I also like cut scenes and as far as I see it's up to the DM to determine how to handle them. If the PCs don't like cinematic scenes it's not too complicated to either make it an action encounter or simply something that happens in the background and is later retold to the PCs by and NPC.
Spoiler:The queen sticking one arrow into the head of the Sable Company commander...a 10th-ish level warrior NPC and killing him straight out will have eyebrows raising so high as to fly off foreheads at my table. At the very least, it gives the impression the queen has some uber-damage ability that they've never before seen in the realm of D&D and really break a barrier for me.
One other thing to keep in mind:
One of the complaints we kept seeing pop up in Runelords was that the "Main Bad Guy" felt a little tacked on. He doesn't get really much screen time at all before the final battle, so that to a certain extent, by the time the PCs fight him, they've heard his name enough but the impact of confronting him is somewhat diminished.
With Crimson Throne, we're trying to give Ileosa a LOT more screen time than Karzoug, between encounters with PCs and cut scenes that show her doing her thing without PCs. And since she's really powerful really fast (CR 20 by adventure 3), it's unfair to throw the PCs up against her before they're able to at least have enough skill and power to run away.
It's a sort of balancing act. Just keep in mind that if you take most or all of Ileosa's scenes out of the adventure, you might end up with a BBEG who the PCs don't have anything invested in defeating.
This is a tough balancing act. If the PCs don't know enough about the BBG, the ending is flat: this happened a lot with SCAP. If they know a lot early on, it's incredibly hard on morale: that was our SCAP campaign, and it nearly killed the game. For some player groups, anyway, the knowledge that the NPCs have the ability and motivation to squish the group at any moment, and aren't doing it--why?--is a big problem.
Karzoug was actually okay in this regard, as you could work out why he hadn't--more importantly, the PCs could work it out. This only fell apart in #6, where logically speaking the PCs should be hit with everything Xin-Shalast has. (Giving the bad guys a means to find the PCs was a strange decision.)
My own approach to giving Ileosa more screen time would be to make her more ambiguous--an evil political leader, not a genocidal maniac--so that killing her is not such an obvious necessity. This is what my GM is doing with his massive rewrite. The PCs just had dinner with Ileosa, and they know they don't like or support her, but regicide is not even vaguely in their minds.
I would introduce a significant secret minion of hers for the PCs to take out. The head recruiter for the Gray Maidens would be perfect. Shutting down the Maiden recruitment pipeline would be a major but indirect blow against Ileosa, and an appealing plotline to me. If the minion is secret, it's harder for Ileosa to retaliate openly. It seems to me that minions like this help strike a balance between "Who are these bad guys anyway?" and "You mean we're 4th level and up against a 20th level foe? When's the next ship out of town?"
It would also help to give Ileosa a significant enemy in the city--Arkona is the obvious choice--so that the PCs are not the largest problem she faces.
Finally, in my opinion you can *not* usefully foreshadow an NPC's abilities in a scene which breaks the game rules. The players will not take it as real information--why should they? Could a player reasonably predict Blackjack's stats (as given in #3) from what he does in #1? Players know that they can't, and therefore won't usually try. If you want to foreshadow you have to avoid even the suggestion that you are breaking the rules, so that the players will understand that this is real, valid information. (It doesn't matter if the scene can somehow be justified under the rules with a bunch of special circumstances: if the players cannot perceive it as legal, they won't treat it as legal.)
Mary
|
I foreshadow NPC abilities all the time and ive never really had a problem before. I am willing to admit that what happend was my fault not because of the cinematic scene but because of several other factors that had actually made it nigh on impossible for the Pc's to do anything because they were being watched like hawks mainly due to some very rash desicions they made earlier.
I will add my voice to the support of cinematic scenes. I run a large number of PbP games and incorporate these into most of them, and my tabletop group greatly enjoy the scenes in CotCT.
|
I will add my voice to the support of cinematic scenes. I run a large number of PbP games and incorporate these into most of them, and my tabletop group greatly enjoy the scenes in CotCT.
