS takes them to the story rewards, the second to the goal. One advantage of using teleportation is that the topology doesn't have to make as much sense.
2. I'll have to fully agree here. If you want to have a bit of a write-up on the whole area for DM infomation, that's okay. Just make sure that each encounter area has the full write-up, including any boxed text to be read aloud and what occurs after the encounter, all in one location.
3. I didn't mind the combats too much, though they could have used a bit more theme. I didn't have too much of a time issue, but I ran it as 3 4-hour sessions. The first two went by in about 3 hours while the 3rd took 4 1/4 hours.
4. I had made the decision to have the players go the 'long' way no matter which path they took but took out the construct encounters (they were there but too rusted to work anymore). It gave the party a chance to interact with their surroundings at little bit. I will say that as written, it doesn't sit well with me.
5. I'm fine with Dungeon Tiles but would've appreciated a full map. Especially true since, as written, there is likely a combat in a mapless area.
6. A bit more theme for the monsters would've been nice but doesn't make-or-break it for me.
7. Most of my players weren't new and TPKs weren't that close except at the end. The 1st encounter perhaps should've been a bit easier though.
8. Agreed. See 5.
9. Reporting problems will surely get fixed. No biggie for me.
Biggest beef was the formatting.
I'll add that for the end of the second part with the Ritual, I DMed it that it was BECAUSE they interupted the Princess that they ended up in the Shadowfell. Seems to me that this works better. The Arcana check just allowed them to tell she was trying to get to the Feywild.
Also, the final combat, while kinda cool, needed more hints for the players to succeed. I had the portals open in a defined sequence so they could at least plan their moves once they figured out one of them was the way home.
Story Award Week1-5 is way too poor a setup to be of use, IMO. As well, if the party flees up the stairs, which is reasonably possible, the mod ends very poorly. I read where one DM had the Princess perform a ritual at that portal to take the players back and while totally not played as written, makes at least a better end.
I also found some of the encounters to be very poorly written, and then others were lots of fun. Encounter 7 and 8 were the worst, because of the afflicted souls. My party I was DM for had multiple people on the ground and dying, and yet couldn't rest, and had no way to get rid of the afflicted souls. And this is one of my biggest pet peeves, module writers creating interesting ideas, but not creating any way for the party to overcome it. Also, Encounter 9 was a disaster, and one that I pretty much cut short, because it was too confusing to run.
Even still, the players had a good time, and it looks like I've got 5 new players. I just wish the module made me want to DM more.
If you indeed get a long rest between, then you shouldn't be in the same places. If you don;t then it gets even uglier.
The party I was playing as a member of got a TPK right at the start of the third mopdule because of a few issues from the end of the second module:
1) Our sole healer was in the other room, in a cage he could NOT get (and stay) out of.
2) 3 members of the 5 member party started out standing in the Vortex area, and therefore took damage and started dazed from the get-go.
3) Our GM, I think, misinterpreted the role of the Princess in part 3, and had her run, on her own, straight for the wall barrier, which caused part of our party to chase her into the other encounter.
Overall, IMO, the beginning of module 3 should have had a setup placement for the PCs & princess, over away from the Vortex area, around where the arcane circle was, and that any PCs in room 8 in Module 2 should wind up in the Vortex room with the rest of their party.
As it was, the way the GM started the module, and ran the NPC, made a TPL unavoidable. And the bundles for that third module were one of the reasons I wanted to play it. And our PCs wound up, hung, just a few XP from leveling, missing out on all the bling from the third module. Not much fun.
Actually, as a GM and a player, I would have to say that the transition between modules 2 & 3 is the ugliest thing.
The second-most annoying thng, for me (after the fact that, no matter how well the PCs perform, they MUST fail in order for Part 3 to occur) is that the module writer knows very well that having the party split between two rooms at the start of Part 3 is highly lethal, goes to lengths to point it out, and still creates a set-up at the end of Part 2 that actually encourages this to happen!
Instead of having burrowing monsters who dig their way through the walls to outflank the PCs and encourage some of them to remain in the lightning room, the writer should have chosen slower-moving opponents combined with artillery in cover, to encourage the party to get themselves all into the ritual room as soon as possible.
The second-most annoying thng, for me (after the fact that, no matter how well the PCs perform, they MUST fail in order for Part 3 to occur) is that the module writer knows very well that having the party split between two rooms at the start of Part 3 is highly lethal, goes to lengths to point it out, and still creates a set-up at the end of Part 2 that actually encourages this to happen!
Instead of having burrowing monsters who dig their way through the walls to outflank the PCs and encourage some of them to remain in the lightning room, the writer should have chosen slower-moving opponents combined with artillery in cover, to encourage the party to get themselves all into the ritual room as soon as possible.
Actually, both in the game I ran, and the game I played, the PCs managed to defeat the opponents in the ritual room, but then had time left to get screwed up by the multi-room nature of the effect.
Things that would have helped:
1) Make sure the players know that the lightning room is included in the transportation effect.
2) Make sure that it is a LOT more difficult for the PCs to take out the Princess before the ritual completes. I am sorry, if a completely 1st level party, with only one striker, can do it, that goal of the module is way too easy. The party consisted of a Drow Rogue, Dwarf Fighter, Tiefling Wizard, Human Warlord, Windsoul Genasi Swordmage & Dwarf Cleric.
3) If you are going to include the second room in the transportation area, make it clear to the DM that the transportation takes some time, and that the PCs can move into the same area, if they weren't at the end of Episode 2. Also make sure that the players know that the second room is included, so they can understand that just passing the former barrier wall is not going to protect them from transportation.
4) Make a "starting zone" for the PCs in Episode 3, where they will start if they are either starting fresh (not coming in from Episode 2, for one reason or another), or want to get organized before the scenario starts. My advice would have been in the area where the arcane runes were in part 2.
On another note, if the players are paying attention, and the GM reads the description clearly, it should be obvious where the safe zones are in the Lightning Room, and it would be possible for a good defender to make it to the lever fairly quickly.
The GM for the game I played in had the skeletons appear in all the open spaces around the activated pillar, not in the spaces around the PC who set the pillar off. We did what we could, but wound up, at one point, with around 24 skeletons in the room. Mainly because the Warlord hit one of the still-active areas around one of the inner pillars, after the level shut down the outside pillars...
Fortunately, we did have a Wizard, and my Dwarf succeeded on the Strength check on the first try, so we managed to keep the room from totally filling up.
The group I ran for had an Eladrin in the party, but even tried the hedge wizard's gloves first, before sending the teleporter over.
I think the main fault here was the editor who thought "Well, WOTC is publishing this, so it goes into our format". The correct thought process should have been "Is this an RPGA event? Yes, so it goes in the RPGA format so as not to confuse the DMs". It was probably an honest mistake. If this was a module I was running in a non-timed format, I don't think it would have been such an issue. When you are under the gun to complete a three hour slot, you don't really have time to be constantly searching for the correct information when the players ask a question.
Also, if I may rant a bit on the encounters themselves. If we can first assume that this should have been an RPGA module through and through because it was meant to bring people into LFR, then my following rant has merit. If it was decided at a high management level that the module would be WOTC, then my following rant should be ignored.
1. The encounters should have had a high and low tier. The first encounter is WAY too difficult for a party of 1st level PCs, especially with longbows doing 1d10. My party failed to detect the archers, and when the surprise round was over, three were bloodied and the wizard was down and unconscious. Alternately, the second table we ran with two 2nd level PCs and a 3rd level burned through the whole adventure in record time.
2. The final encounter in the toad statue room was very confusing and complex. Trying to keep track of monsters and portals and PCs all at once was information overload for both myself and the other DM. Please note, we are not Rookie DMs. My friend has played & DMed for over 20 years. I have been DMing for over a year, but even when running large scale 3.5 encounters with over a dozen monsters, I never had that big of a headache.
While Weekend in the Realms was a success in my area, I understand it was not in other venues. if I make a suggestion, if WOTC decides to make a similar adventure to launch Eberron next year, please let a high ranking RPGA official look over the module to see if there are any modifications required for RPGA judges to use it.
