In the James Keegan "First time D&D player and Savage Tide." thread, a discussion popped up on the vault puzzle in Part Three: The Vanderboren Vault of There is No Honor. The initial comment was about new players possibly having problems with the puzzle as it relied on knowledge of some D&D monsters to complete.
I hadn't really thought about this as a problem for new players, as I won won't be letting players use OOC knowledge to solve the puzzle anyway. Instead, they'll either need to make Knoweldge checks (set at a flat DC 15 for each check) as appropriate or find someone in Sasserine to provide the needed information. I'll break the XP award into two parts, one for figuring out the needed solution to the puzzle and the other for either actually breaking the code themselves or thinking to consult an expert. If they don't come to the latter
conclusion themselves, Lavinia will suggest it (and the party will not get the XP award). My thought on the expert advice is that with so much exotic stuff flowing through Sasserine, there will be merchants, scholars, adventurers, etc. that can be fairly easily found to answer such questions.
My post here is soliciting thoughts/feedback on this approach, and also looking for how others will deal with the puzzle.
Oh, and for the Cyclops I remembered where my 3.0/3.5 stats are from - Arcana Evolved...it's definitely of the Giant type in Monte's book!
I think that's a good idea. Especially the flat 15 DC. Some of the monsters are probably too high a HD for low level characters to identify with knowledge checks.
As for the cyclops, I definitely agree that it's of the giant type and thus falls under knowledge (nature.) My point was that since there is no cyclops in any D&D monster manual, there's not really a way for characters to even know what it is, by the book anyway. Of course this is an easy fix: have them make a knowledge check and then if they make it tell them they've heard of a rare one-eyed giant called a cyclops.
I've not read the adventure yet but I'm assuming there's a "How many eyes does a Cyclops have?" sort of question there.
How about having the word Cyclops be derived from a non "Common" language that one or more of the characters speaks?
Give them an INT check (say DC 10ish) to realise that Cyclops has its roots in, for example, Draconic:
"Cycli" = "One"
"Opsen" = "Eyed"
JMTPW
miph
Hey, I just remembered/found the other place I'd seen a Cyclops monster entry and it's even a WotC book--Deities and Demigods. Still definitely of the Giant type. In my campaign world (Mystara) the cyclops isn't rare at all.
For the DC 15, I was thinking this isn't quite like the "identify monsters and their special powers or vulnerabilities" mechanic of Knoweldge checks (for that cyclops, the base DC would then be 23 for a Lesser or 26 for a Greater Cyclops) since the party isn't trying to determine strengthes and weaknesses but rather base physical descriptions.
Instead, it seems more like a "basic question within field of study" which carries a flat DC of 15. If the monster were unique or rare, I might go with the DC 20 or 30 for a "really tough question."
Creative Director
|
Yeah... the fact that the puzzle requires player knowledge of monsters is a flaw. Using Knowledge checks to figure out how many eyes the monsters have is a perfect solution, as is seeking out the answers in libraries or from sages in Sasserine.
As for the Knowledge check, make it a DC 15 or DC 20 check. The whole "DC = 10 + monster's HD" is kind of goofy anyway, since that means that no one would ever know about super famous monsters. Like a great wyrm dragon. Or the Tarrasque.
Yeah... the fact that the puzzle requires player knowledge of monsters is a flaw. Using Knowledge checks to figure out how many eyes the monsters have is a perfect solution, as is seeking out the answers in libraries or from sages in Sasserine.
As for the Knowledge check, make it a DC 15 or DC 20 check. The whole "DC = 10 + monster's HD" is kind of goofy anyway, since that means that no one would ever know about super famous monsters. Like a great wyrm dragon. Or the Tarrasque.
Not to get too off-topic but that last point you make is a good one, James. We use a lot of knowledge skills in our games, and always make knowledge checks when we can on monsters but I hadn't thought of how it works with the super high hit die monsters. It seems reasonable that there would be some sort of bonus on truly legendary monsters like the tarrasque, because they are so famous. Maybe not to know what their abilities are and such, but to be able to recognize one when you see it.
