-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
In the Belly of the Beast
- Thread starter Messageboard Golem
- Start date
Messageboard Golem
First Post
In The Belly Of The Beast is an adventure for four to six 2nd to 4th
level characters. The majority of this adventure is roleplaying
intensive; pitting the group against numerous NPCs (although it does
have some hack and slash). It is broken up into five chapters as
follows.
Chapter one is the introduction with some notes on customization, along
with a description of what Open Gaming Content is. It also has a few
ideas on what you could use to help with various parts of the module.
Chapter two deals with the history of the NPCs and the current
situation of the story so far. Each NPC or group has its own section
with their history and information on how to add them to your campaign.
Chapter three introduces the PCs to some of the more important NPCs.
This is the beginning of the adventure detailing how the PCs get
involved and which NPCs they ally with. This section also has a
removable section with all relevant gaming stats for all the NPCs along
with sketches and maps; it even has a full page combat table that is
great for keeping track of the NPCs.
Chapter four is the core of the adventure dealing with the beast and
most of the combat. This chapter deals with the current situation and
the environment where the final event takes place. There are eight
events that lead up to the final battle. Each event adds tension to the
Situation between the PCs and the various NPCs. The events can be
played in any order or some may be omitted with a little work.
The last chapter deals with the loose ends, with a small portion going
to each NPC or group. Each NPC or group is given a story hook dealing
with this adventure detailing what actions they will take after the
adventure is over, possibly involving the PCs.
Overall this adventure is well written with the ability to be placed in
any fantasy setting with little work makes it even better. Even if you
don’t use the adventure you could use the backgrounds of the NPCs as a
campaign idea.
level characters. The majority of this adventure is roleplaying
intensive; pitting the group against numerous NPCs (although it does
have some hack and slash). It is broken up into five chapters as
follows.
Chapter one is the introduction with some notes on customization, along
with a description of what Open Gaming Content is. It also has a few
ideas on what you could use to help with various parts of the module.
Chapter two deals with the history of the NPCs and the current
situation of the story so far. Each NPC or group has its own section
with their history and information on how to add them to your campaign.
Chapter three introduces the PCs to some of the more important NPCs.
This is the beginning of the adventure detailing how the PCs get
involved and which NPCs they ally with. This section also has a
removable section with all relevant gaming stats for all the NPCs along
with sketches and maps; it even has a full page combat table that is
great for keeping track of the NPCs.
Chapter four is the core of the adventure dealing with the beast and
most of the combat. This chapter deals with the current situation and
the environment where the final event takes place. There are eight
events that lead up to the final battle. Each event adds tension to the
Situation between the PCs and the various NPCs. The events can be
played in any order or some may be omitted with a little work.
The last chapter deals with the loose ends, with a small portion going
to each NPC or group. Each NPC or group is given a story hook dealing
with this adventure detailing what actions they will take after the
adventure is over, possibly involving the PCs.
Overall this adventure is well written with the ability to be placed in
any fantasy setting with little work makes it even better. Even if you
don’t use the adventure you could use the backgrounds of the NPCs as a
campaign idea.
Merova
First Post
In the Belly of the Beast
"Trust is the last resort of the desperate."
Stated on the back cover blurb of this module for 4-6 second to fourth level characters, this sentence clearly defines the premise. In this adventure, we are exploring the themes of trust and cooperation. It focuses on social challenge by putting the PCs in a situation where combat is not a feasible option, literally in the "belly of the beast."
To elaborate, the PCs are hired by a young member of a prestigious merchant house. Their mission is to thwart a conspiracy that threatens to financially undermine their employer. In pursuing the mission, they and their foes find themselves in a situation where teamwork is the only path that leads towards survival. But can the PCs build a coalition sufficient to overcome the threat? Moreover, how far can the PCs trust their new "allies"?
"The scenario is very roleplaying intensive, as the meat of the story revolves around the characters' ability to successfully hold together an uneasy alliance of three rival groups. There are plenty of chances for negotiation, social tension, and backstabbing." (p.3)
I love social challenges. I think the premise and situation are hot-to-trot, a fresh avenue of exploration in a published D&D module. The situation is tense; the NPCs are vivid. So, through mechanical implementation and advice on technique of play, how does this adventure bring the premise to life for you and your players?