And that is my two cents.
This thread exists to help get real feedback on the module so that future events/modules can be improved.
Constructive criticism is a good thing.
Electronic copy: please be considerate of you volunteers and the technical aspects of the module.
1) Be aware of mailbox size limits that exist for many users. The 15MB file (zipped) was too large for me to be able to send to my judges.
2) Get rid of pages of black ink. I have no interest in printing up pages of black ink.
3) Pretty art work. Put it in a gallery or secondary file. I don't want it cluttering up the adventure when running it or printing it.
4) The adventure is too long. Strong parties might wump it with lots of time to spare, but senting out posters quoting 8 hours after initially describing it as 9 hours, and including encounters that can take a couple of hours.... Some playtesting, please.
Thanks.
David
Also, the final combat, while kinda cool, needed more hints for the players to succeed. I had the portals open in a defined sequence so they could at least plan their moves once they figured out one of them was the way home.
My group figured out how to succeed, but since the portals didn't open in any defined sequence the encounter did not function for us. We saw what we needed on round one, and it literally never occured again. Our GM simply gave up after about 12 rolls. Putting the entire chance to complete an encounter on a single die roll that the players have zero control over is one of the worst things that could have been done, 12-20 rounds of combat before the GM gives up or the correct portal appears is simply not acceptable. Forcing the players to leave n encounter so they could take a short or extended rest just so they can walk back in and maybe complete it on the next try is also not acceptable. One of several minor adjustments could have made the entire thing function:
1. Putting a specific portal sequence in. This would give the players 4 rounds to prepare to leave, which should be more than adequate time to be ready, but not too long of a time to be fighting.
2. Keep the portals random, but limit or remove the respawns on the monsters. Not only did the only 2 mechanic seem silly, the respawns can keep the party in difficult combat for far too long.
All in all I thought the mod was ok. The storyline and combat and how they flowed was mostly reasonable, there were definatley some spots that didn't make sense and could have been clarified or written better (like the part 2-3 change), but the only thing I can not find justification for is the final encounter.
2. Keep the portals random, but limit or remove the respawns on the monsters. Not only did the only 2 mechanic seem silly, the respawns can keep the party in difficult combat for far too long.
The respawns were the most fustrating part of this encounter for me.
Take 1, on the way in. The respawns aren't infinite, the correct answer is to kill everything that appears, and move on.
Take 2, on the way out: Infinite respawns. I think our party killed 8, 9 monsters before the DM figured out that we were just gonna be stuck there forever waiting for the right portal, and had the NPC kite one of us out to the fixed portal on the other side of the room.
The change from "Kill-em-all" to "run, Forrest, Run" wasn't obvious, which turned the room into a death trap.
(I really, really, really hate Infinite Respawns. It's a horrible horrible mechanic that should never be used. If you want a timer, use an explicit timer. Cave-in collapsing things. Moving walls. Moving magic forcefield of doom... not infinitely respawning monsters.)
Doug
We had great success in Portland, OR, at Guardian Games. Guardian Games did a decent level of advertising and the games were mentioned in advance on the PDX_RPGA Yahoo group. This all led to 13 full tables with some players switching out (I would guess almost 30 different players). There was another Portland location running the game and there were two slot 0s, so there was a lot of gaming. Many of the players were fairly new (1-2 previous LFR games) and many were unaware of regional lists and so on, so it was a great promotional tool for the game. (Our Sundering Hall future Adventuring Company recruited several dwarves... the East Rift should see many heroes!).
The tables I judged/played had lots of fun. Most of the tables had some very experienced DMs who did a good job making creative changes. As a result, the very difficult parts of the mod were challenging but not completely overwhelming and stayed fun (and nail-biting). As a judge, I would like to thank the many people that posted files, ideas, and concerns in advance of the event. This gave me some great ideas that improved the mod.
Now, with regards to the mod design. I think faulting the mod's author is barking up the wrong tree. The mod had some absolutely great concepts, some really great challenges, and some solid mechanics that were compelling and creative. What the mod needed was editing. Seldom is there a great published work without a great editor. As with LG, LFR sorely needs great editors and playtesters. For my own judging I borrowed heavily from great comments that judges and slot 0 people shared prior to the event, then made a few changes of my own. Most of those changes were ones that should have been caught and made in editing.
As a simple example, a table of 6 facing the suggested spectre/phantom warrior encounter will have a high chance of being overwhelmed. I withheld one monster and it was still an amazing nail-biting encounter. Another judge created a cinematic experience where Eldara uses her diadem and the strength of her will to hold back the line of advancing souls, allowing the party to take a short rest before going into the next room - brilliant, and still very challenging.
Another example is the final room. As written, there is a high degree of variability as to how many monsters will be in the room and what portals show up. A party can either get lucky and have an easy time getting through or they can be in a really tough running-out-of-resources and forced to perhaps-die-while-readying to exit situation. Many DMs chose to have several portals per round, some fudged how often the return portal appears, and I chose a combo of two portals per round and having the portals move across the room on three initiative counts (this allowed players to delay, then take their round if the right portal did not appear). In all cases, the end combat was a 'by the skin of your teeth' escape - I suspect just about everyone enjoyed it but wanted it to be a bit less epic.
In the hands of a DM that really wants and expects the mod to be perfect and does not want to make (or is not capable of making) changes, this was a mod that would likely frustrate players and DMs. I don't blame the author. Compared to special events and preview mods of the past, this was a far more interesting/creative engaging offering. Instead, I would like to see better Editors brought into the LFR process.
Overall, we had a lot of happy players in Portland. A dozen relatively new players are motivated to play more. A pretty solid offering from WotC and a good move forward for the campaign.
Teos
Most of the other issues were easy enough to deal with - I don't run adventures exactly as they are written anyway.
The only change I would have liked to have seen would have been in the "Toad Hall" with the portals. Instead of a totally random die roll to see which appears they should have done the portals in a predetermined way. The PC's would most likely miss the opportunity the 1st time around realizing what is happening. So it would probably only take them approx 8 rds at the most before being able to escape.
Or have the other 3 portals go on consecutive rounds dropping off their packages (monsters) before the actual exit portal appears.
Other than that it was a fun module to run and to play. Seen better but have seen worse. The lay out was the biggest problem I had with the module.
The lay out was the biggest problem I had with the module.
Most people have already said the issues I agree with...but this one needs another vote.
The layout added at least another half an hour to the running of this module because of the constant flipping back and forth.
THAT and teh COMPLETE BLACK PAGES. GAH!
please don't do that again. Some people run volunteer to run slot 0's and don't get the pretty packets to run with.....Lynn
I would have preferred that the module have been laid out like a normal Living Forgotten Realms module with perhaps even a Low and High option for play.
This was an issue for the table I DMed, which was "APL" 3. The players grumbled that they got lower rewards for more more work. If we're gonna offer adventures for levels 1-4, let's stick with the tiered model of rewards, please.
And, my table grumbled that the clay scouts and iron defenders was a non-XP encounter. Please don't put in encounters without offering XP rewards. I ran the encounter, but two DMs at our venue skipped it.
The afflicted souls were a cool concept when I read them, but they were abundantly annoying in game-play. I ended up taking them out of play.
As noted above, a full dungeon map would have been very nice. All of the DMs I wrangled for the event had to interrupt my tables and theirs to get "map" clarifications several times. I had tiles, so it was no problem for me. But, other DMs did not and we basically needed side-meetings so I could explain how the encounter areas related to each other absent a full dungeon map.
I thought the Toad Hall's portals were cool. But, the players despised the encounter and were quite vocal about their displeasure. They were also disappointed the way the adventure basically stopped, rather than had an ending.
Last, I'll add my voice to those calling for better editing. Wow! A few typos I can live with. But, Beneath Haunted Halls was ridiculous.
Players may need to be reminded, their task was to retrieve the Princess and the diadem, and to return them safely. After reaching her, Part 3 should be focused on how the heck do we get out (escape) with minimum pain. Unfortunately some players have trouble with the transition from killing all monsters.
