Quote from: Omega on August 09, 2024, 09:40:33 PMOk... so you both lack imagination.

You can go off on an adventure and never once face a single battle or even risk past a "do you achieve what you set out to do or not?"

Oh fuck off you smug asshole.

Without any stakes or danger, it's just a haunted house tour and not even a scary or interesting one.

Quote from: Svenhelgrim on August 09, 2024, 02:28:27 AMIs there anything that you can salvage from this adventure?  Is the map any good? 

I suggest that you make up your own adventure there work it into this setting.  Perhaps a pack of ghouls is digging up the bodies in the graveyard?

Quote from: Aglondir on August 09, 2024, 01:16:58 PMYeah, I'm with YosemiteMike on this. If there's no risk or no danger, it's not an adventure. Maybe an interesting story, but not an adventure in RPG terms.

I've been away for family, but I just got back and looked this one up. In the anthology, it's a twelve-page mini-adventure for third-level characters, by veteran authors Christopher Perkins and Kim Mohan. Perkins published his first adventure at age 20 for Dungeon magazine #11 in 1988. Mohan is an old hand from TSR days with a ton of publications.

The climactic battle - through the portal in the child's grave - has a host of creatures that attack the characters in waves. Two gargoyles (CR2), followed by twelve ghouls (CR1) in waves of three, and a wight with a ring of jumping (CR3); plus three warhorse skeletons (CR 1/2) that guard the treasure.

yosemitemike calls this "trivially easy", but it seems like a tough fight to me - depending on who the PCs are and how it is run. The ghouls in particular can be devastating if the PCs are unlucky with saving throws.

Reflecting on this a little more...

It is something of a fake-out that there are almost no threats within the main house. Instead, there's one big threat that the PCs get warned against. And still, the more I think about it, that fight is damn tough for 3rd level. I can't picture calling it trivially easy.

Two other disagreements:

1) The chalet is not a place to stash evil relics. It's the meeting place for the order and they stash the items elsewhere, though it does say "They occasionally stash magic items of evil repute here until better hiding places can be found for them."

2) The wereravens are suspicious and will assume bad intent at first, but they aren't completely paranoid and are willing to communicate and cooperate with good-aligned adventurers -- and might even let a PC join their order.


In general, the house has mostly mysteries rather than being full of monsters to kill. The real threat is through the portal.

Quote from: jhkim on August 12, 2024, 11:14:00 AMThe climactic battle - through the portal in the child's grave - has a host of creatures that attack the characters in waves. Two gargoyles (CR2), followed by twelve ghouls (CR1) in waves of three, and a wight with a ring of jumping (CR3); plus three warhorse skeletons (CR 1/2) that guard the treasure.

IME enemy waves are not great encounter design for a tabletop RPG. Is there a gimmick to the combat arena or something to let the players strategize around the oncoming waves, or is this just a room that enemies turn up in on a timer?

Quote from: ForgottenF on August 13, 2024, 07:01:25 PM

Quote from: jhkim on August 12, 2024, 11:14:00 AMThe climactic battle - through the portal in the child's grave - has a host of creatures that attack the characters in waves. Two gargoyles (CR2), followed by twelve ghouls (CR1) in waves of three, and a wight with a ring of jumping (CR3); plus three warhorse skeletons (CR 1/2) that guard the treasure.

IME enemy waves are not great encounter design for a tabletop RPG. Is there a gimmick to the combat arena or something to let the players strategize around the oncoming waves, or is this just a room that enemies turn up in on a timer?

The wereravens could potentially give the PCs warnings about what is on the other side, but the module gives no details about what information they have. If I were running it, I'd have the wereravens give detailed (but not fully complete) information on what they will face based on legends they've heard.

As for the setup - it's an open graveyard rather than a room. The gargoyles will spot the characters first and fly to attack (first wave). Then the ghouls swarm the characters as they come up from the scattered graves they are in (second wave). Then the wight boss comes out of the mausoleum and starts shooting arrows at the PCs (third wave).

It's not at all tactical, but there is a certain logic to the waves.

To be fair, most dungeons would be impossible if all the monsters worked together and used good tactics against the PCs.

Quote from: jhkim on August 13, 2024, 08:08:54 PMAs for the setup - it's an open graveyard rather than a room. The gargoyles will spot the characters first and fly to attack (first wave). Then the ghouls swarm the characters as they come up from the scattered graves they are in (second wave). Then the wight boss comes out of the mausoleum and starts shooting arrows at the PCs (third wave).

Subjectively it sounds pretty underwhelming for the set piece final fight of an adventure. Serviceable but uninspired. I haven't played 5e in years, but I'd guess that's likely to be a pretty long fight without being exciting or memorable.

