Hi Keith, thanks for replying. I'm happy to hear that the tactical frustrations were a result of DM error.
In the ship combat, the DM indicated that the railings encircled the entire ship. I argued that there must be a gate or something for the gangplank. He then allowed me to open the gate using mage hand, and then push a bloodied enemy off the ship.
In the second combat, I was basing my comment about the teleport on the assumption that the crenelations were "blocking terrain" (which would block line of effect). The situation as you've described is legitimate.
Other than that, I did enjoy the adventure. Thanks!
It's been a little while since I ran the mod, but if the PC's defeated the last encounter, can't one of the enemies testify about the frame-up? Even if the PC's kill all of them, it's been established that the government can cast Speak with the Dead.
Yes, a reasonable extension from the "ending the encounter" information on what the bad guys may reveal. I admit I was thinking of captives and interrogation, but I would think Speak with Dead would work fine.
There is probably a better method for Gomez's particularly group, which Claire sent him in a off list email.
ps Gomez, if you change around the encounters to add alternative paths, then leave out something, that is not my fault.
Why do people assume I blame the author? Do people read my posts? I already noted I missed something during prep. No reason to nail me to the wall for thinking that defeating the shadow cell would have been enough proof, I just hadn't read the Conclusion well enough.
Still, while the conclusion implies it isn't, possibly capturing a shadow cell member may be enough? The PCs did capture a shadar-kai and smuggle him out of the embassy, pretending him to be a drunk reveler of the social event they were visiting. So that could potentially be enough. I am considering using Claire's idea though.
Why do people assume I blame the author? Do people read my posts? I already noted I missed something during prep. No reason to nail me to the wall for thinking that defeating the shadow cell would have been enough proof, I just hadn't read the Conclusion well enough.
Knee jerk reaction based on how some other people commented on adventures in the past? That, and the fact that is rather easy to glance over important text in mails. We all do it at times
MINI 2-3: The best character scene I had for the party.
Yes, it was railroading the characters ,but everyone had fun for I handed out hidded information to the "messager" so the rest of the PC's didn 't know what was going on. Every one had fun.
Now back to that character scene, The party was just told to swim through the tunnel. The one party memeber is the Kenku Bard who hates getting wet. He takes off his clothes and on top of his pile he puts his treasured Lute. He dives in and comes out the other side fine. The rest of the PC's can't figure out where the tunnel comes out so they decide to swim it anyways ,damn the instructions. They have to take the Kenku's equipment with them. So they come out the other side while the Kenku is dripping wet still. One of the party memebers tries to dry out the lute with no success, so the Kenku gets his waterlogged,burnt lute back. Now there is one dejected Bard.
So he just turns and walks down the street with lute dragging on the ground. The next urchin runs up with instructions and the Kenku just turns to the KID and screams 'NO!'. The kid drops the note and runs away. The whole table couldn't stop laughing for a few minutes.
Our messenger was a hybrid battlemind/fighter, with a very strong sense of honour (so even without the cup, he would not have broken his oath), who kept insisting on going alone to the encounters (we followed him anyway, staying stealthed (rogue, rogue, bard (BOAT), and a paladin (not so stealthy, but the hybrid's perception was very low). Each time he gets attacked, he blames us (despite us attempting to reason with him that neither of the encounters would have gone differently, the first was a trap, the second, due to his refusal to give the cup up to anyone other than the "shadowed man" mentioned in the instructions, would have ended up the same) (this is all in character). By the leadup to the third encounter, one of the rogues has had enough, steals the cup, and runs off. Unfortunately, he's not quite as fast as he thinks (bad athletics check), and the hybrid catches up. After a short scuffle (grab/grapple only, no damage exchanged), the watch turn up, and after the situation is explained (back in the watch house), refuse to let us go until we all agree on one course of action (we had been deciding between pusuing the twin, and just going to the final encounter, nealy splitting the party at one point.).
In the end, we followed the instructions. I'm fairly sure the alleyway is supposed to be the harder fight, but an at will pull 2 made quick work of the warlocks.
Our party totally missed the Sembian connection, until questioning after the last encounter, so missed out on the XP for that skill challenge part.
Overall, I enjoyed the campaign. The second part was a nice hack and slash adventure (though the last fight was a touch harsh, area denial by trap for all but a 6x6 square, and then a large monster with an aura 2....), the last fight was the closest victory I've ever seen (the half-orc rogue dashed to the final lock on the chest to open it after the rest of the party had fallen, I think there was a bit of DME to allow him to turn off the trap after opening the chest with his remaining minor), though there was no obvious flag that doing so would actually get rid of the monster, or that the monster had a bloodied recharge.
