Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sadras" data-source="post: 7079712" data-attributes="member: 6688277">In Hoard of the Dragon Queen (HotDQ) an uneasy alliance exists between the Bullywogs, the Lizardmen and the Cultists, the adventure stipulates that the lizardmen would be amenable to an arrangement between the PCs and the Lizardmen against the other two factions.As a backstory (and to fast-track the HotDQ story, as we had had 10 full session prior of Murder in Baldur's Gate), I established that the connection which might have been made by the PCs with the lizardmen had already been made by the Harper organisation which in turn asked for the PCs assistance in exploring the alliance with the lizardmen to strike out at the Cutlists. As an extra I inserted a partially submerged temple within the swamp which imprisoned a beholder (why or how has not yet been established, only that the beholder does not have the disintegrate stalk available). In the 5e MM it describes the unnatural phenomena (regional effects) which might occur around beholders. These regional effects include the temporary appearance of trinkets - I built on this idea that the lizardmen, rather primitive in technology, saw these trinkets as gifts from the divine and they perceived these gifts would appear when they were in close proximity to the temple. Ignoring some inserted backstory about the tribe's shaman and a guardian of the temple, the lizardmen believed that some powerful gift lay within the temple which would assist them against the Bullywogs and the Cultists.They relayed all this to the PCs who agreed to help.Therefore the encounters for the journey were all preset - Shambling Mounds near a sinkhole, a whistle, a Yuan-ti hunting party, floating pebbles and a bridge made of foliage which led to the partially submerged temple roof, which was the nest to a Phase Spider and half a dozen Large Spiders.I had decided that should they enter the temple before solving the riddle, I would create the inside of the temple from from the player's ideas as they spoke at the table (unknowingly) and the random dungeon tables within the DMG until it would dawn on them that this was a dream.The adventure was therefore linear, and this mostly because the DM who was to run our Westeros campaign for that session  informed me earlier that day that he was not prepared and asked if I could run something instead. So I skimmed the next chapter of HotDQ, determined I did not want to run it so hastily, used what was needed from the adventure to run this little side vignette.   Thankfully this railroad session paid off.I'm not sure I understand you here.In (i) I used the guidelines in the DMG for encounter difficulties expected for their level and indeed was generous - given the situational disadvantage that was imposed on them when facing the beholder for the '2nd time'. I did mention that the journey to the temple did happen as it was roleplayed somewhat, so the party earned XP for those encounters. There was no linking of resource expenditure choices to be made.As for (ii), that would have been neat had I thought of it, but I had no idea who was going to solve the riddle and I should mention that I had predetermined which beholder spells would be affecting the party.It would then be my subjective view on whose outcome in the dream sequence more closely aligned with the fear or charm..etc attacks from the beholder. That would be a DM judgment call right? We have no issue with that at our table.</blockquote>

Verification