So my group is looking to start a new campaign soon and we are trying to decide on which one to run. A couple of my players are leaning toward Out of the Abyss because it seems like a sort Lovecraftian vibe to it with weird, indescribable monsters. But what I am seeing is its more of a plain demon war situation that just happens to take place in the underdark. I want to share this with them, but I dont want to risk spoiling the story unless I am sure they will not get what they want out of it.
Yeah, it' more demon war, and demons in D&D aren't terribly Lovecraftian.
Correction, they aren't super Lovecraftian in FR. They are in some campaigns, including mine. I would say that OotA is somewhat Lovecraftian with the madness, though.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Homebrew (Mostly Outdated):Magic Items,Monsters,Spells,Subclasses ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
Yeah, it' more demon war, and demons in D&D aren't terribly Lovecraftian.
Correction, they aren't super Lovecraftian in FR. They are in some campaigns, including mine.
Whatever you do in your own campaign isn't really relevant. As presented in both the module and the game's lore, demons are not really Lovecraftian, with a few exceptions.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Yeah, it' more demon war, and demons in D&D aren't terribly Lovecraftian.
Correction, they aren't super Lovecraftian in FR. They are in some campaigns, including mine. I would say that OotA is somewhat Lovecraftian with the madness, though.
Can you further explain the madness aspect of it? Because they would probably be more flexible on the lovecraftian monsters if there was a significant component regarding madness and such.
If you want to get deep into details on a published adventure, you may want to go to the DMs Only section of the forum.
I'll just say the DMG has mechanics for Madness in Chapter 8, OOA encourages the DM to use them. I've yet to use them. From these boards and other player community discussions, I get the sense that the rules aren't all that popular, more frustrating than challenging, and there are those who question the propriety and ethos of "playing mental illness and or shock/trauma." If I were you I'd review them, and see if they're something you think your players may want to work with. As written, the Madness rules has the DM randomly impose a range of afflictions (arguably drawn from a range of things ranging from actual shock response, behavioral and personality disorders that arguably arise from trauma, things that at least used to be called "neurotic" behaviors, and some conditions that are thought to be more organic or genetic in origin). You could do that, you could also grant more player agency by letting the players use the tables as a way to determine or negotiate with the DM how their character responds in an extremely traumatic circumstance.
On another thread, someone recommended Sandy Petersen's Cthulhu for 5e book. Folks who like D&D and CoC seem to like it and Petersen is a major name in Cthulhu gaming. I imagine there may be mechanics in there you could use to make OOA more Lovecraftian, but now you're buying ~2 hardback books for the price of one (and I think Petersen's book is pricier than WotC work).
This is where I'll interject. I've seen contemporary CoC rules, like even within Gumshoe, using "bonds and ideals" as something to pull or drawn from when faced with trauma. Has anyone seen anything like this in a D&D supplement (obviously third party)?
The Underdark as presented is pretty cool to explore, and there's a lot to do and keep track of without worrying about potential madness burdens. I don't think mechanics are necessarily to force the idea that the players are playing in a "weird" place, but if you really want to make madness a part of the trip, option is there.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Thank you! I appreciate the response. I was not aware that the madness aspect was covered in the DMG (and OotA just defers to it). I will probably homebrew a lot of the elements they want in then.
OOA has some tables that help the DM pin the duration of a madness "episode" and some other things that would support the use of madness over the game, and some broad guidance on what conditions in OOA may prompt madness checks, but the bulk of how madness operates in in the DMG.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So my group is looking to start a new campaign soon and we are trying to decide on which one to run. A couple of my players are leaning toward Out of the Abyss because it seems like a sort Lovecraftian vibe to it with weird, indescribable monsters. But what I am seeing is its more of a plain demon war situation that just happens to take place in the underdark. I want to share this with them, but I dont want to risk spoiling the story unless I am sure they will not get what they want out of it.
Check out my Homebrew Magic Items
Yeah, it' more demon war, and demons in D&D aren't terribly Lovecraftian.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Correction, they aren't super Lovecraftian in FR. They are in some campaigns, including mine. I would say that OotA is somewhat Lovecraftian with the madness, though.
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homebrew (Mostly Outdated): Magic Items, Monsters, Spells, Subclasses
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
Whatever you do in your own campaign isn't really relevant. As presented in both the module and the game's lore, demons are not really Lovecraftian, with a few exceptions.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Can you further explain the madness aspect of it? Because they would probably be more flexible on the lovecraftian monsters if there was a significant component regarding madness and such.
Check out my Homebrew Magic Items
If you want to get deep into details on a published adventure, you may want to go to the DMs Only section of the forum.
I'll just say the DMG has mechanics for Madness in Chapter 8, OOA encourages the DM to use them. I've yet to use them. From these boards and other player community discussions, I get the sense that the rules aren't all that popular, more frustrating than challenging, and there are those who question the propriety and ethos of "playing mental illness and or shock/trauma." If I were you I'd review them, and see if they're something you think your players may want to work with. As written, the Madness rules has the DM randomly impose a range of afflictions (arguably drawn from a range of things ranging from actual shock response, behavioral and personality disorders that arguably arise from trauma, things that at least used to be called "neurotic" behaviors, and some conditions that are thought to be more organic or genetic in origin). You could do that, you could also grant more player agency by letting the players use the tables as a way to determine or negotiate with the DM how their character responds in an extremely traumatic circumstance.
On another thread, someone recommended Sandy Petersen's Cthulhu for 5e book. Folks who like D&D and CoC seem to like it and Petersen is a major name in Cthulhu gaming. I imagine there may be mechanics in there you could use to make OOA more Lovecraftian, but now you're buying ~2 hardback books for the price of one (and I think Petersen's book is pricier than WotC work).
This is where I'll interject. I've seen contemporary CoC rules, like even within Gumshoe, using "bonds and ideals" as something to pull or drawn from when faced with trauma. Has anyone seen anything like this in a D&D supplement (obviously third party)?
The Underdark as presented is pretty cool to explore, and there's a lot to do and keep track of without worrying about potential madness burdens. I don't think mechanics are necessarily to force the idea that the players are playing in a "weird" place, but if you really want to make madness a part of the trip, option is there.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Thank you! I appreciate the response. I was not aware that the madness aspect was covered in the DMG (and OotA just defers to it). I will probably homebrew a lot of the elements they want in then.
Check out my Homebrew Magic Items
OOA has some tables that help the DM pin the duration of a madness "episode" and some other things that would support the use of madness over the game, and some broad guidance on what conditions in OOA may prompt madness checks, but the bulk of how madness operates in in the DMG.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.