Mechanics
How well do mechanical elements of the game facilitate the premise and aid in implementation? There are three relevant areas to discuss: NPC statistics, encounter design, and social-simulative implementation.
Statistics are the basic tools of game-effective modeling. What does this character add to the die roll to succeed? Look at the stat box; it represents competency. So how do the NPCs add up? Poorly.
While the basic elements, like attacks, saves, or feats, are generally on target, the skill point allocation is horrible. Nearly every major NPC is off in skill ranks by a significant degree. Given the situation, this is a severe flaw. The "social" skill should get the spotlight in this scenario, but there are opportunities to put others to use. Listen can be used to eavesdrop on conversations. Physical skills, such as balance, climb, and escape artist, also could be of use in this module.
Boiling down the scenario to an issue of resource allocation, we can say that the "winning" condition of this game is to survive the "siege" of Vog Mor, the Devourer of Flesh. To do so, the PCs need to acquire sufficient resources to attain the winning condition. Since the situation is designed so as to put a tight limit on available resources, those resources which are presented need to be detailed to their maximum implementation potential.
For example, a viable strategy that the players may come upon is "pulling" their foes into attacking the barricade in easily handled numbers, whittling down Vog Mor's servitor forces bit by bit. To plan this to best effect, the group needs to know who has a high climb skill, so as to minimize the potential of trapping a character on the wrong side of the barricade. Lydia, the bounty hunter, or Nazzek, the orc mercenary, are both viable choices to help the PCs implement this plan, but their skill allocation is so messed up that a DM can't reliably convey their utility to the players.
Furthermore, Vog Mor's special abilities are vague. For instance, in manifesting a tentacle from the floor or wall with the "environmental control" ability, how long does it last? Can it be attacked and, if so, what are its relevant stats? How often can the telepathic manipulation of dreams be utilized? I think these are big oversights. We're talking about the Big Bad of the scenario here, not a random orc. There is no excuse for such mechanical vagueness.
So, I found the mechanics modeling NPC ability to be seriously lacking.
Encounter design is a tough call in writing a published adventure. The resources that a party brings to the table varies drastically from group to group. The 3E guidelines are helpful when using the "iconics" as playtest fodder. However, once you diverge from the standard, things start getting complicated. This scenario does a decent job of covering the bases, but there are a few gaps.
First, in the initial encounter with Vog Mor's servitors, there is an attack upon the barricade. What happens if it is breached? Much of the story revolves around this barrier, both as a tactical and thematic issue. How can it be rebuilt? With an appropriate craft or profession check? A few mending spells?
Second, how many servitors does Vog Mor have? At least ten take part in the initial attack. Then two per attacking character, PC or NPC, challenge the coalition in the second event. How many exist for the final combat? Can this number be depleted by "pulling" or "sweeping" before the final encounter?
Third, what is to keep more powerful groups from combat "sweeping" this event? For instance, after the initial encounter with the servitors, Vadgral wants to take the fight to them instead of waiting for the next siege attempt. This may appeal to the PCs, who then join with the orcs to wipe out the servitors, whatever their number may be. If successful, then who's next? Many such groups may then "sweep" away their opposition and wait for the Big Bad all by themselves. Certainly, the showdown will be tougher than if they had some "red shirts" on their side, but it is definitely doable.
However, "sweeping" misses the entire premise of the scenario, which is exploring the themes of trust and cooperation. What processes are suggestions are offered to a DM to prevent such a situation from occurring? Is there a mechanical measure that can be implemented to discourage the party from "sweeping" their foes and potential allies? Nope.
PCs can be really clever. Even at low levels, there are countless things that resourceful players can use to foil even the most intricately prepared plans of DMs and module writers. However, the situations listed above aren't unlikely. They should have been discussed.
Simulation of social challenge, how does this module handle it? After all, isn't the premise focused on the creation and maintenance of an alliance of disparate and desperate factions? I'm sorry to say that the mechanical facilitation of this premise is totally lacking from the module.
