So its free on DnDBeyond? I am confused why I have full access to the online version
You may be in a campaign where one of the members as a subscription and already bought the book. That would give you access for as long as the shared campaign lasts.
Guess I'll be holding off on buying this one then, based on what I'm hearing. It's a shame, I thought we were finally going to get something darker and less humorous, like Curse of Strahd was. Oh well, I'll just have to stick to homebrew for that.
New DM here, but just out of curiosity can you not take the content and maybe just tweak or rewrite some of it to achieve the darker tone?
I think its more they marketed it as a "DnD Meets the Thing" type of experience and its not quite that. I do think there are decent horror elements in there but its less so than anticipated. I give the book about a 6.5/10. Pretty decent premise with good ideas but the legwork as a DM to get it together is kind of a lot. There is a bit of weird balance with these books...too much handholding and its seen as rigid and not enough you leave too much work to the DM to figure out where to go.
This one leans towards the latter.
I don't think anyone outside of Adventurer's League (where it's sort of presumed or mandated, as far as I understand) plays any D&D Adventure straight as written. Honestly, I think the hardback adventures put out for 5e largely work for me as "adventure or campaign kits". They do a good job presenting settings and personalities that add "character" to the setting. It's the script you're encouraged to follow is usually where things break down (last go round with Avernus, many pointed out a key "why would they do that?" issue with character motivation between the intro chapter and where the meat of the adventure starts). I think it would be better for Wizards to focus on its strengths: provide a setting, organize the powers that be in the world and explain those dynamics, then explain in broad "this key world event happens" and provide ways for the characters in the setting to respond directly or indirectly to the event. This allows the DM to pick and choose or more easily follow the PCs logic, and would also provide more value because there's stuff to "revisit" in the game with another set of characters, etc. It also allows groups to drop in established characters and figure out a place to start rather than go with the Wizards assumption that begins every book with PCs at first level and a need to figure out a way to bind them as a group. In short, publish the map let the game players figure out their path.
Perhaps I do things differently. As a DM, it is my duty to know the source material. I studied the Nine Hells, devil hierarchy, demons and the Abyss for weeks before I read the FULL campaign of Descent before getting started. So, with my players, everyone was aware of their motivations and I have tweaked a lot of the storyline. Particularly when my players go off the rails. But, it's all good because I'm familiar with what the storyline is, where it's going, and what the motivations are of the NPCs that my players interact with. I will agree, my players were constantly asking when we were going to "Hell" when we were in Baldur's Gate....but, that's also more to do with the damages of letting your players know what campaign they are getting ready to embark on. Nobody ever complained about a lack of excitement or horror in this game. I've been told more than once, this game is very serious and scary. Much moreso than COS, which is the gold standard by which D&D horror is defined.
Rime of the Frostmaiden may not hold up as a genuine horror based game to some...but that seems to be dependent on the DM just as much as the setting given them.
Guess I'll be holding off on buying this one then, based on what I'm hearing. It's a shame, I thought we were finally going to get something darker and less humorous, like Curse of Strahd was. Oh well, I'll just have to stick to homebrew for that.
New DM here, but just out of curiosity can you not take the content and maybe just tweak or rewrite some of it to achieve the darker tone?
I think its more they marketed it as a "DnD Meets the Thing" type of experience and its not quite that. I do think there are decent horror elements in there but its less so than anticipated. I give the book about a 6.5/10. Pretty decent premise with good ideas but the legwork as a DM to get it together is kind of a lot. There is a bit of weird balance with these books...too much handholding and its seen as rigid and not enough you leave too much work to the DM to figure out where to go.
This one leans towards the latter.
I don't think anyone outside of Adventurer's League (where it's sort of presumed or mandated, as far as I understand) plays any D&D Adventure straight as written. Honestly, I think the hardback adventures put out for 5e largely work for me as "adventure or campaign kits". They do a good job presenting settings and personalities that add "character" to the setting. It's the script you're encouraged to follow is usually where things break down (last go round with Avernus, many pointed out a key "why would they do that?" issue with character motivation between the intro chapter and where the meat of the adventure starts). I think it would be better for Wizards to focus on its strengths: provide a setting, organize the powers that be in the world and explain those dynamics, then explain in broad "this key world event happens" and provide ways for the characters in the setting to respond directly or indirectly to the event. This allows the DM to pick and choose or more easily follow the PCs logic, and would also provide more value because there's stuff to "revisit" in the game with another set of characters, etc. It also allows groups to drop in established characters and figure out a place to start rather than go with the Wizards assumption that begins every book with PCs at first level and a need to figure out a way to bind them as a group. In short, publish the map let the game players figure out their path.