Keith
I liked the afflicted souls; it was a great plot device to move the PCs along. With a speed 1 and no attack (beyond occupying the same square), they were the slow moving menace that kept the PCs hustling. No one at my tables were harmed by the afflicted souls.
All they really do in this adventure is force Encounters 7 and 8 together into one big encounter. Infinitely spawning, invulnerable enemies in a room where the only exit leads straight into another room full of enemies, with no chance of even a short rest? That's a terrible plot device.
The preview mod Escape from Sembia threw you into basically 3 encounters without a short rest (2 combat and 1 skill challenge where you can lose healing surges)
There is nothing that says you have to have an encounter and be able to rest for 5 minutes. Sometimes you have to run for your lives. This was a perfect example of one
Jonathan
I prefer to not have cakewalks and the ability to rest after each encounter. But to each his own.
Just because its not to your liking does not mean its a poor writing or plot device.
Just because its not to your liking does not mean its a poor writing or plot device.
Similarly, just because you like it doesn't mean that it's good.
This infinite stream of invulnerable monsters was a poor device to make the PCs run for their lives. First, because they're monsters. PCs generally prefer to attack monsters rather than flee from them, and they have no way of knowing that fighting will be ineffective until they've wasted a lot of time trying. Second, because it was not obvious that the stream of souls was never-ending until it was far too late to effectively flee. In fact, given that the previous encounter with a monster-spewing portal had a definite limit to the number of monsters, it was reasonable for the PCs to expect that this one did too.
Similarly, just because you like it doesn't mean that it's good.
This infinite stream of invulnerable monsters was a poor device to make the PCs run for their lives. First, because they're monsters. PCs generally prefer to attack monsters rather than flee from them, and they have no way of knowing that fighting will be ineffective until they've wasted a lot of time trying. Second, because it was not obvious that the stream of souls was never-ending until it was far too late to effectively flee. In fact, given that the previous encounter with a monster-spewing portal had a definite limit to the number of monsters, it was reasonable for the PCs to expect that this one did too.
It takes one person to attack one to see it does nothing for the PC's to figure it out. And if you start the encounter over by where the ritual circle was by the time you move thru them and thru the zombie wall and into the next room at 1 square of movement each they will take many many rounds to follow your group thru the door to where the Dark Creepers are. Just being 1 basic move for a PC in front of them is at a minimum 5 rds before they can be where that character ended its 1st move. Its not like they were right on your heels and were right there with you the whole time.
My group had killed 1 of the Dark Creepers and had the other 2 tied down with Defenders while the others used their movement to get the cage with the portal before the 1st of the souls made it into the same room as us.
Basically, when something is written as an introductory adventure I would assume many new players playing 1st level characters would be the norm (and also assume they are not used to Living Campaign formulas). The concept of "Get the Players to run for it" is not inherently bad, its when in a regulated reward environment you punish the tactic you want to encourage that it becomes poorly written/edited/someone's fault.
Jonathan
I would like to add my comments to those who disagree with the layout format of this adventure. As was pointed out in another thread, separating the story from the encounters is standard for all published D&D material from WOTC. However, Weekend in the Realms was touted as a way to bring people into playing Living Forgotten Realms. This automatically means it will be run in the majority by RPGA judges. RPGA judges are familiar with a certain type of module format. I especially enjoy the 4E RPGA modules because everything is broken into encounters (both fighting & role-playing) and you can set aside the rest of the printout and not mess with it during the encounter.
My conclusion from this isn't that they should have used the RPGA format but that the WotC format is a terrible idea. It had no redeeming features whatsoever.
Putting Combat Stats in Appendices made sense for LG purely because there were so many different APLs for most modules to accommodate. LFR's system is much better. When there's only ONE SET OF MONSTERS it's simply inexcusable to make such a mess of it.
My regret as a GM is that I didn't chop more of the combat and spend more time on the roleplaying. It's a shame that I should have had to do that myself. I could have used more help on how to run the Princess too.
So my players were not very kind to their diplomat (blaming her for trapping them in the shadowfel) So when we reached the last room and the feywild portal hit her after many rounds of combat she took the portal.
Well one of our Eladrin Rogues was standing next to her and got the option to go as well since the guide said "Eladrin players may choose to enter the feywild portal"
Then the rogue turns to me and says "Now what happens to me in the feywild?" since he was one of the prime instigators against the Diplomate she instantly Feystep away leaving him stranded in the Feywild. (How he escapes is up to him and can give his character some amusing backstory, and he loved the idea). BUT it does seem kind of a lose end for Eladrin players.
Anyone else leave a party member in the Fey?
Anyone else leave a party member in the Fey?
Not the Feywild at my table. I had a player that voluntarily wanted to leave Toad Hall, pass the devil and angel statues, climb up the spiral staircase and explore the Shadowfell. So, I just let him wander up there alone and left it at that.
It made us all think there should have been an alternative way to get home besides the very unpredictable and unreliable Haunted Halls portal in Toad Hall. And waiting for a portal was a big complaint, too. The big issue these players had was that they had to delay or ready to see if the right portal showed up - getting beat-up on the whole time. They did not like the idea of what they described as, "Let's stand here doing nothing and likely get slaughtered waiting for the right way home that may or may not materialize." They got frustrated enough that I just stopped rolling and said a Haunted Halls portal popped in.
With the 'Bands' system and small stat blocks we shouldn't have to have this sort of ill formatted module again.
It seriously looks like instead of editing it, they spent many hours graphically designing it to be pretty with big pictures, time that could have been spent helping out GMs.
Don't make it difficult for your HUGE volunteer workforce of GMS WoTc, and one would hope that the RPGA makes this clear to them.
I know this, I won't run a mod like that again. I have a limit.
As to the comments on infinite monsters, that is more of a story/author thing. Most of the problems I had with it were administrative/editing.
Constructive criticism is a good thing.
Sometimes what I say is actually useful Howie
Grumpiness asideElectronic copy: please be considerate of you volunteers and the technical aspects of the module.
1) Be aware of mailbox size limits that exist for many users. The 15MB file (zipped) was too large for me to be able to send to my judges.
I just realised how important of a point this one is. There is no reason that this module should be so large. Cut out the pointless pictures or attach them as a separate gallery. a 15MB zipped PDF is larger than it needs to be.
Sometimes what I say is actually useful Howie
Yes, I'm aware you serve a useful purpose in some strange and yet-to-be-determined-manner. :D
But seriously, you should slow down. A 22 year old who has played for 3 years but sounds like some grognard who's played for 30 years...someone slipped something into your Vegemite.
Howie the Hopeless
It takes one person to attack one to see it does nothing for the PC's to figure it out.
Did it do nothing because of fluff of a miss? Did it do nothing because it's not the right damage type? Maybe X works... maybe Y works... and by the time someone gives up and runs there's an army of 30 of them.
A few months ago I thought the idea of DM empowerment and each table being different than the other was a pretty terrible idea. While I'm not completely a fan, I have embraced it fully because those are the rules we now have.
This module, more than any other, showed me how important it is to embrace that concept now.
The biggest guideline in LFR is fun. If the players at our table aren't having fun, we as DMs have the responsibility to do something. This mod did not require much to make it fun (or at least to keep it from being a TPK or disaster to new players). This mod had obvious editing issues. You read through the specter's stat block and you think.... two of these with blasts that do real damage and impede movement... and they can go invisible while they wait for the recharge... Hmmm.... that sounds challenging. And there will be no rest after this, going into a decently challenging encounter... We should then immediately come up with a bare minimum plan (I'll be open to having the specter's stay in this room. I'll reduce the number of Dark Creeper's. I'll have Eldara help out. Etc.).
LFR is not LG. While, ideally, lots of playtesting and editing will take place, that has not been the case in the past. Thus, in this era of DM empowerment, we bear the ultimate responsibility to take what is handed to us and make it fun.
I thought that what the community did around WiR, posting maps and ideas, was really useful. We should do more of this DM group-think in the future.