I've seen comments that this adventure is really tough to run because of the number of NPCs involved. It's a roleplaying juggling act to portray each one as distinct and with a unique agenda to push. I look at the cast of characters and see only seven significant players in the coalition building endeavor, not including the players. This isn't an overwhelming number, even for novice GMs. So, why do people claim that it's too tough?
Imagine running a detailed combat involving around twelve participants totally freeform. You ask the players what they want to accomplish and how they hope to attain this goal. Then you consider the NPCs response to such actions and goals. Based upon pure GM whim and player persuasiveness, you detail the happenings of the combat. No dice are rolled. No stats are referenced. No mechanics are used. Wouldn't that be tough? Yes, but why?
Mechanics facilitate implementation. Just as a freeform approach to a large and detailed combat would be difficult, so is social "combat." We need a mechanical approach to social simulation that can be used in conjunction with "actor" stance roleplaying. This point merits a few examples.
Examples of Social Challenges Set in Mechanical Terms
1) Take Nazzek, the mercenary orc. His goals are to be the sole orcish survivor of this mission. He will work with the group that offers the best plan for dealing with the situation. However, he's a cunning foe and will try to manipulate the situation to further his goals.
So, using the base d20 NPC attitude system, we can set a DC for the PCs to meet with their diplomacy skill. His initial attitude to the alliance is indifferent, but, if a DC 15 is met, he'll become friendly to the suggestion and will enter into the coalition. However, there are complications. For instance, Tarmalac, the head slaver, tries to undercut the PCs; he wants to be the guy calling the shots. If he is aware of the negotiating going on between the PCs and Nazzek, he will attempt to oppose the check. If he scores a higher roll, then Nazzek backs out of the alliance.
But that's roll-playing! We want roleplaying! Yeah, actually playing out the negotiation is useful in that it determines situational modifiers. For instance, Nazzek wants his rival Vadgral, dead. If the PCs offer to help eliminate the problem as a show of "friendship" then they ought to receive a substantial bonus to the diplomacy role. Likewise, bribes are good; Nazzek is starving and food is a valuable commodity to a hungry man.
2) Take Ofec, the apprentice necromancer. He lies, bullies, and pontificates. He's totally bogus. However, since the players depend upon the DM to accurately portray the game reality, it's likely that either the DM is going to play him straight, convincing the players that Ofec really is all that, or crooked, tipping the players off to his empty claims. In both cases, the situation is done an injustice. The revelation of Ofec's bluff comes down to DM whim.
But the dice do not lie and the d20 system has a mechanic to facilitate the situation. There should be an opposed roll between Ofec's bluff skill and the PC's sense motive skill. Given the situation, the DM can give Ofec a high situation bonus at the start, due to his "expertise" on Vog Mor; he's talking the talk, after all. However, as things go down hill, Ofec's bogus claims will start to stretch a bit thin, losing the initial bonus and depending upon his natural charm and good dice rolls.
These are not the most elegant systems of implementation, but they work. With a chart of DCs, relevant motivations, and suitable bribes, this situation could have been presented in a mechanically expedient manner with which even a novice DM could have dealt. Just as important is the fact that this approach would have rewarded those players that actually bought ranks in the pertinent skills, which are chronically underutilized in D&D adventures.
And if you're a hardcore "We roleplay social challenge" type, then you could have ignored the mechanical implementation; you're obviously comfortable enough using freeform resolution (ie: DM whim) and cheating those player who allocated resources to the social skills and charisma.
Social challenge is a viable avenue of exploration, one that this module claims to be following. However, there are no mechanics. None at all! Again, we see a design bias that views only combat as worthy of mechanical modeling, creating the impression that D&D is only good for "hack-n-slash" roll-play. This is a pity.
Technique
While this module totally fails in the mechanical arena, it soars above the crowd in terms of technique. There are three areas of technique relevant to this critique: adventure design, advice on implementation, and DM tools.
Adventure design differs from encounter design in that it's a "big picture" view of the scenario. While encounter design focuses on mechanical implementation of a particular event or scene, adventure design looks at how each individual encounter works within the whole narrative structure towards the execution of the premise.