For me, that's the difference between a check in one's field of study versus trying to determine strengths/weaknesses.
The flat DC for the former check works such that characters can readily identify things they should be able to, and might eek out a thought on some obscurity. So for example, a Knowledge: nature check versus a DC of 10-15 will pretty much say "that's a storm giant" and a check versus a DC of 20-30 will say "that's the storm giant Narcisu that rules the undersea off the coast of Davania." This could even provide basic information--storm giants like lightning and live underwater (so one miht assume they breathe water and swim well).
On the other side, when facing a storm giant and you want to know exactly how many times he can use call lightning or that they're affected as if by a continual freedom of movement spell, then that would be a Knowledge: nature check against the (10+HD) DC of 29.
I was concerned about this, too. I wouldn't have known how many eyes a gray render has and I've been playing for years. I don't think my players have even heard of one.
One hint I was contemplating was maybe having a picture of each creature's head instead of the name. Maybe the head could be looking slightly left/right to correspond to the appropriate direction to turn the dial. This would make it seem more like hieroglyphics. If my players are stumped and can't figure out what the monster is, maybe they could show it to a knowledgeable person in town who could say, "Oh yeah, that's a such-n-such. Big four-eyed creature with fangs, etc."
Any thoughts?
I was concerned about this, too. I wouldn't have known how many eyes a gray render has and I've been playing for years. I don't think my players have even heard of one.
One hint I was contemplating was maybe having a picture of each creature's head instead of the name. Maybe the head could be looking slightly left/right to correspond to the appropriate direction to turn the dial. This would make it seem more like hieroglyphics. If my players are stumped and can't figure out what the monster is, maybe they could show it to a knowledgeable person in town who could say, "Oh yeah, that's a such-n-such. Big four-eyed creature with fangs, etc."
Any thoughts?
Definitely on the approach of asking around for info--pretty mcuh the same thing I was thinking. I like the idea on the hieroglyphic-type clue. Might even be able to whip something up in Photoshop for that...
|
I am definately in favor of using "pictures", for both the clue and the actual vault.
I have a mixed group of experienced players/newbies and I think this provides a fun way to approach it for both: Experienced players get to "try and remember what monster that is", and newbies get to try and figure out the puzzle AND learn about monsters from their mentors..
I was concerned about this, too. I wouldn't have known how many eyes a gray render has and I've been playing for years. I don't think my players have even heard of one.
Well, the scrap of paper just has common creatures; the gray render is depicted on the wall, so you can describe it. (Let's hope the players don't get sidetracked on whether a medusa's snakes have eyes, and if they count.)
One hint I was contemplating was maybe having a picture of each creature's head instead of the name. Maybe the head could be looking slightly left/right to correspond to the appropriate direction to turn the dial. This would make it seem more like hieroglyphics. If my players are stumped and can't figure out what the monster is, maybe they could show it to a knowledgeable person in town who could say, "Oh yeah, that's a such-n-such. Big four-eyed creature with fangs, etc."
Any thoughts?
Clever. If anyone tries this, let us know how it works.
|
Creative Director
|
HA! Good point about the medusa! Oh well...
The monsters on the list were chosen specifically because they are classic monsters from D&D that are quite familiar to people. Furthermore, I tried to pick monsters that have gaze attacks for most of them to subtly get people thinking about their eyes. Not sure if that works or not...
The more obscure monsters, like the gray render, the aboleth, and the spectator I saved for the carvings and made sure that the boxed text took pains to call out how many eyes each one of them have if it's not obvious. Giving the spider seven eyes (spiders usually have eight) is also a clue that the eyes are what matter.
Figuring out how this puzzle worked was actually the part of the adventure took the most time to design, and I'm still not 100% happy with how it turned out (stupid tricksy medusas!!), but I think it works well enough as it is. I hope!
Worry not, James! I think overall it's a good puzzle. Not too hard and not too easy. Can be bypassed with Rogue skills if necessary. Now, obviously I'd like to have had something in about how to solve it without "metagame" thinking, but that work-around wasn't too hard to come up with. It probably would help new folks that aren't as familiar with monsters like the chimera.
