Witchfire trilogy question

[cwhs01]

As the review section of ENworld is still down, i thought i´d ask the boards instead; Is the witchfire trilogy any good?

I have both of the main Iron Kingdoms setting books (world+character guides), and though i have lots of ideas for adventures in the setting, i thought i might look at the witchfire trilogy as well. But i can't find any reviews of it (could be i need to brush up on my googlefu skills), and it's a tad difficult finding any reviews here.
So a few questions, if noone can point me towards a full review:

1. is the series any good (an unfair question as i haven't really explained what i want in an adventure..)
2. how linear are the adventures. Is there any room for sidetrecks, pc´s going of on tangents etc. or is it a series of classic d20 railroad adventures?
3. how much pc/npc interaction is there. Can pc's gain advantages through diplomacy or is a strong swordarm and high str stat more important?
4. how much dungeoncrawling is there.
5. is it easy to convert the 3.0 versions of the modules (probably cheaper, if i can find them in a bargain bin somewhere), or should i grab the revised and compiled version? are there any important changes done in the revision (apart from rules updates)?

 

[Stormborn]

I played in two parts of the 3.0 version. Based on that I would say:
Railroad. Railroad. Railroad.

Very frustating to me. But that may have been in part to the somewhat inexperianced DM.

I cannot help but think that the revisions have to be better.

There are chances for diplomacy, and in some instances you have the choice between combat, stealth, and social interaction; but in the end the story moves to predetermined points regardless of what the PCs do.

What I experianced was largely dominated by dungeoncrawls.

Overall the IK is a great setting. Fantastic ideas, cool look. But in lots of cases I think the execution of the mechanics falls a little flat. Mechanika can be confusing, more so that even standard DnD magic item creation. The gun mage is the coolest class ever but when I played one the mechanics felt weak (a homeruled fix wouldn't be too difficult, but thats a nother story).

Love the world, love the idea of the witchfire trilogy, but I think you would be better off coming up with something for the IK on your own. Or taking the setting and using something like True20 or even d20M/Future to do the mechanics.

 

[Felon]

I played in two parts of the 3.0 version. Based on that I would say:
Railroad. Railroad. Railroad.

Very frustating to me. But that may have been in part to the somewhat inexperianced DM.

Rest assured your poor, inexperienced DM was simply going by the advice provided by the incompetent author. Monte Cook used to have a very concise 2-out-of-5-star review of this book on his website, but he seems to have discarded most of his reviews.

The adventure outright instructs the DM to railroad the players, citing that a good DM gives players the illusion that their choices are significant while moving the adventure along in the proper direction. That's paraphrasing, but believe me I am not twisting their words here. That is the creed held by the author.

A quick spoiler from the end of the first adventure:

Spoiler

The characters are reduced to spectators watching the two villains of the piece duke it out. In typical fashion, the author simply discards the idea that the players might be able to make a difference, insisting they are too low-level to even gain the notice of the NPC's. The players ultimately are provided with a supposedly critical decision to make about which villain gets the mcguffin device, but in a move that sums up this crappy adventure, it actually doesn't matter because either way the same character winds up getting it.

In case you can't tell, I found this adventure particularly odious, mainly because it actually got glowing reviews from some folks here at ENWorld.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

My experience is with the three seperate books, not the compilation, but... Some good setting information, some interesting NPCs, and a decent plot. All tied together with a railroad that allows little or no player choice.

I managed to ditch the railroad, largely by having the NPCs make different choices as well as allowing the PCs to do things. *Spoiler*

Spoiler

The Ogrun PC tackling the ex-Inquisitor was the high point of the first adventure, followed by one of the PCs trying to pick up the Witchfire, getting hurt by it, then throwing it in the general direction of Alexia. Actually fairly close to the way the book thought the battle would go, except that Oberon was more than willing to target PCs. I also had to redo some of the maps, since some of the buildings just made no sense as designed (a gatehouse without a gate, that kind of thing).

Use it as an outline, mix it in with some adventures of your own design, and allow the players freedom of choice and you can have some fun with it. Follow it like the railroad it is designed as and, while the players may never notice the railroad they are riding on, it will feel like a scripted computer game and you, the person running it, will have less fun.

