After reading how this group of character responded, I feel a lot better about how my PCs were in Curse of the Crimson Throne. The reactions in the OP were just way too neurotic for a group of proper heroes, it seems to me. The group I had for Crimson Throne were kind of nuts, but they wouldn't have been too afraid to take action.
After reading how this group of character responded, I feel a lot better about how my PCs were in Curse of the Crimson Throne. The reactions in the OP were just way too neurotic for a group of proper heroes, it seems to me. The group I had for Crimson Throne were kind of nuts, but they wouldn't have been too afraid to take action.
It is not fear of taking action. The difficulty is in identifying the "right" action to take.
The Player's Guide sets up the characters to be fairly loyal citizens. The NPC contact commits an Act of Treason in front of them. (The adventure itself says as much on Page 13.)
|
First, I'm currently running Council of Thieves. After I read the Players Guide and the first adventure, I told my players right out of the gate that their PCs must not like the government and how the people of Westcrown are living and be willing to take action to change that. And that if they find their PCs saying things like "Why am I doing this?" and "My character wouldn't go along with that". Well then, you need to make another character.
I agree that the traits aren't the best, but with a little thought they could work into the theme of going against the government. The problem is the theme of not liking the government would have been presented at the beginning, which I think is the problem here.
This next thought might ruffle some feathers. I brought this up to different people and a huge discussion ensued.
When players and a GM sit down at the table, there is some kind of understanding and expectations about what is about to happen. The GM is going to put forth a story and the players are going to react to it. Fine, we all get that.
I understand that some players really get into their characters with the background, motives, 5 page essays on their characters life, whatever. Despite this, as a player, you still have an idea of what your character is supposed to do in any given game. Call it metagaming, thinking outside of the box, or just common sense.
In this example: Janiven gives this big speech and the first thought is to turn this crazy b@#*& in! I'm sorry, but you have to know you are going against the grain here. I don't care if she challenged hell itself.
It's like me asking people over with the instructions of making first level characters that are ready for adventure. I describe the opeing scene in a tavern when a guy walks in with a bag of coins and a map to some caves. If your the character who says "Im not going there, why?" Then you need to pack up your things and go home.
Am I way out with this way of thinking?
|
I understand that some players really get into their characters with the background, motives, 5 page essays on their characters life, whatever. Despite this, as a player, you still have an idea of what your character is supposed to do in any given game. Call it metagaming, thinking outside of the box, or just common sense.
Am I way out with this way of thinking?
In my opinion, no. It's what I was also trying to convey in my own response. In my mind behind every AP is an unwritten contract. The DM will try his/her hardest to accommodate players and their needs, and in turn the players should be expected to "play along" to the best of their ability.
For example: in my CoT campaign as I mentioned I had one player with motivations that absolutely did not fit the feel of the AP. Even the other three players made an in-character comment about it. This character is a con-artist and a scoundrel with no real reason to participate (though I knew that Part 2 was a perfect hook for his character). The fix I could come up with was that the Bastards also murdered his fixer and stole the fixer's ledger. That element, even as minor as it was, wound up being enough for the player to play along pretty well (since that character flies under the radar most of the time, he really didn't want his personal information out, especially to some shady organization known only as "The Council."
Though the DM isn't without fault, I agree that the players really didn't do their best to be flexible. The OP made several comments to the effect of "the PG said X", or "the campaign book said Cheliax is Y", rather than simply going with the flow. The situation is salvageable, but only with cooperation from both sides.
Spoilers for Bastards of Erebus:
They might either be more inclined to join up after getting a beating for not having done anything yet, or they may still not be willing to do so.
If they still don't want to join, the option of having the Pathfinders serve as a patron for the group is presented. If you go this route, the biggest issue is just finding a few extra encounters to get the PCs up to the level they should be by the time they take on the Bastards of Erebus, since Arael's rescue won't make much sense at this point.
The second adventure starts out with a Pathfinder asking for help from the Children of Westcrown, so that option would just be cutting out the middleman.
After reading how this group of character responded, I feel a lot better about how my PCs were in Curse of the Crimson Throne. The reactions in the OP were just way too neurotic for a group of proper heroes, it seems to me. The group I had for Crimson Throne were kind of nuts, but they wouldn't have been too afraid to take action.It is not fear of taking action. The difficulty is in identifying the "right" action to take.
The Player's Guide sets up the characters to be fairly loyal citizens. The NPC contact commits an Act of Treason in front of them. (The adventure itself says as much on Page 13.)
That's correct--or to put it another way: Our group agrees that the sort of people who are reasonable people (rather than suicidal or just not cognisant of the risks, or metagaming to assume they are safe in this adventure because they're the PCs or what-have-you) living in a harsh oppressive place (like Cheliax as described) with the fear of (active) secret police, and yet who decide, though frightened, to do something heroic and good, these people are even more heroic (to us). But at that point, the question is what action to take--the ones in the actual adventure (according to everyone here and the GM) are the right actions. But Janiven makes them seem like the group is doing other things.
Though the DM isn't without fault, I agree that the players really didn't do their best to be flexible. The OP made several comments to the effect of "the PG said X", or "the campaign book said Cheliax is Y", rather than simply going with the flow. The situation is salvageable, but only with cooperation from both sides.
Thanks for your advice here, MisterSlanky (and Cralius in the post above)--it is sound. However, I think it's important to note, from the very first post, we do have players and GM working together on this. And the solution Cralius the Dark describes with metagaming to fit the rails is well-known to us, and we have indeed bandied it about (as I said, we considered making new characters who were already part of the organisation--we would have done it from the start if the adventure wanted us to, we just weren't ready for it initially due to being led a bit astray by the PG), but we'd like to use it as a last resort--if possible we'd rather make new characters who fit better than shove the character somewhere it doesn't really fit, round peg, square hole and all that--we were of course all ready to stretch to accomodate the AP, Janiven was just more of a stretch than we imagined:
To go back to Cralius's analogy:
I describe the opeing scene in a tavern when a guy walks in with a bag of coins and a map to some caves. If your the character who says "Im not going there, why?" Then you need to pack up your things and go home.