While I havn't gotten to run either of these scenes, my PbP group sems to like cinematic scenes as well.... I think their great personally
Please don't let a vocal minority sway you, James. ... A vocal, negative minority shouldn't ruin it for the rest of us.
Vocal majority.
(In other words, only Paizo has any clue as to whether it's a majority or minority in this case.)
A cinematic scene is like any other scene in the AP, so definitely keep them. You may want to consider focusing more upon what the scene is supposed to communicate rather than trying to tell people how the scene unfolds as clearly not everyone who purchases your product is capable of understanding the point of a cinematic scene, or how to use it for their particular player subset.
Focus on explaining what the cinematic scene needs to get across to the PCs, and perhaps provide a number of ways that that might be done, but clearly indicate that it is up to the DM to fit the scene in for their particular PCs since clearly even that isn't assumed by those who are purchasing the product.
Another option is to simply write a unique version for each DM out there, and for each PC group. Just let me know when you'd like to schedule an appointment with me. :)
Please don't let a vocal minority sway you, James. Not everybody (in fact, not even most, I'd wager) are active enough on the boards to represent those who love what you're doing well enough. A vocal, negative minority shouldn't ruin it for the rest of us.
Just to clarify -- I don't think the dichotomy in opinions is between "keep cinematic scenes" and "get rid of cinematic scenes". I think it's between "cinematic scenes shouldn't have to follow the rules" and "cinematic scenes should follow the rules".
Since future AP are hanging in the balance with this I definitly would like to voice that I am PRO cinematic scenes.
They really help craft a fantastic story. Players should be allowed to try to interfere if they choose of course, but events happening in the world that dont revolve around the PCs is just something players should be ok with once in a while.
James' explanation of cinematic scenes being used to showcase the main villian multiple times before the final confrontation is spot on.
My last suggestion to those who run into problems because you dont know the stats or backstory of certain characters...Dont run the AP until you read all 6!!!
Im sure Im just yelling in the wind with thsi suggestion.
They really help craft a fantastic story. Players should be allowed to try to interfere if they choose of course, but events happening in the world that dont revolve around the PCs is just something players should be ok with once in a while.
I disagree. To have an event take place with characters present and to not allow the characters to affect it in a meaningful way is, to me, a throwback to the bad old days of roleplaying.
James' explanation of cinematic scenes being used to showcase the main villian multiple times before the final confrontation is spot on.
I prefer that these type of scenes be told to the PCs by other characters if the PCs cannot alter the events. I find it is generally better that the PCs not be there when the events take place. This removes PCs complaints that they can't do anything and it sidesteps the requirement for events to 'follow the rules' as if the rules were the world physics.
My last suggestion to those who run into problems because you dont know the stats or backstory of certain characters...Dont run the AP until you read all 6!!!
Im sure Im just yelling in the wind with thsi suggestion.
Having to wait five months to play an adventure that you hold in your hands is probably forbidden by the Geneva Convention. If not, it should be!
|
The best thing about the Blackjack cut scene is:
So when the PC's actually get the chance to BE Blackjack it becomes all the more meaningful. They know how to act and what they have to live up to. They know the reactions the people have to Blackjack and how to manipulate those reactions.
it really adds to that element of the adventure later, more so if the players were able to interact and outclass him
As for the assassination attempt:
Is there any reason for the Commander to be at his full hit points when he makes the attempt? Hit points are an abstract, which represents not just taking physical blows, but also exhaustion and loss of morale. Both the guards and Sable Company have been more harried over the past weeks/months then at any time in recent memory, quelling massive riots and combating an absolutely terrible plague. That the Queen, possessed by a ancient and powerful Blue Dragon, is able to so easily strike down an exhausted and desperate man who thought her nothing more than a petty, pampered tyrant seems unremarkable to me.
I prefer that these type of scenes be told to the PCs by other characters if the PCs cannot alter the events. I find it is generally better that the PCs not be there when the events take place. This removes PCs complaints that they can't do anything and it sidesteps the requirement for events to 'follow the rules' as if the rules were the world physics.