Perhaps I do things differently. As a DM, it is my duty to know the source material. I studied the Nine Hells, devil hierarchy, demons and the Abyss for weeks before I read the FULL campaign of Descent before getting started. So, with my players, everyone was aware of their motivations and I have tweaked a lot of the storyline. Particularly when my players go off the rails. But, it's all good because I'm familiar with what the storyline is, where it's going, and what the motivations are of the NPCs that my players interact with. I will agree, my players were constantly asking when we were going to "Hell" when we were in Baldur's Gate....but, that's also more to do with the damages of letting your players know what campaign they are getting ready to embark on. Nobody ever complained about a lack of excitement or horror in this game. I've been told more than once, this game is very serious and scary. Much moreso than COS, which is the gold standard by which D&D horror is defined.
Rime of the Frostmaiden may not hold up as a genuine horror based game to some...but that seems to be dependent on the DM just as much as the setting given them.
Almost all the adventure modules are dependent on the DM eh?
I don't think anyone outside of Adventurer's League (where it's sort of presumed or mandated, as far as I understand) plays any D&D Adventure straight as written. Honestly, I think the hardback adventures put out for 5e largely work for me as "adventure or campaign kits". They do a good job presenting settings and personalities that add "character" to the setting. It's the script you're encouraged to follow is usually where things break down (last go round with Avernus, many pointed out a key "why would they do that?" issue with character motivation between the intro chapter and where the meat of the adventure starts). I think it would be better for Wizards to focus on its strengths: provide a setting, organize the powers that be in the world and explain those dynamics, then explain in broad "this key world event happens" and provide ways for the characters in the setting to respond directly or indirectly to the event. This allows the DM to pick and choose or more easily follow the PCs logic, and would also provide more value because there's stuff to "revisit" in the game with another set of characters, etc. It also allows groups to drop in established characters and figure out a place to start rather than go with the Wizards assumption that begins every book with PCs at first level and a need to figure out a way to bind them as a group. In short, publish the map let the game players figure out their path.
Perhaps I do things differently. As a DM, it is my duty to know the source material. I studied the Nine Hells, devil hierarchy, demons and the Abyss for weeks before I read the FULL campaign of Descent before getting started. So, with my players, everyone was aware of their motivations and I have tweaked a lot of the storyline. Particularly when my players go off the rails. But, it's all good because I'm familiar with what the storyline is, where it's going, and what the motivations are of the NPCs that my players interact with. I will agree, my players were constantly asking when we were going to "Hell" when we were in Baldur's Gate....but, that's also more to do with the damages of letting your players know what campaign they are getting ready to embark on. Nobody ever complained about a lack of excitement or horror in this game. I've been told more than once, this game is very serious and scary. Much moreso than COS, which is the gold standard by which D&D horror is defined.
Rime of the Frostmaiden may not hold up as a genuine horror based game to some...but that seems to be dependent on the DM just as much as the setting given them.
I apologize, I might not have been fully clear, so I don't think you understand or misread my point on Avernus and _player character_ motivation. I appreciate your effort to school me about the prep work a DM like yourself should do (and yeah I understand you got all the scenery pre-chewed and all, my own work was able to cull on my own reading on damnation, Blake's illustrations of Milton, Francis Bacon's painting, the Screwtape Letters, Hadestown the musical, etc on top of the lore and stat blocks, these were things that populate my regular gaming and creative imagination so I was keen on Avernus). I think we both agree that the published adventures require prep above and beyond the book itself (though I think the publisher could do better in that regard especially for less experienced DMs).