Some of the required event scripting can also happen 'off screen' - if it needs to happen, and if the PCs aren't allowed to change it, then there is no reason for the PCs to be there, so let 'em read about it in the papers. Or, as I did in one scene, if you have a PC that is likely to be sneaking off on his own, allow that one PC to spot the bad guy(s) and follow if he wants, he will feel that he has accomplished something if he can describe what happened to the rest of the party. And if he does not follow then have the events happen 'off screen' - do not force him to follow.

The adventure does set up some important events in the Iron Kingdoms, so if you are using the setting then it can help flesh out the surroundings for the PCs. Just don't become a slave to the book.

The Auld Grump

 

[Ashrum the Black]

And I'd have to disagree. I ran the entire witch fire series for my players and they had loads of fun. The two main villians you mention are duking it out in the middle of an undead assualt on a church. the players have been invovled in and are still invovled in saving the chruch while these two folks go at it. They are window dressing to the real fight, which is the players saving the city and the chruch from the undead.

When the sword is lost during the battle it is up to the players as to what they want to do with it. Mine gave it to Alexia becaue they rightly feared the Inquistor would do terrible things to them and because Alexia agreed to stop her undead army if they did. Seeing the townspeople screaming and dying left them little doubt they were making the best choice. Even if they hated doing it.

Every complete adventure I've ever read feels railroaded behind the screen. Its the DM's job though to make sure the folks end up where they need to be. I've tossed whole sections of modules before because the players jumped left instead of right. I still brought them back to the ending though and normally use at least portions of the dropped sections to get them there.

The point is that the module is only a railroad if the players feel its a railroad and that's the same point of the author of the modules. The players are low level, and most players will stay out of this fight, they don't belong in it, it is out of their league. Throw some fireballs around 3rd level parties and they should get the picture to stay back.

If they don't and try to jump in, let them. No, they won't kill Alexia, she needs to escape today, but even if the barbarian runs in and does a max crit with a great axe you can describe how his blow rocks cleaves her arm, she drops the sword her hand still gripping the hilt, and she clutchs her bleeding stump. She offers to forestall her revenge if they return th sword. Otherwise the undead will never stop. Or maybe she grabs the player with the sword and they both teleport away. He's found later the next day wondering around, no memory of where he was or what happened. When the pc's meet her later she now sports a mechanical hand.

Was the outcome predetermined, yes. The PC's make a descision on the witchfire, and Alexia gets away. But the PC's don't know that. And when they see her mechanical arm they know they had an effect on the magor villian and the outcome.

The modules IMHO were very well done, and some of the tightest I've seen under 3.0. I haven't read the updates but can assume they have remained as tight. My party had tons of fun with them (which is the point) and I did very little modification. The dungeon crawls were well done, the roleplaying sections were excellant and left planty for the DM to expand on and some nice directions for the PC's to explore if they chose to. Which is truley where the DM needs to do their own work to allow the modules to cme to life.

As for the 2 out of 5 stars from Monte Cook, while I love his writing and his books, his playing style and mine are very different in what we're looking for. At least from what comes through over the internet. So I'd look through the module on my own and make up my own mind.

-Ashrum

 

[painandgreed]

I was a player in the first adventure(3.0). It was fun and a good mix of RP and dungeon crawl that didn't seem so much railroaded as much as just following the logical steps, but it was obvious that the ending was railroaded and frustrating to the point of getting your character killed in protest. I would imagine that a good DM who didn't play it word for word the way the module lays it out could come up with a good freeform adventure with the same end results that would allow the adventure to continue.

 

[cwhs01]

hmmm. i think i'll browse through the revised book before any decision of a purchase. But it seems (though a few have disagreed) that it may be too scripted/railroaded for my taste. But stil fixable, and as it is a cool setting, i'm rather undecided as to what to do.. dangit

 

[Felon]

And I'd have to disagree. I ran the entire witch fire series for my players and they had loads of fun. The two main villians you mention are duking it out in the middle of an undead assualt on a church. the players have been invovled in and are still invovled in saving the chruch while these two folks go at it. They are window dressing to the real fight, which is the players saving the city and the chruch from the undead.