Teos
1. In the fight against the princess in part 2, my party managed to knock the princess unconscious, take out all the kruthiks save 1, and get back onto the portal in the lightning pillar room in the 6 round countdown. They were absolutely ****** that the ritual went off and they were transported into the Shadowfell regardless.
2. They really loved the pictures. Split the pictures into a separate download. I was running WEEK on Sunday and did not get a pre-printed booklet. Neither could the DM send me the pdf because of the huge size of the zip. So I had to pick it up after midnight on Saturday to run the game Sunday morning.
Like most of the DMs here, the formatting is really difficult to deal with, constantly flipping back and forth between combat encounters and room info, Princess stats, and other encounters.
I also feel the mod was really badly written. I ran through all 3 parts with the same party (except 1 player dropped on the 3rd part). L1 1/2 Elf Paladin (Hammer/Shield), L3 Human Wizard, L3 Dragonborn Infernal Warlock, L2 Elven lazer Cleric, Level 2 Dwarven Fighter (Hammer/shield), Level 2 Dragonborn Fighter (Maul) [dropped last mod].
Encounter 1. Its supposed to be a skill challenge. Its almost impossible to spot the elves (24 passive perception?! that means skill training, skill focus, high wisdom, and misc bonus. CRAZY) or they attack you first. How many LFR encounters (or other living) allows for negotiations during combat? With no real warning that you aren't supposed to fight (other then the heavy rain... which just makes the Melee guys happy), it turns into a fairly easy fight. DM Solution: gave them a DC 20 insight check to realize something wasn't quite right about the ambush.
Encounter 2: Pretty easy... although the tactic of the better fighters bull rushing guys into the webs for the weaker guys didn't quite cut it. Should have been other way around. or add minions.
Encounter 3: way too easy. Thraven dropped on first round before he could do anything. Dire wolves weren't too hard (good PC tactics)
Part 2.
Statue Room: monsters were way too random... they should have at least made some sense.
Portals. Portal #1: all the treasure for the mod, both the story awards, and 1 of 2 found magic items. LAME. if they go to the other door, they loose out on everything. DM solution: 1 portal goes here first.
Door #2: broken trap (it was easy for my party, with 2 dragonborns sporting 5x5 breath weapons, plus a wizard), followed by another minion fight! the first portal lasted 1 combat round, followed by mass minion squishing. The paladin broke through and started beating on the princess in round 2. By round 3, Princess was unconcious, the wizard took the diadem, and everything else was dead.
Part 3: Party got unlucky as I kept recharging the Spectre's burst power. Bloodied everyone before they could make it into the next room. On the second half, the fighter got sucked into the cage right away; the wizard was the hero again who kept using Thunderwave to push the Creepers away so they could push to the portal. The invicible souls were really bad. It would have been much better to allow a short rest in between and not an extended after the second fight... but, thats me.
Last room. Bad luck. I roll in the open. With 4 portals going off each round, the party quickly figured out not to fight the baddies (round 2), but went to the doors on the opposite side of the room. I didn't roll the portal back 'home' till like the 4th or 5th round (which they quickly figured out what they needed to do). The problem: by this time, they were on the other side of the room, thinking they way out was through the stairs. By this time (mainly due to provoked OAs with 2 wights and 1 fey panther), the monsters had them bottled up. By the time they made it back into the room, there were like 7 healing surges between 5 party members (in addition to having already blown all AP, encounter, and daily powers before they even made it across the room the first time!)
Bad formatting, minimal (if any) playtesting, and complete randomness to exit, and almost no roleplaying. Plus the story holes. At least it was better balanced then the PREV mods...
Did it do nothing because of fluff of a miss? Did it do nothing because it's not the right damage type? Maybe X works... maybe Y works... and by the time someone gives up and runs there's an army of 30 of them.
DMs should NEVER forget that the 4E has the rule that a DM should always make sure the players have a good idea of what is going on. They should tell the players what are minions, solos, elites and normal monsters, and they should only use unexpected surprise abilities when they make sense (and even then they should provide clues). For example, the hexer goblins ability to deal damage when an afflicted character moves should be mentioned to the player since the whole goal of that hex is to keep a PC stuck at a location.
The authors of LFR adventures have been asked not to repeat core rules. So why expect an adventure to mention that it is the DM's job to make sure the players realize what is going on based on fun, fairness and PCs' skills?
Note: Actually, the skill challenge with the elves in encounter 1 can be started during actual fighting. You need a good Diplomacy check to pull it off, but my players understood this instantly. As for whether this is possible in other LFR adventures, there are several adventures (SPEC1-1 and CORE1-1 to just name two examples) where this is the case and that is not even talking about DMs empowerment. I always start an event with new players by stating that:
(a) Just because I make a detailed battle map does not mean there is going to be fight.
(b) Just because I ask for initiative does not mean there is an unavoidable fight.
(c) Just because the opposition has already attacked, does not mean you can try to calm things down.
(d) Of course, some fights are unavoidable, so the battle map and the initiave might be all about an unavoidable fight, but if you think a particular situation could be resolved peacefully, feel free to try.
Pieter Sleijpen
RPGA LFR Global Administrator
DM Solution: gave them a DC 20 insight check to realize something wasn't quite right about the ambush.
Nah, it is fairly easy to deduce that the elves are attacking on a false premise. I realized it instantly. But hey, I'm a paladin of Tempus - when I am being attacked, I don't stop to negotiate. I instead whack them silly, to show them the error of their ways. THEN we talk...
If this is supposed to be a skill challenge, then don't start with an ambush that drops one PC in the first round. Nobody feels much like talking once one of their members is down. Instead, start with one elf approaching, giving a speech, and allow the PCs to speak up before they attack. THEN you have a fair chance at a skill challenge.
In all other cases, it really is: hit first, talk to the bloody remains later.
Gomez
DMs should NEVER forget that the 4E has the rule that a DM should always make sure the players have a good idea of what is going on. They should tell the players what are minions, solos, elites and normal monsters, and they should only use unexpected surprise abilities when they make sense (and even then they should provide clues).
At my table, we wasted, literally, 4 rounds trying to figure out how to kill the souls (after all the real monsters were down) before finally figuring out(/believing the guy who figured out 3 rounds ago) that they were immortal. And even then, we didn't really realize that they were a timer until we started to run and saw how slow they moved out in the open.
Add in no opportunity for a rest before the next encounter (the DM had them walking through walls, which seemed reasonable enough), and you have some very frustrated players.
Pieter: While you should tell the players the details of things that are affecting them (as your example) the rules do not support what you say in general:
- you only know what's a minion/elite/solo if you make the knowledge check. You can guess based on appearance too but that's just guessing.
- you only know what powers something can throw when they do so unless you make the knowledge check
None of these apply to the annoying souls if you can't make the knowledge check -in this case the GM most certainly should tell the players though because it's a thoroughly unusual (unique) feature that doesn't mesh at all with most people's understanding of the game. Telling teh players reduces the fun reducing aspect.
I do hope someone is reading this and paying attention to the comments on the god awful WoTc adventure format.
With the 'Bands' system and small stat blocks we shouldn't have to have this sort of ill formatted module again.
It seriously looks like instead of editing it, they spent many hours graphically designing it to be pretty with big pictures, time that could have been spent helping out GMs.
Don't make it difficult for your HUGE volunteer workforce of GMS WoTc, and one would hope that the RPGA makes this clear to them.
I know this, I won't run a mod like that again. I have a limit.
As to the comments on infinite monsters, that is more of a story/author thing. Most of the problems I had with it were administrative/editing.
Keep in mind this format is what's used for published mods as well (H-1 Keep on the Shadowfell, for example).
While it's great to voice an opinion here, in the hopes that the RPGA stops using this format - you might also want to voice your opinion to Customer Service (http://wizards.custhelp.com) if you feel it's a mistake that WotC should abandon wholesale.
It's worth noting that Dungeon doesn't seem to follow this format, so it may be that WotC is "on the fence" about the format now. Public opinion could sway things further.