But the problem I have is still internal to the "storyline" of Descent into Avernus. It's that the railway into the Sandbox is missing a smooth transition between gauges, specifically:
Why would a band of Baldurians, as you should recall "by the book" the characters are encouraged to be from Baldur's Gate, after being press ganged into being basically a death squad to purge a cult uprising in their city, venture into Hell to save Elturel, a city of uptight pious church mongers for whom many a Baldurian would probably experience a high degree of schadenfreude upon learning it had been smote off the map. Finn "Because it's the right thing to do," Poe: "The next chapter brings you there." Finn "The next chapter brings me there." I mean maybe saving Ravenguard, but really, the leader of the Flaming Fist, the mercenary de facto force of law, with an emphasis on force, that just dropped the party in a murder cult meat grinder? I seeded the game with a cleric of Lethander who studied in Elturel (useful later in game too) and made our Paladin a prospect for the Hell Riders and nixed Mantelborn to give the party some skin in the game (also foreshadowed Burney in a way that got players smelling something they don't understand yet, but espionage for the Court of Bahamut may be in the cards ... but that's work I had to do to repair a broken story between it's prologue and main plot ... which means I'm not working with the best material for which I paid.
The sort of characters I feel are encouraged by Baldur's Gate framing are the sorts that after the fall of another Duke would likely see "chaos as a ladder" opportunity staying in Baldur's Gate to advance their standing there. In fact, because Summer to fall schedule changes have required me to split our group, we actually were able to have separate "we're going to save those sanctimonious dupes" and a "Hell? Hell no, we're staying here and going try to run this town" groups. Maybe the latter group blows it, and needs to get away, far away, like these no man's lands they here far North they've heard talk about experiencing a very long winter...
How did you handle it? I mean, you did all the work, and presuming among your appreciation for the deep background that you didn't lose the plot and you were able to see how the railroad gauges weren't compatible between part I and II to deliver entry into the more sandboxy section, surely you an unasked effort was required too.
Almost all the adventure modules are dependent on the DM eh?
That's pretty much what I said. The DM is the narrator of the story. It's up to him/her to set the tone of the campaign. If you're DM isn't too into horror and simply finds humour in everything, you are going to be playing a very whimsical version of something another DM would have the players navigate as dark, daunting and terrifying. It's the same adventure, but the delivery rests on the DM and how they interpret the story and tone to be...Or, how they want it to be.
Almost all the adventure modules are dependent on the DM eh?
That's pretty much what I said. The DM is the narrator of the story. It's up to him/her to set the tone of the campaign. If you're DM isn't too into horror and simply finds humour in everything, you are going to be playing a very whimsical version of something another DM would have the players navigate as dark, daunting and terrifying. It's the same adventure, but the delivery rests on the DM and how they interpret the story and tone to be...Or, how they want it to be.
Almost all the adventure modules are dependent on the DM eh?
That's pretty much what I said. The DM is the narrator of the story. It's up to him/her to set the tone of the campaign. If you're DM isn't too into horror and simply finds humour in everything, you are going to be playing a very whimsical version of something another DM would have the players navigate as dark, daunting and terrifying. It's the same adventure, but the delivery rests on the DM and how they interpret the story and tone to be...Or, how they want it to be.
Yeah I was agreeing with you
I thought you were, and it's late so I have a tendency to ramble when I'm tired. Sorry if it came across as defensive.
Almost all the adventure modules are dependent on the DM eh?
That's pretty much what I said. The DM is the narrator of the story. It's up to him/her to set the tone of the campaign. If you're DM isn't too into horror and simply finds humour in everything, you are going to be playing a very whimsical version of something another DM would have the players navigate as dark, daunting and terrifying. It's the same adventure, but the delivery rests on the DM and how they interpret the story and tone to be...Or, how they want it to be.
Quite! For instance, I’m very funny, so I make Taika Waititi & Peter Jackson’s Kobolds. Both scary and cowardly.
I apologize, I might not have been fully clear, so I don't think you understand or misread my point on Avernus and _player character_ motivation. I appreciate your effort to school me about the prep work a DM like yourself should do (and yeah I understand you got all the scenery pre-chewed and all, my own work was able to cull on my own reading on damnation, Blake's illustrations of Milton, Francis Bacon's painting, the Screwtape Letters, Hadestown the musical, etc on top of the lore and stat blocks, these were things that populate my regular gaming and creative imagination so I was keen on Avernus). I think we both agree that the published adventures require prep above and beyond the book itself (though I think the publisher could do better in that regard especially for less experienced DMs).
