D&D 5E Rime of the Frostmaiden Post-Mortem (Spoilers)

[Ruin Explorer]

Carry on up the Castle

Oh the brutality.

Fair though.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

That's great. I don't consider my preferences the sole taste of D&D. With the way most of the adventure content from Wizards of the Coast has failed to connect with me, I'm finally realizing that my preferences don't line up with the majority of D&D players.

It's a sort of bad spot to be in, honestly. When I'm not interested in the bulk of the official content, it feels like the hobby has moved on from me. Like if most D&D customers are getting excited about an adventure that can be won by hugging unicorns and befriending cuddly baby displacers (the newest Feywild adventure), I have to just enjoy what is there from the past and make my own fun.

You don't have to hate hugging unicorns to be unimpressed with WotC's adventure output. I love hug-a-unicorn stuff and I'm still deeply unimpressed.

I don't think that the tone of WotC adventures even has much to do with anything. WotC just isn't very good at writing campaign-length/adventure path material. They literally never have been. I struggle to think of a WotC AP that is more that more than mediocre, certainly in 4E/5E. They could be as edgy as hell, and about strangling unicorns, and they'd still not be very good.

And the "large sandbox section with poor support!" is pretty common in WotC adventures, and I guess is part of what means they're not really APs. As is "a series of largely disconnected and incoherent adventures". Third parties seem to be a lot better at this. Obviously Paizo are better at this and I don't even like Pathfinder (1E or 2E).

That's not to say WotC doesn't sometimes put out good adventures, but they are very much the exception and tend to be the short and mid-length ones, not the campaign-length ones.

I don't think it's new, and I don't expect them to change, because I think it's management-level failure to recognise they're kind of crap at this, and that their products sell largely because they're part of a brand and well-advertised, and there's an inherent demand for pre-written adventures/campaigns, rather than because of them being particularly good. It's a bit like Abercrombie and Fitch, where one employee said they could put dog-poop on a baseball cap, spell out Abercrombie and Fitch with it, and it would sell. Not quite that extreme, but I suspect even the very worst 5E adventures have sold extremely well, simply because there's no real critical reviewing of this stuff, and customers just take what they're given. It is obviously difficult to critically review an AP before playing it, but most "reviews" early in the life of an AP/campaign adventure are glowing, even if ultimately consensus is that it wasn't very good, simply because the people who review this stuff are mostly fans, and mostly reviewing it in a vacuum in the best possible light (in some cases they don't even DM). And from my groups at least, most of the other DMs don't even look for reviews - they just automatically assume "WotC = doesn't suck". Or, they used to, anyway.

 

[Retreater]

Sigh.
I can assure you there is nothing in the book that says any form of sacrifice is working. It is really badly handled in the book. Not sure what Paul is smoking TBH

So ... I don't know if this is the Mandela effect or what, but I remember a specific passage in the book saying "the sacrifices don't work." Like pretty much in those exact terms.
I don't have the book with me at work, but I'm searching the text on Roll20 (which isn't the easiest to navigate, admittedly). The only reference I am see is "The town speakers (see the "Council of Speakers" sidebar below) have unanimously agreed to honor these practices, which they consider necessary evils, but would end them in a heartbeat if Auril were to be appeased or dealt with in some other way."
This infers that the sacrifices are indeed appeasing and "dealing with" Auril.
Maybe I'm wrong, or maybe it's been revised where the human sacrifice is actually condoned in the newest edit of the adventure?

 

[billd91]

Sigh.
I can assure you there is nothing in the book that says any form of sacrifice is working. It is really badly handled in the book. Not sure what Paul is smoking TBH

That's not the same thing. Burnside's statement is that the adventure text explicitly says the sacrifices aren't working. You're addressing whether the book explicitly says the sacrifices are working. There's a gap between those two statements.
The continuation of the disaster may imply the sacrifices aren't appeasing Auril enough to get her to stop, but that's not the same as explicitly not working at all. They may be staving off the disaster worsening further, they may be doing nothing at all other than showing a certain degree of faith, subservience, and piety (and, honestly, isn't that what all non-monetary sacrifices from foreskins to meat during Lent are truly about?).

