5-11 Library of the Lion GM Discussion


GM Discussion

51 to 100 of 290 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

I just started trying to prepare this scenario to GM it, but for some reason, I'm unable to get the map of the library to extract. This is an oddity because no other scenario (that I've come across, at least) has had that problem before, and I did get most images out of the PDF, but not that map.

Any idea what might have caused this?
Or how else to export it without screenshot/cut/paste/saving?

I'm using Some PDF Image Extract, if that helps. I'm happy to download something else.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This game sucked!


I played this and felt it was a good idea implemented horribly.

I play a 14 int barbarian/alchemist level 2 human charatcer. So I had plenty of skills, but not one that could help. Honestly I could have said I follow the PCs left the table and added the same amount of addition to the party's success. Well I guess my knowledge local I rolled poorly on could have helped us find the library sooner for fluff reasons.

Any scenario that forces a player to watch I think is not worthy of any gaming system. Espcially PFS that does not want you screening adventures before you play them. What makes it worse is that it is a level 1 to 5 so a new player starting that game and saying. Hey you can watch other players play the game, but you will be worthless.

The 2 hour realtime limit I found was garbage as it rushes you to search rooms and elimate roleplay.

The best GMs and Scenarios give every player atleast one moment to shine. In 5-11 Library of the Lion, that breaks that rule without any regards.

To me there is no difference between a scenraio holding one player from playing, or a jerk player from killing everything before anyone else gets a chance.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

DMFrank wrote:
This game sucked!

That isn't very constructive.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Finlanderboy wrote:

I played this and felt it was a good idea implemented horribly.

I play a 14 int barbarian/alchemist level 2 human charatcer. So I had plenty of skills, but not one that could help.

The GM didn't even allow you to roll Perception at a penalty? Because that is what the scenario says about characters that do not have the listed skills. As long as you could make an argument about how it would help, you could roll other skills with a -2 to -5 penalty.

Finlanderboy wrote:
The 2 hour realtime limit I found was garbage as it rushes you to search rooms and elimate roleplay.

There is no realtime time limit. You can take as long as the GM lets you at the table. In-game time is tracked, not out of game time.


Andrew Christian wrote:
DMFrank wrote:
This game sucked!
That isn't very constructive.

While I agree it is not detailed explaingin their opinion. It is constructive. Someone saying that hate this scenario shows there is animosity towards it. Now just because someone is unable to provide a reason why they do not like somehting does not mean they should not speak.

I dumped wisdom. But I was told I NEEDED a rank to help. Now I know someone will say "Thats what you get for dumpign wisdom." My statement still stands you should never not allow someone to contribute because of their build.

TOZ: hrrmm maybe our dm misunderstood it.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

Finlanderboy wrote:
TOZ: hrrmm maybe our dm misunderstood it.

Undoubtedly. This is a complex scenario with lots of moving parts. I made the same mistake in The Disappeared by letting the players feel rushed rather than stepping in and slowing them down. If you think you have to make split decisions, the scenario will be that much worse for you. Of course, you also can't take half an hour deciding what to do either.

Shadow Lodge

We were allowed to use any reasonable skill to do a "research check", including knowledge skills, linguistics, and even perception.

We knew there was going to be a GM-decided penalty based on whatever was there, and that's fine and to be expected if you're using a less-specific skill.

We modified our actions based on who was doing the researching in what room and what was the most likely check needed, and what the penalty might have been. If players are reasonably careful and GM expectations on the research check are clear, there shouldn't be too much trouble here.


I tried to use appraise for valuable books, but was told no.

I will have to look over the scenario. Before I review it.

But from what I was told of while playing worst adventure for any rpg i ever dealt with.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Great adventures are often divisive, because great adventures are often ambitious. The Dalsine Affair, The Disappeared, and Library of the Lion have this issue of divisiveness.

-Matt


Mattastrophic wrote:

Great adventures are often divisive, because great adventures are often ambitious. The Dalsine Affair, The Disappeared, and Library of the Lion have this issue of divisiveness.

-Matt

I disagree completely. A great adventure is a template that allows a DM to give the players at the table the most fun possible. Infact I would argue you contradict yourself. If people a significant amount of people argue and hate a scenario. Then how is it great? Because some think so?

Defintion of divisive: tending to cause disagreement or hostility between people.