But the problem I have is still internal to the "storyline" of Descent into Avernus. It's that the railway into the Sandbox is missing a smooth transition between gauges, specifically:
Why would a band of Baldurians, as you should recall "by the book" the characters are encouraged to be from Baldur's Gate, after being press ganged into being basically a death squad to purge a cult uprising in their city, venture into Hell to save Elturel, a city of uptight pious church mongers for whom many a Baldurian would probably experience a high degree of schadenfreude upon learning it had been smote off the map. Finn "Because it's the right thing to do," Poe: "The next chapter brings you there." Finn "The next chapter brings me there." I mean maybe saving Ravenguard, but really, the leader of the Flaming Fist, the mercenary de facto force of law, with an emphasis on force, that just dropped the party in a murder cult meat grinder? I seeded the game with a cleric of Lethander who studied in Elturel (useful later in game too) and made our Paladin a prospect for the Hell Riders and nixed Mantelborn to give the party some skin in the game (also foreshadowed Burney in a way that got players smelling something they don't understand yet, but espionage for the Court of Bahamut may be in the cards ... but that's work I had to do to repair a broken story between it's prologue and main plot ... which means I'm not working with the best material for which I paid.
The sort of characters I feel are encouraged by Baldur's Gate framing are the sorts that after the fall of another Duke would likely see "chaos as a ladder" opportunity staying in Baldur's Gate to advance their standing there. In fact, because Summer to fall schedule changes have required me to split our group, we actually were able to have separate "we're going to save those sanctimonious dupes" and a "Hell? Hell no, we're staying here and going try to run this town" groups. Maybe the latter group blows it, and needs to get away, far away, like these no man's lands they here far North they've heard talk about experiencing a very long winter...
How did you handle it? I mean, you did all the work, and presuming among your appreciation for the deep background that you didn't lose the plot and you were able to see how the railroad gauges weren't compatible between part I and II to deliver entry into the more sandboxy section, surely you an unasked effort was required too.
By no means was I intending to "school" you on these topics or the work that goes into being a DM. Just meant to convey that people can take the same material and interpret it very differently. Baldur's Gate is a town full of political intrigue and unrest. Particularly related to events of Elturel and the disappearance of Ravenguard. From the beginning of the campaign only one member of my party was from Baldur's Gate. Two were from Elturel. One was a descendent of Zariel and was raised in the Nine Hells and the other four came from various parts of the map. The group as a whole has a lot of ties to different aspects of the campaign, so tying motivations along as they formed their bonds of friendship wasn't too difficult. The main question you have to answer is WHY the party goes to Candlekeep. This is the pivot point of the entire campaign. Like you, my party ended up splitting, leaving two behind around this point that felt justice had been served and didn't see any need to investigate further, even though there was overwhelming evidence that there was more to uncover. Instead, one stayed behind to assist the temporary new leader of the flaming fist ensure order and that the fist would not be abusing its power as it was with Zodge. One ended up going to Candlekeep with the party as a way of gaining entry after trying for years to get in but never being successful (a real part of this character's backstory). This one stayed behind in Candlekeep, wanting nothing to do with the remaining "mission" of the rest of the party. These two picked up new characters in Elturel refugees.
The new characters got filled in on the events that have occurred and brought up to speed on what was known and why they were heading to Candlekeep and what they hoped to find there. The answers they learned instilled a renewed vigor and hunger to right wrongs at this exact point. So, it seemed to flow fairly smoothly from one to the next.
For my characters, following after Ravenguard was a minute thing. If they found him, great. If not, no huge loss as it was seen as mere bonus points if they could retrieve him. They had their eyes on bigger prizes. Again, I feel like part of that was either how I presented it to my players or how my players interpreted the information given them and reacted. Not saying one is 100% right. And, I feel you, having to give up or drop a character because their motivations no longer carry the storyline is hard and makes for a somewhat rough transition from part to part...but it also felt natural in my campaign as these actions fit the character's attitudes, ideals, backstories and motivations and was decided by the players that ran the characters.
Hope I communicated that well. It is 2 AM where I am and I am usually asleep for three or four hours most nights at this point. My wife is keeping me up tonight, so I might as well play around on Beyond. Haha!
