Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="(un)reason" data-source="post: 9176789" data-attributes="member: 27780">Dungeon Issue 89: Nov/Dec 2001part 6/6Wedding Bells: Another idea that they did several times in the previous edition but have only just gotten around to doing here. The PC’s are invited to the wedding of their friend, but of course things won’t go smoothly and they’ll have to intervene to save the day. Along the way, they’ll be attacked by an unusually well-equipped band of Gnolls, which is foreshadowing that has clues as to the rest of the adventure if the PC’s think to ask. A little later they’ll come across a halfling woman searching for her lost son, which is also downplayed for comedy but important foreshadowing, as he’s been kidnapped by the issue’s cover star to be subjected to unspeakable torments, then being healed so she can torture him again, before eventually becoming dinner. When they get to the village, they’ll be tested before being allowed to enter in ways that may make more hack & slashy parties say screw this, start a fight and miss the whole rest of the adventure whether they win or lose. Once they have gained the trust of the villagers, they’ll soon start getting asked for help with all sorts of minor fetch quests, which will culminate in rescuing the halfling from the harpy. To do so in a timely manner, they’ll need to be able to get information out of a satyr that was raised by a villager but became an outcast as his fey nature and powers became increasingly dominant, strongly implying that he mind-controlled and had sex with the wrong person. So this is an interesting but intentionally problematic little adventure that pushes hard on the limits of what they’ll allow in terms of depicting rape and torture. There’s still a fair bit of bowdlerisation and ambiguity, giving you room to lighten it up in your own campaign, but it’s pretty obvious what they’re implying. Since this is by official 3e writer Jonathan Tweet, it feels like another bit of testing the waters for their full-on embrace of vile darkness next year. If there had been too many complaining letters, would they have scrapped it? Will there be any complaints at all? Another good reason to keep a close eye on those letters pages. Probably not one I’d use, but more for reasons of being irritatingly linear and easily short-circuited if the players do the wrong thing rather than the darkness, which I have no objection to as long as it’s done well. Maps of Mystery is a particularly cool double bill this time, showing us maps of the city of Womthan, (barely a village by modern standards, but you know what fantasy worlds are like when it comes to scale) both on the surface and the secret tunnels underneath. Between the sewers, thieves guild stuff and the hidden crypts probably filled with undead you could run several different adventures here before they explore it all. Make sure you only show your players the first one, unless they’re playing TMNT expys. Between all the subpar promotional tie-ins and the sharp uptick in linearity, this issue was bad, but in an interesting way, showing them actively picking a type of adventure I dislike despite probably having better options in the slush pile. Was this the fault of the editor, or was the promotional stuff shoehorned in by order of someone higher up? Will they do it all again next issue, or will they be freer to actually put the adventures they want in when they’re not pushing the big book releases for holiday season? Just how much room will they have for adventures anyway once they start sharing with Polyhedron? Time to start another year and see just how dramatic the changes they have in store are.</blockquote>

Verification