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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 5206394" data-attributes="member: 29398">Or a Thief-type makes a really good sneaking roll... That suggestion is in there.  However, my party weren't exactly approaching the slave lords module in the traditional way.  It's supposed to "end" with the party facing down the lords and losing, but my lot never got that far.  They attracted enough attention wandering around in Suderham that some of the lords came to them (they barely escaped), then later were hiding in a cave on the same island when the lords came to them again (some surrendered this time, others escaped).The party never realized until much later the lords had been scrying them all along; and a few of the lords had got bored waiting for the party to find them and went out after them instead.My plan was to either have the party captured or befriended by one of the lords who is a double agent [insert long story here]; if captured they'd have woken up already out of prison and drifting on a boat at sea.In the specific case of the slave lords, why would your players see strike-to-subdue as abuse?  Slavers aren't usually trying to kill their inventory! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  There's loads of other situations where strike-to-subdue also makes realistic sense; it's hardly abuse, and in these cases I'd suggest your players might want to lighten up a bit.Lan-"slave to the grind"-efan</blockquote>

Verification