So my PCs are going to be defending a castle soon. There are 4 of them and there are 5 head guards that will help them. I want there to be multiple things happening at once so the players are divided. Last few sessions they've gotten into a fight, then slept, then next fight. etc. So I was thinking of having 5 things happening at once during this siege. The attacking army has a ram set up to destroy the gate, a big monster (haven't decided what kind yet) is headed for a wall to knock down, the enemy army have 3 catapults set up firing at the wall, a spellcaster is attempting to mind control the Captain of the guards, and some enemies are coming in through the sewage system under the city. Is this too much? Too little? They've never encountered a situation like this
It sounds like fun.. but it will depend on how you run it. You might want to do it as a skill challenge rather than trying to run straight combat with it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I was thinking the mind control thing could be them using their charm spells (2 of them have it and are CHA focused) to "fight" the spell caster over control of the guard. like the guard has a strong will so the mind control doesn't work right away. it takes time. so they could try using charm to unmind control them
Never split the party is one of the guiding, if unofficial, rules of the game -- works great in movies, not so much in D&D (for example, what if the wrong characters go to the mind control situation you've described). If I was a player, there's no way I'd even think to do it.
Multiple threats can be cool, just make sure the choices are meaningful. Like decide (I'm torn on whether or not you tell the players this exactly) that the PCs need to defeat three or even four of the five in order for their side to win. Also make time an element. Make sure they know this is all happening roughly at the same time, so they won't be able to get to all of them (its not a video game where the guy will say its urgent, but stand there waiting until you decide to actually go).
Or decide which ones are happening when and build in some time for them to take a short rest if they like. More interesting could be a short rest with a consequence, like they can take one, but each time they do, they will have failed in one of the missions. So they have to weigh the short rest benefits with giving themselves less cushion for failure.
One predictable predicament will end up being the 4 party members will decide to--simultaneously--try to tackle all 5 different challenges independently. After all, no planned encounters survive first contact with a d&d party. That would be a headache for any GM to manage.
I like the idea of presenting numerous different challenges happening at the same time and "encouraging" the party to only have the capacity to tackle one specific problem (or two, if you feel up to it). While the party is handling problem A, problems B, C, and D are being resolved just narratively in the background with quick "cut scenes" at the top of an initiative round. This narrative can flow however you like to raise/lower the tension of the session, and any Named NPC's in the background can also have their own moments to shine (or even heroic deaths??)
I'm hoping they spilt themselves in half. Or idea. There are 4 players. 5 NPCs (Lt. Guards) and the captain. Captain orders one Lt. to stay with him and randomly divides the 8 into 4 groups to deal with the 4 problems. 2pc, 2pc, 2npcs, 2npcs. After players finish their mission get word of NPC mission not going well. They can rest to recover or go straight there. If they rest then the mission fails. In the middle of the battle is when the captain starts getting mind controlled. If 3 missions fail the foe get into the city. City begins to burn
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So my PCs are going to be defending a castle soon. There are 4 of them and there are 5 head guards that will help them. I want there to be multiple things happening at once so the players are divided. Last few sessions they've gotten into a fight, then slept, then next fight. etc. So I was thinking of having 5 things happening at once during this siege. The attacking army has a ram set up to destroy the gate, a big monster (haven't decided what kind yet) is headed for a wall to knock down, the enemy army have 3 catapults set up firing at the wall, a spellcaster is attempting to mind control the Captain of the guards, and some enemies are coming in through the sewage system under the city. Is this too much? Too little? They've never encountered a situation like this
It sounds like fun.. but it will depend on how you run it. You might want to do it as a skill challenge rather than trying to run straight combat with it.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I was thinking the mind control thing could be them using their charm spells (2 of them have it and are CHA focused) to "fight" the spell caster over control of the guard. like the guard has a strong will so the mind control doesn't work right away. it takes time. so they could try using charm to unmind control them
Never split the party is one of the guiding, if unofficial, rules of the game -- works great in movies, not so much in D&D (for example, what if the wrong characters go to the mind control situation you've described). If I was a player, there's no way I'd even think to do it.
Multiple threats can be cool, just make sure the choices are meaningful. Like decide (I'm torn on whether or not you tell the players this exactly) that the PCs need to defeat three or even four of the five in order for their side to win. Also make time an element. Make sure they know this is all happening roughly at the same time, so they won't be able to get to all of them (its not a video game where the guy will say its urgent, but stand there waiting until you decide to actually go).
Or decide which ones are happening when and build in some time for them to take a short rest if they like. More interesting could be a short rest with a consequence, like they can take one, but each time they do, they will have failed in one of the missions. So they have to weigh the short rest benefits with giving themselves less cushion for failure.
One predictable predicament will end up being the 4 party members will decide to--simultaneously--try to tackle all 5 different challenges independently. After all, no planned encounters survive first contact with a d&d party. That would be a headache for any GM to manage.
I like the idea of presenting numerous different challenges happening at the same time and "encouraging" the party to only have the capacity to tackle one specific problem (or two, if you feel up to it). While the party is handling problem A, problems B, C, and D are being resolved just narratively in the background with quick "cut scenes" at the top of an initiative round. This narrative can flow however you like to raise/lower the tension of the session, and any Named NPC's in the background can also have their own moments to shine (or even heroic deaths??)
Boldly go
I'm hoping they spilt themselves in half. Or idea. There are 4 players. 5 NPCs (Lt. Guards) and the captain. Captain orders one Lt. to stay with him and randomly divides the 8 into 4 groups to deal with the 4 problems. 2pc, 2pc, 2npcs, 2npcs. After players finish their mission get word of NPC mission not going well. They can rest to recover or go straight there. If they rest then the mission fails. In the middle of the battle is when the captain starts getting mind controlled. If 3 missions fail the foe get into the city. City begins to burn