Hi guys, question on Rime of the Frost Maiden. I've been really looking forward to this adventure, but my party is only three people and this is recommended for 4-6.
Is anyone else in the same boat? What kind of work should I expect to optimize this for my party of three?
By no means was I intending to "school" you on these topics or the work that goes into being a DM. Just meant to convey that people can take the same material and interpret it very differently. Baldur's Gate is a town full of political intrigue and unrest. Particularly related to events of Elturel and the disappearance of Ravenguard. From the beginning of the campaign only one member of my party was from Baldur's Gate. Two were from Elturel. One was a descendent of Zariel and was raised in the Nine Hells and the other four came from various parts of the map. The group as a whole has a lot of ties to different aspects of the campaign, so tying motivations along as they formed their bonds of friendship wasn't too difficult. The main question you have to answer is WHY the party goes to Candlekeep. This is the pivot point of the entire campaign. Like you, my party ended up splitting, leaving two behind around this point that felt justice had been served and didn't see any need to investigate further, even though there was overwhelming evidence that there was more to uncover. Instead, one stayed behind to assist the temporary new leader of the flaming fist ensure order and that the fist would not be abusing its power as it was with Zodge. One ended up going to Candlekeep with the party as a way of gaining entry after trying for years to get in but never being successful (a real part of this character's backstory). This one stayed behind in Candlekeep, wanting nothing to do with the remaining "mission" of the rest of the party. These two picked up new characters in Elturel refugees.
The new characters got filled in on the events that have occurred and brought up to speed on what was known and why they were heading to Candlekeep and what they hoped to find there. The answers they learned instilled a renewed vigor and hunger to right wrongs at this exact point. So, it seemed to flow fairly smoothly from one to the next.
For my characters, following after Ravenguard was a minute thing. If they found him, great. If not, no huge loss as it was seen as mere bonus points if they could retrieve him. They had their eyes on bigger prizes. Again, I feel like part of that was either how I presented it to my players or how my players interpreted the information given them and reacted. Not saying one is 100% right. And, I feel you, having to give up or drop a character because their motivations no longer carry the storyline is hard and makes for a somewhat rough transition from part to part...but it also felt natural in my campaign as these actions fit the character's attitudes, ideals, backstories and motivations and was decided by the players that ran the characters.
Hope I communicated that well. It is 2 AM where I am and I am usually asleep for three or four hours most nights at this point. My wife is keeping me up tonight, so I might as well play around on Beyond. Haha!
Yeah, I think wee hours writing also made my response more antagonistic than I intended. But, hey, we both have Tieflings at our table, so more common ground on top of our approach to published adventures.
I guess my broad take on published adventures from WotC and the "lift" GMs must do to not just make the adventure work for their table, but just to make it "good" can be summed as a nagging feeling "this should be better" with every adventure I've read so far (I'm doing a comprehensive read through now maybe because I'm a masochist). The various videos published through official channels "celebrating" the latest "tentpole" production seems to focus on some "how's" and just strike me as sort of apologist.
Of course, I was never super big on published D&D adventures. Back in my gaming heyday, my D&D work was basically house designed world, and my present tables are probably going to migrate that direction ultimately. That said, I remember fondly reading Twilight:2000's Europe and U.S. "narrative arc but sandbox resourced" modules, and in a shorter order Cyberpunk 2020's 4th Corporate War "big event but sandbox" books. Now both of those had the luxury of having a focus of what their games "is" where D&D admittedly has a much more diverse and diffuse player base. That said, I think the fact that my gold standards for what a TTRPG (we just called them RPGs back then, not to be confused with explosive missile weapon, but it happened because of the games we played) came at the late point where game designer studios or workshops were more a craft industry than Wizards is today may speak to what's nagging me. Wizards is more in line with the hype cycle and product churn of a video game studio and as long as there's buy in, it will be what it will be. Good gaming can still come from them, but there's a dissonance between producers and players that gives me some pause. But this is my mind wandering while my brain's blood is still caffeine bonding.
Back to Rime, has anyone watched any of the Celebration event Wizards has been hosting? There was a panel on DMing which was quite fun and probably really useful to new DMs.
