Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 PeteZero Dec 11, 2008 7:16:31	So, I want to run this adventure for my group. Reading over it I noticed it is very combat heavy. I would like to get more exploration and roleplaying in. For LFR, can I just take out some combats (and maybe lower XP, gold, treasure bundle rewards)? And can I add a side treck (without altering final rewards)? And if yes, has someone done it actually yet? Looking forward to some suggestions, or maybe even solutions? Thanks!
#2 eljeffex Dec 11, 2008 8:57:36	Are you running this as a home game? I've run it myself and I like the module. I have some complaints with layout and, like you, the lack of much roleplay. You can say that last part about most of the LFR modules, though. What you need to do is inject your own roleplay parts into it. If you're running it at home, you can take all the time you want. Add in as much roleplay as you want. There's a lot of NPCs detailed but not much in the way of opportunity to interact with them as an LFR module series, unless the DM specifically allows or creates it. If you want to drop an encounter or three, I'd suggest replacing them with skill challenges of equal xp value so that the players get the full boat for having played. There are encounters you can skip and/or bypass as well, so feel free to leave those out alltogether, as long as the players are aware and agree so they don't feel cheated out of possible xp. Of all the LFR modules so far, Scepter Tower is pretty special in that it takes the character out of play and requires 30 hours or so to complete, more if you take your time and add in extra roleplay. I don't see this being run often as anything more than a home module, so I'd say add what you want to make it fun for your friends.
#3 Dragon9 Dec 11, 2008 13:12:33	Roleplaying is something the players should be doing on their own... why does the module need to dictate their roleplayig opportunities? The mod, like many other published mods, are dungeon crawls. They aren't big on the intrigue and role playing. Howveer, you can tailor the mod to the players you are running it for if you wish, as long as you don't change the publshed max xp rewards or treasure bundles (when running it for LFR).
#4 _Mithreinmaethor_ Dec 11, 2008 15:19:06	If you are running this as an LFR event and the characters are to be carried forward as LFR characters then you should run it as is. The document you download when you sanction the game should have information on how to modify the encounters based upon number of players etc. And I agree with the other poster. The players should be roleplaying on their own. Its not the modules responsibility to provide or force roleplaying.
#5 telvin3d Dec 11, 2008 15:30:44	Also, that adventure includes extensive descriptions of various NPCs and other residents that the characters can interact with that have nothing to do with the adventure itself. If you want more roleplay, just have the characters interact more with them between battles.
#6 syrsuro Dec 11, 2008 15:32:41	There is more than enough 'meat' for substantial roleplaying in the adventure information (the different camps, the NPCs at the monastery, etc.) What there really isn't is the use of this material in skill challenges. So if what you really want is roleplaying - this has lots of useful information and doesn't really need to be changed. But if you want to add more skill challenges, that is a different matter. To start with, I would stip out some of the redundant encounters - they seem to like the 'lets fight the same thing for an entire level's worth of encounters' approach. Elminating one or two (or four) of those fights gives you the experience budget to do other, hopefully more interesting, things. That said, one change I am going to try is to make it a bit closer to the written adventure (and a bit more old school and a lot less LFR like) and that is to use some of the experience freed up above to allow for 'wandering' monsters. But I will connect those wandering monsters into the players skill use (good stealth and perception to avoid them) as well as using them how they were intended to be used ( Show to 'encourage' the players to take their extended rests either at a camp or the monastery
#7 Madfox11 Dec 12, 2008 3:48:14	If you are running this as an LFR event and the characters are to be carried forward as LFR characters then you should run it as is. The document you download when you sanction the game should have information on how to modify the encounters based upon number of players etc. This is not exactly true. You should run it more or less as printed, and you definitely cannot change xp and treasure rewards. DMs empowerment does allow minor changes, and exchanging a few fights with similar challenging skill challenges is certainly within what is allowed with DMs empowerment. So I wouldn't add complete sidetracks, but the changes Syrsuro talk about are certainly fine. Some of those were changes I also contemplated. I probably would also make Show the rival adventuring group less aggressive and give them a somewhat more long-term rivalry approach
#8 PeteZero Dec 12, 2008 8:06:46	Thanks for all the helpful replies. One amendment will be reducing the number of fights, and add something else. In the end I won't change the possible treasure. And my players already said, they don't mind getting less xp or gold and throwing out some random combats. Will see, what I will add (probably some skill challenges), but at least it is good to know that I have some freedom.
#9 JohnduBois Dec 12, 2008 10:39:37	I'm DMing this adventure for a group, and even from the start, I made some RP changes (although no combat changes). The biggest probably was Show introducing Devlin and Kal in the initial trip to the monastery. The PCs rolled well on Streetwise, so I figured I'd drop some future recurring elements early. As it turns out, the PCs interacted a lot with Devlin, and gave him some information about the party that I may or may not be using in the future.
#10 mr_industrialpants Dec 12, 2008 10:41:06	One thing I have done, with at least my non-LFR home games, to help induce 'role'-playing from others is get into character myself. Often times this has helped, other times it's lead to silliness. I would encourage any DM to 'get into character' when running NPCs as this should cause the players to get into character in response. Good luck.
#11 andra Apr 29, 2009 15:46:55	I merged Vannak and the wandering band of adventurers for the purposes of role-play and it seems to have worked well. The pcs were very curious about Vannak and his potential prisoner and it led very easily into a later wandering fight. I found the currently present skill challenges a little limiting as far as what skills were able to be 'successes' and have added a lot of other skills (e.g. kn: Dungeoneering for the flooding trap) to help with successes. I've also made the key to the door a bit more of a puzzle and added in another quick puzzle door between the ramparts and catacombs instead of one of the quasi-skill challenges.
#12 Keithric Apr 30, 2009 8:20:20	The beginning doesn't seem so bad - in the wererat area there's a lot of ways to RP in every combat. Even the wolf encounter I had people trying to calm and Nature them and arguing amongst themselves on whether to kill the feral beasts. I've been trying to figure out what I'd like to do in the Catacombs for RP, as it's a bit more tricky with undead. I've been considering maybe having the specter following them around and taunting and teasing them at various points. For the tower... well, I haven't thought extensively on it yet. It has lots of creatures that could talk, but oh my good does it look bland and boring, so yeah, just not sure what I want to do with that. My group did a fair amount of RP with all the people at the monastery (like, literally all of them), but I doubt they'll visit Vannak unless I give them a good reason so I was thinking of having them see him at some point when they're going through the ruins and overhear a snippet of conversation about his captive.