It wasn't that we were like "No, we won't take the coins, we want to go to this other cave that isn't in your adventure" it was more like "Player: So my Detect Evil detected the shadowy figure as Evil? GM, I won't take his money, but I want us to go to the caves anyway and keep the scroll he wants away from him. That way we can still do this adventure, and I hope that's still OK with the later adventures?" "GM: That would be a cool twist, but I think adventure 2 may assume you gave him the scroll. Let's figure something out." "Me: When I ran Rise of the Runelords, Paizo forums people had some really awesome ideas for how to modify it, and they already saw all the problems I did before I saw them--let's ask them.".
But GM included, we prefer an approach that would allow us to keep what we have with a little bit of careful balancing of other events. So that said, to everyone who's been giving us very good and helpful advice about what we could have done before (and there are a lot of you, and I thank you for it), let us look to the future, as I hoped to do when I started the thread (my apologies, I probably wasn't very clear):
As to the proposed fix I mentioned above (which will obviously include the players working to be more likely to accept it), what do you guys think? Say what you want about the heroism of our characters, but my Summoner, despite being shy and scared, would literally march into Citadel Rivad for that Paladin NPC (and I think that makes her heroic, at least to me). Beyond that, the conciliatory NPC should get the PCs willing to join the group despite Janiven, but is the speech I presented (or a similar one) realistic and doable?
That's correct--or to put it another way: Our group agrees that the sort of people who are reasonable people (rather than suicidal or just not cognisant of the risks, or metagaming to assume they are safe in this adventure because they're the PCs or what-have-you) living in a harsh oppressive place (like Cheliax as described) with the fear of (active) secret police, and yet who decide, though frightened, to do something heroic and good, these people are even more heroic (to us). But at that point, the question is what action to take--the ones in the actual adventure (according to everyone here and the GM) are the right actions. But Janiven makes them seem like the group is doing other things.
I guess my players in the past have just been people who tend to play their characters as having an overinflated sense of their own immortality (despite evidence to the opposite) and strong subversive tendencies. Anyway, as it's been pointed out, your DM did have an alternate avenue for continuing the story. And perhaps this group of characters would have responded more readily to the Pathfinder Society's approach rather than Janiven's "vive la revolution" approach.
|
Any truly loyal citizen of westcrown would HATE what's happening to the city, and really dislike the uncaring government. Seriously, this is basic stuff you can apply in the real world. Being patriotic doesnt mean agreeing automatically with what you government says. A government is not the nation it governs, and it's possible to love your country while disagreeing with government policy, even while actively fighting against it.
This isnt Dark Heresy, this isnt Paranoia, this is D&D, and players dong get dragged off in the dead of night with black bags on their heads just because they joined a rebel group. Sure, that might be the logical thing to happen if the authorities are ultra-competent omniscient MIBs (which the westcrown authorities are not), but it would make for a poor Heroic Fantasy tale.
Finnaly, they're bloody PCs! Your summoner was CRYING? HE CAN SUMMON OTHERWORLDLY CREATURES TO DO HIS BIDDING! HE KEEPS ONE AROUND AS A DOGSBODY! he has MAGIC POWERS! Sure, the government is still a threat to him, but he's not nearly as utterly helpless as the average craven peasant.
YOu players need to man up, get a little genre savvy, and play the bloody game. One of the benefits of APs over, say, single-player RPGs is that the DM can adapt on the fly. But there's still the expectation that the players will want to play the game.
I'll bet if your players were playing something like Dragon Age or Baldur's Gate, they would immediately try to abandon the main quest and become farmers or something. Well, this isnt Oblivion, and even if it was, that would be boring as hell.
Any truly loyal citizen of westcrown would HATE what's happening to the city, and really dislike the uncaring government. Seriously, this is basic stuff you can apply in the real world.
I think it's a big step between "I hate the monsters that prowl around the city at night" and "Hey, let's break some guy I've never met out of jail! The Hellknights will never catch me...because I'm ****ing innocent!".
Now if all of the PCs were already members of the "revolution" (yes, I know it's not a revolution) at the beginning of the game, that would be a little different.
Any truly loyal citizen of westcrown would HATE what's happening to the city, and really dislike the uncaring government.
Actually, I believe a lot of the Wiscrani see the current mayor as a step up. He may be venal, he may spend on the arts so he can indulge in them, but he's not downright hostile like a couple of his noteworthy predecessors.
Of course, he hasn't been any more effective at dealing with nightly visitation of shadowy creatures than his predecessors either.It's also worth noting that opposition campaigns, whether rebellious or reformist or anywhere in between, often fire up either when people have lost their fear (like during the plague years in Europe) or there are real prospects for improvement (like when a relatively weak or merciful leader follows a real terrifying bastard at the job). Both situations give aggitators real opportunities to build support.
The Council of Thieves Player's Guide is an amazingly unhelpful document when it comes to creating characters that will be motivated to participate in this adventure path.
Hmmm... this seems to be a bit of a trend with Paizo's Player's Guides...
What's up with that?
Creative Director
|
The Council of Thieves Player's Guide is an amazingly unhelpful document when it comes to creating characters that will be motivated to participate in this adventure path.Hmmm... this seems to be a bit of a trend with Paizo's Player's Guides...
What's up with that?
Part of the problem there is that we've had an increasingly less amount of time available for me and Wes (AKA: the two folks who know the most about what's going on with the AP) to actually write the Player's Guide. We're hopefully going to be handling that with the Kingmaker Player's Guide, which will mostly be written by me, building off of some work we had a freelancer start.
The Council of Thieves Player's Guide is an amazingly unhelpful document when it comes to creating characters that will be motivated to participate in this adventure path.Hmmm... this seems to be a bit of a trend with Paizo's Player's Guides...
What's up with that?
That's not quite true.
The "Legacy of Fire" campaign traits actually do quite well at getting the PCs together and highly motivated to complete at least the first installment the adventure path.
Even the "Second Darkness" campaign traits do this adequately. They get everyone into the right place at the right time for events that should hopefully build a party.