You may be in a campaign where one of the members as a subscription and already bought the book. That would give you access for as long as the shared campaign lasts.
Perhaps I do things differently. As a DM, it is my duty to know the source material. I studied the Nine Hells, devil hierarchy, demons and the Abyss for weeks before I read the FULL campaign of Descent before getting started. So, with my players, everyone was aware of their motivations and I have tweaked a lot of the storyline. Particularly when my players go off the rails. But, it's all good because I'm familiar with what the storyline is, where it's going, and what the motivations are of the NPCs that my players interact with. I will agree, my players were constantly asking when we were going to "Hell" when we were in Baldur's Gate....but, that's also more to do with the damages of letting your players know what campaign they are getting ready to embark on. Nobody ever complained about a lack of excitement or horror in this game. I've been told more than once, this game is very serious and scary. Much moreso than COS, which is the gold standard by which D&D horror is defined.
Rime of the Frostmaiden may not hold up as a genuine horror based game to some...but that seems to be dependent on the DM just as much as the setting given them.
Almost all the adventure modules are dependent on the DM eh?
I apologize, I might not have been fully clear, so I don't think you understand or misread my point on Avernus and _player character_ motivation. I appreciate your effort to school me about the prep work a DM like yourself should do (and yeah I understand you got all the scenery pre-chewed and all, my own work was able to cull on my own reading on damnation, Blake's illustrations of Milton, Francis Bacon's painting, the Screwtape Letters, Hadestown the musical, etc on top of the lore and stat blocks, these were things that populate my regular gaming and creative imagination so I was keen on Avernus). I think we both agree that the published adventures require prep above and beyond the book itself (though I think the publisher could do better in that regard especially for less experienced DMs).
But the problem I have is still internal to the "storyline" of Descent into Avernus. It's that the railway into the Sandbox is missing a smooth transition between gauges, specifically:
Why would a band of Baldurians, as you should recall "by the book" the characters are encouraged to be from Baldur's Gate, after being press ganged into being basically a death squad to purge a cult uprising in their city, venture into Hell to save Elturel, a city of uptight pious church mongers for whom many a Baldurian would probably experience a high degree of schadenfreude upon learning it had been smote off the map. Finn "Because it's the right thing to do," Poe: "The next chapter brings you there." Finn "The next chapter brings me there." I mean maybe saving Ravenguard, but really, the leader of the Flaming Fist, the mercenary de facto force of law, with an emphasis on force, that just dropped the party in a murder cult meat grinder? I seeded the game with a cleric of Lethander who studied in Elturel (useful later in game too) and made our Paladin a prospect for the Hell Riders and nixed Mantelborn to give the party some skin in the game (also foreshadowed Burney in a way that got players smelling something they don't understand yet, but espionage for the Court of Bahamut may be in the cards ... but that's work I had to do to repair a broken story between it's prologue and main plot ... which means I'm not working with the best material for which I paid.
The sort of characters I feel are encouraged by Baldur's Gate framing are the sorts that after the fall of another Duke would likely see "chaos as a ladder" opportunity staying in Baldur's Gate to advance their standing there. In fact, because Summer to fall schedule changes have required me to split our group, we actually were able to have separate "we're going to save those sanctimonious dupes" and a "Hell? Hell no, we're staying here and going try to run this town" groups. Maybe the latter group blows it, and needs to get away, far away, like these no man's lands they here far North they've heard talk about experiencing a very long winter...
How did you handle it? I mean, you did all the work, and presuming among your appreciation for the deep background that you didn't lose the plot and you were able to see how the railroad gauges weren't compatible between part I and II to deliver entry into the more sandboxy section, surely you an unasked effort was required too.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
That's pretty much what I said. The DM is the narrator of the story. It's up to him/her to set the tone of the campaign. If you're DM isn't too into horror and simply finds humour in everything, you are going to be playing a very whimsical version of something another DM would have the players navigate as dark, daunting and terrifying. It's the same adventure, but the delivery rests on the DM and how they interpret the story and tone to be...Or, how they want it to be.
Yeah I was agreeing with you
I thought you were, and it's late so I have a tendency to ramble when I'm tired. Sorry if it came across as defensive.