Having just played this mod last sat, i enjoyed it very much... frankly i am grateful to the author for writing a scenario in which combat is a sign of failure. Not every character in the game should be a combat monkey, with intimidate to get there way.

From what the GM said where viable skill checks, to be honest they made perfect sense. if you got the cards, you also got bonuses to skill checks and even more. I realize that int is used as a dump stat for many melee classes... this mod proves there are coincidences for making that decision.

also, appraise is to determine value, not content.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

By being something that can incite such strong emotion.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Talon89 wrote:


also, appraise is to determine value, not content.

In previous PFS scenarios, the appraise skill is used to determine both content AND value. Value is derived from knowledge of the content of the artefact.


Talon89 wrote:

Having just played this mod last sat, i enjoyed it very much... frankly i am grateful to the author for writing a scenario in which combat is a sign of failure. Not every character in the game should be a combat monkey, with intimidate to get there way.

From what the GM said where viable skill checks, to be honest they made perfect sense. if you got the cards, you also got bonuses to skill checks and even more. I realize that int is used as a dump stat for many melee classes... this mod proves there are coincidences for making that decision.

also, appraise is to determine value, not content.

I agree compeltely to punsih players if they dump a stat and can not compensate. I think it is awesome to have a anti-combat mod.

I think it is poor taste to have the mod so one sided that some players would not be allowed to contribute.

Make a series of different checks.

Point in case. Hell knights feast. I DMed this 3 times. Each time I had atleast 1 player with no skills to make persuading people likely.

hell knights feast:
I had follower of calistra guest have the PCs find a creative way to determine if damien was gay. So the players ran around trying to oust them
. This allowed those players to still play that part of the game, be creative and enjoy the game. Now that is one part of the scenario. It is much worse to have the whole scenario box you out.


Apparently not in this case, since it was not on the listing which were appropriate. There were at least four skills which could be used in each case. This is not something new, in some scenarios you had one or two to complete the secondary success conditions.

5/5 5/55/55/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Central Europe aka GreyYeti

Having played it last weekend i think it is one of my favorite scenarios of all time. Everybody was on the edge the whole time because of the time limit, and the moment

Spoiler:
the careteker showed up after we had to fight the book swarm
produced one of the biggest "omg what do we do now" moments i ever experienced in PFS play. That diplomcy roll felt like the deciding hit on a BBEG that prevents a TPK. On the other hand the whole party cheered when we finally managed to break the code.

There were only a few things i did not enjoy that much.
The whole thing seems a bit too luck-based IMO, a single bad diplomcy or research roll can lead to total failure, because it either means the guards get called, or you miss an important piece of information (like the correct cypher).
And i am not a fan of DC30 checks in low level scenarios, which are normally unbeatable at that level unless some serious min-maxing is involved.
Finally i think the whole scenario would have been better as 3-7 instead of 1-5. Level 3 and up characters are more well-rounded and have better ressources for such a mission. Playing it with a group of fresh level 1 characters seems likely to end in failure.

Dark Archive 5/5 5/55/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Upper Midwest aka Silbeg

Avatar-1 wrote:

I just started trying to prepare this scenario to GM it, but for some reason, I'm unable to get the map of the library to extract. This is an oddity because no other scenario (that I've come across, at least) has had that problem before, and I did get most images out of the PDF, but not that map.

Any idea what might have caused this?
Or how else to export it without screenshot/cut/paste/saving?

I'm using Some PDF Image Extract, if that helps. I'm happy to download something else.

Avatar, I didn't have any issues getting it to work. Just selected the image, copies, and created a new image in Paintbrush (using a Mac).

Oh, if it matters, I was viewing it in Adobe Reader.

I am sure this doesn't help you, directly, but at least you'll know it can be done?

Shadow Lodge

Not sure what you mean by "selecting the image, copy and create in Paintbrush", Silbeg? You can't select an image using Adobe Reader in a PDF?

Meanwhile, I'm trying to decode this cipher on my own, and I'm getting nowhere fast. What order are you meant to apply the clues? It seems each clue is independent, so I'm guessing you don't use the "consonant/vowel" clue on the "substitution"-processed letters. The "backwards" clue doesn't seem to matter when you apply it (earlier is probably better to save some work).