So, the only one I have seen a problem with so far is the "Council of Thieves" player's guide. The element of having issues with the way things are in Westcrown needed to be laid out in the Player's Guide (and had more influence in the trait design). While such information does belong in the GM's info, the players need it sooner then they often get it to make it more intergrated with their character concepts.
That's not quite true.
It is, AFAIC.
You're right about LoF (by far the best AP, IMO), and even RotRL's guide was decent.
But SD? No way - I've seen enough complaints that the guide prepares you for Riddleport and its seedy underworld - not helping the elves and saving the region from drow - that people end up wanting to stay in Riddleport and tell the (obnoxious) elves to take a hike... and I happen to very much agree with those complaints.
CotCT? Again, I've seen tons of complaints about that one too. You kill the one annoying dude - quickly - and that's it; people suddenly lose all their motivation. (Not totally fair, I know - but it is what it is.)
CoT has been mentioned already.
That's enough of a trend for me - my post was accurate. [And enough of the hijack - this thread is about CoT's starting hook.]
But SD? No way - I've seen enough complaints that the guide prepares you for Riddleport and its seedy underworld - not helping the elves and saving the region from drow - that people end up wanting to stay in Riddleport and tell the (obnoxious) elves to take a hike... and I happen to very much agree with those complaints.
That is not a problem with the guide, that is a problem with the "bait & switch" Adventure Path.
B.T.W., I am in this adventure path. Unfortunately, what you have said I already knew, but be careful with spoilering.
CotCT? Again, I've seen tons of complaints about that one too. You kill the one annoying dude - quickly - and that's it; people suddenly lose all their motivation. (Not totally fair, I know - but it is what it is.)
No, those complants are the result of bad character design - namely "turtling" on the part of the players (i.e., creating characters with no outside connections or roots in the city of Korvosa).
Hiya.
I'm DM'ing this path; my first foray into the Pathfinder RPG (although I did play 3.5 for almost two years...and, by the by, *really* didn't like the system...but that's another thread... ;) ).
When my players first approached me with playing Pathfinder, I looked for the first PF AP. This was it. Looking at it now, I'm not sure it was the best choice for a "first adventure with a new-ish system". Perhaps something a little more 'bash the door, kill the monster, take the treasure' adventure would have been better...but too late for that now. Trial by fire I guess! :)
Anyway, to get on point, my players and I all knew that this wasn't an "adventure series". It was an "adventure PATH". I outright told them to make characters that had lived most of their lives (or at least a good dozen years or so) in a BIG city ruled by a LE government. Their characters have to have some beef with the current government. Lastly, that they basically have to meet with a NPC called Janiven and agree to join forces with her in "making a difference for the people of Westcrown". No if's, and's, or but's about it; if they don't, they won't be doing the AP because I don't want to have to figure something else out.
This has worked surprisingly well.
The players don't feel 'railroaded' because I was honest with them in what and how the AP starts; they RP'ed the meeting with Jan and looked for a way to 'agree' with her. They all know that the AP hinges around trying to do something against the current government...but that's about it. They won't be annoyed if, suddenly, they find out NPC X was a government spy all along because they *know* that the AP focuses on intrigue, conspiracy and paranoia. In short, they're all fine with it. :)
On the flip side of that note...the first 'running through the sewers' basically sucked donkey spheres. The players were just not that into it (which was obvious); I think I'm going to modify the 'chase' to move above ground where they run through he dark streets, avoiding the Hellknights, the dottari, the shadowgarms, etc. This will feel MUCH more "city-like" I believe, and it will also put the PC's in the mindframe of "night = bad" and "Hellknights = bad", rather than trying to start a city-based AP and the first thing they do is get thrown into a dungeon... o_O
This has been an interesting read. And, ironically enough, our group (I'm a player in a CoT Play-by-Post game here on Paizo's boards) started out a little too gung-ho to evoke revolutionary changes in Westcrown. I'm playing a priest of Milani (the goddess of rebellion!) and I'm the one reining people in...and convincing them we have to go slow...inspire the people first to win their hearts and minds...and then, maybe...somewhere way down the line...we can start talking about overthrowing House Thrune and taking back Cheliax.
So, it's actually pretty funny to read the OP's experience as having a group that would totally be behind the "win their hearts through acts of kindness" angle, getting bogged down with a fiery speech by Janiven, thereby convincing them the AP is all about directly overthrowing House Thrune and slaying as many Hellknights as possible. Regardless of how Janiven's speech is written in the opening scene, I think there's lots of background material in there for the GM to recognize that she's not the unstable revolutionary your group of players have surmised her to be. In fact, in our PbP game, the GM has consistently portrayed Janiven as non-confrontational when it comes to engaging (and especially killing!) any Hellknights.
If you'd like to see how our game started and where it's gone since the AP started, I'll leave a link here to the game thread. Maybe your GM can read through it and get a better sense for the NPC motivations? She can also see how another GM handled the insertion of our characters.
My two-cents,
--Neil
This has been an interesting read. And, ironically enough, our group (I'm a player in a CoT Play-by-Post game here on Paizo's boards) started out a little too gung-ho to evoke revolutionary changes in Westcrown. I'm playing a priest of Milani (the goddess of rebellion!) and I'm the one reining people in...and convincing them we have to go slow...inspire the people first to win their hearts and minds...and then, maybe...somewhere way down the line...we can start talking about overthrowing House Thrune and taking back Cheliax.
So, it's actually pretty funny to read the OP's experience as having a group that would totally be behind the "win their hearts through acts of kindness" angle, getting bogged down with a fiery speech by Janiven, thereby convincing them the AP is all about directly overthrowing House Thrune and slaying as many Hellknights as possible. Regardless of how Janiven's speech is written in the opening scene, I think there's lots of background material in there for the GM to recognize that she's not the unstable revolutionary your group of players have surmised her to be. In fact, in our PbP game, the GM has consistently portrayed Janiven as non-confrontational when it comes to engaging (and especially killing!) any Hellknights.
If you'd like to see how our game started and where it's gone since the AP started, I'll leave a link here to the game thread. Maybe your GM can read through it and get a better sense for the NPC motivations? She can also see how another GM handled the insertion of our characters.