It's also important that GMs realise that neither insubstantial nor phasing let somethign end it's move inside a wall or other object/creature. They explicitly have to end in a clear space (though they can pass through stuff) ..our slot 0 had the spectres hiding in the wall/ceiling when they weren't blasting us which made things rather tricky.
Wow, I'd completely missed that. It didn't come into play with this mod, but I totally owe my players an apology for a near-TPK two weeks ago.
I liked the afflicted souls; it was a great plot device to move the PCs along. With a speed 1 and no attack (beyond occupying the same square), they were the slow moving menace that kept the PCs hustling. No one at my tables were harmed by the afflicted souls.
Keith
It essentially makes two encounters into one big encounter.. that is if it isn't already by the way the 3rd might start. There's absolutely no way as written to take a short rest between those two combats, again even if they are separate.
I agree that it sounds cool, but in practice it has it's problems. The encounters do not factor most of those factors into them... that's a problem.
I wound up killing two PCs in that set of encounters, and it was touch and go that I wouldn't simply TPK the entire table. The other table that ran it had a similar touch and go, brink of TPK to it. Both tables played well.. I shudder to think how it would have ran otherwise.
-James
Keep in mind this format is what's used for published mods as well (H-1 Keep on the Shadowfell, for example).
While it's great to voice an opinion here, in the hopes that the RPGA stops using this format - you might also want to voice your opinion to Customer Service (http://wizards.custhelp.com) if you feel it's a mistake that WotC should abandon wholesale.
It's worth noting that Dungeon doesn't seem to follow this format, so it may be that WotC is "on the fence" about the format now. Public opinion could sway things further.
Dungeon does use the format, it just isn't as obvious in some scenarios (usually because the amount of non-combat information is close to null). Master of the Icy Spire (which is being adapted for LFR) definitely uses the Delve format.
I know that I personally abhor the delve format as currently used in regular adventures (I didn't like it when they initially started using it in 3.5 scenarios either). For honest to goodness delve events (like the D&D Delve monthly events and demos at D&D Experience or Gen Con), it is a fantastic and useful format. For regular home game use, it is nothing but a pain in the tookus.
(And yeah, I'm going to hit the customer service link to complain right now...)
I think some of the complaints in this thread are not due to the module. For example, trying to schedule each part for 3 hours is poor planning, IMO. Every other mod is designed for 4 hours per 400XP/3 encounters.
From what I've seen, the 'fun' factor for players was about 70-30 in favour. For DMs it was the opposite but because of the good job many DMs did in running it, the players mostly had fun.
Changes I made to make it more fun for my players:
Encounter 1 - I allowed more failures than stated to turn it into a good roleplaying opportunity. Roleplaying shouldn't go away because of a couple unlucky rolls.
Part 2 - The party found the 'living area' no matter which portal they took. I had the Clay Scouts and Iron Defender be too old and rusty/decayed to function (basically, removed the encounter).
Encounter 6 - It's BECAUSE they interrupt the Princess that the party goes to the Shadowfell. They cause the ritual to not function properly. The Arcane check only shows the ritual ending 'soon' -- not in a set number of rounds. This can build tension much better as the DM can 'eyeball' whether the Princess is 'about to finish'. Alternately, you could make the hp of the silvery barriers higher with an automatic dazed condition if you 'push' through or some combination to make it take longer to get to her. (I will say that non-minions would've worked better.)
Encounter 7/8 - This went well for me as written but my but specters only recharged once. I also had 2 Clerics in the group I ran so healing wasn't too much of an issue. I liked the mounting tension of the apparitions.
Encounter 9 - I had only one portal open per round in a pattern. This gave my players a chance to figure out that the portals were the key to escape. I described the Haunted Halls portal as 'familiar', while the others were 'silvery', 'fiery' and 'shadowy'.
It takes one person to attack one to see it does nothing for the PC's to figure it out. And if you start the encounter over by where the ritual circle was by the time you move thru them and thru the zombie wall and into the next room at 1 square of movement each they will take many many rounds to follow your group thru the door to where the Dark Creepers are. Just being 1 basic move for a PC in front of them is at a minimum 5 rds before they can be where that character ended its 1st move. Its not like they were right on your heels and were right there with you the whole time.
That wasn't how it worked out for my group when we played it. We didn't make our knowledge roll to know anything about them. The first guy to attack them rolled poorly. Our DM said that it had no effect. OK, we figure---maybe they're minions and don't take damage from a miss. Or maybe they have some funky. The second guy to attack one rolled decently well, but not well enough to be sure it would have hit. By the third attack, we were pretty sure that they were just straight-up invulnerable, but we had just finished off the last dark creeper and the last spectre had moved around into the cage room behind us.
My group had killed 1 of the Dark Creepers and had the other 2 tied down with Defenders while the others used their movement to get the cage with the portal before the 1st of the souls made it into the same room as us.
Hmm. When I played, we started off with our two leaders in the soul portal room by themselves, the rogue in one cage, and my fighter in another cage with the princess and the warlock. The swordmage just barely missed being grabbed by a third cage. The warlock then teleported out and the swordmage spent at least six rounds failing to open the door to enable the leaders to escape while my fighter spend two rounds bashing through the door to the cage he was in only to be told "ok, it hits your reflex and puts you back inside" after he had finally escaped.
It made for a very challenging fight, but having half the party start off imprisoned in cages seemed arbitrary in the extreme--especially since the reason we ended up in as bad a situation as we did seemed to be because we accurately read the situation and tried to escape the area of the ritual.
- you only know what's a minion/elite/solo if you make the knowledge check. You can guess based on appearance too but that's just guessing.
Actually, the designers of the game were pretty clear on this aspect at DDXP last year and with good reason. I will walk away from a game where a DM does not tell me wheter an opponent is a minion, especially when the DM looks at me gleefully after the striker used a mass damage daily power on it, assuming the monster does not have a special ability to keep himself hidden. I have less problems with a DM keeping the fact hidden whether something is a solo or elite. The fact that the opponent uses an action point in the first round offers enough clues in that regard anyway.
In case of these souls, I would describ them as shadowy husks looking even more insubstantial than the spectral warriors and specters. They looked as if they had as much substantiality as a shadow or the glow of a magical zone. Most players would likely conclude that normal attacks would have no effect and for those that did not, I would simply tell them since doing otherwise is going to ruin the fun as many people already concluded.
LFR is not LG. While, ideally, lots of playtesting and editing will take place, that has not been the case in the past. Thus, in this era of DM empowerment, we bear the ultimate responsibility to take what is handed to us and make it fun.
Ok this attitude really ticks me off. (No personal offence). Note: Most of this rant is from another post of mine.
There seems to be a lot of excuses generated for bad modules of late. 'DM empowerment' Seems to be the rallying call of many. I maintain that the DM's ability to change a module is a SEPERATE issue to whether or not a module is sloppy. (See WitR)
When a module is more difficult for a GM than it HAS to be (due to bad formatting, insufficient editing, and poor choices in encounter design), than whilst DM empowerment can fix it, so can constructive criticism/better guidelines to ensure similar issues don't crop up again.
I keep seeing repeated rhetoric of 'you the GM can alter the mod' but when push comes to shove, this doesn't excuse a poor module. Yes, many LG veterans need to deal with the paradigm shift to not running a mod 'by the book', but by the same token many new writers should still learn from experience and feedback that certain ideas (e.g: arbitrary decision to go left or right dictating rewards) should not occur.
Sorry if I come off as harsh, but a lot of the defence of bad modules has been based around this notion.
I say, is it too much to ask for a decent mod and DM empowerment?
Sometimes we just have to pick up the module and run it without playing it first. And that shouldn't mean a huge difference in the experience of the players if the module is done right and the GM is experienced.(Often the difference will mean MORE tailoring to the current play group, instead of innately poking the party to follow the decisions your slot zero made)
Additionally, this is from another thread. thought it aptly summed up a lot of what I felt:
Significant judge empowered changes to a module should be the exception, not the norm. I should be able to run a module as written, without changes, and have the plot of the module make sense and be reasonably enjoyable for an average standard LFR table.