Quite! For instance, I’m very funny, so I make Taika Waititi & Peter Jackson’s Kobolds. Both scary and cowardly.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
By no means was I intending to "school" you on these topics or the work that goes into being a DM. Just meant to convey that people can take the same material and interpret it very differently. Baldur's Gate is a town full of political intrigue and unrest. Particularly related to events of Elturel and the disappearance of Ravenguard. From the beginning of the campaign only one member of my party was from Baldur's Gate. Two were from Elturel. One was a descendent of Zariel and was raised in the Nine Hells and the other four came from various parts of the map. The group as a whole has a lot of ties to different aspects of the campaign, so tying motivations along as they formed their bonds of friendship wasn't too difficult. The main question you have to answer is WHY the party goes to Candlekeep. This is the pivot point of the entire campaign. Like you, my party ended up splitting, leaving two behind around this point that felt justice had been served and didn't see any need to investigate further, even though there was overwhelming evidence that there was more to uncover. Instead, one stayed behind to assist the temporary new leader of the flaming fist ensure order and that the fist would not be abusing its power as it was with Zodge. One ended up going to Candlekeep with the party as a way of gaining entry after trying for years to get in but never being successful (a real part of this character's backstory). This one stayed behind in Candlekeep, wanting nothing to do with the remaining "mission" of the rest of the party. These two picked up new characters in Elturel refugees.
The new characters got filled in on the events that have occurred and brought up to speed on what was known and why they were heading to Candlekeep and what they hoped to find there. The answers they learned instilled a renewed vigor and hunger to right wrongs at this exact point. So, it seemed to flow fairly smoothly from one to the next.
For my characters, following after Ravenguard was a minute thing. If they found him, great. If not, no huge loss as it was seen as mere bonus points if they could retrieve him. They had their eyes on bigger prizes. Again, I feel like part of that was either how I presented it to my players or how my players interpreted the information given them and reacted. Not saying one is 100% right. And, I feel you, having to give up or drop a character because their motivations no longer carry the storyline is hard and makes for a somewhat rough transition from part to part...but it also felt natural in my campaign as these actions fit the character's attitudes, ideals, backstories and motivations and was decided by the players that ran the characters.
Hope I communicated that well. It is 2 AM where I am and I am usually asleep for three or four hours most nights at this point. My wife is keeping me up tonight, so I might as well play around on Beyond. Haha!
Hi guys, question on Rime of the Frost Maiden. I've been really looking forward to this adventure, but my party is only three people and this is recommended for 4-6.
Is anyone else in the same boat? What kind of work should I expect to optimize this for my party of three?
Thanks all!
Yeah, I think wee hours writing also made my response more antagonistic than I intended. But, hey, we both have Tieflings at our table, so more common ground on top of our approach to published adventures.
I guess my broad take on published adventures from WotC and the "lift" GMs must do to not just make the adventure work for their table, but just to make it "good" can be summed as a nagging feeling "this should be better" with every adventure I've read so far (I'm doing a comprehensive read through now maybe because I'm a masochist). The various videos published through official channels "celebrating" the latest "tentpole" production seems to focus on some "how's" and just strike me as sort of apologist.
Of course, I was never super big on published D&D adventures. Back in my gaming heyday, my D&D work was basically house designed world, and my present tables are probably going to migrate that direction ultimately. That said, I remember fondly reading Twilight:2000's Europe and U.S. "narrative arc but sandbox resourced" modules, and in a shorter order Cyberpunk 2020's 4th Corporate War "big event but sandbox" books. Now both of those had the luxury of having a focus of what their games "is" where D&D admittedly has a much more diverse and diffuse player base. That said, I think the fact that my gold standards for what a TTRPG (we just called them RPGs back then, not to be confused with explosive missile weapon, but it happened because of the games we played) came at the late point where game designer studios or workshops were more a craft industry than Wizards is today may speak to what's nagging me. Wizards is more in line with the hype cycle and product churn of a video game studio and as long as there's buy in, it will be what it will be. Good gaming can still come from them, but there's a dissonance between producers and players that gives me some pause. But this is my mind wandering while my brain's blood is still caffeine bonding.
Back to Rime, has anyone watched any of the Celebration event Wizards has been hosting? There was a panel on DMing which was quite fun and probably really useful to new DMs.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.