James' explanation of cinematic scenes being used to showcase the main villian multiple times before the final confrontation is spot on.
I guess there is no right answer. Its all who you are..
But I think its really sad that major events in a campaign world's history cant occur when the PCs are present unless they are shaping the event themselves.
I like the players to be right there seeing whats going on. A good DM can weave an awsome story if the PC witness these things first hand instead of hearing what happened in the town scqare from the innkeeper.
To each his own.
But I think its really sad that major events in a campaign world's history cant occur when the PCs are present unless they are shaping the event themselves.
What I prefer to avoid is having major events in a campaign world's history occur right next to the players and nothing they can do can change the course of the events without derailing a multiple book adventure path.
A scripted event like this basically is a choke point in the adventure path. If the players mess up the event, rocks fall, etc etc. If the players can't mess up the event, they're not players, they're watchers.
Something like this is like Global Thermonuclear War (or tic-tac-toe) in the movie Wargames. The only way to win is not to play that game.
and of course a good DM can make anything into great gaming. For suitably high values of good. DMs obviously suck horribly and should be banned from DMing if they can't weave an awsome story if the PC witness these things first hand instead of hearing what happened in the town scqare from the innkeeper.
Creative Director
|
A scripted event like this basically is a choke point in the adventure path. If the players mess up the event, rocks fall, etc etc. If the players can't mess up the event, they're not players, they're watchers.
Agreed. That's why the very first sentence of the assassination scene says this:
"This event is best handled off-stage."
In fact, it should REALLY occur while the PCs are doing their in-between adventures "shopping" or whatever. If you're running a mini-adventure between the two, that'd be the best time to have Ileosa do her thing. Perhaps it occurs just after Zellara manifests to the PCs and indicates to them that it's time for another Harrowing. PCs are notorious for sleeping at odd hours in the day too... maybe it occurs when they're asleep. The point is, you're the GM. You get to time the event for some point where the PCs won't be able to swing in on the chandeliers and start disrupting things (or, in this case, picking a fight with someone whose level is over twice their own).
A scripted event like this basically is a choke point in the adventure path. If the players mess up the event, rocks fall, etc etc. If the players can't mess up the event, they're not players, they're watchers.
So run with it. Really.
My RotRL players didn't make it into Sandpoint for the Swallowtail Festival. They missed the entire first part of volume one, and had to hear about it later. My CotCT players decided not to make characters who had a history with Gaedren Lamm. They ended up hiring the iconics as NPCs to go take care of the problem. Also, when Zellara offered to do a Harrow reading for them they declined.
This doesn't mean that rocks fall and everyone dies. It just means that I stretch my GMing muscles and keep going. If the writing style of the scene isn't to your liking then change styles and carry on. If you'd like help with that, post about how we can help and (in my experience, at least) several people will be all over the problem before you know it.
Please don't let a vocal minority sway you, James. Not everybody (in fact, not even most, I'd wager) are active enough on the boards to represent those who love what you're doing well enough. A vocal, negative minority shouldn't ruin it for the rest of us.Just to clarify -- I don't think the dichotomy in opinions is between "keep cinematic scenes" and "get rid of cinematic scenes". I think it's between "cinematic scenes shouldn't have to follow the rules" and "cinematic scenes should follow the rules".
I'll agree with this point. Scenes which break the rules completely rub me the wrong way as well. Ones where the PCs should not be allowed to interfere also are problematic. We all want a great plot and great scenes but there are issues if the scene defies explanation.
Now I think this scene could be done within the rules (with Black Jacks stats and after choosing what kind of actions are needed to save the damsel in distress) but it'd obvously require more magazine real estate and probably rules regarding what kind of terrain dumbstruck nobles represent.
I'd be happy to have cut-scenes if they followed two principles:
(1) What happens in the cut-scene should be approximately what would happen under the rules if you played the scene out. I don't mind a little bending for flavor, but please, not wholesale disregard of the rules.
(2) Either the reason that the PCs cannot intervene should be very clear (such as their being offstage when it happens), or it should be entirely possible for them to intervene. It doesn't have to be wise or useful, just possible.
