Help me "unspoil" the surprise

[pukunui]

Hi all,

I'm currently running H1: Keep on the Shadowfell and I intend to follow it up with H2: Thunderspire Labyrinth. While I would prefer to design my own adventures, the time required to do so is a luxury I simply don't have. That being said, however, 4e makes me feel a lot more comfortable about winging it should my players do something unexpected or should they go off on a tangent.

Anyway, the thing is that I prefer not to emphasize that I'm using premade modules so that my players will focus more on the story and get more immersed in the fantasy world, etc etc. Although I understand why they do it, having modules with very revealing titles can be quite annoying sometimes ... as I discovered much to my chagrin just last session.

The players ran through the Water Cave encounter in H1 and discovered the letters and map that act as a hook for the Bloodreavers in H2. Unfortunately, when I was doing the map, I put an arrow pointing to the east with "Thunderspire" under it. In retrospect, I should have put "To the Seven-Pillared Hall", as that would've been more vague ... because as soon as one of my players saw the map, he blurted out, "Thunderspire! That's the name of the next module!" Doh!

Not all of my players pay attention to WotC's catalog, and I think that that just ruined things for them. They all know I want them to go to this Thunderspire place next. Yes, one of the players wants his character to go there anyway because he's a minotaur but that's beside the point. I don't want the group to feel railroaded into following the hooks to the next published module just to make it easier on me. I want them to feel free to let the adventure take them where they want to go.

So how do I "unspoil" the surprise? Any ideas?

Should I try to "trick" my players into thinking they going somewhere else only to have them wind up at Thunderspire after all? Should I go through all the other hooks with a fine tooth comb and make sure they don't read like neon signs with "This way to the next module" written on them? Should I just get over it and try harder to make hooks that are more vague yet somehow just as enticing?

I suppose I could make a new map without "Thunderspire" on it and swap it out for the first one and see if anyone notices/remembers the player's blurted comment next session ...


Thoughts? Comments? Questions? Anyone?


Thanks in advance.


Cheers,
Jonny

 

[greyscale1]

I would start with replacing the words on the map.

Most of your ideas are good, I'm afraid I can't offer any specific advice as I haven't played the moduals. What I would do is take many of the hints towards thunderspire away and let the players just continue doing what they were doing. At some point you could do maybe a 1 shot where they played an ill-fated group of 'whatevers' in the days when thunderspire was just built. Some people who might have been instrumental in ancient days?

Iunno.


I wouldn't worry about it to much. I find that a good DM usually fears railroading much more than his players, dont get too worried about them feeling railroaded unless you actually see them actively denying their character goals to doot-dee-doo after the plot. In the time before thunderspire, just make sure that all the characters will have an incentive to go there. That way, even if it is the only REAL adventuresome options, most PCs wont have trouble with that little bit of thematic RP.



Goooood luck.


~Grey

 

[Wild Gazebo]

Wait.

Your worried that your players might know enough about the published modules that they would purposely follow a path out of politness--for you!

Wow. Stop worrying and go take your group out for pizza.

 

[pukunui]

I would start with replacing the words on the map.

Most of your ideas are good, I'm afraid I can't offer any specific advice as I haven't played the moduals. What I would do is take many of the hints towards thunderspire away and let the players just continue doing what they were doing. At some point you could do maybe a 1 shot where they played an ill-fated group of 'whatevers' in the days when thunderspire was just built. Some people who might have been instrumental in ancient days?

Iunno.


I wouldn't worry about it to much. I find that a good DM usually fears railroading much more than his players, dont get too worried about them feeling railroaded unless you actually see them actively denying their character goals to doot-dee-doo after the plot. In the time before thunderspire, just make sure that all the characters will have an incentive to go there. That way, even if it is the only REAL adventuresome options, most PCs wont have trouble with that little bit of thematic RP.



Goooood luck.


~Grey

Wait.

Your worried that your players might know enough about the published modules that they would purposely follow a path out of politness--for you!

Wow. Stop worrying and go take your group out for pizza.

LOL. Thanks guys.

It's not so much railroading or that my players might have read the modules as much as me wanting to downplay anything that might remind the guys that they're just playing a game. I really want them to get into it and get into the roleplaying and all that and having someone blurt out "Hey that's the name of the next module!" doesn't really help.

For the record, though ... yes, my players would let themselves be railroaded out of politeness. They don't want me to have to work too hard.

 

[CharlesRyan]

I agree with your retrospective strategy to take the names of other adventures out of the clues you hand to players (changing "Thunderspire" to "Seven-pillared Hall"), and doing that sort of thing in the future isn't a bad idea.

But like the other posters, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it this time around, especially if your players aren't showing any resistance. From a dramatic standpoint, don't think of it as railroading--think of it as foreshadowing.

So long as your players don't have some sort of knee-jerk negative reaction to perceived "railroading," foreshadowing is actually a nice dramatic technique that gives the campaign some continuity. And the players all know that there's going to be another adventure, so, as long as the campaign direction is more or less within their expectations, who cares if they know the name of it in advance?

 

[S'mon]

If I want to run module X, I tell the players that, and give them reasons why their PCs want to do X. I'm not a fan of using 'Illusionism' to make the players think they're freely choosing to go to X, when it's the only thing I'm ready to run.

So, I wouldn't worry about it at all. Problems arise only when, due to prior events, PCs would logically not do X. In that case you need to either not run X, or get the players to make new PCs for the adventure.

 

[S'mon]

Wait.

Your worried that your players might know enough about the published modules that they would purposely follow a path out of politness--for you!

Wow. Stop worrying and go take your group out for pizza.

QFT.

 

[pukunui]

I agree with your retrospective strategy to take the names of other adventures out of the clues you hand to players (changing "Thunderspire" to "Seven-pillared Hall"), and doing that sort of thing in the future isn't a bad idea.

Cool. I think I might do that. I certainly will be more careful in the future.

But like the other posters, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it this time around, especially if your players aren't showing any resistance. From a dramatic standpoint, don't think of it as railroading--think of it as foreshadowing.

No, they're not resistant. They're never resistant. They're all perfectly happy to go along for the ride. I'm very lucky, I know.

who cares if they know the name of it in advance?

I guess I'm the only one ...

If I want to run module X, I tell the players that, and give them reasons why their PCs want to do X. I'm not a fan of using 'Illusionism' to make the players think they're freely choosing to go to X, when it's the only thing I'm ready to run.

It's not so much that I'm trying to give them the illusion of choice. It's more that I just don't want to emphasize that I'm using a module. It just sort of spoils it. I've had a very hard time articulating this (this thread was at least my fourth attempt at it and I don't think I succeeded this time either).

 

[S'mon]

It's not so much that I'm trying to give them the illusion of choice. It's more that I just don't want to emphasize that I'm using a module. It just sort of spoils it. I've had a very hard time articulating this (this thread was at least my fourth attempt at it and I don't think I succeeded this time either).

But does it spoil it for them, or just for you? If just for you, then "don't worry about it" seems like good advice.

 

[Grimstaff]

I wouldn't be worried about letting an adventure name slip, "shared adventures" is a big part of the D&D community (wanna hear how my character died in Tomb of Horrors? How many PCs Irontooth killed?), just try to keep the details close to your chest until they've played it.

You could always change up the backstory with something like having a rival gang of warlock-slavers wipe out the bloodreavers, and change up the stats of the first section of encounters a bit, so the players don't feel like they're in "familiar" territory.