Quote from: ForgottenF on August 13, 2024, 10:14:51 PM

Quote from: jhkim on August 13, 2024, 08:08:54 PMAs for the setup - it's an open graveyard rather than a room. The gargoyles will spot the characters first and fly to attack (first wave). Then the ghouls swarm the characters as they come up from the scattered graves they are in (second wave). Then the wight boss comes out of the mausoleum and starts shooting arrows at the PCs (third wave).

Subjectively it sounds pretty underwhelming for the set piece final fight of an adventure. Serviceable but uninspired. I haven't played 5e in years, but I'd guess that's likely to be a pretty long fight without being exciting or memorable.

It seems to me there is a pattern of making false shit up just to throw at Candlekeep Mysteries, I assume because of general WotC hate. Pundit brought his claims of there being combat wheelchairs in it and every dungeon being wheelchair-accessible. yosemitemike started this thread claiming the fight was "trivially easy" which is flatly false.

I'm not saying this adventure is a masterpiece, but upon rereading it, it is solid. I don't agree with your assessment of the fight. Ghouls can be frustrating because of the swinginess of paralysis, but that also makes the fight challenging and exciting when PCs go down. And the wight shooting and jumping from the roof of the mausoleum is fun and cinematic - and could be particularly tough if the PCs are more melee focused. I'd probably alter a few things if I ran it, but I think the core is pretty good.

---

In general, I think Candlekeep Mysteries overall is much better than the crappy early 5E adventures like _Lost Mine of Phandelver_ and _Into the Abyss_. I like the core rules of 5E, but their early adventures sucked. When I ran 5E, I tended to adapt older modules from AD&D or 3E rather than use any of the 5E adventures.

Candlekeep still has plenty of flaws, but I think the anthology approach made for more tightly designed and focused adventures.

Quote from: ForgottenF on August 07, 2024, 09:55:21 AM

Quote from: yosemitemike on August 07, 2024, 03:55:54 AMAnother thing I noticed is that this adventure actually tried to do a horror movie jump scare twice.  In one part, a harmless moth flies out when they investigate something.  In another, it's a bird.  This works to startle the audience in a horror movie because they can flash the thing on screen and insert a loud jump scare noise.  How do they envision this going at the table?  Am I supposed to slam a book down and squawk loudly at players to get that jump scare effect? 

Please do that. It'd be hilarious.

In seriousness, I'd use those harmless scares as false flags. Instead of trying to jump scare the players with a moth or a bird, take a little time to build it up, describe how they hear a rushing of wind and a hideous fluttering coming from the chimney, and then when they've all prepared themselves for combat, a cloud of bats streams out and and briefly engulfs them before flying off. Maybe the bats do a couple points of damage from bites. Doesn't really matter. After you do that a few times you can get them either paranoid of an actual attack or complacent that one will never come. Then your third or fourth version of the "thing which flaps towards you out of the darkness" can be a Hunting Horror or whatever. 

I've done this with great effect several times.  The trick is to always describe things this way.  Describe what they sense before they know what it is, as much as possible.  A couple of times I've even got a character to waste a major spell preparing for what they thought it was. Nothing like a few false flags to drag players attention into the world as it is, instead of always trying to game it.

Of course, for that to work, it has to be mixed in with some real adventure, not this drivel.

Quote from: jhkim on August 14, 2024, 02:18:37 AMIn general, I think Candlekeep Mysteries overall is much better than the crappy early 5E adventures like _Lost Mine of Phandelver_ ...

Well, that's an opinion.  Stupid, flawed, false, and retarded.  But it's an opinion.

Honestly, I hope you're getting paid by someone to post here.  Because, in order to humiliate myself, I'd at least require a large sum of money.  I can't imagine making a fool of myself (even with statements like) that for free...

Quote from: Eirikrautha on August 14, 2024, 06:28:06 PM

Quote from: jhkim on August 14, 2024, 02:18:37 AMIn general, I think Candlekeep Mysteries overall is much better than the crappy early 5E adventures like _Lost Mine of Phandelver_ ...

Well, that's an opinion.  Stupid, flawed, false, and retarded.  But it's an opinion.

General creative assessment is a subjective opinion, sure.

My main beef is using objective falsehoods in claims about Candlekeep Mysteries. Claiming that it has rules for the combat wheelchair - like Pundit did - is objectively wrong. There are no wheelchairs of any kind in the book, and none of the dungeons are wheelchair accessible.

Likewise, claiming that a 3rd level fight against 2 gargoyles, 12 ghouls, and a wight is "trivially easy" is objectively wrong - which is at the core of this thread.

You can go on with ad hominem attacks against me, but it seems rather telling to use clearly false claims in the critique.