My two-cents,
--Neil
Hi Neil,
Thanks for your interesting perspective--as it turns out (I think I mentioned this upthread), I had heard from others about that a lot of people can derail the AP by making PCs who are too gung-ho to topple Thrune, which isn't the AP's focus, so for my part, I was trying to help the GM nip that in the bud with my character.
Our GM has also portrayed Janiven as not wanting to kill the Hellknights, wanting to run in the sewers. Out movement speed was insufficient to outrun them, but she had a fit when the Gnome started Coup de Gracing them.
But in the end, we took the advice in this thread into consideration and worked everything out a few weeks ago. The GM decided to give Janiven all of her own and Arael's extremist tendencies, making her more extreme than she actually is but thus leaving Arael much more moderate, thus allowing them to represent both sides of the Children of Westcrown (we called the group Blades of Aroden though). Except Arael is still racist against Tieflings and our party has two of them, but that just leads to interesting roleplaying moments. Here's how it shook down (and I hope this will help some of the upthread posters see that everyone here was interested in helping the GM keep the game running smoothly):
Starting from where I left you guys off before, my character knew that her Paladin friend had also been captured by the Hellknights, but it was almost sunset, so she and the Half-Orc Paladin realised they needed the CoW's help with that issue, so she ran back to the Temple of Aroden and started talking really quickly and then ran back to the Temple of Shelyn before it got dark (barely). Amaya followed just after, breaking curfew, and she delivered a conciliatory speech. After paying the Gnome, who didn't want Janiven anywhere near the operation, all PCs--except the human Priestess of Shelyn we were worried about--were ready to join up for the rescue op. That Priestess secluded herself in her room drawing depressed paintings that looked vaguely surrealist based on her time in the sewers. The player made a new character, a Middle-Aged Half-Elf Rogue from Galt who had seen the old Cheliax fall and was incredibly paranoid about security risks, constantly lecturing people on being careful to keep incriminating information in areas he called "red" rather than "black".
The rescue was ridiculously easy, and raised people's spirits after the sewers, which were enormously full of monsters (the GM wondered how things like fallen debris and undead got to be there when Janiven and Arael had been recently using those paths in the sewers--Janiven's 35 foot move wouldn't have been enough to flee everything if she hit a block in the path). The Gnome Colour Sprayed in two consecutive rounds all but the guy on the roof. My Summoner and the Paladin took him. Meanwhile the Rogue unlocked the back door and the manacles on Arael and Laeni (the Paladin that we added to the rescue to help motivate the PCs). We disguised ourselves as bandits rather than using default Blades of Aroden disguises because we considered it pure folly to risk linking Arael to the BoA (it would be child's play to find him, and anyone who even bothered to Scry would have our HQ and other things imediately).
Arael explained that the BoA (we actually got the name after he came back) were going after the Bastards of Erebus. The Gnome took the opportunity to switch from indistinct thugs who tormented him in his backstory to the BoE and vociferously agreed that they all must die. My Tiefling Summoner knew of them and felt that they had given into their Fiendish taint and thus were also a danger to all. The Paladins were easily convinced to fight a group that serves Mammon, and the Rogue was already a full member of the BoA. Thus, everyone was on board for the mission. In order to foster more character interaction (I know my character is very loyal to her few friends, and easily motivated by helping friends), I had her talk to a bunch of the BoA. She had Tarvi sell some of the group's billions (minor exaggeration but there were a lot!) of CLW potions at her store (in nice fancy glasswork from Amaya so the nobles would particularly want some to match their new jewelry) so we could get a little bit more money. My character's Knowledge [Local] dug up that Tarvi was a noble, and she started curtsying and calling her "My Lady", which unsettled Tarvi.
So the PCs are pretty firmly into the AP now and everything is fine. Janiven's final line in her speech was really the main obstacle to overcome, and other than losing the one cleric, we've dealt with it by it becoming an in-joke for the characters. Many of us will end speeches or verbal correspondences on different topics with a similar construction, much to Janiven's chagrin and Yakapulio's amusement: (e.g. "OK, so for breakfast today, we have waffles, pancakes, and tea. Remember, breakfast is the most important meal of the day, and a Westcrown in which you eat a healthy balanced breakfast is one step closer to a Westcrown free of the devil that is the Thrice-Damned House of Thrune!") Also, my character felt sorry for Janiven that no one believed her conspiracy theories about Thrune, so she got a Hat of Disguise and pretended to be an envoy of House Thrune who came to tell Janiven that Thrune is upset that she has discovered their secret (that they are behind everything bad in Westcrown) and wish to detain her so she will desist in spreading it. Unfortunately, everyone got worked up enough about an agent of Thrune walking into the base that my character had to reveal the charade, which caused more laughing at Janiven because Janiven had been attacking the so-called Thrune envoy and most everyone else had not. We have at least convinced the Gnome by this point that Janiven is a competent scout and that Morisino is the actual reason for the incredible bumbling that led to the initial Hellknight attack (it took several sessions of the other PCs telling him this and Janiven scouting without a hitch for him to eventually acquiesce).
So I guess in conclusion, our group enjoys roleplaying fun and complex interactions among different characters (and the variety in the BoA is great for this), but we always want to work with the GM to avoid derailing the adventure, and we did find a way to continue and only lose the one character.
Having played through BoE now (we just killed Palpatine, or Palavene or whatever he's called), I can confidently say that so far, anyway, the final line of Janiven's speech is out of place with the rest of the adventure and I recommend to GMs starting out to gauge your groups (and in-character, Janiven would be able to do this with Sense Motive before she even invited them to her pub) and not include the last line of boxed text unless you have a group that's very midline (if it's like us, it'll put them off, if it's like some of the more radical groups, it might spur them too far) or a group so radical that without Janiven's speech, they already want to kill Thrune and need the CoW to slow them down.
Any thoughts on that?
I haven't done anything with the AP thread yet, but am very interested and likely ordering at least #25 and start looking into it.
That said, there are VERY different reasons to react to perceived revolutionary antics. Not all "revolution" has to overthrow the government, not all protest has to be violent.