I don't know how you can describe a big Dragonball-Zesque battle between high-level mages as window dressing. It's the main event that everything builds towards. It just so happens that the PC's aren't a factor in it.

When the sword is lost during the battle it is up to the players as to what they want to do with it.

Right, which is what I said. I also pointed out that it doesn't matter because if they make the "inconvenient" choice, the author has the error automatically corrected. There are actually a lot of little corrections like that, which mainly require DM's to declare certain NPC actions occur without providing the players an opportunity to react, or conversely that player actions are summarily interrupted and prevented (the author doesn't seem to think much of the concpet of initiative rolls).

The point is that the module is only a railroad if the players feel its a railroad and that's the same point of the author of the modules. The players are low level, and most players will stay out of this fight, they don't belong in it, it is out of their league. Throw some fireballs around 3rd level parties and they should get the picture to stay back.

IMO you are making some broad assumptions about the way players are going to take cues. If the players aren't heroic, they have no real incentive to be getting involved in the first place. If they are heroes, they will try to get involved even if they know they're out of their league. Heroes do such things.

If they don't and try to jump in, let them. No, they won't kill Alexia, she needs to escape today, but even if the barbarian runs in and does a max crit with a great axe you can describe how his blow rocks cleaves her arm, she drops the sword her hand still gripping the hilt, and she clutchs her bleeding stump. She offers to forestall her revenge if they return th sword. Otherwise the undead will never stop. Or maybe she grabs the player with the sword and they both teleport away. He's found later the next day wondering around, no memory of where he was or what happened. When the pc's meet her later she now sports a mechanical hand. Was the outcome predetermined, yes. The PC's make a descision on the witchfire, and Alexia gets away. But the PC's don't know that. And when they see her mechanical arm they know they had an effect on the magor villian and the outcome.

You say it's only a railroad if players perceive it as a railroad. Now, I don't know how savvy the average gamer is, but my group has been about a century of collective gaming experience, and they would certainly perceive this bit with the arm severence (instead of life severence) as the DM intervening to save an NPC from the party.

And when they see the mechanical arm, they won't think they had a meaningful effect on the major villain because they can see the bottom line: there really is no net effect. She had a flesh arm, now she has a mechanical arm. If they chop that off, maybe she'll get a crystal arm. Mox nix.

The modules IMHO were very well done, and some of the tightest I've seen under 3.0. I haven't read the updates but can assume they have remained as tight. My party had tons of fun with them (which is the point) and I did very little modification.

Well, it's certainly worth noting that some players can have a wonderful time even when they're being railroaded and they know it.

 

[Felon]

hmmm. i think i'll browse through the revised book before any decision of a purchase. But it seems (though a few have disagreed) that it may be too scripted/railroaded for my taste. But stil fixable, and as it is a cool setting, i'm rather undecided as to what to do.. dangit

While Ashrum and I strongly disagree, I think it's good that different people step forward to give you a range of views. The Iron Kingdoms campaign setting is pretty good. As for this particular adventure, there comes a point where you, as the DM, are doing so much re-writing that you really might as well be coming up with your own adventure.

Typically, the benefit of buying a packaged module is that a lot of the work is done for you. I can come up with my own story, just gimme some maps and save me the trouble of writing down a bunch of different stat blacks. That isn't the case here. There is a lot of unmapped terrritory, and there's not a great array of villainy. Just Alexia and a few different varieties of thralls. "Thralls", btw, are just the product of the author wanting something gross and yucky to throw at 1st-level PC's, and deciding that zombies and skeletons don't cut it.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I loved it from a player's perspective, but then, I *like* a railroaded adventure. Give me a strong plot and interesting NPCs over a playground I can watch my fellow players screw around in while I search vainly for a plot hook any day.

As a player, I do my best to railroad other players to follow the GM's plot (as long as I'm enjoying said plot), so take my views on it with a grain of salt. As a GM, without a player whose tastes were similar to mine to nudge the PCs into not rebelling against the story, I can see getting frustrated with it.