"Going Down The Road To Hell!" Is Announced!

[Thorin Stoutfoot]

After re-reading your post Thorin, I think I may have erred. Do you think SHARK's more freeform approach is good or bad? It will determine whether I agree or disagree with you, respectively.

I think that the freeform approach has problems if he uses it as an excuse for not fully fleshing out NPCs. (i.e., not providing default spell selections, magic items, etc) I'm imagining a module that says:

Evil Wizard #5: 25th level, 117 xp, Spells: 8/8/8/8/6/6/5/4/4/4/2. Standard spells, standard equipment.

That's ridiculous. I will NOT pay for that kind of abbreviated NPC description. Without a standard spell/equipment selection, I might as well make up the NPC myself and not bother buying the pre-made adventure.

Contrast this to what shows up in Monte Cook's excellent adventures. Not only does he provide spell selections, he describes what the NPC will do with it, and usually better than an average DM can do. (i.e., he usually suggests spell combinations and effects that are amazing) In one particularly memorable encounter, Monte Cook writes: "If this creature manages to grapple a PC, he will drag the PC over to the prismatic wall and stick the PC into it, laughing all the way. He's a real bastard."

Now THAT'S an adventure module. Using the "the DM will fill in the blanks anyway" as an excuse for not doing work is just lazy.

 

[MasterOfHeaven]

Question... I assume the point of the module is to hunt down and destroy the Vampire King, and maybe rescue the Elven Princess. Correct?

If so, what's to prevent PCs from simply scrying the Vampire King and attacking him? Does he have protections against this sort of thing? And even if he does, won't he always be in his fortress? I'm assuming the PCs will always just teleport to the fortress, or right outside of it, and skip traversing through the land.

I know for a fact that the majority of high level PCs act in this way, and if I'm going to buy this module I'd like some assurance that this kind of thing is accounted for, as I know for a fact my PCs will do this if the option is there.

 

[SHARK]

Greetings!

"Evil Wizard #5: 25th level, 117 xp, Spells: 8/8/8/8/6/6/5/4/4/4/2. Standard spells, standard equipment."

LOL! No, dear Thorin, that isn't in the module. No worries!

Master of Heaven: Indeed, all such things are incorporated into the module, with just such tactics in mind!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

 

[mmadsen]

SHARK, I'm a bit late chiming in, but congrats on cranking out this monstrous (200-page!) adventure. If only I had a dozen epic-level heroes in need of an adventure...

 

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Thanks mmadsen! As I mentioned, however, the module has integration notes for groups that are smaller than 12, or larger.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

 

[Dragonblade]

Master of Heaven: Indeed, all such things are incorporated into the module, with just such tactics in mind!

Yeah baby!!

 

[Dragonblade]

I totally agree with you on that note, Thorin. But I think SHARK is a bit more creative than that!

I just hate it when modules feel like a straitjacket. When everything is scripted out to such a confining degree and then no provision is allowed for groups who don't follow the predicted path.

 

[mmadsen]

Thanks mmadsen!

You're very welcome, SHARK!

As I mentioned, however, the module has integration notes for groups that are smaller than 12, or larger.

Ah, but do you have notes for groups of 1 to 4 characters of levels 2 to 4?

 

[(contact)]

You do bring up a valid point in the fact that it is good for a DM to have ready made encounters to save them a lot of work. But if the players deviate from the path predicted by the authors of the module then you have gained nothing other than a book of useless encounters.

It seems like SHARK is taking a more freeform approach. I believe he does have encounters that are detailed enough so that the DM need not expend a lot of extra creativity, and yet are versatile and flexible enough that some clever players won't reduce the encounter to a useless exercise because the author of a module based the whole thing on the assumption that the characters would do X when in fact they do Y.

No, you're misunderstanding my original (probably poorly stated) point. I think a 'free form' encounter structure is the way to go, especially at higher levels.

But each of the villians has some sort of general approach they take toward conflict/combat (their fighting paradigm). I mean, something they are doing worked for them to get them to 20th level, right?

As a DM, I would rather have those approaches laid out for me, then I can adjust them or abandon them entirely as the circumstance (and my assessment of the bad guy's tactical flexibility) warranted.

Make sense?

 

[Eridanis]

Now that you're a few months into this project, do you have an ETA for this adventure?