Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaculata" data-source="post: 6890067" data-attributes="member: 6801286">The wolf thing also confused our party. The DM described that 2 wolves were chained up, and then a third joins the battle. I assumed that maybe the cave was a bit deeper, and the third wolf was simply hidden from sight. But I think it is definitely an error in the module.And then there's the descriptions. I already spend a lot of words on it in the other thread where I detailed my first experience with 5th edition and LmoP. The description of the cellar is indeed incorrect, there is one door out of the room towards the north (underneath the stairs), and one to the west (to the barracks), plus the one the players came in through (but that doesn't count). The third is a secret door, which you obviously don't tell the players about unless they investigate. But lets look at the actual description of the room:This is a TERRIBLE description for a room, and unfortunately it is the default style for descriptions in most campaign modules. You should never describe a room in this way, because the lay out of the room is completely unclear. The only detail I understood, was that two stairs descend down from a small elevated platform, and that there was a door somewhere. The orientation and location of the door is unclear, and if you look at the actual map, it looks entirely different from what you'd assume it looks like. Campaign modules cannot clearly describe rooms to save their lives.-Measurements of the room are often useless information when trying to get a general idea of what the room looks like. It is better to keep it simple, and say if the room is small or large, thin or wide. The exact measurements are only relevant when specifically asked for.-Not mentioning from which direction the players are approaching, is a huge error, because it makes the location of the other door unclear. So either include the direction from which the players are entering in the description, or describe the entire room from the point of view of the players (to your left you see....). I prefer the latter.-The cistern is also a bad description, because it is more important to describe the basin of water (not everyone knows what a cistern is exactly). -The door to the barracks is not mentioned at all. Further more, the description mentions a door underneath the stairs to the north. Without having any point of reference, the players have no idea where this door is. The description does not mention that the players are coming from the east. A better description, would be to say that the stairs to their right has a door underneath it.Here is how I would describe this room:This is way better, because you now know where things are located from your point of entry. It also gives a better description of this cistern, because a lot of people don't know what a cistern is. You do not need to know compass directions, unless the party has a compass.Lets look at another example from the cave entrance:This description is useless, without first telling the players from which side they are approaching the cave. Further more, the idea of a lookout that is just a bunch of planks lying on the ground is strange, and immediately demands an explanation (why not a watchtower, or why not simply hide in the bushes?). And the river coming from the cave is mentioned in one sentence along with the bizarre look out. Too many details! Start out simple! Here's how you should describe this scene:There you go, done. You could also add further that there's a steep wall of natural rock behind the cave, so the only way to travel further north, is by going through the cave. The map illustrates this, but the description does not include it. When I heard the original description, I thought it was just a cave in the middle of a forest clearing. Which seemed bizarre.</blockquote>

Verification