Dark Archive 5/5 5/55/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Upper Midwest aka Silbeg

Finlanderboy wrote:

I dumped wisdom. But I was told I NEEDED a rank to help. Now I know someone will say "Thats what you get for dumpign wisdom." My statement still stands you should never not allow someone to contribute because of their build.

TOZ: hrrmm maybe our dm misunderstood it.

Undoubtedly your GM misunderstood it. I believe mine did as well, but we had a team of skill monkeys.

To quote the scenario:

5-11 p6 wrote:

Searching a room for texts requires a successful skill check, and multiple PCs can search an area simultaneously. Each researching PC can attempt a Linguistics, Knowledge (history), or text-based Craft or Profession check (such as Profession [librarian] or Craft [bookbinding]) to find texts. A PC might use a different skill or ability albeit with a penalty ranging from –2 to –5 at your discretion. Several areas also identify additional skill check options that PCs may use without penalty. PCs who use magic or class abilities in a particularly creative or relevant way might receive up to a +5 bonus on a check at your discretion. Except where noted, the skill check DC is 14 (DC 18 for Subtier 4–5).

From that, you could have used your knowledge local (perhaps knowing how Taldan think will help you figure out their system of organization), or just perception check. I'd give you a chance, though a penalty. Maybe the Perception would be at a -5 (you really don't know what you are looking for), but the Kn: Local would be a -2... all depending on the room, of course!

And, also, only the BEST roll counts... all others turn into "aid another" -- something to be aware of, in case people have traits, feats, or boons, that increase their bonus for Aid Another (such as the Shadow Lodge trait, or the Taldor boon from season 4... assuming the max-roller was Taldor faction).

It is unfortunate that your GM missed this. But it sometimes happens, especially with a scenario as complex as this one is. I'll bet you do better when you run it, Finlanderboy!!! :D

I know that I am taking everything I learned from playing this one into my GMing of it.

Also, a final note... it has been said before, but...

Run this ONLY from a print out... don't try running it from the PDF on a tablet or laptop. FAR too complex, with far too many of the clues and rules spread out between multiple pages.

I am planning on creating a cheat sheet for this one... including the mechanics above, time tracking, and the clues to the door to the secret archive.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

Avatar-1 wrote:
Not sure what you mean by "selecting the image, copy and create in Paintbrush", Silbeg? You can't select an image using Adobe Reader in a PDF?

Yes, you can right-click and save images from PDFs.

Avatar-1 wrote:
Meanwhile, I'm trying to decode this cipher on my own, and I'm getting nowhere fast. What order are you meant to apply the clues?

You only apply Cipher #2. The other two do not decode the cipher.

3/5

Silbeg is right, I just tried copy/pasting from Adobe reader into Photoshop and got the map just fine.

Unfortunely the secret door is marked on the image itself as opposed to typed in later with the room labels, which is honestly just poor attention to detail.

Dark Archive 5/5 5/55/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Upper Midwest aka Silbeg

Avatar-1 wrote:

Not sure what you mean by "selecting the image, copy and create in Paintbrush", Silbeg? You can't select an image using Adobe Reader in a PDF?

Sorry, to be more clear.

1) Open the PDF in Reader... browse to page
2) Select the image (so it is highlighted blue), and hit CMD-C for copy (ctrl-C in windows, right?)
3) Open Paintbrush (a Mac paint utility) - cmd-N for create new from clipboard.

That's about it

Avatar-1 wrote:
Meanwhile, I'm trying to decode this cipher on my own, and I'm getting nowhere fast. What order are you meant to apply the clues? It seems each clue is independent, so I'm guessing you don't use the "consonant/vowel" clue on the "substitution"-processed letters. The "backwards" clue doesn't seem to matter when you apply it (earlier is probably better to save some work).

Remember that you are reading the cypher to encode. You need to reverse that to decode. I'll have to try that myself, soon.

Shadow Lodge

Sorry, figured the image problem out - thanks guys.

The cipher is another story. The results I've gotten so far are DOSUKRV (without reversing decode/encode, oops) and VKGZJDG (including doing the decode/encode). What the!

Edit:

TriOmegaZero wrote:
You only apply Cipher #2. The other two do not decode the cipher.

This is the problem. Be right back.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

Avatar, if you need help check this post on the previous page.

5/5 5/55/55/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Central Europe aka GreyYeti

1 person marked this as a favorite.