My GM had really good success with some of the visions in _Hangman's Noose_ played as cut-scenes. But he didn't feel he could run the Blackjack scene without violating both (1) and (2), so he didn't.
Mary
|
|
That's an excellent point. If you DO enjoy the cut-scene type encounters, we need to hear about it. If we don't I basically have to assume that the folk who DID enjoy them didn't enjoy them enough to rave about them. Another example of a new type of encounter we introduced in Pathfinder, of course, was the haunt. This created a lot of traffic on the boards here as well; some folk hated them, but the vast majority seemed to like them. We haven't heard much support for the cinematic encounters yet, though... that may just be because folk haven't really had a chance to try them out yet, but we've certainly heard a lot form folk who don't like them.
I'm happy to say it as much as you'd like! I love the cutscenes, and I'd love to keep having them!
The fact of the matter is that if Paizo doesn't make them for me, then *I* have to find a clever way to give the PCs vital information for the sake of a good story, and that's time I could be spending doing other important things in the game. So count this as one STRONG vote for keeping cutscenes alive in the upcoming Pathfinder products.
This is my attempt to help out with the language in the scenario:
"What happens here is up to the PCs. Don't run this encounter as a battle - think of it more as an interactive scene (roleplay) the PCs can take part in. Blah dee blah...If they do little, Blackjack escapes. If the PCs attempt to help Blackjack, be a GM and explain how they helped in a creative manner. If the PCs try to hinder Blackjack and they roll high (or execute some excellent plan), go ahead and let their actions be the deciding factor. In this case, Blackjack is revealed to be
|
|
For those of you saying that this is a static scene the PCs cannot act during, I DMed it exactly according to the written text and this is what happened:
See, The PCs affected the scene, very little extra work needed to be done, and everyone was happy.
|
I feel alot of the negative feed back on the "cut scenes" stems from the fact that it is a different & new. Different from your typical encounters or text boxes that we have all encountered over the course of are role playing lives. New ideas or things seem to always be meet with apprehension merely because it is not the norm we are used to.
My group & I like them, and feel that they are a refreshing change in a world which sometimes becomes to overly concerned with game mechanics. Sometimes the rules have to take a seat for the fantasy to unfold.
Either way you are the GM so omit or change what you don't think will work for your players. Please don't complain about a perfectly fine new way to approach plot development. Because in the end it is all feedback that Paizo takes into consideration, and I would be sorely disappointed if they dumped this feature just cause a few nay sayers couldn't wrap there brains around a new concept that can be easily navigated, omited or altered by any creative GM.
Suspend reality, suspend belief, suspend the rules!....if only for a little while. It won't hurt much I promise. GAME ON!!!
My group & I like them, and feel that they are a refreshing change in a world which sometimes becomes to overly concerned with game mechanics. Sometimes the rules have to take a seat for the fantasy to unfold.
I guess this is a matter of personal philosophy. To me, saying:
"Sometimes a good D&D adventure needs to ignore the rules." (paraphrasing)
Is like saying:
"Sometimes a good haiku needs to use 22 syllables instead of 17."
Or:
"Sometimes a good banana split needs to use an apple instead of a banana."
You might have a terrific 22-syllable poem, that doesn't make it a great haiku. And you might have a delicious apple dessert, but that doesn't make it a great banana split.
That comparison might have a shred of validity if the rules of a roleplaying game could be encompassed in such limited parameters. As it is its simply a fallacy.
RAW happily accommodates all of the cinematic scenes provided by this AP even though the AP doesn't happen to provide the nuts and bolts (hence the cinematic part).
I still find it insane that we're going over this again and again.
You guys might as well start arguing that Reefclaws can't exist because they didn't provide what Runelord Alaznist rolled when they were created, and didn't provide stat blocks for the Runelord and what clearly must be an artifact in the flesh-warping vats of Barakhan.