Quote from: jhkim on August 14, 2024, 08:11:56 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on August 14, 2024, 06:28:06 PM

Quote from: jhkim on August 14, 2024, 02:18:37 AMIn general, I think Candlekeep Mysteries overall is much better than the crappy early 5E adventures like _Lost Mine of Phandelver_ ...

Well, that's an opinion.  Stupid, flawed, false, and retarded.  But it's an opinion.

General creative assessment is a subjective opinion, sure.

My main beef is using objective falsehoods in claims about Candlekeep Mysteries. Claiming that it has rules for the combat wheelchair - like Pundit did - is objectively wrong. There are no wheelchairs of any kind in the book, and none of the dungeons are wheelchair accessible.

Likewise, claiming that a 3rd level fight against 2 gargoyles, 12 ghouls, and a wight is "trivially easy" is objectively wrong - which is at the core of this thread.

You can go on with ad hominem attacks against me, but it seems rather telling to use clearly false claims in the critique.

Greetings!

Jhkim, why do you think so many people here blast Candlekeep Mysteries? You don't see people blasting Annihilation, Saltmarsh, Tiamat, the Dragons module, Icewind Dale, and so on.

Personally, I like most of the modules before Candlekeep Mysteries. WOTC's quality drops off a fucking cliff with Candlekeep Mysteries, and onwards.

That seems to me firmly based on objective or at least solid and persuasive standards and criteria. It doesn't have anything to do with your personal politics.

I do find it odd though, that you somehow are always on the other side of the fence in all of these discussions about WOTC, and their writing and module presentation. It is entirely predictable by now. Regardless of what anyone says, whatever their critique of WOTC--you always manage to stride forward to always "White Knight" for WOTC.

Beyond that, I have always been a fan of early 5E D&D, and yet, everyone here blasts you for being a "White Knight" for WOTC. No one would ever accuse me of being a "White Knight" for WOTC. Why do you think that you are targeted so ruthlessly?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

I think it's important to remember that some friction and difference of viewpoint is good in an internet community. You sharpen your thoughts against the whetstone of another's contradiction.

That said, jhkim brings up a solid argument. There absolutely is combat in Book of the Raven and there is an encounter that poses a challenge. However, I don't think yosemitemike can be completely discounted when he says that said encounter can be missed entirely.
Ultimately, it's up to the DM/Party if they even learn about the shadow crossing in the first place meaning, as written, there is a decent chance a group of players won't even get to experience it.

Personally, I don't like that the climactic battle of the book is nearly painted as optional content, such that only players that are practically begging for it will see it. A party will likely be warned of the danger ahead of time and having a teleport to a wave-based encounter just feels very artificial compared to the ambient unease of the rest of the module.
It almost seems like it was thrown in as a relief for players who absolutely have got to hit something every session. But it is there, and we all have to admit that.

I must admit I'm not a published adventure writer so I could well be wrong.

Quote from: SHARK on August 14, 2024, 09:37:09 PMI do find it odd though, that you somehow are always on the other side of the fence in all of these discussions about WOTC, and their writing and module presentation. It is entirely predictable by now. Regardless of what anyone says, whatever their critique of WOTC--you always manage to stride forward to always "White Knight" for WOTC.

That's a pretty shitty prediction, SHARK, because I just bad-mouthed several WOTC books -- naming _Lost Mine of Phandelver_ and _Out of the Abyss_ (which I own) and I'll add _Horde of the Dragon Queen_ which I played through. I also dislike _Tasha's Cauldron_ and hate _Fizban's Treasury of Dragons_.

In earlier WotC work, I was lukewarm to the 3E rules -- but _The Sunless Citadel_ is my favorite introductory adventure of any edition. So there are some positives.

About D&D books more broadly - I generally haven't liked the 1980s tournament modules like _Egg of the Phoenix_ and _Ghost Tower of Inverness_, as they felt awkward and artificial to me to create the point-scoring. Of the 1E era, my favorites are _Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan_, _Ravenloft_, _Ravenloft II_, and _Dwellers of the Forbidden City_. I never played 2E and kept using 1E material for the most part, but I strongly disliked later linear-story modules for the Ravenloft demi-plane (as opposed to the first two modules).

What I've haven't observed is that my preference is predictable by politics. There are RPG authors whose politics I strongly disagree with, but they write great stuff, and authors whose politics match mine but whose works I hate.

Quote from: jhkim on August 14, 2024, 02:18:37 AMyosemitemike started this thread claiming the fight was "trivially easy" which is flatly false.

The CR system defines these encounters as of trivial difficulty you disingenuous weasel.

This isn't intended as a shot at either side of the argument, but I thought it was generally agreed that the CR system was essentially busted and unreliable?