Judge empowerment should be the answer to "My table didn't have fun because of bad luck, a bad party mix or some unusual situation the module author couldn't have anticipated."
Judge empowerment should never be the answer to "My table didn't have fun because the module didn't make much sense and was a generic dungeon crawl without any depth."
Judge empowerment is a tool to deal with the unexpected or make a good module great, not a necessity to make a bad module mediocre.
On another note, I do hope that this leads PCs back into the habit of trying to get baddies to surrender (see below) and mods start to actually allow it.
Note: Actually, the skill challenge with the elves in encounter 1 can be started during actual fighting. You need a good Diplomacy check to pull it off, but my players understood this instantly. As for whether this is possible in other LFR adventures, there are several adventures (SPEC1-1 and CORE1-1 to just name two examples) where this is the case and that is not even talking about DMs empowerment.
Yes, the skill challenge can be started during the fight, but the point is, there's nothing pointing the PCs towards that option (near impossible perception check and Ambush). So far, in LFR, I haven't seen a skill challenge that can stop a fight in the middle of it - with live people. Traps can be disarmed, but for the most part, its easier to bash them in 1-2 rounds then have the rogue waste 4 rounds trying to disarm it, all the while its still shooting bolts at the party.
Just reread through Core 1-1 and only "skill challenge" during a fight was disarming traps (not a skill challenge... and see above). If you mean the skill challenge during Core 1-2, that doesn't end the fight. There are several instances of using a skill challenge to AVOID a fight... but not stop one already started. Also, many early mods have it written into them that monsters will fight to the death (like AKAN 1-1), so players that would have gone that route have already given up on trying to get enemies to give up
I haven't played SPEC 1-1 and neither have anyone in our LFR group - they mostly stay local. If this is the sole exception, remember that most people didn't play it at Con and can't play it till sometime next year. Also, many of them used to play LG and/or LX, and same issue there: once a fight started, it was only over when 1 side was on the ground OR the baddies had something written in that they surrender/flee/negotiate when dropped below X hp (and few of those).
Nah, it is fairly easy to deduce that the elves are attacking on a false premise. I realized it instantly. But hey, I'm a paladin of Tempus - when I am being attacked, I don't stop to negotiate. I instead whack them silly, to show them the error of their ways. THEN we talk...
If this is supposed to be a skill challenge, then don't start with an ambush that drops one PC in the first round. Nobody feels much like talking once one of their members is down. Instead, start with one elf approaching, giving a speech, and allow the PCs to speak up before they attack. THEN you have a fair chance at a skill challenge.
In all other cases, it really is: hit first, talk to the bloody remains later.
Gomez
lol... my Dwarf is a Cleric of Tempus and feel the same way: once a fight starts, its only over when 1 side is on the ground. Most other PCs think along the same lines.
Actually, the designers of the game were pretty clear on this aspect at DDXP last year and with good reason.
For those of us who were not at DDXP last year, where do we find this aspect in the rule books? I've been through the DMG pages on information dispersal. I don't see support there for this aspect.
David
For those of us who were not at DDXP last year, where do we find this aspect in the rule books? I've been through the DMG pages on information dispersal. I don't see support there for this aspect.
I think that most parties are extremely likely to have someone with a +5 in the relevant knowledge skill(and therefore get a 15 on the passive knowledge check) - my 8 Int Paladin 3 has a +5 in Religion as an example - this takes no action and you can take free actions on other people's turns.
While it isn't 100% clear what 'identify the creature' or 'typical temperament' means exactly, it seems reasonable that you could identify a creature as a minion as a result - and then inform the rest of the party who the minions are before they had to go.
Show
That seems to reduce the fantasy roleplaying side of things to a very combat oriented wargame:
PC 1: "Don't worry, he's only a minion, I've seen his picture in a book before. That's the elite, you can tell because it says 'elite' in glowy green letters above its head."
PC 2: "I better move 4 arbitrary units of measurement towards them and use a close blast 3."
PC 3: "Yeah, then use your action point to encounter power the elite."
Is this the kind of 'in character' conversation we are now reduced to? This sort of banter should be 'out of character' tactics. If the DM is required to tell us this due to an in-game knowledge check result, it's not really role-playing.
Elite, Artillery, Minion, Brute, these are metagame concepts that don't exist in the PC's world. They are rules terms that belong in the PLAYER'S world.
I do feel that an apposite description of the monsters is helpful however. From that a cluey gamer should be able to work out who the minions are:
e.g: You see five Kobolds with spears and dodgy armour, a Kobold with shiny armour, sword and shield, and a Kobold with a staff crackling with arcane energies should be enough to tell you which group are likely to be minions.
Let's not kill off what little suspension of disbelief remains in what is supposedly a ROLE-playing game. I played many a wargame, and D&D is a poor substitute, as it's not what the game is meant to be about.
While it isn't 100% clear what 'identify the creature' or 'typical temperament' means exactly, it seems reasonable that you could identify a creature as a minion as a result - and then inform the rest of the party who the minions are before they had to go.
That seems to reduce the fantasy roleplaying side of things to a very combat oriented wargame:
PC 1: "Don't worry, he's only a minion, I've seen his picture in a book before. That's the elite, you can tell because it says 'elite' in glowy green letters above its head."
PC 2: "I better move 4 arbitrary units of measurement towards them and use a close blast 3."
PC 3: "Yeah, then use your action point to encounter power the elite."
Is this the kind of 'in character' conversation we are now reduced to? This sort of banter should be 'out of character' tactics. If the DM is required to tell us this due to an in-game knowledge check result, it's not really role-playing.
Elite, Artillery, Minion, Brute, these are metagame concepts that don't exist in the PC's world. They are rules terms that belong in the PLAYER'S world.
I do feel that an apposite description of the monsters is helpful however. From that a cluey gamer should be able to work out who the minions are:
e.g: You see five Kobolds with spears and dodgy armour, a Kobold with shiny armour, sword and shield, and a Kobold with a staff crackling with arcane energies should be enough to tell you which group are likely to be minions.
Let's not kill off what little suspension of disbelief remains in what is supposedly a ROLE-playing game. I played many a wargame, and D&D is a poor substitute, as it's not what the game is meant to be about.
I must say, there is nothing wrong with the mod as written. Nor does it need DM empowerment to fix.
#1: In the top of the stat block, there is ital text to provide to the players that something is amiss - the attack doesn't seem right. The mod could be improved a great deal with some organization (it seems many DMs missed this cue). However, the information is in there.
#2: Yes, it's set up so that the elves attack the caravan - with the PCs on the far edge of the map. With tasty caravan guards to attack, half of the elves could be pre-occupied while the party makes their way into sight - 5 squares.
#3: Most importantly, let's put some responsibility on the players. While there may be a LG history of "once the fight starts, there's nothing you can do" . . . the players lose nothing by asking the DM whether it would be worthwhile to negotiate. (Especially with the flavor hint.) Finally, even though the DC was high, a group working together can use Aid Other in diplomacy to quickly diffuse the situation.
Now, most players are indeed of the mindset that this should be a combat encounter - - BUT that's up to the players, not the mod author.
Mods seem to be giving players a choice between combat and skill challenges. The DM shouldn't have to push them into one choice or the other.
Minion is a Keyword and you get it at DC20 I believe.
The Designers should have written their intention into the rules if that's what they wanted. personally I don't want to be told where the minions are immediately.
You don't get passive knowledge checks.
Minion is a Keyword and you get it at DC20 I believe.
(responding to this here)
Show
You can try to convince the phantom warriors to step down. After all, they are guarding the property of the Thanterim family. The PCs are not thieves, they are working for the Thanterim family, taking their possessions with them.
Cormyr *should* care for the elves' fate because they are a nation led by a good-aligned monarch (afaik), even if not all -or even most - of the nobles are.
There are elf groups that do cause tension - the Eldreth Ventuura - and if those were involved things would be a bit more logical, as racial tension plays a part. But a misplaced people that try to find a home should, for a nation such as Cormyr, not be a reason to go to war.
