Frederick Lux's page

In the end, it didn't matter for me. They only failed one check, and that one happened to result in a combat, rather than a trap.

Overall, as a GM, I liked it, but you really need to add fluff to it to make it work thematically. Also, they really trampled over all the combats, final boss didn't even get his spell off (rolled a 1 on initiative, then had to cast a full-round spell. A player noted that the higher level tier strategy made much more sense for him). No real problems to speak of, other than that it just doesn't seem quite there yet.

Yes, that's what I thought, but having all people check means that probably no one will fall in the trap, because from my experience if there's something to be spotted by Perception, on average, someone will see it. One check seems fair.

I'm going to run this tomorrow, this just occurred to me: In the "Price of Failure" section, the scenario says this:

So, if they fail, should I have them roll a Perception check, or just let them suffer the consequences? I'm inclined to do the first, but a case could be made for the latter, IMHO.

Thanks for the reply. I'll probably play down, then. I'm fairly confident they can handle most stuff, but the Spriggans are nasty.
Also, I agree on the unanimous decision. If not everyone feels comfortable, I won't do it.

I'm interested in running this sometime soon, small question: if the players were okay with it, would you advise to play up in this case (even if players don't fall in that tier - again, with their permission)? Season 0 tends to be rather easy, and I see from reviews that tier 1-2 is kinda boring and kinda on the short side. I hope that by upping the challenge a bit we'll all get more enjoyment out of it. Besides, the adventure doesn't seem that deadly at first glance (although I am bad ad judging this, I must admit).