Or perhaps Gaedren Lamm didn't really beat the PC to within an inch of his life via "unhappy childhood", at least not until you actually roll initiative and play out the encounter... How dare they not provide a stat block for Gaedran from 5-10 years ago so you could do the combat between him and your PCs as children yourselves!
How you guys are deciding to draw a line on the "cinematic events" when you have no issues with these other elements is beyond me. You can't start with the premise that an event cannot occur without RAW being taken into account in detail, and expect to be taken seriously after accepting all the other things you've clearly accepted about the AP.
How you guys are deciding to draw a line on the "cinematic events" when you have no issues with these other elements is beyond me. You can't start with the premise that an event cannot occur without RAW being taken into account in detail, and expect to be taken seriously after accepting all the other things you've clearly accepted about the AP.
You're still misunderstanding what I'm trying to say. I don't have a problem with "cinematic events", I just don't like when they do something that's impossible under the rules. For example, if Gedrenn Lamm casts a dozen "Wish" spells in a cinematic scene and then is later revealed to be a poor level 3 rogue, that's playing fast and loose with the rules. If Gedrenn Lamm stabs someone in a cinematic scene, that's completely consistent.
I understand this doesn't bother many (most?) people; that's why I said it's a philosophical difference.
|
|
First I have to add my name to the keep cinematics list.
Secondly, in handling the assasination attempt when the PC's heard about it I told them that the Queen had lifted the commander up and stabbed him. A gush of blood followed when she violently yanked the shaft from his neck. At which point she dropped him and ordered everyone to watch as he bled out.
So rules wise I made the arrow wounding along with a Crit from the Queen so that she puts out a bit of damage. For her part I gave her fast healing since the AP states that the Crown of Fangs keeps her alive so long as it is intact.
How you guys are deciding to draw a line on the "cinematic events" when you have no issues with these other elements is beyond me. You can't start with the premise that an event cannot occur without RAW being taken into account in detail, and expect to be taken seriously after accepting all the other things you've clearly accepted about the AP.You're still misunderstanding what I'm trying to say. I don't have a problem with "cinematic events", I just don't like when they do something that's impossible under the rules. For example, if Gedrenn Lamm casts a dozen "Wish" spells in a cinematic scene and then is later revealed to be a poor level 3 rogue, that's playing fast and loose with the rules. If Gedrenn Lamm stabs someone in a cinematic scene, that's completely consistent.
I understand this doesn't bother many (most?) people; that's why I said it's a philosophical difference.
What has been done that is impossible?
Gaedren Lamm hasn't fired off any Wish spells, so what kind of example is this of what is wrong with the AP? Clearly this would be problematic, but since nothing like this has happened it is just another fallacy being used poorly to illustrate some phantom issue you've decided to have with the AP.
The Queen survives an assassination attempt, and the description of her survival as provided in the AP may not fit into your idea of RAW (though I again fail to see how ANY combat could be described according to RAW since there are no rules for where people get hit when they do get hit). The Queen slays the leader of the Sable Company, and does it in a way that makes it appear as though it were a trivial encounter for her... Again, this is purely explainable via RAW combat, but since the PCs aren't supposed to be at the event the person relating the event to them isn't speaking to them in terms of Armor Class, Hit Points, Experience Levels, etc... They are simply laying it out there that someone generally considered to be a more accomplished combatant confronted the Queen head on, failed to phase her even though they clearly got their best shot in, and then perished as the Queen handily dispatched them despite everyone assuming she was little more than a childish noble.
Frankly, for me you need to address my point that the Gaedren Lamm tie-ins are acceptable, that Reefclaw creation mythology is acceptable, that Hippogriffs are acceptable, but spending a couple of minutes to understand that the description of a combat isn't going to translate to RAW is not a viable option for you.
Otherwise you're just being contrary in my view.
As long as things aren't overdone, the cutscenes/scripted events are quite okay.
Sometimes, important stuff happens and the players have no way to influence it. In fact, I think that is a very important lesson, especially at low levels: You're not the most powerful creatures in the world.
Just don't have them at every corner (I'd say not quite one per Pathfinder issue would be okay).