I keep getting a "Batman" vibe, or low-level "Justice League" type of feel off the concept; people who have to work outside the system, restore hope in justice, and do what has to be done. Bruce Wayne doesn't want to be arrested, and it would be a very bad thing for him to be. Likewise, it would be pretty damn foolish to incite all of Gotham to revolution, despite the corrupt system in place. But, take out the worst threats, restore hope and confidence, get the people to rise up as one voice and demand better of their government, makes sense. If that avenue fails, then the people are impassioned, united, and believe they can make a change, which does make armed revolution possible. Also has to be crafted to elicit that kind of response.
Going forward forewarned, I'll keep that in mind if I do end up running this.
My take on the OP's situation is a little different than most's, it seems. From my perspective (with one major exception that I will address in a moment) it isn't so much that the GM failed to depict Janiven accurately, it's that he failed to depict Westcrown accurately...
Wow, that is completely different than the impression my fellow PCs and I have been given of Westcrown, as well. We're nearing the end (I think) of Council of Thieves' first module, and I'm trying not to find out any spoilers, but I'm very confused about how to help my GM and harmonize with my fellow players, because I still don't understand why my character would continue to agree to everything she's been asked to do. (But if she refuses, it just holds everybody up). 'You want to have an adventure/help people, so you'll jump at *any* opportunity' just doesn't seem like good motivation. When you live in a Hell City, and you're approached by a random stranger who wants you to commit your loyalty to her but won't tell you what she actually wants you to *do,* and the only explanation she can give when you ask 'why me, specifically?' is: 'Well, I've been surreptitiously watching you,' that's not a relationship getting off to such a great start. (Maybe it would have been better if it had been clear that she was a loose cannon, but our Janiven was like a Glinda the Good Witch that doesn't understand why you ask so many questions and is trying to hide how she is getting impatient with you).
I wish we had, at the very least, been told about the shattered sense of destiny in the city's history. We'd probably have that sense just by living there, and a notion of the city's thwarted hopes would have been great to shape the flavor of our Tiefling bard, for example. It would also have made some sense of Janiven's refrain that she wants us to 'INSPIRE THE PEOPLE!' We kept asking, 'how?' and she wouldn't give us an answer. My character actually *is* a Westcrown Firebrand, but while I do think that means she'd join a resistance, were she convinced the cause were righteous, does that also mean she'd join an organization without any idea what it's about? (Several days and a Group Name later, we still don't know. The best explanation we've been given for our recruitment has been: well, there are some vague things we want to accomplish, and some of it is too dangerous for us. So we found you!')
I found (and then resurrected - sorry) this thread searching for insights into adventure hookery, on account of my confusion/frustration. I want meaningful storytelling to be a part of our game, but I don't want to be exasperating and refuse to cooperate. My fellow PCs and I are almost all very new at any gaming whatsoever, and this is our second adventure in a row where the hook has been positively stultifying. (The first time, we got in trouble with the law for something the majority of us had nothing whatsoever to do with, and in exchange for our release we were offered a deal SO BAD, that virtually anybody - especially a Rogue, me - would probably be all, 'Forget this; I'm out of here. I *wanted* to go on an adventure, but this is like a fool's errand crossed with getting shanked in the prison yard. I'll opt out and find a better adventure tomorrow...')
Is a somewhat awkward start common to most RPG APs and modules? I want this to be a time when I make sense of my character's relationships to the other PCs and figure out her priorities in a crisis (the OP sounds much better about staying true to what her character might actually do; I intended for my character to be a little easily discouraged, but the moment we roll initiative I get distracted worrying about acquitting myself well and not letting my friends down), but I think we're all kind of stuck. Because we're agreeing to go on missions for which we don't have legitimate motivation - and I think that might be somewhat alienating us from our own characters. We don't feel like we have real choices. If one of us were to opt out entirely (and I'm not the only one who might have), would the game be ruined? Or would there be an alternative scenario that brings us back in?
Any advice? Whether (spoiler-free) for this particular AP, or just in general, as to how to get past the awkwardness of a clunky beginning? A series of only weakly-motivated combats will still be fun for me, but I gather that RPing is supposed to be much more than that. I want to aspire to better from myself, but not at the expense of the GM's sanity or my fellow players' right to just get on with it.
My take on the OP's situation is a little different than most's, it seems. From my perspective (with one major exception that I will address in a moment) it isn't so much that the GM failed to depict Janiven accurately, it's that he failed to depict Westcrown accurately...Wow, that is completely different than the impression my fellow PCs and I have been given of Westcrown, as well. We're nearing the end (I think) of Council of Thieves' first module, and I'm trying not to find out any spoilers, but I'm very confused about how to help my GM and harmonize with my fellow players, because I still don't understand why my character would continue to agree to everything she's been asked to do. (But if she refuses, it just holds everybody up). 'You want to have an adventure/help people, so you'll jump at *any* opportunity' just doesn't seem like good motivation. When you live in a Hell City, and you're approached by a random stranger who wants you to commit your loyalty to her but won't tell you what she actually wants you to *do,* and the only explanation she can give when you ask 'why me, specifically?' is: 'Well, I've been surreptitiously watching you,' that's not a relationship getting off to such a great start. (Maybe it would have been better if it had been clear that she was a loose cannon, but our Janiven was like a Glinda the Good Witch that doesn't understand why you ask so many questions and is trying to hide how she is getting impatient with you).
I wish we had, at the very least, been told about the shattered sense of destiny in the city's history. We'd probably have that sense just by living there, and a notion of the city's thwarted hopes would have been great to shape the flavor of our Tiefling bard, for example. It would also have made some sense of Janiven's refrain that she wants us to 'INSPIRE THE PEOPLE!' We kept asking, 'how?' and she wouldn't give us an answer. My character actually *is* a Westcrown Firebrand, but while I do think that means she'd join a...
Well, I'm the OP, and let me say, it's worked really well for us after a shaky start. And in fact, some of my little brother's friends wanted me to run something while I was on vacation, so I ran Bastards of Erebus from my memory of playing through it and I got them all hooked easily thanks to the excellent advice of everyone in this thread. I just told them up-front--look, your characters are going to wind up being masked superheroes to bring the glory back to this city, so make characters who want to do that, and they did.