There are three "acts" to this adventure. In "act" one, we have a "lull" setup. The PCs meet their employer, receive the mission goal, and have a minor conflict. The purpose of this mission is to "lull" the PCs into a false sense of confidence and trust. This section runs the risk of going too slowly, but the timing of the combat and the opportunity for the PCs to make showy moves will spice up the scene.
"Act" two involves building the coalition. The PCs find themselves in a tough spot. They need allies, but their only options are three diverse groups of villains. Who do they trust? How do they go about forming a viable coalition out of these miscreants? Meanwhile, their main foe, Vog Mor, makes numerous attempts on their lives through servitor attacks, tentacles sprouting from the floor, and telepathic insinuations.
"Act" three is the siege. The coalition has been built, but is it enough to withstand Vog Mor's attack? Moreover, will the "allies" stand with the PCs in the fight, or will they use the opportunity to further their own evil goals?
All in all, this adventure design is beautiful. It is simple in concept but presents a rich complexity in implementation. The varied moods this module inspires are intense, from overconfidence in the beginning, to desperation in the middle, to determination at the end. The whole focus on trust and cooperation will definitely leave a lasting impression upon your players.
The advice on implementation is wonderful. Suggestions are given on running each NPC, along with useful background, roleplaying notes, and goals. Incorporating this module into a preexisting campaign is also addressed in detail, as is dealing with loose ends; this adventure has consequences for the party in terms of future enemies and allies. The setting is detailed, from Bruno's dining room to terrain conditions of Vog Mor's final attack. Overall, the writing is smooth and helpful.
DM tools are given prominence in this module. There is a chart for keeping track of the combatants. There are useful cards with the NPCs write-ups, with the mechanic-related "crunch" on one side and the technique-related "fluff" on the other. A simple map is provided; it's not much to look at, but it does the job.
Appraisal
I have mixed feeling about this module. I really loved the premise and overall design of the adventure. It dares to explore new ground in social challenge. It combines an intrigue adventure with a siege adventure. There is so much potential in this module.
The thematic elements of the game are gorgeously developed. For example, the use of manipulation is under scrutiny here; the PCs need to manipulate the others into a coalition for mutual survival, but this is called encouraging "teamwork." However, when Lydia ingratiates herself with a PC beau, it's called "seduction." Furthermore, the concept of " ends justifying means" is explored as well. Nazzek wants his rival dead; if the PCs aid him in this task, he will definitely work with them. But does this beneficial result justify a questionable act?
This module is resonant with thematic exploration. The imagery of the barricade separating the alien from the familiar, Ofec's betrayal, the cries and accusations of the tortured souls of the servitors, these and many other situations create a tight thematic exploration which contains no fluff. This is an intense adventure!
Moreover, the premise and adventure design work well outside of baseline D&D. With some mechanical and setting adaptation this would make a compelling scenario in a Ravenloft, Shadowforce Archer, Fading Suns, Engel, Xcrawl, or Mutants & Masterminds game. Heck, it makes for a good scenario even in systems beyond the d20, like Earthdawn, Shadowrun, or Rifts.
I want to give it a high rating. However, the mechanical weaknesses are overwhelming. If this were a setting supplement or "idea" book, the mechanics wouldn't be such a big issue for me. However, it's an adventure module.
When a consumer purchases a module, she's looking for something that contains the following traits:
1) An exploration of an interesting premise
2) A coherent adventure design with advice on techniques to facilitate play
3) NPCs, monsters, and challenges given mechanically sound stats
4) Minimal effort in implementation because the writer has done all the mechanical busywork for her
This module does excellently in the first two areas, but chokes on the second two. Unfortunately, if a module fails at any one area, it fails as a whole. Like a table, if a single leg is broken, utilization becomes troublesome.
Therefore, I am not able to recommend this product.
---OMW
"Trust is the last resort of the desperate."
Stated on the back cover blurb of this module for 4-6 second to fourth level characters, this sentence clearly defines the premise. In this adventure, we are exploring the themes of trust and cooperation. It focuses on social challenge by putting the PCs in a situation where combat is not a feasible option, literally in the "belly of the beast."
To elaborate, the PCs are hired by a young member of a prestigious merchant house. Their mission is to thwart a conspiracy that threatens to financially undermine their employer. In pursuing the mission, they and their foes find themselves in a situation where teamwork is the only path that leads towards survival. But can the PCs build a coalition sufficient to overcome the threat? Moreover, how far can the PCs trust their new "allies"?