How to do the cipher

Spoiler:

cipher 2 is the correct hint, each vowel goes 2 backward (e becoming c) and each consonant goes 3 forward (h becomes k). The important part here is, that is the way to encrypt the message. To decrypt it, you have to undo the changes, so you have to reverse the whole process.

k -3 h
y +2 a
v -3 s
w -3 t
k -3 h
c +2 e
e -3 b
c +2 e
o -3 l
o -3 l
m +2 o
i -3 f
m +2 o
e -3 b
c +2 e
f -3 d
g +2 i
c +2 e
q -3 n
f -3 c
c +2 e

Shadow Lodge

Okay, I worked it out, with one minor error:

From GreyYeti's very handy guide above:
I got the last word as "Obecience". The letter "F" in the original code going back 3 places is a "C", not a "D" looking at Greyfen's guide.

Seems to me that this single letter is a mistake, but everyone who's pointed it out got the same (seemingly incorrect) result?


Silbeg wrote:
stuff

Thanks that clears things up a bit. I had a decent knowledge local, but when appraise was shut down as not a skill listed. I assumed nothing else would work either.

When I was was to believe that only the skills listed could be used, or perception. Then I stopped caring about trying.

This makes the scenario a lot better, but the repitition is still not ideal. But that is splitting hairs and a minor issue.

Thanks for clearing that up for me.

5/5 5/55/55/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Central Europe aka GreyYeti

actually you are right, the problem here seems to be (which is one of the reason why that code system would actually suck in real life):

Spoiler:
two different letters in the original message can lead to to the same letter in the code, so it is impossible to decide without context what the original letter was.

In that example the d and the i both become g in the code, so the code should actually look like ... mecggcqfc, which could be translated to either obedience, obeiience, obeidence, or obeddence, and that is not even counting on the fact that z also becomes c, so it could also be obzddzncz.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

Oh geez, that's rough.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Finlanderboy wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
DMFrank wrote:
This game sucked!
That isn't very constructive.

While I agree it is not detailed explaingin their opinion. It is constructive. Someone saying that hate this scenario shows there is animosity towards it. Now just because someone is unable to provide a reason why they do not like somehting does not mean they should not speak.

I dumped wisdom. But I was told I NEEDED a rank to help. Now I know someone will say "Thats what you get for dumpign wisdom." My statement still stands you should never not allow someone to contribute because of their build.

TOZ: hrrmm maybe our dm misunderstood it.

Hey DMFrank and Finlanderboy!

Thanks for jumping in here and providing feedback. I'm all in for any and all types of feedback.

First off let me say that this scenario will allow PC's to smash and grab style if they want. Run in, get to the "back rooms" and take the information they are looking for...but you are correct, you cannot achieve every aspect of this scenario through combat.

Many of the secondary success conditions and the faction missions require a non-combat based approach. Searching for the items are very skill based checks, ones that can be repeated and aided through actions that your GM identify as appropriate or clever.

For both you and DMfrank, I will gladly run this scenario. Either over the internet, or if that doesn't work, I'll fly to each of your hometowns and run it there...either as an event during the week or at a nearby convention y'all will be attending. I'll gladly run it for your entire table a second time, including the GM, just to experience the same situations you are talking about here so I can know them first hand to improve any scenarios I may (or may not) write in the future.

Shadow Lodge

Okay, well if that error is real, is it safe to change the original code so that that letter is changed from an F to a G? It seems to me that would fix it.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

Probably the best way to handle it.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm also seriously considering allowing an intelligence or wisdom check (whichever is higher) for anyone who's working on the code, similar to a knowledge check, that works like this:

10+ - writing out the alphabet normally might provide a visual aid as you attempt to decode the message
15+ - it's possible that a different cipher was applied than the one you've discovered
20+ - (once it's found) the consonant/vowel cipher explains how the message is encoded, not decoded.

These are just, well I don't want to say obvious things, but rather helpful things that characters would possibly work out on their own with a decent mental capacity, but the players might struggle with (but could still work out on their own anyway).


Kyle Elliott wrote:


Hey DMFrank and Finlanderboy!

Thanks for jumping in here and providing feedback. I'm all in for any and all types of feedback.

First off let me say that this scenario will allow PC's to smash and grab style if they want. Run in, get to the "back rooms" and take the information they are looking for...but you are correct, you cannot achieve every aspect of this scenario through combat.