The first had a few logical inconsistencies (why was blacktree captured by the pirates, when he'd been framed for murder anyway? And for that matter, why did they kill longbottle?), plus dopplegangers are so overused as to be the default answer for any murder investigation.
"I am the seeker, I am the stalker, I am the walrus"
The first had a few logical inconsistencies (why was blacktree captured by the pirates, when he'd been framed for murder anyway? And for that matter, why did they kill longbottle?), plus dopplegangers are so overused as to be the default answer for any murder investigation.
Blacktree was captured because the villains wanted to question him, and Ravensbluff's system would make it hard to do so while the man is in prison. The reason for framing him was simply to redirect investigation by authorities.
Longbottle actually tells the PCs why he was killed. He was resisting the torture, and the villains decide to kill him since it is easier to question a dead person with the Speak with Dead ritual then him being alive, and you are also more certain he is telling the truth.
Dopplegangers: yeah, but it is a typical catch which is a necessary evil in convention adventures. Without such a catch, chances are that a sizable group of people never solves the mission, and gets frustrated after 4 hours of RP. Strictly speaking he is not necessary for PCs who are doing the right things, and I have DMEed him away on a couple of tables who solved the mystery on their own. There are probably other sollutions to give the players a push, but for LFR it is actually the first time I have seen it.
The first had a few logical inconsistencies (why was blacktree captured by the pirates, when he'd been framed for murder anyway? And for that matter, why did they kill longbottle?), plus dopplegangers are so overused as to be the default answer for any murder investigation.
In part, the agents of Netheril wanted to question Blacktree regarding the Cup of Truth (short term), but in part, they would hope to pressure or control this powerful noble family in Ravens Bluff (long term). Having the heir gives you leverage. I am a great believer in leaving some dangling threads for later adventures to pick up on. As for Longbottle, as explained in the adventure, when he did not respond to torture with the information, they reasoned a speak with dead ritual had a greater chance of results. I am not aware of that much usage of doppelgangers in LFR and the doppelganger was a descendant of a citizen of Ravens Bluff during the LC campaign. His backstory was included which explained his motivation.
Overall, I enjoyed the campaign. The second part was a nice hack and slash adventure (though the last fight was a touch harsh, area denial by trap for all but a 6x6 square, and then a large monster with an aura 2....), the last fight was the closest victory I've ever seen (the half-orc rogue dashed to the final lock on the chest to open it after the rest of the party had fallen, I think there was a bit of DME to allow him to turn off the trap after opening the chest with his remaining minor), though there was no obvious flag that doing so would actually get rid of the monster, or that the monster had a bloodied recharge.
Having less than a 6x6 area that was "safe" from the trap every round combined with a large monster with an aura 2 (and a close blast 5 attack) basically meant that there was never a safe place for the PCs to stand. It didn't matter too much what the PCs did - they'd almost certainly be taking auto damage. The feeling of helplessness did not make it an enjoyable encounter. The thought process every turn was basically: "Well, I could stand here and take auto-damage, or I could stand there and take auto-damage, or I could stand there and take double-auto-damage, or I could stand there and take auto-damage and be bunched up with everyone else, or I could go over there and take auto-damage and provoke from the Frostwyrm, or I could run over there and grant combat advantage and still take auto-damage..." I enjoy challenging encounters, but it's not enjoyable when it doesn't really matter what you do or how well-built your character is or what tactics you use, you're just going to keep taking auto-damage pretty much regardless of player actions. The trap had the potential to make it a dynamic, interesting encounter, but in reality it just turned into a rotating "PC penalty box."
Combined with the rest of the encounter, having the monster be completely immune to the trap was frustrating as it made many controller powers (forced movement, slow, immobilize, etc.) not particularly useful.
With all the auto-damage around, if a PC was reduced to 0 HP, they were pretty much out of luck unless the party could get them back on their feet quickly.
The encounter scaling for the number of PCs did not seem appropriate. If it is possible to win the encounter by just doing the skill challenge, it shouldn't be identical for 4 PCs, 5 PCs, and 6 PCs. The actions required to deal with the skill challenge is a huge resource cost, especially for smaller groups. If I recall correctly, the skill challenge to open the chest required a minimum of 4 standard actions (requiring skill checks that not all the PCs will be able to make), 4 minor actions, and 4 move actions. (Did opening the chest with the keys require skill checks too?) And that doesn't even include all the move actions required to move to each corner of the room and then to the center (and possibly other move/minor actions if a PC hands off the keys to another PC). That also doesn't include the actions required to turn off the flames, grab any treasure, or get back on the elevator. We played this with 4 PCs. We wasted several actions on the skill challenge before we realized it was practically impossible to complete with so few PCs and our efforts were fruitless. The real "trap" was making it look like completing the skill challenge was possible and a valid tactic. (I'm sure it can be done with the right group of 4 characters, but probably not a typical group).