When the AP gets you to do this, the hooks are solid. For instance, Curse of the Crimson Throne Player's Guide hooks you easily at the beginning by making all the characters hate a common foe who wronged them in the past. In Rise of the Runelords, there's an attack really early on. Council of Thieves works pretty well if the players know what to expect from the very beginning.
The only minor hitch we had after the beginning in our main group is that the plan in the second adventure is a bit too much like a Rube-Goldberg Machine (like the contraption in the game Mousetrap, it has like 12 steps before it may or may not pay off), but we just bought into it anyway because we had no better leads in character.
Well, I'm the OP, and let me say, it's worked really well for us after a shaky start. And in fact, some of my little brother's friends wanted me to run something while I was on vacation, so I ran Bastards of Erebus from my memory of playing through it and I got them all hooked easily thanks to the excellent advice of everyone in this thread. I just told them up-front--look, your characters are going to wind up being masked superheroes to bring the glory back to this city, so make characters who want to do that, and they did.
That actually sounds really fun! You have me at 'superhero.' I will try to think of the story that way as we proceed, and see if that helps my stay in tune with the story.
If I could have just one do-over wish, I wish the GM had told us up-front to trust Janiven, treat her as genuine and just play along. (Or that we already knew her. Why a stranger, you know?) I gather it's sort of considered standard practice and a player's responsibility to acquiesce, but the GM emphasized that this would be a city full of secrets and intrigue. I felt all panicky, not knowing whether this was a trap or just a rather ham-fisted opening. (We Sensed Motive and all, but we didn't learn anything conclusive by doing so). I think he's keeping secrets about the actual tenor of the adventure because he wants us to be surprised, but it's meant we have a hard time planning to accommodate the general direction of the story.
I also wish we had a cool hideout. But perhaps all in good time...
Well, I'm the OP, and let me say, it's worked really well for us after a shaky start. And in fact, some of my little brother's friends wanted me to run something while I was on vacation, so I ran Bastards of Erebus from my memory of playing through it and I got them all hooked easily thanks to the excellent advice of everyone in this thread. I just told them up-front--look, your characters are going to wind up being masked superheroes to bring the glory back to this city, so make characters who want to do that, and they did.That actually sounds really fun! You have me at 'superhero.' I will try to think of the story that way as we proceed, and see if that helps my stay in tune with the story.
If I could have just one do-over wish, I wish the GM had told us up-front to trust Janiven, treat her as genuine and just play along. (Or that we already knew her. Why a stranger, you know?) I gather it's sort of considered standard practice and a player's responsibility to acquiesce, but the GM emphasized that this would be a city full of secrets and intrigue. I felt all panicky, not knowing whether this was a trap or just a rather ham-fisted opening. (We Sensed Motive and all, but we didn't learn anything conclusive by doing so). I think he's keeping secrets about the actual tenor of the adventure because he wants us to be surprised, but it's meant we have a hard time planning to accommodate the general direction of the story.
I also wish we had a cool hideout. But perhaps all in good time...
I don't know how far you are, but you get a hideout pretty much immediately.
Our GM also emphasised the secrets and intrigue, hence my OP.
As for the use of Janiven, who nobody really knew, I agree. When I ran it, I had five PCs. One of them really wanted to be part-Minkai as a Tiefling, so I told him that he was discriminated against by nearly everyone in Westcrown, but his cousin Amaya was always the one person he could count on to be compassionate to him, and she recruited him. The Halfling Rogue who had Shadowchild worshipped Cayden Cailean and believed that his Shadowchild-given ability to go out at night and blend in well enough not to get killed immediately made it his duty to use that power for good (with great power, great responsibility and all that). He wound up doing runs for people smuggling slaves out to Andoran, where he met a cutie named Fiosa who had recently smuggled out some slaves herself with the help of her friend Arael. Fiosa recruited him.
Apparently in the actual AP, everyone is supposed to be really open about membership in this organisation (there's like a fame point system that assumes people know that the PCs are members of the organisation), but we've been running it entirely masked superhero. In fact, my PC made up a fake identity using Hat of Disguise and started going to taverns and arenas to make the fake identity known, with the intent of having the fake identity "come out" as a member, still allowing all real members to stay secret while giving us a human face.
I don't know how far you are, but you get a hideout pretty much immediately.
I think we *do* have the hideout in question, but I was hoping for something a little more ambitious. According to the GM, the shrine is just one big room. If it has any remarkable architecture/defining or secret features, I guess I have yet to find that out. (Once we have some down time, I should totally 'Sense Motif,' as one of my friends said on another occasion, a couple weeks ago). If the Shrine turns out not to have any special features or secrets... maybe we can remodel and flip it?
As a gesture of good faith to my GM, I volunteered to move in to the hideout full-time when he asked who would do so, leaving behind my menial backstory job as a laundress. (I would pretend to launder and sew, but just use Prestidigitation and Mending, then trip off to explore the city). Maybe I can hippie-chicify some little corner of the place and make it seem more like home, LOL. Start a stash of books and fictional flea market items. Secret a pet in my cupboard. I do rather like the idea of my character living in charming disarray and flavorful communal poverty...
But I would also like a revolving fireplace and a secret dungeon and a library of salvaged banned books and a staircase that goes to nowhere.
Apparently in the actual AP, everyone is supposed to be really open about membership in this organisation (there's like a fame point system that assumes people know that the PCs are members of the organisation), but we've been running it entirely masked superhero. In fact, my PC made up a fake identity using Hat of Disguise and started going to taverns and arenas to make the fake identity known, with the intent of having the fake identity "come out" as a member, still allowing all real members to stay secret while giving us a human face.
AWESOME.
I don't know how far you are, but you get a hideout pretty much immediately.I think we *do* have the hideout in question, but I was hoping for something a little more ambitious. According to the GM, the shrine is just one big room. If it has any remarkable architecture/defining or secret features, I guess I have yet to find that out. (Once we have some down time, I should totally 'Sense Motif,' as one of my friends said on another occasion, a couple weeks ago). If the Shrine turns out not to have any special features or secrets... maybe we can remodel and flip it?