Many of the secondary success conditions and the faction missions require a non-combat based approach. Searching for the items are very skill based checks, ones that can be repeated and aided through actions that your GM identify as appropriate or clever.

For both you and DMfrank, I will gladly run this scenario. Either over the internet, or if that doesn't work, I'll fly to each of your hometowns and run it there...either as an event during the week or at a nearby convention y'all will be attending. I'll gladly run it for your entire table a second time, including the GM, just to experience the same situations you are talking about here so I can know them first hand to improve any scenarios I may (or may not) write in the future.

That is awesome you suggets and support it that much. Just seeing you say this kinda stuff makes you the type of person I want to play with.

From what I was to understand from the scenario as it was presented to me. Was that there was a list of skills to use and no others. Also untrained skills could not be used. Because I said anyone can use craft untrained so I will try that(a+2 vs -2 for perception), and I was told no only trained skills can be used. That made it felt like to add to the scenario you needed take specific skills.

I assumed that what the scenario had written, since that was what was told to me. I just hate the idea of people not having those skills not getting to partipate in the scenario. Again for my character I could have left the table and not rolled a single die and helped as much as I did trying to provide reasons to help.

I do not think any table top game should ever do that to any player for any reason. But misunderstandings in the scenario is not the fault of the scenario.

I love the idea of the anti-combat theme. That is a great idea and a wonderfull way to mix things up. I had no complaints in the slightest concerning that.

Dark Archive

Finlanderboy wrote:
Kyle Elliott wrote:


Hey DMFrank and Finlanderboy!

Thanks for jumping in here and providing feedback. I'm all in for any and all types of feedback.

First off let me say that this scenario will allow PC's to smash and grab style if they want. Run in, get to the "back rooms" and take the information they are looking for...but you are correct, you cannot achieve every aspect of this scenario through combat.

Many of the secondary success conditions and the faction missions require a non-combat based approach. Searching for the items are very skill based checks, ones that can be repeated and aided through actions that your GM identify as appropriate or clever.

For both you and DMfrank, I will gladly run this scenario. Either over the internet, or if that doesn't work, I'll fly to each of your hometowns and run it there...either as an event during the week or at a nearby convention y'all will be attending. I'll gladly run it for your entire table a second time, including the GM, just to experience the same situations you are talking about here so I can know them first hand to improve any scenarios I may (or may not) write in the future.

That is awesome you suggets and support it that much. Just seeing you say this kinda stuff makes you the type of person I want to play with.

From what I was to understand from the scenario as it was presented to me. Was that there was a list of skills to use and no others. Also untrained skills could not be used. Because I said anyone can use craft untrained so I will try that(a+2 vs -2 for perception), and I was told no only trained skills can be used. That made it felt like to add to the scenario you needed take specific skills.

I assumed that what the scenario had written, since that was what was told to me. I just hate the idea of people not having those skills not getting to partipate in the scenario. Again for my character I could have left the table and not rolled a single die and helped as much as I did trying to provide reasons to...

Hmmm, I see a major disconnect.

Skills can be used in the scenario as per the rules for trained vs. untrained skills in the core rule book.

Also, this excerpt from the beginning of the scenario may have been missed by the GM. It read as follows:

Each researching PC can attempt a Linguistics, Knowledge (history), or text-based Craft or Profession check (such as Profession [librarian] or Craft [bookbinding]) to find texts. A PC might use a different skill or ability albeit with a penalty ranging from –2 to –5 at your discretion. Several areas also identify additional skill check options that PCs may use without penalty. PCs who use magic or class abilities in a particularly creative or relevant way might receive up to a +5 bonus on a check at your discretion. Except where noted, the skill check DC is 14 (DC 18 for Subtier 4–5).

An example might be the wizard using detect magic to help find any books that might be magical...I would give that player a +1 to his search checks.

We had our "not able to read" barbarian search by looking for "specific pictures" of demons and paladiny type folk. He received a penalty on some checks, and a bonus on others.

This scenario in the skill checks of it all allow and outline alot of GM control and decision making to bend the scenario to the party at hand.

Grand Lodge 5/5 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Wisconsin—Madison aka Totenpfuhl

GreyYeti wrote:


Finally i think the whole scenario would have been better as 3-7 instead of 1-5. Level 3 and up characters are more well-rounded and have better ressources for such a mission. Playing it with a group of fresh level 1 characters seems likely to end in failure.