 

[BenTheFerg]

That's not the same thing. Burnside's statement is that the adventure text explicitly says the sacrifices aren't working. You're addressing whether the book explicitly says the sacrifices are working. There's a gap between those two statements.
The continuation of the disaster may imply the sacrifices aren't appeasing Auril enough to get her to stop, but that's not the same as explicitly not working at all. They may be staving off the disaster worsening further, they may be doing nothing at all other than showing a certain degree of faith, subservience, and piety (and, honestly, isn't that what all non-monetary sacrifices from foreskins to meat during Lent are truly about?).

There is no guidance on this matter.

The book states:

SACRIFICES TO AURIL
The desperate people of Ten-Towns, hoping to appease Auril so that summer can return to Icewind Dale, make sacrifices to the Frostmaiden on nights of the new moon. This is a new practice that started a little over a year ago, when it became clear that Auril was angry and summer would not be returning anytime soon. The town speakers (see the "Council of Speakers" sidebar) have unanimously agreed to honor these practices, which they consider necessary evils, but would end them in a heartbeat if Auril were to be appeased or dealt with in some other way."

There is nothing I have found in my reading to indicate otherwise.

As others have pointed out, new players in the 10 Towns can have any desire to help them destroyed by the knowledge they practice human sacrifice.... Fortunately the community have found fixes, eg by having the cult of Auril organising such things & having them & their leaders the Frost Druids as an evil organisation the players need to deal with.

As for making a comparison between fasting in Lent & human sacrifice......?!?! whatever!

 

[BenTheFerg]

So ... I don't know if this is the Mandela effect or what, but I remember a specific passage in the book saying "the sacrifices don't work." Like pretty much in those exact terms.
I don't have the book with me at work, but I'm searching the text on Roll20 (which isn't the easiest to navigate, admittedly). The only reference I am see is "The town speakers (see the "Council of Speakers" sidebar below) have unanimously agreed to honor these practices, which they consider necessary evils, but would end them in a heartbeat if Auril were to be appeased or dealt with in some other way."
This infers that the sacrifices are indeed appeasing and "dealing with" Auril.
Maybe I'm wrong, or maybe it's been revised where the human sacrifice is actually condoned in the newest edit of the adventure?

No - it suggests they are not working since Auril is not appeased. The problem is this is badly developed..... as mentioned above, some GMs have posted how they have introduced a cult of Auril who are leading the sacrifices, led by frost druids. At low level, pcs will have to be careful of them (think The Wicker Man)....

 

[BenTheFerg]

No - it suggests they are not working since Auril is not appeased. The problem is this is badly developed..... as mentioned above, some GMs have posted how they have introduced a cult of Auril who are leading the sacrifices, led by frost druids. At low level, pcs will have to be careful of them (think The Wicker Man)....

Later we get on p22

"Although each town has resolved to appease the Frost maiden with sacrifices of one kind or another, no respite from winter's fury seems forthcoming."

 

[Retreater]

There is no guidance on this matter.

And this is a shame, considering that human sacrifices are likely going to be a big deal for players of heroic characters. If the writers can't address it clearly (even if it's unclear if it works or not), that's a glaring oversight.
Why even put this in the adventure if you're not going to follow up with it? It's human sacrifice - in lawful towns!
Next thing you'll know they'll add in dogs and cats, living together and mass hysteria.

 

[billd91]

And this is a shame, considering that human sacrifices are likely going to be a big deal for players of heroic characters. If the writers can't address it clearly (even if it's unclear if it works or not), that's a glaring oversight.
Why even put this in the adventure if you're not going to follow up with it? It's human sacrifice - in lawful towns!
Next thing you'll know they'll add in dogs and cats, living together and mass hysteria.

What are the PCs going to do? Balk at helping the Ten Towns that feel they have been driven to institute human sacrifice as a desperation measure? It's not like they're gleefully murdering people to further their evil cult.

 

[BenTheFerg]

What are the PCs going to do? Balk at helping the Ten Towns that feel they have been driven to institute human sacrifice as a desperation measure? It's not like they're gleefully murdering people to further their evil cult.

The pcs rock up as outsiders to the 10 Towns. One of the first things they can experience is a human sacrifice.

I wish I had handled it better - retrospectively I wish I had the Cult of Auril running it. The event nearly put the pcs off helping the 10 Towns.... fortunately I got them back on track.