Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="incognito" data-source="post: 553023" data-attributes="member: 7008">Ha!  I've beat that mouthy/write-aholic seasong to the critiquing punch!Here now is this Judge's decision in the seasong vs ImhotepthewiseJust to remind our contestant's I'm looking for proper use of the ingredients, playability of the scenario.  Writing style, originality, and hooks/spin-off’s also factor in.Let's begin with seasong because he wrote first:Even Seasong's bad writing is still pretty ok.  And we can see how a little sleep deprivation can affect a submission.  Let's start with the bad, because there are a few really obvious omissions.#1 Where's the Paladin's holy mount?  Is it that little pony thing? Seasong took some poetic licence with the ingredient, but it just feels like he excluded it - I missed it after 3 readings!#2 The drow card.  If you're going to incorporate the drow, in a backstory, plot hook, and in the loose ends, don;t they deserve an encounter or two in the actual story?  Espcially since according to the plot hook, they've encountered the dancing  sword/been in the tower.  If there is a danger of the drow overtaking the tower -why doesn't the party bump into them on thier way to doing just that?#3 Weak ingredients.  Gargantuan fire beetle AND Flooded mine feel tacked on; something for Tom to do.  While sesong set up two interesting and role-play filled creepies (Tom Gallows & Mud), the inclusion of these elements seems too over the top/unlikely/'magicky'  - added just for the ingredient  of it, than adding anything to the adventure.So what's good?The tower itself, both as a power center that multiple groups can struggle over, and a realistic place to explore.  Notice how so many evil mage/cleric types build their fortresses right out in the open?  W'sup with that - the local goody-goodies are bound to notice and send in adventuring types to "strength check DC 25" a few doors.The necromancer's toys: It's tough to create horror. I've tried.  It's easy to make things that are gross, but difficult to make things downright creepy.  Tom Gallows is creepy.  The living diary is creepy - great ingredient use.  Mud, if his name wasn't so lam, is also another nasty thing one could see a necromancer doing to someone.  Mud needs a better MO, and a much better name, but at least I totally see him, wandering the halls of the tower, giving Tom a good wallop every now and again. So...it appears that Imhotepthewise has a chance at deposing the veteran!  On to his submission.First, a brief nod to the fact that English is not Imhotepthewise's first language.  Since this is a writing competition, he is at an inherent disadvantage, the again, no one forced him to take part in this contest in the first place.These all based on the saddened Paladin's Mount:  this is the best use I've seen of this ingredient.  In no one else's story do I really feel for the horse, including the official IronDM submissions.  Good job Imhotep!  We do tend to see the beetle and the flooded mine used together. Do, while not entirely unique, it is still passable. Note that Imhotep provides for non-combat solutions for all the encounters.  I like that!  a Hack and slack pary can hack, and a role-playing party can do their thing as well.  My players tend to go 50/50 - I think there is value to be had in having the option.Where this scenario falls down is the interaction with the crippled rogue, mount, and the greatsword.  Why would a paladin's greatsword consort with a banished rouge?  Why would a highly intelligent mount allow the rogue anywhere near his fallen master's sword?  Or the diary?  Better to drown than consort with the toungle-less one.It's not that I don't like the concept of this rogue, it's just that there is not enough reason for events to play out as the back-story describes.  It make's more sense for the horse to stomp he rouge flat, or the sword to reject him.  ....both these submission have a few compelling concepts, both has some serious flaws.  Seaong sneaked an ingredient or two in while Imfotep faces language and contextual challenges.It all comes down to: is seasong's ingredient blunders a big enough penalty to make Imhotepthewise's scattered, soemtime's unintuitive entry the victor?It isn't. I award this round to seasong, becasue IronDM is about a single scenario, not about setting up a campaign.Oh, and boy's: one word Exposition!</blockquote>

Verification