[Wulf's BARAKUS FOLLIES] LOST CITY OF BARAKUS TPK...?


log in or register to remove this ad

For what it's worth, I expect a revolt if I take them prisoner and make them suffer any kind of abuse. Most players (myself included) would rather have their PC killed than enslaved, and I would certainly rather be dead than have my ass tattooed by some damned drow.

Assuming that you mean a PC revolt against their erstwhile mistresses (instead of the DM dodging dice, soda cans, etc.), I think you've got yourself a winner with this idea. Giving the PCs a real, tangible reason to hate the long term baddies in a campaign fairly early on is something I think is just campaign gravy.

And the tattoos? I'd say spider on the forehead and house on the meaty part of the shoulders (mark 'em as property first, and then who's property second, and make sure that their shifts have no sleeves).
 

Enkhidu said:
And the tattoos? I'd say spider on the forehead and house on the meaty part of the shoulders (mark 'em as property first, and then who's property second, and make sure that their shifts have no sleeves).

That was my line of thinking as well-- but I like the idea of the spider at the throat.

Plus, you know, PCs get these crazy ideas about trying to burn off or scrape off tattoos like that, so having it right on the throat... well, discourages that, I hope! :]
 

Enkhidu said:
Assuming that you mean a PC revolt against their erstwhile mistresses (instead of the DM dodging dice, soda cans, etc.), I think you've got yourself a winner with this idea. Giving the PCs a real, tangible reason to hate the long term baddies in a campaign fairly early on is something I think is just campaign gravy.

And the tattoos? I'd say spider on the forehead and house on the meaty part of the shoulders (mark 'em as property first, and then who's property second, and make sure that their shifts have no sleeves).

Shift? Drow slaves should be nude. That way they can't hide anything and feel the most vulnerable. A Tattoo on their butt is fine since it will be shining for all to see.
That way if they escape and survive, they have a shameful reminder that they have to bare to have removed. But the forehead isn't bad either.

If you do capture and enslave them, make the experience especially painful, but brief. Either an early chance to escape or death.

Game ON!
Nyrfherdr
 

If Rule 0 is that the GM can change anything he wants, rules-wise, I think more players need to learn Rule -1:

Stupidity leads to character creation.

I'd say this falls into that category.
 

Really, I think the dumbest part was just blurting out what they were down there for.

The die was cast at that point-- the drow were going to F them, someway, somehow, to get that magic token.


Wulf
 


Wulf Ratbane said:
See, I don't see it that way at all.

How many opportunities does a DM get to introduce the drow to his players?

EDIT: In fact, now I am downright giddy at the thought of double-crossing them and making them truly hate the drow.

So, about those tattoos: Spider at the base of the throat, House symbol on the forehead? Sound good?

Exactly. I once had kobolds shave my brother's dwarf character's beard off - no question he would have preferred death!
 
Last edited:

Wulf Ratbane said:
By fortuitous circumstance, they head north first-- bypassing the throne room of the Ghoul Lord (where the token is just sitting in a lockbox under his throne) and going straight to the door that separates the drow from the ghouls.

This reminds me of a star frontiers adventure aboard a space station. The player searched every room except one, the one with The Answer on the computer screen...

Then they returned to their ship and called it a stupid adventure IIRC. :)
 

How commited to the dungeon are the drow?

They could simply get what they came for, steal the parties stuff and leave them in the dungeon alone, laughing as they leave...

THEN the Ghoul Rogue awakens, to stalk them through the dungeon, unarmed and unarmored...
 

Remove ads

Top