"The scenario is very roleplaying intensive, as the meat of the story revolves around the characters' ability to successfully hold together an uneasy alliance of three rival groups. There are plenty of chances for negotiation, social tension, and backstabbing." (p.3)
I love social challenges. I think the premise and situation are hot-to-trot, a fresh avenue of exploration in a published D&D module. The situation is tense; the NPCs are vivid. So, through mechanical implementation and advice on technique of play, how does this adventure bring the premise to life for you and your players?
Mechanics
How well do mechanical elements of the game facilitate the premise and aid in implementation? There are three relevant areas to discuss: NPC statistics, encounter design, and social-simulative implementation.
Statistics are the basic tools of game-effective modeling. What does this character add to the die roll to succeed? Look at the stat box; it represents competency. So how do the NPCs add up? Poorly.
While the basic elements, like attacks, saves, or feats, are generally on target, the skill point allocation is horrible. Nearly every major NPC is off in skill ranks by a significant degree. Given the situation, this is a severe flaw. The "social" skill should get the spotlight in this scenario, but there are opportunities to put others to use. Listen can be used to eavesdrop on conversations. Physical skills, such as balance, climb, and escape artist, also could be of use in this module.
Boiling down the scenario to an issue of resource allocation, we can say that the "winning" condition of this game is to survive the "siege" of Vog Mor, the Devourer of Flesh. To do so, the PCs need to acquire sufficient resources to attain the winning condition. Since the situation is designed so as to put a tight limit on available resources, those resources which are presented need to be detailed to their maximum implementation potential.
For example, a viable strategy that the players may come upon is "pulling" their foes into attacking the barricade in easily handled numbers, whittling down Vog Mor's servitor forces bit by bit. To plan this to best effect, the group needs to know who has a high climb skill, so as to minimize the potential of trapping a character on the wrong side of the barricade. Lydia, the bounty hunter, or Nazzek, the orc mercenary, are both viable choices to help the PCs implement this plan, but their skill allocation is so messed up that a DM can't reliably convey their utility to the players.
Furthermore, Vog Mor's special abilities are vague. For instance, in manifesting a tentacle from the floor or wall with the "environmental control" ability, how long does it last? Can it be attacked and, if so, what are its relevant stats? How often can the telepathic manipulation of dreams be utilized? I think these are big oversights. We're talking about the Big Bad of the scenario here, not a random orc. There is no excuse for such mechanical vagueness.
So, I found the mechanics modeling NPC ability to be seriously lacking.
Encounter design is a tough call in writing a published adventure. The resources that a party brings to the table varies drastically from group to group. The 3E guidelines are helpful when using the "iconics" as playtest fodder. However, once you diverge from the standard, things start getting complicated. This scenario does a decent job of covering the bases, but there are a few gaps.
First, in the initial encounter with Vog Mor's servitors, there is an attack upon the barricade. What happens if it is breached? Much of the story revolves around this barrier, both as a tactical and thematic issue. How can it be rebuilt? With an appropriate craft or profession check? A few mending spells?
Second, how many servitors does Vog Mor have? At least ten take part in the initial attack. Then two per attacking character, PC or NPC, challenge the coalition in the second event. How many exist for the final combat? Can this number be depleted by "pulling" or "sweeping" before the final encounter?
Third, what is to keep more powerful groups from combat "sweeping" this event? For instance, after the initial encounter with the servitors, Vadgral wants to take the fight to them instead of waiting for the next siege attempt. This may appeal to the PCs, who then join with the orcs to wipe out the servitors, whatever their number may be. If successful, then who's next? Many such groups may then "sweep" away their opposition and wait for the Big Bad all by themselves. Certainly, the showdown will be tougher than if they had some "red shirts" on their side, but it is definitely doable.
However, "sweeping" misses the entire premise of the scenario, which is exploring the themes of trust and cooperation. What processes are suggestions are offered to a DM to prevent such a situation from occurring? Is there a mechanical measure that can be implemented to discourage the party from "sweeping" their foes and potential allies? Nope.