I also understand the pangs of worrying over a module coming and waiting for the reviews to come back--I've had some good ones (my LG Yeomanry modules) and some stinkers (my lone LotGR module)...
This one is definitely getting high marks in my book. Good for starting characters out, lots of play styles accommodated, enough detail for RP but not too much.
Ah, it hadn't occurred to me that they were all gaze monsters. I guess I went straight for the Umber Hulk and failed my save.
It might not be such a tough puzzle after all. My players might just surprise me. If they need some hints maybe I'll have Lavinia contribute (even though it says in the mod that the puzzle is too clever for her). While she may not have the solution, she could offer help.
hehe, anyone who has played the spelljammer computergame should know about umberhulks... as their confusion gaze made you helpless, and killable in one strike!
Needless to say, those were dealth with by fireballs instead of melee..
HA! Good point about the medusa! Oh well...
The monsters on the list were chosen specifically because they are classic monsters from D&D that are quite familiar to people. Furthermore, I tried to pick monsters that have gaze attacks for most of them to subtly get people thinking about their eyes. Not sure if that works or not...
For what it's worth, I replaced the medusa with a vampire (two eyes, gaze-like attack) in the riddle. After a session and a half, I now firmly believe that my players would overthink the medusa and its snakes. We'll see next week if they solve it.
For what it's worth, I replaced the medusa with a vampire (two eyes, gaze-like attack) in the riddle. After a session and a half, I now firmly believe that my players would overthink the medusa and its snakes. We'll see next week if they solve it.HA! Good point about the medusa! Oh well...
The monsters on the list were chosen specifically because they are classic monsters from D&D that are quite familiar to people. Furthermore, I tried to pick monsters that have gaze attacks for most of them to subtly get people thinking about their eyes. Not sure if that works or not...
My players figured it out very quickly (the fact that the boxed text described almost every creature's eyes). They did a good job of not metagaming the number of eyes of the creatures on the scroll. Two of the PCs are Academy graduates, and thus have a lot of knowledge skill, and I let them return to Sasserine and use the library at the House of the Dragon for circumstance bonuses to the skill checks.
The medusa thing tripped them up as well, so I told them they found an obscure text which revealed that a medusa's snake heads are actually blind.
My players spent half an hour of real time working on it, but they slowly peiced it together like any good mystery. Cours, I had prepared a handy illustration of the vault layout with Order of the Stick style monsters next to their respective wall locations. It wasn't long before the druid starting getting perturbed by the seven eyed spider. After that, it all started clicking into place.
Once they realized that the number list only went to 7, the medusa wasn't a problem, as the only numbers it could be were 2, or a number a lot bigger than 7.
Black Bard, same exact thing happened with my group. I personally liked the puzzle. My group figured it out almost immediately but then spent a loooong time debating the number of eyes on the medusa. For such clever veterans, it took a shocking amount of time for them to figure out that the numbers only went up to seven. Then the debate ended because the medusa must be counted as only having 2 eyes (everyone grumbled, grumbled) and the game proceeded. The only other stumbling block was the grey render. I was not familiar with the creature and neither were my players (or their characters) so there *was* a bit of confusion there as well.
Besides the learned folks of the Noble District, contacts in Zelkarune's Horns or the black market in exotic pets might be able to give some answers to help the PCs solve this riddle.
I will be doing this section of the adventure on Friday--we'll see if my crusty veterans can figure it out!
A little irony - I only have ONE newbie - She is the one who cracked the code - she figured it our right away - monsters on the wall, compass rose, monsters looking (referred to eyes AND the direction). I was stunned - I have never seen a PC figure out a puzzle so quickly. The only thing she had no clue about was the NUMBER of eyes some of them had. So they had to make some lore checks - fortunately she is playing a bard.
So while all the Vets were scratching their heads - she, the newbie went all rain man on them and figured it out.
