ZEITGEIST [Zeitgeist] Coaltongue Encounter

Well, I guess I'm going to be that guy.

I'm planning on running Zeitgeist for a group starting Sunday. I've been inspired by several people here to run a Session 0, introducing the setting, and especially Geoff Massarde, to give them a bit of a head start for the big set piece encounter.

I have a few questions about the first act of Axis.

1) My party is going to be four PCs. Should I modify the opening skill challenge at all to reflect that, and if so what would be the best tweak?

2) I've heard rumors of a hi-res version of the Coaltongue map to print off at miniature scale. Are those rumors true? That encounter, more than most, requires a pretty detailed map, because of the intricacies of it all, and I'm not sure my artistry is up to the challenge on it's own. Plus, the map is so pretty, I want to be able to use it on the table for my players.

3) How much is the DM to assume the PCs know about the ship? Like, there is a montage section where they are taking a tour or whatever, and I want to make sure they have all the pieces to the puzzle (wards, firegems, shovels, etc.), so is it best to just tell them about all of that, or should I wait until the actually encounter and then tell them things like "oh, you know a ship like this would normally have several shovels for the firegems" or are those the kinds of things they should learn by asking for help from others? I'm more interested in the encounter being fun and exciting rather than frustrating, if that makes sense.

4) Along those same lines, should the PCs know how many rounds they have left? Should I just tell them, "you have 40 rounds to solve this and then the ship blows up" or should I just not say anything and try to keep up the suspense through narration? I'm sure the answer to some of these is "whatever works best for you", but I guess I'm just curious how others have done it.

Thanks, everyone!

Not ideal timing because I'm at Gen Con and don't have access to my computer. Ping me at ryanznock at gmail, and I'll see if I can get you a high-res map. The layout is a smidge different from the one in the adventure, though.

Don't tell the PCs how much time they have, but provide some clues that stuff is getting worse, so as to rachet the tension.

I think with 4 PCs you just reduce the number of successes needed for the skill challenge.

Montage tour is a good time to share info. Good luck, have fun.

#1 . Your party will have less actions and they are on a round counting clock so I'd drop the number of successes required in the challenge or give them more rounds unless you are using some sort of wacky house rules for skill challenges (like I am).

#2 . I print all the maps on posterized 13x19 paper (have done so since WotBS); assuming you have something like photoshop to up the uprez and sharpen a bit they actually come out OK despite being ~25PPI images.

#3 I believe the module states the PC's get offered a tour of the ship. They get to meet some of the crew, see the sights and ask questions if they wish. If your party is of the heart string tugging variety you can flesh out some of the soon to be dead crew they meet (the module has some bits in it already you could draw on).

#4 I think telling the party exactly how long they have rather than describing what is happening would kill this part of the encounter. But, keep in mind there is a way to trivialize this; if the party is smart enough to use the fire runes they won't take any fire damage from doing anything, so all they need to do is figure out a way to open the rusted furnace door and then they are home free. I'm thinking the fire runes were left in as a way to have an out where the ship sinks but everyone isn't killed, but if 3 party members just hold onto the things they can shovel/scoop fire gems out of the furnace to their heart's content w/o any fire damage (which is what my party did). If the terrorists were smart the first thing they would have done is either destroyed those or at least thrown them overboard.

rangda said:

[URL=http://www.enworld.org/forum/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=1]#1 [/URL] . Your party will have less actions and they are on a round counting clock so I'd drop the number of successes required in the challenge or give them more rounds unless you are using some sort of wacky house rules for skill challenges (like I am).

Click to expand...

Mind if I ask what kind of rules you are using?

RangerWickett, I'll send you a message, but don't worry about it right away. I purposefully asked a few weeks ahead of time. I'm not expecting to need the map for at least two weeks, so... no rush. Enjoy the con!

d2OKC said:

Mind if I ask what kind of rules you are using?

Click to expand...

I talk about them a bit in my campaign thread, but they are based on the concepts of the GUMSHOE system.

I've broken skills into two groups, active skills and investigation skills. Some skills have moved and some have been split. For example perception is now the active part of perception, i.e. spotting an ambush and evidence collection is the investigative part of perceptions, i.e. finding clues. Characters get a certain number of investigation points to spend on investigation skills (the idea is to have close to 100% skill coverage so as you have fewer players they get more IP each so party IP is vaguely the same). I give PC's one point in the IP for their class' power source (I've added Tech and Martial Lore skills so every skill has a power source) and other than that it's a free for all, they can buy any skill or investigative skill as long as they have the points or spend feats. For investigative skills they can spend multiple points.

With investigative skills it is assumed the players are actually good at what they do so (generally) there is no dice rolling. Low to moderate DC check information I give anyone who has a point in the appropriate skill. High DC information (say DC 18+ @L1) is purchased by spending points; so if a scene has information like this I'll say "you can spend a point of these skills to find out more" and it's up to the PC's to decide whether they spend their points. Spent points refresh at level up (in GUMSHOE they don't refresh until the module ends but GUMSHOE modules are much smaller than the 2-3 level modules ENWorld does).

In skill challenges I give the party an automatic success for every investigative skill point they have that is appropriate for the challenge. So if Arcana & Nature are listed as skills in the challenge and the party has 3 Arcana points and 1 Nature Lore point (the investigative version of nature) they get 4 auto-successes. The only requirement is that they tell me what they are doing with their points to get the auto-successes, for example "I use Arcana to do some research on the artifact". Once they get their auto-successes just for having the skills they can spend IP as with high DC information to get more auto successes (in my previous example, someone could spend 1 Arcana IP to get a 5th auto-success).

I really like this for seveal reasons:

1. Opening skills up makes for more well rounded parties skill wise, and helps eliminate some of the rock-paper-scissors in D&D skills (we have no DEX character so nobody has theivery).
2. Skill challenges become more a give and take between the GM & players instead of an exercise in dice rolling tedium. The auto-successes encourage the players to think of ways to use their skills.
3. (The big reason for GUMSHOE in the first place). You don't have the players getting stuck because they arbitrarily rolled poorly on a skill check to get some vital piece of information.
4. It encourages players to spend feats on something besides raw combat power.

That's an interesting system.

I've usually done my "skill challenges" pretty fast and loose. Like, I just give the PCs a conflict, a goal, and let them try and figure out creative ways to solve it. The more creative the better.

I like to try and hint at using skills and powers in ways they wouldn't normally. My group has a problem getting their heads around that a bit. I haven't fully decided how I'll run this challenge, but it will probably be pretty close to the book, based on the very specific goals in each ten-minute round.

I don't know. Maybe I'll update here later after I've done it.

My group has the following:

Human Swordmage
Human Wizard
?? Artificer (This player has not been very forthcoming with his character stuff so far)
Razorclaw Shifter Shaman/Monk

There isn't a lot of social-interaction in the group, which concerns me a bit, but it was like pulling teeth getting them to choose characters, so as long as they've got them finished I'm fine with it.

Yeah, I'll just update here later if I do anything different. Let you guys know how it goes. Thanks!

Would i be correct in assuming that a maximum of three creatures could stand in front of the Coaltongue's furnace to shovel out firegems? Perhaps only two?

I'd say three, if they're willing to take the damage.