They should be more or less possible by the rules, but shouldn't be slaves to the rules.
Having just read the Blackjack scene again, I must say it's only semi-scripted. It's not a full battle (not everything should be), but they can definetly change its outcome.
The APs are dripping with atmosphere and story and cut-scenes enhance that experience for my group. Such scenes should be in the spirit of the rules but don't need to be constructed with literal mechanics.
Again... the cinematics were sort of an experiment, and judging by the feedback we've been receiving, folk seem to be a bit resistant to them. You can expect there to not be cut-scenes like this in future Adventure Paths as a result.
That said, I still think that they work pretty well. It's also a convenient, compact way to deliver key story elements into a campaign without having to spend pages on stat blocks and maps and all that. Part of the problem, I suspect, is trying to cram TOO much adventure into the adventure.
My players are very much pleased with this scene. And even more with the assassination attempt carried out by Endrin (They think that these scene is awesome... and I too). They have asked me to congratulate you for the scenes, and that I tell that you have done a great job. And that I do. It is a pity that there are people who have not enjoyed with this kind of scenes. We would like to that in future APs there were more.
With the assassination attempt you got to shake my whole party. Good job!
Sorry for my poor English :(
|
|
Well as before mentioned I was the Dm that ran this one. Since it now has been a few months since the campaign finished I feel better prepared to explain what went wrong when I ran it.
The simple answer is nothing went wrong with the piece as written the problem came with what a certain player (Not the original poster) did when Trina was arrested. Which was to attack the person arresting Trina (Even after they showed proof that they were servants under orders from the queen.) and then to charge up to the castle gates and rant and threaten Saibina.
Add in the fact that the party composition was very unusual (two of the party were Kobolds one was a catfolk) meant that any plan that involved them being in plain sight was going to fail because of the actions of said Pc they were being watched like Hawks.
Also on a side note said Pc (Who is in actual fact my Real life brother) Quit the campaign after History of ashes after he Ic and Ooc did his nut after failing the totem trial. saying it was unfair because his Str 8 char had almost no chance of passing it. His Ic response was to tell the sun shaman (In front of the entire tribe) "To watch his back before he goes to sleep that night." After which I promptly told him his char was dead because I honestly saw no way the char would survive after that.
Sorry about the rant but I have needed to get it off my chest for a while now.
|
|
Our group has loved the cinematics. And what James said earlier about Karzoug not getting a lot of screen time and comparing that to Ileosa I whole-heartily agree. Both of our games are at the end of Book 3. The RotRL group thinks the big bad is a cabal of 7 people, one for each sin. The CotCT group knows exactly who the BBEG is and that they aint equipped to take her down yet. I would've liked it if the game had stayed in Korvosa and done more 5th column-esque stuff over a huge freaking dungeon crawl out in the middle of nowhere but c'est la vie.
We're going through all three APs simultaneously (RotRL is going slow due to a key player being in college) and CotCT is by FAR my favorite.
|
|
I say keep the cinematic scenes.
I have not commented before because I had not run the scene yet.
I have now and it went great. I have a PC in the group who has been suspicious of the Queen for a time. He was not sure they should turn Trinia over to the guards but Kroft said she would be given a fair trial. Next thing they know Trinia is to be executed.
I drew the courtyard out and filled it with the queen, the executioner, soldiers around the platform. A crowd of commoners and nobles and archers on the ramparts. The group was in the crowd and the rogue I was talking about squeezed up to the front where guards were holding everyone back. Most of the party stayed in the back of the crowd.
Putting it all out there made it obvious that there were going to be consequences to going against the queen's will in the castle with a lot of guards around.
When Blackjack showed up the party watched with admiration the bravery of someone risking all those guards and archers to save the girl they thought was innocent. The rogue (at an appropriate moment) threw a handaxe and killed the executioner to help Blackjack who bowed to him before going over the wall. No body noticed the rogue throwing the axe in the confusion.
The party did not feel they were left out of the scene at all. They just did not think it was a good idea to attack the guards and pay the consequences and the rogue slightly affected events and felt good about it and good about not being noticed.