But the pregen Ezren was a godsend to the players in the one I ran. :)

Dark Archive

Craft Bookbinding is a skill that can be used untrained hence all PC's have at a minimum their INT modifier on the checks and if your brought your INT 7 barbarian to the library well sometimes you have to just stand on the sidelines and deal with the hitting part when it comes up.

Also yes the code is wrong but it only takes about 20 seconds to realise it must be Obedience not Obecience although for completeness I told my GM both answers to ensure we met the success condition


I GM'd Library of the Lion this past Saturday, the 25th, for an event my wife and I put on at a local game store.

My prep for this scenario was...extensive.

I had to make a real point to keep one player involved, who brought a level one Fighter that had almost no skill utility. I made it work and kept them in the flow of the roleplay and group conversation.

As a note, I had three Grand Lodge players sitting at the table and they were completely lost on the cipher, being unable to complete it. After reading up on this thread, I can certainly see why they had so much trouble with it. The best that can be said for it was they did not get too sidetracked by it and did not let their frustration with it impede their progress in the primary aspects of the scenario.

My players had a good time though and managed to avoid any combat whatsoever. In addition, they were able to complete the primary and secondary victory conditions. It was definitely not a roleplay- or skill-heavy group, but they really pulled together as a team and made it happen. I was proud of them and glad they had fun.

This was not a fun scenario to run for me. It was not easy. That being said, I think I'd run it again if asked, if only to see another group of players really (hopefully) blossom like my last table did.

Shadow Lodge

Surprisingly, on the table I ran, my Grand Lodge player found only the correct cipher until nearly the very end of the mod, so he didn't have much of a problem deciphering it.

He failed that "extra help" int/wis check I mentioned earlier, so didn't get any additional hints I was willing to give him - but he didn't need them.

Before giving him the handout, I crossed out the "F" and wrote in "G" underneath it, and he asked me if that's actually what was on the handout - I said it was, and he must have gotten the hint. He had no confusion.

4/5 Venture-Agent aka pianopraze

Finlanderboy wrote:

I played this and felt it was a good idea implemented horribly.

I play a 14 int barbarian/alchemist level 2 human charatcer. So I had plenty of skills, but not one that could help. Honestly I could have said I follow the PCs left the table and added the same amount of addition to the party's success. Well I guess my knowledge local I rolled poorly on could have helped us find the library sooner for fluff reasons.

Any scenario that forces a player to watch I think is not worthy of any gaming system. Espcially PFS that does not want you screening adventures before you play them. What makes it worse is that it is a level 1 to 5 so a new player starting that game and saying. Hey you can watch other players play the game, but you will be worthless.

The 2 hour realtime limit I found was garbage as it rushes you to search rooms and elimate roleplay.

The best GMs and Scenarios give every player atleast one moment to shine. In 5-11 Library of the Lion, that breaks that rule without any regards.

To me there is no difference between a scenraio holding one player from playing, or a jerk player from killing everything before anyone else gets a chance.

I agree. This was a good idea horribly implemented to the point it was the worst module I have ever played. Or to quote DMFrank "It sucked".

spoiler:

We did very well finding clues in the rooms even though only 2 of 5 players had skills listed but we were so pressed for time we did not perception check each room for secret doors at the end (come on really, putting a secret door at the end pc's can easily overlook and might not have time for that can lead to total module failure???) . Due to the random and capricious nature of the design we did not get the primary and barely got secondary win conditions and very little Gold Even though we found all of the secondary clue cards and three of the primary clue cards.

I could go on and on, but I can not emphasize enough how much I dislike this module due to it's capricious nature. I do think it was a good idea, and a non-combat mod is very welcome. Just the implementation and randomization can lead to zero prestige and almost no gold despite otherwise doing well.

We didn't have a rogue and almost didn't break down the door (the intro box text warns you not to break anything) in the main library to get to the last few rooms (even if we had a dc 30 is too high for a 1-3 tier rogue). We avoided talking to the alarm system, i mean lion construct, as we didn't want to get in a fight with a construct and cause more breakage. So this cost us what 5??? points... enough that we barely got any reward for this mod. We would have been better off to have ransacked the room, killed the construct, killed the guards and took all the time we needed to search - the exact opposite of what we were told to do and followed, which lead to low reward.