A little irony - I only have ONE newbie - She is the one who cracked the code - she figured it our right away - monsters on the wall, compass rose, monsters looking (referred to eyes AND the direction). I was stunned - I have never seen a PC figure out a puzzle so quickly. The only thing she had no clue about was the NUMBER of eyes some of them had. So they had to make some lore checks - fortunately she is playing a bard.
So while all the Vets were scratching their heads - she, the newbie went all rain man on them and figured it out.
I love it when things like this happen. :)
A little irony - I only have ONE newbie - She is the one who cracked the code - she figured it our right away - monsters on the wall, compass rose, monsters looking (referred to eyes AND the direction).
Likewise in my group. They came oh-so-close almost immediately, pegging the number of eyes on the walls and in the clue (I replaced the medusa with a vampire, as noted above). The new-to-tabletop-gaming player finally had his character walk up to the pillar and start turning.
Ok, am I missing something? As far as I can tell, the pictures on the walls are simply a red herring. The combination to the vault is simply turning it the number of eyes to the right or left according to the monsters on the note.
So, starting from the roper, it goes 6 right (spider), 1 left (render), 2 right (roper), 4 left (ettin), and 2 right (render). Is that right?
Or does it go, starting from the roper, right to the render (6 eyes), left to the roper (1 eye), right to the dragon (2 eyes), left to the ettin (4 eyes), right to the render (2 eyes)?
Ok, am I missing something? As far as I can tell, the pictures on the walls are simply a red herring. The combination to the vault is simply turning it the number of eyes to the right or left according to the monsters on the note.
So, starting from the roper, it goes 6 right (spider), 1 left (render), 2 right (roper), 4 left (ettin), and 2 right (render). Is that right?
Or does it go, starting from the roper, right to the render (6 eyes), left to the roper (1 eye), right to the dragon (2 eyes), left to the ettin (4 eyes), right to the render (2 eyes)?
I have to read it again (before Friday's game ;) )but I thought the sun description told you which direction to turn and the number of eyes in the combination clue creature told you which creature to turn to on the wall (to a matching number of eyes that is).
Ok, am I missing something? As far as I can tell, the pictures on the walls are simply a red herring. The combination to the vault is simply turning it the number of eyes to the right or left according to the monsters on the note.
So, starting from the roper, it goes 6 right (spider), 1 left (render), 2 right (roper), 4 left (ettin), and 2 right (render). Is that right?
Or does it go, starting from the roper, right to the render (6 eyes), left to the roper (1 eye), right to the dragon (2 eyes), left to the ettin (4 eyes), right to the render (2 eyes)?
It's the latter--the number of eyes for each monster on the wall corresponds to the numbers from the note. They are in order from 1-7, with the last space being null.
I have to read it again (before Friday's game ;) )but I thought the sun description told you which direction to turn and the number of eyes in the combination clue creature told you which creature to turn to on the wall (to a matching number of eyes that is).
See the last paragraph in the first column on page 23, specifically the second sentence, for clear support of this.
See the last paragraph in the first column on page 23, specifically the second sentence, for clear support of this.
I just saw that. The instructions are spread out in the description and it confused me. =)
My players had a problem with this puzzle, because they immediately dismissed the idea of the number of eyes matching the direction to turn the indicator to as "too simple". They correctly assumed that the number of eyes was the identifier for each position of the lock mechanism, but their interpretation of the clue sheet found on the Blue Nixie actually makes more sense than that provided in the adventure.
They decided that the indicator (the red arrow that rotates with the pillar) was actually the fixed "directional". They started by assuming it ment north. Thus, when a monster with four eyes was described as looking to sunset, that ment the arrow should be turned so that it was 90 degrees clockwise of the wall with four eyes (The arrow IS north, therefore when a monster looks west with four eyes, the mechanism has to be turned the four eyed wall is in the "west" position).
This solution felt both much more clever and less dependant on our modern notions of what a combination lock notation should look like. Unfortunately, the players came up with this solution during downtime between play sessions, and proceded to execute it without telling me their conclusion, and I casually told them it didn't work. Once I had asked enough questions to figure out how they had come to up with the sequence, I realized their solution fit the puzzle better, but it was too late to substitute in theirs for the published version.