Now, he is down on the government and the queen but seems to trust Kroft with reservations because she was not too sure about the whole Trinia thing either.
It went well and the group enjoyed the drama of it. They were enthralled.
|
Many rounds later, the Blackjacks escaped with the girl and didn't notice that they had passed Trinia to the real Blackjack until they exited the sewers and found her missing. The players had a great time. :)
That's hilarious! :)
I like the cinematic scenes, they add to the story. But of course, they are more complex to run than basic combat. They require skill as a DM, and a certain level of maturity on the part of the players, who have to accept not being in the spotlight 100% of the time.
In a setting like Korvosa, it would be quite unbelievable that the PC's are the only ones taking actions against injustice. I love that scene because it makes all of Korvosa feel more alive, by showing that someone outside the PC group is also trying to make things right.
|
|
His Ic response was to tell the sun shaman (In front of the entire tribe) "To watch his back before he goes to sleep that night." After which I promptly told him his char was dead because I honestly saw no way the char would survive after that.
I think the problem is that some players do not think that there are consequences to their actions. I do not say things to them like you did where you declare him dead. I play out the consequences and they may be dead or they may not. The consequences may hit now or may hit later.
The group is constantly trying to decide whether to go back and finish it instead of looking over their shoulders. One player left the group (my decision) and his character's head showed up in a box - this character worked at a well known tavern and started a lot of bar fights. He was easy to find.
I think when groups adventure in the wilderness a lot they forget that in town they cannot bully the locals, attack the guard, insult the shaman. They get used to actions without consequences and when they get them they are surprised. The art is to give them the consequences in a way that makes sense to them and does not feel like the DM doing somehing to them personally. I say give them the consequences rather than a metagame comment - they insult the shaman, they have to fight the barbarians and they win or lose. If they win they still have to get out of the cinderlands on their own and they never complete their quest and the queen consolidates her power. Now maybe another group comes a long or maybe someone else in town NPCs figures it out. Or maybe you start second darkness and the group hears how a powerful queen has totally destroyed her city and killed her citizens in Korvosa.
|
|
I think when groups adventure in the wilderness a lot they forget that in town they cannot bully the locals, attack the guard, insult the shaman. They get used to actions without consequences and when they get them they are surprised. The art is to give them the consequences in a way that makes sense to them and does not feel like the DM doing somehing to them personally. I say give them the consequences rather than a metagame comment - they insult the shaman, they have to fight the barbarians and they win or lose. If they win they still have to get out of the cinderlands on their own and they never complete their quest and the queen consolidates her power. Now maybe another group comes a long or maybe someone...
Actually the problem in this case is much simpler My brother is a [Inssert expletive here] If it had just been things Ic then sure no problem however he as a player would 1, constantly be the last to arrive and be the first one to want to leave after maybe only an hour or two 2. constantly fall asleep during sessions 3. start reading a book when Im trying to explain things.
If he is not going to bother giving me the time of day then I will not give him it and before anyone asks yes I did try talking to him I tried for two years and three wreaked campaigns before I finally got the stones to kick him out.
It is much more difficult for a new dm or less pc social interaction heavy dm to run all of the scenes mentioned. The cut scenes can easily go bad, because the rule guidelines do not apply easily to scenes like the assassination and execution.
The dm who was running this adventure path for my party was a new dm and these scenes really fell flat. In the first 1 and a half books it felt like our pcs did nothing important. In fact, we felt like we were so little a part of the story that we ended up quitting the adventure path. I think CoCT is much harder to run than RotR, because the pcs really, really need to care about Korvosa for this path to work.
Hopefully, one day someone more adept at dming will run this path for us.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
I just want to throw in my 2¢ and say that I ran the Blackjack scene and it was a complete success! Before we started, I told my players straight-up that this was an "interactive cutscene" and that they should feel free to interrupt me or influence the scene as they saw fit, but that we wouldn't be using the normal mechanics. It went great, and my players had a fun time subtly aiding Blackjack.