Very poorly written mod, even though I like the concept.

I suggest following alterations:

-Say something about break things if you have to, but just don't let them find out you did it in the intro box text instead of emphasizing don't break anything.

-Allow many more skills for finding the clue cards. 3/5 party members hated this section because they really couldn't contribute.

-Warn party to search for secret rooms somehow. Drop some hints that we need to search every room or else we might totally fail to get gold and prestige.

-Rearrange so you can at least get one prestige without finding secret rooms or interacting with lion construct. We got all the clue cards in the main rooms but barely got 1 prestige and very very little gold. Never played a module that could screw you so badly if you didn't think like the module designer.

-Have two tier of skill checks for 1-3 and 3-5. We were low tier and the dc's were just too high for many things.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

Quote:
-Allow many more skills for finding the clue cards.

Sounds like your GM made the mistake of not allowing unlisted skills to be used. If you had made a good argument for a skill you should have been able to use it at a penalty.

Quote:
-Rearrange so you can at least get one prestige without finding secret rooms or interacting with lion construct. We got all the clue cards in the main rooms but still failed to get any prestige and very very little gold.

You got all the clue cards and didn't realize you didn't have what you came to get?

Quote:
-Have two tier of skill checks for 1-3 and 3-5.

What checks? There are different checks for different tiers.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Agent, Kentucky—Lexington

I ran this game tonight.

There are a number of facts about it that cause me concern:

  • Gold calculation is easy to miss and do incorrectly.
    Why:
    Line of Succession and Lion’s Shield are behind 3 secret doors (double 20 Perception to B1, 20 Perception to B11, 15 Perception to B12) and you must talk to the Guardian or you severely punish gold.

  • Two Spiral Staircases go to Secret Doors in room A, but only one shown.
  • No Secret Door "S" in B10.
  • Guardian should talk after the PC notice it and choose to ignore it.
    Why:
    My players were afraid to talk to it. They worried that action would cause it to attack and it would be worse for them on the detection front.

  • Door to B6 is impossible on Tier 1-2 due to DC 30 Disable Device and DC 25 Break unless the PC roll 16+ on the D20.
  • GM need to make time tracking sheets to independently track time lines for players and background tasks.
  • Only one Pass without Trace potion will cost the players one Deception point even if used.
  • Primary Success tied to 4x DC 20 Perceptions and 1x DC 15.)
  • Secondary Success tied to not overstaying the 2 hours.
  • Four Shining Crusade texts instead of three.

I prepared this and I didn't realize how bad it is until my party nearly got 0 Prestige and 256 gold. It takes reading the Gold and Success conditions a couple times to make sure you are doing it right and they ended up failing the Primary and passing the Secondary but only 384 gp. This assumes that getting A Silver Horn, General's Logbook, and Encarthan Maps count as the "Three". Otherwise they get zero prestige if you don't find the secret room to B11.

Every players hated the night with most saying they felt like they wasted their night. No one liked when I passed out sheets.

I've spent hours afterwards making sure I ran the module correctly, and I can't find anything clearly I did wrong. At beast I gave them more chances than the module provides.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Agent, Kentucky—Lexington

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Sounds like your GM made the mistake of not allowing unlisted skills to be used.

I'm the GM, and I did not make that mistake. Only one of five had the right skills to make the checks without doing them untrained or at the -2 to -5 penalties.

I prepped it and I've done 2 hours dissecting it afterwards. I strongly don't recommend a GM run this module.

The party got 17 texts and depending on how you reconcile the 3 or 4 Shining texts they either got 1 or 0 (zero) prestige. I went with 1 because there are 4 texts that say "Shining Crusade" and they got 3 from rooms B10 down.

4/5 Venture-Agent aka pianopraze

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Quote:
-Allow many more skills for finding the clue cards.

Sounds like your GM made the mistake of not allowing unlisted skills to be used. If you had made a good argument for a skill you should have been able to use it at a penalty.

Quote:
-Rearrange so you can at least get one prestige without finding secret rooms or interacting with lion construct. We got all the clue cards in the main rooms but still failed to get any prestige and very very little gold.

You got all the clue cards and didn't realize you didn't have what you came to get?