PCs can be really clever. Even at low levels, there are countless things that resourceful players can use to foil even the most intricately prepared plans of DMs and module writers. However, the situations listed above aren't unlikely. They should have been discussed.
Simulation of social challenge, how does this module handle it? After all, isn't the premise focused on the creation and maintenance of an alliance of disparate and desperate factions? I'm sorry to say that the mechanical facilitation of this premise is totally lacking from the module.
I've seen comments that this adventure is really tough to run because of the number of NPCs involved. It's a roleplaying juggling act to portray each one as distinct and with a unique agenda to push. I look at the cast of characters and see only seven significant players in the coalition building endeavor, not including the players. This isn't an overwhelming number, even for novice GMs. So, why do people claim that it's too tough?
Imagine running a detailed combat involving around twelve participants totally freeform. You ask the players what they want to accomplish and how they hope to attain this goal. Then you consider the NPCs response to such actions and goals. Based upon pure GM whim and player persuasiveness, you detail the happenings of the combat. No dice are rolled. No stats are referenced. No mechanics are used. Wouldn't that be tough? Yes, but why?
Mechanics facilitate implementation. Just as a freeform approach to a large and detailed combat would be difficult, so is social "combat." We need a mechanical approach to social simulation that can be used in conjunction with "actor" stance roleplaying. This point merits a few examples.
Examples of Social Challenges Set in Mechanical Terms
1) Take Nazzek, the mercenary orc. His goals are to be the sole orcish survivor of this mission. He will work with the group that offers the best plan for dealing with the situation. However, he's a cunning foe and will try to manipulate the situation to further his goals.
So, using the base d20 NPC attitude system, we can set a DC for the PCs to meet with their diplomacy skill. His initial attitude to the alliance is indifferent, but, if a DC 15 is met, he'll become friendly to the suggestion and will enter into the coalition. However, there are complications. For instance, Tarmalac, the head slaver, tries to undercut the PCs; he wants to be the guy calling the shots. If he is aware of the negotiating going on between the PCs and Nazzek, he will attempt to oppose the check. If he scores a higher roll, then Nazzek backs out of the alliance.
But that's roll-playing! We want roleplaying! Yeah, actually playing out the negotiation is useful in that it determines situational modifiers. For instance, Nazzek wants his rival Vadgral, dead. If the PCs offer to help eliminate the problem as a show of "friendship" then they ought to receive a substantial bonus to the diplomacy role. Likewise, bribes are good; Nazzek is starving and food is a valuable commodity to a hungry man.
2) Take Ofec, the apprentice necromancer. He lies, bullies, and pontificates. He's totally bogus. However, since the players depend upon the DM to accurately portray the game reality, it's likely that either the DM is going to play him straight, convincing the players that Ofec really is all that, or crooked, tipping the players off to his empty claims. In both cases, the situation is done an injustice. The revelation of Ofec's bluff comes down to DM whim.
But the dice do not lie and the d20 system has a mechanic to facilitate the situation. There should be an opposed roll between Ofec's bluff skill and the PC's sense motive skill. Given the situation, the DM can give Ofec a high situation bonus at the start, due to his "expertise" on Vog Mor; he's talking the talk, after all. However, as things go down hill, Ofec's bogus claims will start to stretch a bit thin, losing the initial bonus and depending upon his natural charm and good dice rolls.
These are not the most elegant systems of implementation, but they work. With a chart of DCs, relevant motivations, and suitable bribes, this situation could have been presented in a mechanically expedient manner with which even a novice DM could have dealt. Just as important is the fact that this approach would have rewarded those players that actually bought ranks in the pertinent skills, which are chronically underutilized in D&D adventures.
And if you're a hardcore "We roleplay social challenge" type, then you could have ignored the mechanical implementation; you're obviously comfortable enough using freeform resolution (ie: DM whim) and cheating those player who allocated resources to the social skills and charisma.
Social challenge is a viable avenue of exploration, one that this module claims to be following. However, there are no mechanics. None at all! Again, we see a design bias that views only combat as worthy of mechanical modeling, creating the impression that D&D is only good for "hack-n-slash" roll-play. This is a pity.