It is assumed that players (including DMs) who care about such things will have read the FRCG and FRPG and hence know it.
Unfortunately, this assumption is a flaw in our current paradigm.
Players may care either because they like to know more about the setting OR while they don't care about the setting, they want motives to be understandable and to make sense, but if the DM does not care (has not done the research) and there is nothing written in the adventure, they are out of luck.
Not everyone is buying the FRCG and reading it thoroughly. I don't think LFR has ever said that was a requirement for DMs.
Keith
Such details are not printed in LFR adventures, because a basic requirement is that both DMs and players should be able to enjoy the adventure without intrinsic knowledge on the setting. It is assumed that players (including DMs) who care about such things will have read the FRCG and FRPG and hence know it.
No DM can know what is going on in every region all the time. Assuming that is silly.
It is entirely reasonable to include a relevant plot and synopsis of regional activity in the module to help GMs and provide a resource for players who want to know who they are working for/what they are doing!
It is one thing to not have to know anecdotes to enjoy the adventure, and another thing to remove plot/realms lore entirely.
There is no reason we still can't have DM aids and players handouts! or Heaven forbid ROLE play out the PCs discovering what is going on. (Which implies that there is information in the mod for the GM to relay)
Otherwise we may as well be playing DnD miniatures. I know that if I write a module I will be including this sort of relevant information.
No DM can know what is going on in every region all the time. Assuming that is silly.
Considering the current structure of the campaign is one adventure in each region, it is tough to keep things straight. There's a big difference between the way things are run in CORM, and how things are going in IMPI!
I'd love to see mods include a page reference or two to the FRCG to easily look up relevant local flavor for the adventure. That avoids WotC giving away their content for free, and supplies additional support for those of us who use the product!
(As a marketing note, it might help them sell a few more copies!)No DM can know what is going on in every region all the time. Assuming that is silly.
I agree. Some of us don't have unlimited time on our hands, or haven't purchased the FR campaign guide yet. I try to read up on a region before I run a game if I have time, but that doesn't always tell me all that much. I've never run a FR campaign before this, and have only read a handful of books set in FR. I don't have a deep knowledge of FR.
On the other hand, there were LG mods that had *pages* of detailed background. That was overkill. There has to be a happy medium in there somewhere.
Allen.
Ok this attitude really ticks me off. (No personal offence).
None taken, thanks! I absolutely agree the module needs editing. If I could pass one message onto the LFR admins, it would be better editing and playtesting. 70 mods per year is a huge number, and editing will likely be the thorn in the side of the campaign.
However, we can't directly control the mods. In LG specials, we had little recourse. If I had a $ for every time a judge at one of the specials said "Sorry, that's how it's written"...
In LFR, we have the ability to make up for mods, whether bad by editing or authorship or difficulty. When I read the boards and a good number of players are saying the mod is unclear or too difficult, then yes, we as judges should have done a better job. The administration should do a better job with editing. This is a good mod that needs 1-2 more rounds of editing and just 1 more round of playtesting. But, given what things are, then the DMs need to step forth and save the day.
Sometimes we just have to pick up the module and run it without playing it first.
I would argue that judges should do all they can to never be in this situation. In the case that someone throws a mod at you and begs you to run it cold or the slot won't go off... well, all bets are off and the players should know that. To expect mods to be able to be run cold is to expect simple linear modules. That's fine some of the time, but complex mods can be a huge blast. I don't want to see those go away.
I completely agree that modules should be great. Sometimes they are. Most of the time, they aren't. We can continue to complain and beg admins to make them better. But, in the meantime, we can make sure players have fun by applying DME.
Teos
Reread the last fight of CORE1-1:ShowYou can try to convince the phantom warriors to step down. After all, they are guarding the property of the Thanterim family. The PCs are not thieves, they are working for the Thanterim family, taking their possessions with them.
I stand corrected!ShowOf course, doing a level 3/5 complexity 3 challenge (by the rules when I ran it on the first day of LFR release) meant 8 successes before 4 failures, at DC 15/17, all the while NOT fighting against the warriors while THEY still attack you. 8 successes mean a minimum of 2 rounds, most likely 3-4 (depending on party size). Then throw in the additional skeletons that pop up and attack them, the Specter joining in, etc. Even at DC 10, very few PCs will see that particular skill challenge to its end.
It is not in the adventure, but I assume the caravan went to the elves to deliver the diadem and return back to civilization with the princess. They spend the night at the elves, and it during that night the princess or Thraven stole the diadem (the princess is actually much more likely, since leaving that note is really silly for Thraven to do). It makes much more sense when looking at the behavior of the elves.
Thraven could have left the note on the suggestion of the Princess. They expect the elves to catch up and attack, so that they can escape in the resulting confusion.
All part of the plan!
I absolutely agree the module needs editing. If I could pass one message onto the LFR admins, it would be better editing and playtesting.
It's not like the LFR admins (global and regional) don't understand the importance of careful editing and playtesting. Unfortunately, we can only edit and playtest the adventures that we have access to before those adventures are released.
Shawn
LFR Global Admin
It's not like the LFR admins (global and regional) don't understand the importance of careful editing and playtesting. Unfortunately, we can only edit and playtest the adventures that we have access to before those adventures are released.
Shawn
LFR Global Admin
May we assume from your comment Shawn that the WiR modules were not shown to anyone in the RPGA before thye were sent out?
The first look I got at the final version of WEEK1-1 Beneath Haunted Halls was about a week before the event, after it was released in digital form for people running the events. I was made aware of the premise/plot/setting of the adventure in advance, and I thought it sounded great.
I cannot add much to what other people have been saying. If the players at the table do not have a good time, that is a DM/player problem. However, DM empowerment is not an excuse for those of us creating adventures: we should be called upon the carpet when an adventure is lacking. I had a great time DMing the adventure, and I think the players at my table had a good time. But I wish I had had the opportunity to make edits to the adventure before it was released. I don't claim to be perfect, but I've been involved in the creation of enough RPGA adventures to see where issues can sometimes creep into the design and development of them, and more eyes on something never hurts. I would never want anything I wrote (adventure or otherwise) presented to the public without getting a serious review by at least two other people.
Shawn
1) As an un-tiered adventure, it was too difficult for first level characters, but did not provide ample rewards for characters at higher levels.
2) Many players were disappointed by the fact that the access to alchemical formulas in part two was utterly useless due to the revision to the campaign standards the day before. Aside from the +2 armor or +2 implement award at the conclusion of part three, this was viewed as the best reward for playing. There was no good reward incentive for experienced players to play, most especially when compared to the level of difficult.
3) The final combat of part three was a never ending meat grinder of that the players had almost no possibility of actually defeating. (Only one table thought to knock the monsters unconscious and dump their bodies in the pit to prevent respawning.) A few people began to assumed that the final encounter was actually intended to end the adventure with the total destruction of the party. It flies in the face of everything that WotC was touting about how they'd were making 4e more fun for everyone.
But worse than that was the shear randomness of the portals!!! Once our slot zero group figured out how they were going to get home, it was more a dozen rounds later before the number the needed was rolled. (We resolved this by using a stack of MtG land cards to represent the different planes - three cards per plane of existence. While still random, it was guaranteed that the desired portal would eventually appear at some point!) I am still blown away that they allowed this mechanic into the adventure. What happen to how randomness makes the game less fun? How many die rolls did they eliminate from the game because of that mantra? And then they go and base the survivability of a single encounter off of the exact opposite!
And then there was the fact that to have any hope of escaping, they needed to ready an action to run at the portal, should the be lucky enough to have it appear within the next round. This means forgoing attacks against the monsters in the room.
And then there is the fact that if a player gets spirited back home against his will (such as what happened to the paladin at one table in the first round of the encounter), the party is left with increasingly fewer players in a fight that quickly out matches them. That character might ultimately survive, but to those still stuck in the encounter, they might as well have just been struck dead in a single blow.