The encounter had a lot of potential and seemed like it could have been really interesting and fun, but it didn't quite make it there. Since I always hate it when people complain about encounters just to complain and don't provide any constructive feedback, I'll offer a few suggestions on ways I think the encounter could have been better:
~ Scale the skill challenge for the number of PCs. Perhaps 4 PCs would need fewer keys to open the chest and 6 PCs would need more. Or something that required a standard action for 6 PCs could only need a move or minor action if there were 4 PCs. Either scale it or make it clear to smaller groups that doing the skill challenge will require a lot of resources and may not be the best option.
~ Have individual successes in the skill challenge have some partial impact. For example, maybe removing the key from each statue partially damages/weakens that part of the trap so that that one quadrant does less damage. Or maybe damaging the trap reduces the Frostwyrm's resistance to cold (the trap was the thing that summoned the Frostwyrm in the first place, so its magic could affect the Frostwyrm).
~ Have more than 2 primary skills for the skill challenge. Having only 2 primary skills available, especially for smaller groups, makes the skill challenge even more difficult to complete. A better option might be to make retrieving the keys a task that doesn't require any skill checks (and just requires actions) and then have the final task of opening the box with the keys be the part that requires checks. That way the entire party can help gather up the keys which can make the encounter feel more team-work oriented and exciting ("Quick, we have to gather up all the keys! You're the defender so you can handle taking the extra damage from the trap, so you get that one, I'll grab this one, you get that one... Oh good, we got them all? Ok, so everyone needs to hand them off to the rogue so he can pop that open while the rest of us hold this thing off.") Otherwise you may have only one or two PCs in the party that can make the checks at each book and they'll really struggle with not having enough actions. And it's also more boring all the way around to have the rogue go from one corner to another corner to another. It's boring for the other players because they can't really help with the skill challenge and it's boring for the rogue because all he's doing is walking in circles making easy checks.
~ Somehow mitigate the "rotating PC penalty box" feel of the encounter. This could be done several ways. If the room was bigger, the PCs could spread out in the "safe" quadrant so they don't take damage from the trap but aren't forced to bunch up for the solo's aura damage and breath weapon. (The statues could be in the middle of each quadrant instead of the corner if there is a concern about a bigger space requiring more move actions to get from one statue to another.) Another option would be to use a monster that doesn't have aura damage and area attacks in such a small space in an encounter that requires PCs to bunch up. Another possibility would be to allow other skill checks (arcana?) to be used to influence the movement of the trap. For example, an arcana check could be used to make the trap reverse direction or pause where it is for a round (although with a restriction that it can't be used to keep the trap in the same location for more than one round in a row). Although that doesn't change the "penalty box" nature of the encounter, at least the PCs would be able to have some control over the trap and it could be used to hold the auto-damage off of their unconscious friend for a round or give the rogue a little extra time to get that last key or whatever.
(To be clear, I'm not saying all of these suggestions should have be used, I just wanted to provide multiple options for improving the encounter.)
Lori Anderson WotC Freelancer, LFR author @LittleLorika
CALI3-3 The Agony of Almraiven (co-author) NETH4-1 Containing Shadow (co-author) CALI4-1 Plain of Stone Spiders (author) QUES4-1 Liberation (co-author) EPIC5-1 Plaguewrought Prism (co-author)
When I ran the playtest the table actually had a lot fun with that fight. The group understood what was going on the instant the DM described what we saw (and he was sticking to the read aloud text). The monk got to use his great speed and Thievery to get those keys real fast. I think the group already had two keys by the time the monster appeared. By the time the monster appeared, they trusted the author that the challenge was about getting inside the chest and not fight the monster, and that was without any obvious hint from the DM (no idea whether there were subconscious hints ). The defender got to lock down the monster, giving the others the space to stay save. Not to mention that with the mark penalty the monster had chance in hell to actually hit the others. Granted, the defender had resist 5 cold, which meant staying in one spot was not a big issue for him.
The group contained a couple of old time players who have been playing the game since 1E, and this particular encounter definitely fits older designs better then typical 4E encounters. So maybe it was better suited for this particular group than most others.
