On page 3, it says 1d4 townsfolk die each day for the first two days and then increases by 1d4 for every day thereafter.
On page 5, it says the journey takes a little more than three days (for a party moving at speed 30) or five days (speed 20) one way. Not counting time for exploring or resting.
Page 3 also states, once forty townsfolk die the malady has run its course.
Doesn't this make it near impossible for the party to complete the mission in time to save anyone ? The average death toll for six days would be 40 and I imagine most parties would have someone at speed 20. Even at speed 30 most parties would be likely to fail.
On page 3, it says 1d4 townsfolk die each day for the first two days and then increases by 1d4 for every day thereafter.
On page 5, it says the journey takes a little more than three days (for a party moving at speed 30) or five days (speed 20) one way. Not counting time for exploring or resting.
Page 3 also states, once forty townsfolk die the malady has run its course.
Doesn't this make it near impossible for the party to complete the mission in time to save anyone ? The average death toll for six days would be 40 and I imagine most parties would have someone at speed 20. Even at speed 30 most parties would be likely to fail.
I think you're right. Looks like the disease would run its entire course before most parties could return...despite their efforts to move as quickly as they could. Unless the dice come up very favorable (i.e., consistently rolled below the average), the at least 40 townsfolk will die. That could bode particularly bad for the party, since the text also states that once 30 people die, Milon's nephew will be among them and the ranger will hold it against the party for failing to find the cure in time.
Just for kicks, I checked the map to confirm the distances cited. The 37-mile one-way trip to the dwarven monastery is accurate. And it could be about 22-miles coming back if they cut through the forest and cross the river. I guess you'd have the option of speeding a considerable portion of the heroes' journey by saying their travel along the road to the lumber camp would go more quickly -- even moreso if they went by horseback. That makes up at least a third of the journey to the dungeon, but they'd certainly have to go by foot after that. You could speed them back up again if they built a raft and took the river down to Falcon's Hollow on the return trip. Or, again, if they left their horses at the lumber camp, they could pick up time by riding back.
So, best case scenario would probably include the following:
1st day - Journey to lumber camp by horseback in half a day. Journey by foot into the forest to encounter B. Make camp.
2nd day - Journey through encounters C and D.
3rd day - Reach the dwarven monastery by mid-day. Complete the dungeon crawl during the remainder of the day. (Though, the heroes may have to rest and heal up an extra day during this part)
4th day - Journey overland by foot down to the river, which should take about 6 miles and a half-day. Build a raft and set out down the river until darkfall. Should bring them to joining of the tributary.
5th day - Continue traveling by raft for about 3/4's of a day and they're back in Falcon's Hollow by evening.
Average number of deaths over 5 days should be 28. Not good. But better than going over 40.
As for me, I think I'd just dispense with the exponential increase in the number of deaths. Instead of 1d4 deaths over the first two days and then 2d4, 3d4, etc...I'd just drop it back to 1d4 per day, period. That way, the average number of total deaths over a 5-6 day period drops significantly (13 and 15, respectively). And, even if you rolled poorly, the maximum possible number of deaths would be 20-24...assuming the party didn't get really slowed down by the adventure's combat encounters.
If you want to make it a little more harrowing and cinematic, you could go with 1d4 for the first 2 days, then bump it up to 1d4+1, 1d4+2, 1d4+3, etc. thereafter. That would put you around 19-25 deaths on average over 5-6 days...with the possibility of up to 26-34 if you rolled maximum. Still not 40 deaths...unless the PCs get held up in the dungeon recovering from their wounds.
If you want to make it even more aggressive, then go with 1d4, 1d4, 2d4, 2d4, 3d4, 3d4...that way it comes out 28-43 on average...with those last two days being particularly deadly. But I think that model goes too far. The likelihood would still be too great that the heroes actions would never have any impact. And that's not very heroic...
Just my two-cents,
--Neil
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Another idea?
it's actually greyscour rot, easily misdiagnosed as blackscour rot. the deathrate is only 1d4 per day, constant, but the party doesn't know that...
I guess my thought is that the party doesn't have any way of knowing how many people died while they're gone.
They could also commit to a forced march for portion of the journey. I believe this could cut the journey time by a day each way if they are lucky.
I know I can hike 37 miles in one day and still have it it in me to kick butt, especially if I were a few years younger. I would dispense with how far the party can travel in a day based on 30 foot movement and such to make the adventure flow. The NPC deaths are to give the party a sense of urgency.
(Sandia mountains, NM 7 am start Placitas Tunnel Springs trail head to Tijeras Canyon Estates trail head 28+ miles and finished by 3:45 pm had lunch at the crest too)
I know I can hike 37 miles in one day and still have it it in me to kick butt, especially if I were a few years younger. I would dispense with how far the party can travel in a day based on 30 foot movement and such to make the adventure flow. The NPC deaths are to give the party a sense of urgency.
(Sandia mountains, NM 7 am start Placitas Tunnel Springs trail head to Tijeras Canyon Estates trail head 28+ miles and finished by 3:45 pm had lunch at the crest too)
Try wearing plate mail and carrying a greatsword ;)
Perhaps change the d4 to a d3.
|
I just fudged the numbers; especially considering I had to roll for loved ones the earliest one of which would have died after 10 days of them being away. My group took about 6 days (they had to rest once or twice while working through the Monastery)
The big issue with the map is that the forest slows down the hiking time and that isn't taken into consideration. Trails would help out a lot but I highly doubt there was a direct path from the lumber camp to the monastery and there was certainly no clear path to the witch's hut.
I just fudged the numbers; especially considering I had to roll for loved ones the earliest one of which would have died after 10 days of them being away. My group took about 6 days (they had to rest once or twice while working through the Monastery)
The big issue with the map is that the forest slows down the hiking time and that isn't taken into consideration. Trails would help out a lot but I highly doubt there was a direct path from the lumber camp to the monastery and there was certainly no clear path to the witch's hut.
I was thinking the mortality rate could be stablised for the short term, but I was also thinking of explaining where the actual disease had come from.
Making the victims go into a coma with the cure only ending the actual disease and uncovering the fact something else was responsible would make things interesting!
The rate is kind of an unnecessary detail. I like the idea of a random timer on the adventure, but it can really only have one of two outcomes: the PCs get back in time to save some of the afflicted, or save none, and be shunned.
A more simplified method of determining how many afflicted live or die would be to afford a 7-9 day time frame, depending on preference. If the PCs make it back before that, roll 4d10 to see how many of the diseased died. Otherwise, you'll be rolling dice that only you know what the mean. Good for PC-paranoia, but it'll slow down the game if you have to stop your story to do extraneous math.