4) While we didn't have as much issue with the overall story of the adventure, the transitions between parts required a serious suspension of belief. We had expected three individual adventures that were closely tied together by the plot - not one long adventure with a couple of convenient points to take a break (irl, not in game). While it was not mechanically a problem to run, pretty much everyone at least rolled their eyes at the continuity of it.
While the WitR was a general success for getting people to come out and play, the adventure itself was an absolute failure and actually left many players with a bad impression (one person swore off playing any mods written by Mr. Sernett). At best, this was a poorly designed adventure that was even more poorly adapted to the RPGA style of play. Whether it was the author, the editor, or who ever else participated in the creation of this adventure, they all had a hand in it in one way or another, and it's only fair that they all share the blame for such a disappointingly disastrous adventure - more so in the fact that it was intended to draw people to LFR and may well have done the complete opposite!
(Only one table thought to knock the monsters unconscious and dump their bodies in the pit to prevent respawning.)
I raised that possibility, my DM said it wouldn't work.
I raised that possibility, my DM said it wouldn't work.
See this is an example of what I think (as a DM) is a very creative PC solution, and in the context of facilitating fun and rewarding creativity, you bet I would allow that. Bloody impressive idea. :D
Sadly, there will still be DMs who are not there to facilitate fun but to try to defeat any PC solution that is not brute force. :P
One of my tables did have the idea of using Mage Hand to carry a rope with the loop around a pillar to the lever in the lightning pillar room. Sure, I thought I could be MEAN and say the lever went the other direction (considered it for about 10 milliseconds) but then I wanted to reward their creative thinking. So it worked just fine!
As far as the adventure, Beneath Haunted Halls, I think none of the LFR campaign staff had any role in editing (designing, playtesting, etc.) the adventure. None of us are happy about that. I don't know that we can do a darn thing when WotC uses one of their full-time paid employees to write a LFR adventure, and declines to have a volunteer or a contracted free lance help (Global Admin) edit it. :embarrass
However, most of us staff folks who ran a WitR managed to adjust the adventure so that gamers mostly had a good time. Mostly we just ran it as if we had edited it.
Keith
All in all, most people had fun because of the GM and players, not because of the MODULE.
Welcome to D&D. Hope you enjoy your time here.
I agree that a map would have been awesome sauce.
And yes, this module required a lot of careful reading to understand what was happening.
I think much more info is unnecessary, since players and DMs that care about the background, likely are already aware of the intricities because they have read all the books and material.
Woah!
Although I did cut some comments about how there is some in there this is just so different from how I see things. I like to get my background from playing. I don't find books of D&D lore very interesting but that's completely different from how much detail I want to find in the game.
the module is exactly where i want to find the intricacies laid out. I can see how a desire to keep the word count down or whatever might militate against this and acknowledge that others might agree but I'm pretty sure I'm not alone. [and LFR modules are pretty short anyway]
I think I recall the module specifying active creatures in the final encounter -so knocking them out wouldn't help -though I'd be tempted to DM empower that one.
I think I recall the module specifying active creatures in the final encounter -so knocking them out wouldn't help -though I'd be tempted to DM empower that one.
Actually, for the magma hurlers and the fey panthers, the adventure says living creatures on the map. For the wight, it says "active wight", probably as the author did not want to say living undead, being rather awkward. So the knocking creatures unconscious rule was inspired, and putting them in the pit removes them from the area swept by the roving portals.
If PCs removed them from the room itself, out the doors, I would rule that was off the map, so fresh monsters would be deposited, but I think the pit is on the map. DMs might argue about this last point...what is the boundary of the map for this purpose.
Keith
I agree that the format was not RPGA friendly. I much preferred the formatting of the one-offs with both the "flavor" and the "kruft" put into the same encounter section, not separated by a number of pages (damn it what was the DC for finding that sword in the zombie wall again??? etc).
The module had a weak, but plausible stopping point for a full rest between parts 1 and 2 (outside the Halls). Theron can tell the PCs that the Diadem is supposed to keep Eldara safe, so she isn't in any moral danger, just danger of getting away (OK, fine, she'll be researching in library for part of that time, then doing the ritual at the speed of plot).
The module had no stopping point for a full rest between parts 2 and 3, and in fact, due to the 24 hour rule probably shouldn't get one at all. Thank goodness that that flavor text line about "the paths to the heavens and the hells" caught my eye (though no evidence of such paths was written into the module). Taking the PCs through my encounter* was pretty fun from my end and gave a great way to give the PCs their rest without slowing things down. Plus after the encounter, people were likely to be at a good distance from the Vortex of Souls without being smack in it (like Price is Right).
I agree with others that the East-West option that skipped treasure was dumb, thanks to my Head Organizer Brian for the suggestion to give the PCs a different gateway in the Shadowfell reflection (though I only changed the flavor and not the mechanics - miniature table for Creepers instead of Giant's table, burned library for flooded one).
I'm going to do another post in a bit about plot comments (which I think were also deficient).
* If you didn't play at my table and are interested, in the encounter with the Princess in the room past the lightning trap room (OH GOD!!!), I put in two different, super short encounters. Instead of taking the players directly to the Shadowfell reflection, I took them first to a reflection in a demonic part of the Elemental Chaos. A wall of lava blocked passage out and souls burned in a flame in the center of the room. Where the princess stood a Balgura charged the players and a Vrock screamed with demonic delight (does 34 hit your fortitude?)? Maybe a little mean, but it gave the players a taste of what demons looked like and the players weren't in any real danger as the Vrock could only stun and the Balgura couldn't one hit kill a PC. After a round against the PCs, the room shifted again to a heavenly reflection on a plane in the Astral Sea with instead of a wall, a shear cliff to a beautiful vista. Instead of souls being tortured, souls were singing songs of praise and worship. Standing next to such a soul gave them their extended rest as implied to have happened (somehow) by the module.
If Eldara was being a spoiled brat (her betrothal was fake remember), she could have probably taken the Diadem (in keeping with the Moon elves remember) at any time and teleported away. Maybe she needed mounts and a guard on the way to the halls, but I kind of doubt it. I'd guess that she'd be resourceful enough on her own, especially if she sent the note to the Wild Elves, which was only barely implied.
Oh and the note, why would Thraven steal the Diadem when it was being given freely by the King, not even negotiated for, just a straight out gift. Ditto for the princess. That note description in the text did not pass the laugh test. Why would Thraven want to set up a potentially lethal ambush which could precipitate a war on his homeland, even as a love sick dolt?
So the conclusion I came up with was that Eldara was angered that the Moon elves got a raw deal out of the negotiations, saw setting up Thraven to take the fall as a way of sticking it to both Cormyr and Myth Drannor, and the Diadem as a way to both escape and potentially lead her people from the Feywild in a planar resistance against the two as the Mageas Regalas had led an insurrection before. She got Thraven to write a nasty gram to the Elves, which he did properly because he was a dolt, and then she used a Spymaster's Quill to turn it into a murder gram*.
Well, I did what I could. Hope people liked what I tried to do to fill it in a bit.
Oh, and one final thing, as written there is no introductory roleplay; at all. You start on the road rolling perception and initiative in the first combat encounter. Maybe you just got a page of background story read to you. I don't know how people were expected to try and negotiate that first encounter off the bat (though one player did bring it up at the table, I don't think he committed though as the arrows started to really fly - or I missed it). I hope people didn't mind to much getting Shanghai'd**.
* I gave the players two note handouts, one on the elves threatened to murder Eldara. A second note was found in the halls (I put it hidden on Riana's statue, but in the library could be good too), this note was more conciliatory, pleading for the elves of Myth Drannor to give better consideration to the plight of the moon elves and professing Thraven's love for Eldara (which isn't present in the murder note). Players comparing the notes could see that the words where the same but cut and rearranged.
** I started them out in a barracks with the worst hangovers / food poisoning of their lives. A sergeant woke them up at dawn and yelled at them Lee Emory style asking them their names, specialities, and player region (I had notes so I could fashion some insults into the introduction). A captain then called them into a briefing to smooth things over and effect their cooperation on a mission.