Quote:
-Have two tier of skill checks for 1-3 and 3-5.
What checks? There are different checks for different tiers.

We had two of us with Knowledge history, and two using skills at -5, and one player who could use no useful skills and had a -2 to int and wis.

The rest is answered in spoiler below:

spoiler:

We got all the optional cards from searching all the non secret rooms. Searching all these rooms you skill can loose the module if you don't have time or don't think to search for the secret rooms...

We were totally out of time. We figured if we got all the cards in the non secret rooms we could win (we didn't know there were secret rooms with the texts we needed to win).

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

James Risner wrote:
I'm the GM, and I did not make that mistake. Only one of five had the right skills to make the checks without doing them untrained or at the -2 to -5 penalties.

Sounds like the dice were the deciding factor. With my party of four getting the adjustment, and rolling well over 20 in most cases, they easily found the clues with time to spare. Almost all the rooms were treated as small for them, allowing them to manage roughly 8 minutes a room save for the large library with the construct.

pianopraze wrote:

We got all the optional cards from searching all the non secret rooms. Searching all these rooms you skill can loose the module if you don't have time or don't think to search for the secret rooms...

We were totally out of time. We figured if we got all the cards in the non secret rooms we could win (we didn't know there were secret rooms with the texts we needed to win).

Not talking to the NPCs certainly robbed you of a better time. Of course, failing the diplomacy checks like you appear to have failed the search checks would have resulted in much the same thing. Hopefully you were able to take advantage of the halved time on successive searches.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

James Risner wrote:
I prepped it and I've done 2 hours dissecting it afterwards. I strongly don't recommend a GM run this module.

I could have said the same for The Disappeared after my group failed with 0XP, 0/1XP depending on faction, and 0GP. However I have since run it multiple times with successful, happy parties each time.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Agent, Kentucky—Lexington

TriOmegaZero wrote:
I could have said the same for The Disappeared after my group failed with 0XP, 0/1XP depending on faction, and 0GP. However I have since run it multiple times with successful, happy parties each time.

There is a difference. The Disappeared was 0 XP (I had to award 1 XP because they didn't die) and this group wrapped up thinking they did an excellent job.

I'd like to know if I can give them the requested 0 XP because they failed the primary success condition but didn't die. It would make a couple of them happier.

By the way it wasn't die rolls, get got the whole thing done with only two rooms searched twice.

4/5 Venture-Agent aka pianopraze

TriOmegaZero wrote:
James Risner wrote:
I'm the GM, and I did not make that mistake. Only one of five had the right skills to make the checks without doing them untrained or at the -2 to -5 penalties.

Sounds like the dice were the deciding factor. With my party of four getting the adjustment, and rolling well over 20 in most cases, they easily found the clues with time to spare. Almost all the rooms were treated as small for them, allowing them to manage roughly 8 minutes a room save for the large library with the construct.

pianopraze wrote:

We got all the optional cards from searching all the non secret rooms. Searching all these rooms you skill can loose the module if you don't have time or don't think to search for the secret rooms...

We were totally out of time. We figured if we got all the cards in the non secret rooms we could win (we didn't know there were secret rooms with the texts we needed to win).

Not talking to the NPCs certainly robbed you of a better time. Of course, failing the diplomacy checks like you appear to have failed the search checks would have resulted in much the same thing. Hopefully you were able to take advantage of the halved time on successive searches.

I disagree as to the dice being deciding. Putting secrets where/when it was and making it be the deciding factor for getting almost 0 reward on the module is a bad design flaw in my opinion.

My charismatic oracle smoozed through every diplomacy check with ease, but we avoided what we considered an alarm system that would attack us. Making that a key to a module is also bad design in my opinion. We were just happy not to be attacked and avoided breaking/attacking anything we didn't have too as we were told in the beginning.

Another suggestion for the module would be to have that item talk to party, so the party is forced to engage with it and can get the points. I'm sure many will avoid it as we did to avoid a potential fight/breakage.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Captain, Arizona—Phoenix aka TriOmegaZero

James Risner wrote:
There is a difference.

I never said there wasn't.

pianopraze wrote:
I disagree as to the dice being deciding.

I agree after James clarified the results. A single mistake cost the party the mission.

51 to 100 of 290 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / GM Discussion / 5-11 Library of the Lion GM Discussion All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.