Anyway, I really enjoyed the scene. I think the important thing is for the DM to explain what's going on and set the PCs' expectations. I think my players would have been frustrated with the scene if I hadn't specifically said they were free to act, even though we weren't running the scene round-by-round.
BTW, I love Haunts. Keep up the good work, Paizo!
I just want to throw in my 2¢ and say that I ran the Blackjack scene and it was a complete success! Before we started, I told my players straight-up that this was an "interactive cutscene" and that they should feel free to interrupt me or influence the scene as they saw fit, but that we wouldn't be using the normal mechanics. It went great, and my players had a fun time subtly aiding Blackjack.
I, too, gave my players a heads up that the last part was a time for dice down, and they had a great time with it. Figuring out how to react in character and help Blackjack without painting a big ol' target on their own backs, appearing to be helping the 'guard' while really giving Jack a hand, it worked nicely.
I also asked them afterwards what they felt, and told them about the brohaha ont he boards about this scene -- they failed to see a problem and thoroughly enjoyed themselves :) Felt very cinematic ending, was one player's comment.
Go Paizo :)
The blackjack scene was awesome in my game as well. I had the players roll initiative, but they had stationed themselves in the crowd, scattered about, and it was too hard for them to move through the crowd (difficult terrain) for them to get anything done before Blackjack was gone. None of them were stupid enough to try blasting anyone with spells or a bow or anything. It worked great and the speech was awesome. It was easily the high point of the first book of the path, and it pains me to see that James was considering removing cinematic stuff like this, especially since the original post was from a group that was obviously just plain weirded out. Two kobolds and a cat folk? What? Man, I'd want to quit DMing that group, too.
|
|
The blackjack scene was awesome in my game as well. I had the players roll initiative, but they had stationed themselves in the crowd, scattered about, and it was too hard for them to move through the crowd (difficult terrain) for them to get anything done before Blackjack was gone. None of them were stupid enough to try blasting anyone with spells or a bow or anything. It worked great and the speech was awesome. It was easily the high point of the first book of the path, and it pains me to see that James was considering removing cinematic stuff like this, especially since the original post was from a group that was obviously just plain weirded out. Two kobolds and a cat folk? What? Man, I'd want to quit DMing that group, too.
*sigh* Please read my posts before commenting I have no problem with catfolk and Kobolds as Pc's (heck I positivity encourage it and I almost always play catfolk whenever possible.) What I was getting at is that in a city with almost entirly human poulation they do stick out. Also the problem player was human and he himself was the problem not the character.
We finished the Blackjack scene... and it went really well. My players participated in the event, but that was because of how they handled the Trinia encounter.
My group found Trinia, and were convinced that she was framed. The didn't want to turn her over to the city guard, so they took her to their only real contact they could trust: Vencarlo Orisini.
After a few days of city violence, Croft convinced Sabina to announce that the fugitive had been captured, to try to curb the violence, and allow the city guard to continue their search unimpeded by riots.
The announcement worked. It worked so well, that the queen decided to announce the execution of the criminal.
So, the players knew that the queen was going to execute an innocent, and made plans to try to help "Trinia" escaspe.
The party fighter has a hat of disguise. He disguised himself as Sabina, jumped up on the executioner's platform just after the Queen's speech. All the guards started toward them, when Blackjack appeared, finished the scene, then escaped into the crowd, with both Trinias, with some other contacts immediately throwing blankets and whatnot over them to help them get away (a la Stargate) and some other contacts (via Devargo Barvasi) made enough of a commotion to allow everyone to escape.
Orisini was so happy to see the PCs take an active stance to help Trinia (twice), that he revealed himself to the group, and said he would call for them in a couple of days with a favor.
So, it went really well, but our experience was definately more than a cut scene.
My group was already suspicious of the Queen, but they're still unsure of the Queen's motives. It's evident that she is at best a person willing to sacrifice an innocent "for the better good of the city" (because her motives might be to try to stabalize the city) and at worst an out-right evil dictator ready to get the city under her thumb.
Of course... there's also the truth. ;)