My poor, unfortunate players...

[billd91]

I'm assuming, then, that you've never seen a Ravenloft adventure? Because all the bad things you hear about 2e adventures is because of Ravenloft modules. *shudder*

No I've read several Ravenloft modules and I recall Feast of Goblyns being pretty good. I don't remember any kind of requirement that the party needs a paladin to kill the BBEG or get into serious sheep dip.
I don't remember *any* 2nd edition-era modules I've ready *requiring* any particular class. That's bad form since you never know what the players are bringing to the table.
Now, if this had been with pregenerated characters like most of the old RPGA tournament modules, then I'd understand it a little better. Though it still doesn't explain how the PCs have gotten that information.

 

[MerricB]

While I wouldn't use the exact phrase , I agree with most of it.

Calling players dumb or stupid for not doing as you intended, being able to solve a puzzle, do the "obvious" thing, etc. is neither respectful or polite.

Players are not mindreaders and I believe that noone thinks exactly alike. Something obvious to the DM may not be so obvious to the players and vice-versa.

I had told the players what they had to do. I said that above. I said it extremely clearly.

Hell, I'd repeatedly told them what they had to do. I'd even told them the consequences for them mucking it up: their 8th level PCs would have to fight a 13th level necromancer with a maximised circle of death spell. (Think you people can make a DC 22 Fortitude save? Go ahead!)

And the sorceress still killed the bad guy. All the rest of the players looked on in absolute disbelief. I was kind, though. I just banished them to another plane. They can fight the even bigger bad guy when (if) they get back.

I've been preserving the plot of Feast of Goblyns to preserve the innocent. (It's a really great module, and I really advise you don't read this if you ever want to play it!) Here's some spoiler text. Invis-o-mode on!

Spoiler

At the end of Feast of Goblyns, the party have in their possession the Crown of Souls, an immensely evil artifact, and to destroy it, they must kill Radaga, an evil necromancer.

However, the Crown also wants Radaga dead, because it holds the soul of one of her ancestors, the really evil necromancer Daglan. When the last of his descendants dies, he gets to free himself from the Crown and enter Radaga's body and use it for his own.

The Crown will be destroyed if the party member wearing it kills Radaga. (It was a paladin in this particular adventure). Daglan will be freed if Radaga dies by any other means.

Your poor players is right, but probably not for the reason you think. Sounds like a bad case of lame railroading to me.

Sounds like you don't have a clue.

I suppose you think only allowing silver weapons to hurt werewolves, or clerics to turn undead is also lame railroading.

The PCs could take any path they liked towards the end, but had one simple requirement at the end of it all. Believe me, they would have achieved it easily, if one of the group hadn't decided to be utterly moronic.

I had one dumb player, and three other players struck dumb by amazement. They're all poor schmucks because of where they'll end up and what they'll have to deal with.

Cheers!

 

[JesterPoet]

I had told the players what they had to do. I said that above. I said it extremely clearly.

But how did their characters know that the Paladin was supposed to kill the BBEG?

 

[Ovinomancer]

After the invis-o-text explanation, this seem a pretty clear cut case of one player screwing the others. If I was a player in your group, I'd have a serious heart to heart with the sorcerer.

 

[JesterPoet]

After the invis-o-text explanation, this seem a pretty clear cut case of one player screwing the others. If I was a player in your group, I'd have a serious heart to heart with the sorcerer.

But we still don't know how much of that the characters know.

 

[MerricB]

But how did their characters know that the Paladin was supposed to kill the BBEG?

They'd been told by someone they trusted. If they'd bothered to do some research (consulting sages, the gods, etc.) they would have confirmed it.

Because that was in the previous session (two weeks before), I made a special point of reminding the players of that fact. They were all well aware of what they had to do.

Cheers!

 

[JesterPoet]

They'd been told by someone they trusted. If they'd bothered to do some research (consulting sages, the gods, etc.) they would have confirmed it.

Because that was in the previous session (two weeks before), I made a special point of reminding the players of that fact. They were all well aware of what they had to do.

Cheers!

Okay, in that case, your characters are (or perhaps just a single character is) dumb.


Though I'd still have to agree with whoever it was that said Ravenloft was famous for railroading.


EDIT BTW.... What is the sorceress' alignment?

 

[MerricB]

Neutral tending Chaotic, I think.

It doesn't excuse being destructive, though. Even CN characters have a sense of self-preservation. (Those that don't, don't survive long enough!)

It's definitely a single player who is dumb; the rest are just unfortunate.

With regard to the railroading in Ravenloft - possibly. Certainly the beginnings of adventures are railroaded to some extent (as most adventures are!), but Feast is unusual in its presentation: it definitely has a suggested plot, but it makes it very clear that it's only the most likely course of events.

It's actually a difficult adventure to DM, because it does give so much freedom. It's not "go into a dungeon and kill everything", there are lots of things going on and the PCs aren't aware of them all. However, the set-up is detailed enough that you can diverge greatly from the printed plot and still have a lot of fun.

Cheers!

 

[Ylis]

Ah, yes...well, I'm sure that the poor sorceress is sitting there wondering "well why won't they talk to me" It's too bad, really....

As for Ravenloft adventures railroading, I tend to think that most adventures, Ravenloft or not, tend to railroad. I mean, your characters have a goal set with which they really have no choice on (if they want to play the adventure), they go through the set events within the adventure, and fight the good fight at the end....none of my players want to use modules or adventures and rebel horribly if I try to have a break once in awhile and use one (ending up doing things like what this sorceress did...not being dumb, but being rebellious).

I guess the point of the story is this: be happy with what you got At least they'll play adventures and not plot to muck up your games Still, I agree with you, MerricB, they were given ample notice and still failed to do what they were supposed to do...I hope they go through the gauntlets now

 

[Desdichado]

I'm assuming, then, that you've never seen a Ravenloft adventure? Because all the bad things you hear about 2e adventures is because of Ravenloft modules. *shudder*

I thought it was Dragonlance modules that did most of that...