Are any of the sections of "The Haunting of
Harrowstone" player safe. I am meant to be playing it. I just bought the book for my collection however, and would like to know if there is any of it I am safe to read.
The Journal, the Haunts article, and the Bestiary are the only parts that are player-safe.
I would run it by your DM before reading any of it really. Might be little easter eggs in different sections he plans on using that aren't originally part of the module.
Many of the haunts from the article on pg 64 are directly referenced in the adventure.
I was really hoping the section on the town would be for the largest part player safe, like the sandpoint one was back in pathfinder 1.
In fairness, I am not asking for the my DMs sake. I am mature enough to know something and not bring it into the game, I am asking for my sake. But it takes effort to do that and it spoils the suprise, so I want to avoid spoilers for my sake.
Speaking as your GM Zombieneighbours, lots of goodness for me in here, not so much for you :)
Best not to read anything :)
Agreed, the part on Ravengro gives away what few juicy secrets the town has.
Agreed, the part on Ravengro gives away what few juicy secrets the town has.
Well that is just damned inconsiderate of it ;)
Well that is just damned inconsiderate of it ;)
I know! You'd think a bunch of rumor mongering, bored, superstitious villagers with nothing else to do but swap gossip could keep something under their hats! :P
Many of the haunts from the article on pg 64 are directly referenced in the adventure.
Which spoils the adventure about as much as reading the skeleton entry in the Bestiary. Without the context of the adventure, the stats don't spoil anything.
Which spoils the adventure about as much as reading the skeleton entry in the Bestiary. Without the context of the adventure, the stats don't spoil anything.I disagree since the haunt descriptions in the article of pg 64 include the specific methods of destruction, which characters may or may not know.
Thanks, Keith. Vigil -he nailed it on exactly why those referenced haunts shouldn't be read by a player. Method of destruction differs quite a bit from knowing a creature's hit dice or CMB. Not to mention the new alternate rules for communicating with haunts. That is most certainly in the purview of GM-exclusive material.
I mean, the OP did ask for pointers to avoid spoiler-ish info, after all, and that certainly qualifies. I guess I'm from the old-school where players didn't read monster statblocks, either.
Which spoils the adventure about as much as reading the skeleton entry in the Bestiary. Without the context of the adventure, the stats don't spoil anything.I disagree since the haunt descriptions in the article of pg 64 include the specific methods of destruction, which characters may or may not know.Thanks, Keith. Vigil -he nailed it on exactly why those referenced haunts shouldn't be read by a player. Method of destruction differs quite a bit from knowing a creature's hit dice or CMB. Not to mention the new alternate rules for communicating with haunts. That is most certainly in the purview of GM-exclusive material.
I mean, the OP did ask for pointers to avoid spoiler-ish info, after all, and that certainly qualifies. I guess I'm from the old-school where players didn't read monster statblocks, either.
I am also a DM, and one who has a real soft spot for haunts. The haunts article, just like the monsters are exactly the kind of tools that I make use of even when i am not running the game. Knowing how a haunt is destroyed really wouldn't matter to me(other than as a spoiler). My character doesn't know the infomation so I cant act on what I know, and i'll make doubly sure I don't metagame, by taking a back seat in figuring it out.
Ofcause, it is all hypothetical at this point as mark has specifically asked that i don't read it, and I intend to abide by their wishes.