Technique
While this module totally fails in the mechanical arena, it soars above the crowd in terms of technique. There are three areas of technique relevant to this critique: adventure design, advice on implementation, and DM tools.
Adventure design differs from encounter design in that it's a "big picture" view of the scenario. While encounter design focuses on mechanical implementation of a particular event or scene, adventure design looks at how each individual encounter works within the whole narrative structure towards the execution of the premise.
There are three "acts" to this adventure. In "act" one, we have a "lull" setup. The PCs meet their employer, receive the mission goal, and have a minor conflict. The purpose of this mission is to "lull" the PCs into a false sense of confidence and trust. This section runs the risk of going too slowly, but the timing of the combat and the opportunity for the PCs to make showy moves will spice up the scene.
"Act" two involves building the coalition. The PCs find themselves in a tough spot. They need allies, but their only options are three diverse groups of villains. Who do they trust? How do they go about forming a viable coalition out of these miscreants? Meanwhile, their main foe, Vog Mor, makes numerous attempts on their lives through servitor attacks, tentacles sprouting from the floor, and telepathic insinuations.
"Act" three is the siege. The coalition has been built, but is it enough to withstand Vog Mor's attack? Moreover, will the "allies" stand with the PCs in the fight, or will they use the opportunity to further their own evil goals?
All in all, this adventure design is beautiful. It is simple in concept but presents a rich complexity in implementation. The varied moods this module inspires are intense, from overconfidence in the beginning, to desperation in the middle, to determination at the end. The whole focus on trust and cooperation will definitely leave a lasting impression upon your players.
The advice on implementation is wonderful. Suggestions are given on running each NPC, along with useful background, roleplaying notes, and goals. Incorporating this module into a preexisting campaign is also addressed in detail, as is dealing with loose ends; this adventure has consequences for the party in terms of future enemies and allies. The setting is detailed, from Bruno's dining room to terrain conditions of Vog Mor's final attack. Overall, the writing is smooth and helpful.
DM tools are given prominence in this module. There is a chart for keeping track of the combatants. There are useful cards with the NPCs write-ups, with the mechanic-related "crunch" on one side and the technique-related "fluff" on the other. A simple map is provided; it's not much to look at, but it does the job.
Appraisal
I have mixed feeling about this module. I really loved the premise and overall design of the adventure. It dares to explore new ground in social challenge. It combines an intrigue adventure with a siege adventure. There is so much potential in this module.
The thematic elements of the game are gorgeously developed. For example, the use of manipulation is under scrutiny here; the PCs need to manipulate the others into a coalition for mutual survival, but this is called encouraging "teamwork." However, when Lydia ingratiates herself with a PC beau, it's called "seduction." Furthermore, the concept of " ends justifying means" is explored as well. Nazzek wants his rival dead; if the PCs aid him in this task, he will definitely work with them. But does this beneficial result justify a questionable act?
This module is resonant with thematic exploration. The imagery of the barricade separating the alien from the familiar, Ofec's betrayal, the cries and accusations of the tortured souls of the servitors, these and many other situations create a tight thematic exploration which contains no fluff. This is an intense adventure!
Moreover, the premise and adventure design work well outside of baseline D&D. With some mechanical and setting adaptation this would make a compelling scenario in a Ravenloft, Shadowforce Archer, Fading Suns, Engel, Xcrawl, or Mutants & Masterminds game. Heck, it makes for a good scenario even in systems beyond the d20, like Earthdawn, Shadowrun, or Rifts.
I want to give it a high rating. However, the mechanical weaknesses are overwhelming. If this were a setting supplement or "idea" book, the mechanics wouldn't be such a big issue for me. However, it's an adventure module.
When a consumer purchases a module, she's looking for something that contains the following traits:
1) An exploration of an interesting premise
2) A coherent adventure design with advice on techniques to facilitate play
3) NPCs, monsters, and challenges given mechanically sound stats
4) Minimal effort in implementation because the writer has done all the mechanical busywork for her
This module does excellently in the first two areas, but chokes on the second two. Unfortunately, if a module fails at any one area, it fails as a whole. Like a table, if a single leg is broken, utilization becomes troublesome.
Therefore, I am not able to recommend this product.
---OMW
Similar Threads