As a gesture of good faith to my GM, I volunteered to move in to the hideout full-time when he asked who would do so, leaving behind my menial backstory job as a laundress. (I would pretend to launder and sew, but just use Prestidigitation and Mending, then trip off to explore the city). Maybe I can hippie-chicify some little corner of the place and make it seem more like home, LOL. Start a stash of books and fictional flea market items. Secret a pet in my cupboard. I do rather like the idea of my character living in charming disarray and flavorful communal poverty...
But I would also like a revolving fireplace and a secret dungeon and a library of salvaged banned books and a staircase that goes to nowhere.
Apparently in the actual AP, everyone is supposed to be really open about membership in this organisation (there's like a fame point system that assumes people know that the PCs are members of the organisation), but we've been running it entirely masked superhero. In fact, my PC made up a fake identity using Hat of Disguise and started going to taverns and arenas to make the fake identity known, with the intent of having the fake identity "come out" as a member, still allowing all real members to stay secret while giving us a human face.AWESOME.
My character basically lives there too--hey, it's much better than the place she was squatting in the slums.
If the Shrine turns out not to have any special features or secrets... maybe we can remodel and flip it?
It doesn't have any map printed, but the adventure suggests using "Flip-Mat: Cathedral" if necessary. It's not really supposed to just be one big room (however, if the DM wants it to be, then it naturally is).
Edit: By the way, I think most of the problems people have with the start of this AP could have been easily solved by cutting the last sentence from Janiven's first speech. It really doesn't fit, and gives people a very wrong impression of both the AP and the Children.
Edit: By the way, I think most of the problems people have with the start of this AP could have been easily solved by cutting the last sentence from Janiven's first speech. It really doesn't fit, and gives people a very wrong impression of both the AP and the Children.
As I said before, I think the easiest way is just to start out as members of the Children, and work that into the characters' backstories. That makes way, way more sense to me than the "cold call" opening.
|
As I said before, I think the easiest way is just to start out as members of the Children, and work that into the characters' backstories. That makes way, way more sense to me than the "cold call" opening.Edit: By the way, I think most of the problems people have with the start of this AP could have been easily solved by cutting the last sentence from Janiven's first speech. It really doesn't fit, and gives people a very wrong impression of both the AP and the Children.
if i were to do it again, this is how i'd do it...the Children gather, PC's are the newest recruits, shenanigans ensue. Much easier to adjudicate, no need to swallow "run away with strangers," and they're all already "bought into" the primary campaign goal.
If the Shrine turns out not to have any special features or secrets... maybe we can remodel and flip it?
It doesn't have any map printed, but the adventure suggests using "Flip-Mat: Cathedral" if necessary. It's not really supposed to just be one big room (however, if the DM wants it to be, then it naturally is).
Edit: By the way, I think most of the problems people have with the start of this AP could have been easily solved by cutting the last sentence from Janiven's first speech. It really doesn't fit, and gives people a very wrong impression of both the AP and the Children.
Huh, the site said I had the last post last night, but it hasn't appeared. Anyway, our group thought it was a small shrine for a while, but the GM confirmed that it's actually a five-story tall cathedral that magically keeps itself tidy. Plenty of room for people who want to just live at the base.
If the Shrine turns out not to have any special features or secrets... maybe we can remodel and flip it?
It doesn't have any map printed, but the adventure suggests using "Flip-Mat: Cathedral" if necessary. It's not really supposed to just be one big room (however, if the DM wants it to be, then it naturally is).
In the last module there is a map for the shrine, BTW.
|
You're definitely not alone -- I was also skeptical about the beginning of the module. Janiven asks some people she barely knows to join an anti-government cabal and openly defy the Hellknights? That's a tough request to obey unless your character is a die-hard revolutionary in the first place.
Or good aligned and want to bring down the opressive devil worshipers....
I am running the CoT path right now. I love it, but I hated the first module, which had a lot of problems that I felt the need to fix. One was the ease with which the PCs at low level were able to deal with the hellknights on both occasions (avoiding spoilers).
So I ran the characters through a module to toughen them up, made a PC the brother of the imprisoned person (avoiding spoilers), and then let them push through the module quickly and kick more butt than they should because they came in at higher level. Then we were able to get to module 2 more quickly.
Second module on rocks!
Or good aligned and want to bring down the opressive devil worshipers....
You're definitely not alone -- I was also skeptical about the beginning of the module. Janiven asks some people she barely knows to join an anti-government cabal and openly defy the Hellknights? That's a tough request to obey unless your character is a die-hard revolutionary in the first place.
Being good-aligned doesn't automatically imply that you won't be suspicious of possible spies or afraid of a large organisation like the Hellknights. YMMV, of course.
Especially since some Hellknight leaders are, in fact, good-aligned :)
|
I have several issues with BoE.
1. The Hook. Easily fixed - PCs kick off as members of Children. That's enough to get them rolling thru the first adventure - the second one is so g%&+@$n' frickin' awesome that I only need to say "you guys gotta perform a play. On a stage. No, not by making a skill challenge." in order to get them foaming at mouth. You, sir Pett, are a genius.
2. The Baby Hellknights. Ewww...really ? Really ? REALLY ? I'm building up an image of b-b-b-badass jet black full plate doom fumes blazing eyes 2h weapons from pure obsidian dudes (the only thing they are missing are jetpacks) and now I'm supposed to run a bunch of CR 1 mooks in leather armour "shaped to resemble full plate". No no no. There's a reason why I never liked Space Marine Scouts or other "wannabes".
Easily fixed too - have the Dottari replace Hellknights. But that means statblocking, which is time-consuming (maybe GMG or NPC Guide will help here).
3. The Sandbox, only without sand. Part 5 of the adventure assumes some kind of downtime, except it doesn't give much meat to play with in that downtime. I buy Paizo adventures in order to minimize the amount of GM work I have to do, and I am not really fond of anything that increases my workload. At least the Set Pieces are gone, phew.
Conclusion is: keep SKR away from adventure writing. Sean's the man with deities and background stuff, but he's just not close to Mona, Pett, Jacobs, Vaugh or Greer in module writing mojo.
I have several issues with BoE.
1. The Hook. Easily fixed - PCs kick off as members of Children. That's enough to get them rolling thru the first adventure - the second one is so g%#&*@n' frickin' awesome that I only need to say "you guys gotta perform a play. On a stage. No, not by making a skill challenge." in order to get them foaming at mouth. You, sir Pett, are a genius.
2. The Baby Hellknights. Ewww...really ? Really ? REALLY ? I'm building up an image of b-b-b-badass jet black full plate doom fumes blazing eyes 2h weapons from pure obsidian dudes (the only thing they are missing are jetpacks) and now I'm supposed to run a bunch of CR 1 mooks in leather armour "shaped to resemble full plate". No no no. There's a reason why I never liked Space Marine Scouts or other "wannabes".
Easily fixed too - have the Dottari replace Hellknights. But that means statblocking, which is time-consuming (maybe GMG or NPC Guide will help here).
3. The Sandbox, only without sand. Part 5 of the adventure assumes some kind of downtime, except it doesn't give much meat to play with in that downtime. I buy Paizo adventures in order to minimize the amount of GM work I have to do, and I am not really fond of anything that increases my workload. At least the Set Pieces are gone, phew.
Conclusion is: keep SKR away from adventure writing. Sean's the man with deities and background stuff, but he's just not close to Mona, Pett, Jacobs, Vaugh or Greer in module writing mojo.
Yeah, the second adventure has been a blast! And I'm of fan of Skinsaw Murders as well, Pett does good stuff. I agree with your point (2) very much. We didn't think these were going to be 'baby Hellknights' as you call them because our GM built up the fearsome torturers and historical revisionists that are the Order of the Rack--out of character, I could have metagamed that the adventure wouldn't throw things in that powerful, but in character we had no reason to expect that we weren't being chased by the Hellknights of local infamy, and our GM tinkers with the modules enough that she clearly could have swapped them, even though I knew OOC that Paizo wouldn't throw full Hellknights in there.
Being good-aligned doesn't automatically imply that you won't be suspicious of possible spies or afraid of a large organisation like the Hellknights. YMMV, of course.
This. My character is not afraid of doing something dangerous like taking on the entire BoE, but she is still afraid of the Hellknights. I just don't think it makes sense to grow up in Westcrown and not be. Even Janiven is, as evidenced by her high levels of paranoia.
3. The Sandbox, only without sand. Part 5 of the adventure assumes some kind of downtime, except it doesn't give much meat to play with in that downtime. I buy Paizo adventures in order to minimize the amount of GM work I have to do, and I am not really fond of anything that increases my workload. At least the Set Pieces are gone, phew.
If anybody has a minute, could he/she tell me what does happen at the end of the first module? The 'sandbox with no sand,' if you will? I'm reasonably sure that my group is now past module 1 and into module 2 - we're beginning to plan for the play - but I'm very curious about what it is that the published materials specify for the end of BoE.
Here's what our group did:
The GM gave us a week off to craft, shop, and pursue any entrepreneurial endeavors. It was kind of fun to have a whole week's activity that I could narrate as I saw fit. I fulfilled a long-time dream shared by the Cleric and I and bought a small flock of sheep. (We are talking about starting a petting zoo. No, seriously). I took a grain offering to the desecrated church of Erastil (the deity of my character's rural upbringing, though she has no authority or anything within the faith - she's just an ordinary believer). I stocked up on scrolls. I tried to bond with some of the NPCs in our movement. (I would really like to go on a spontaneous hobbit-smuggling mission with Fiosa one of these days). I set up a functioning kitchen in the shrine of Aroden, bought a little nice wine, and cooked meals for anybody living there/anybody who saw fit to come over. I tried to be a consolation to our Tiefling bard, who is feeling very resentful about how many Tieflings we had to... neutralize over the course of the module. And a few of my fellow PCs and I decided that on days off - when we haven't used up our spells - we patrol the streets at night and kill Shadow Beasts, though we don't actually play out these encounters or bother with XP.
At the end of our week, one of the NPCs came and told us that (he? she? I can't remember whether Tarvi is a he or a she!) had seen a ruined manor with a library that appeared to be intact, though guarded by some kind of fearsome presence. Naturally, the party wizard *really* wanted these books. We explored the mansion, solved puzzles, found a few interesting things - including a large cache of valuable alcohols - and eventually acquired the books, which will probably prove very helpful but weren't magic, to the wizard's disappointment.
I had assumed that the modest mansion adventure was the first little event of the second module and was part of the published materials. But is it from the end of the first? Or something our GM just made up? What is the 'sandbox with no sand,' as written? I'm very curious.
That sounds like a part of the AP that occurs a good part after #1 is over. May I ask what level you are at?
Essentially, the end of Bastards of Erebus is like this:
"the next adventure can begin immediately, or after weeks/months/years of downtime, as the DM desires"
What Gorbacz refers to is not the end of the module, but a part of the module itself where some hints are given, but nothing is actually fleshed out. The DM is assumed to either evolve those hints into encounters him/herself or omit that part of the module altogether.
I think everyone in this group is just confused
Er...thanks?
4. Janiven's first want isn't to overthrow the House of Thrune, it's to get rid of the Shadow Beasts and remove the oppression.
That may well be, but when I was playing it, it wasn't immediately obvious to me how attacking a group of Hellknights and breaking a complete stranger out of jail was the quickest and/or smartest way to get rid of the Shadow Beasts.
I think everyone in this group is just confusedEr...thanks?
4. Janiven's first want isn't to overthrow the House of Thrune, it's to get rid of the Shadow Beasts and remove the oppression.That may well be, but when I was playing it, it wasn't immediately obvious to me how attacking a group of Hellknights and breaking a complete stranger out of jail was the quickest and/or smartest way to get rid of the Shadow Beasts.
Yeah, dude. I would just kill me some Shadow Beasts! I kind of wish that had been the first thing I had been invited to do. My character would have been nervous at the prospect, but there's no moral compunction involved in agreeing to cooperate against an unnatural creature that eats people at night. And if you're more neutralish, you'd probably still be happy to do it for the excitement. And/or to save your own life.