Dungeon Masters, Campaign 1: Ravenloft
Re: Dungeon Masters, Campaign 1: Ravenloft
Ah, got it.
-
TheArcaneWeirdo
- Evil Genius
- Posts: 736
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2025 1:22 pm
- Gender: Other
- Location: Jerusalem
Re: Dungeon Masters, Campaign 1: Ravenloft
Though I do want to point out, that, like...
You talk a lot about how 'Ravenloft used to be about being the heroes fighting against the darkness, but nowadays every player wants to be the evilest evil that ever eviled!"
And, like...
You're writing this on the message board of the Fraternity of Shadows. A fan organisation literally named after a secret society of mysogynistic dark wizards. The fan organisation before them was named The Kagratane, after an organisation of vampire-simping special agents.
The Ravenloft fandom always had a thing with roleplaying the villains. Frankly, as a player from the VRGtR generation, I was pretty shocked at how older fans casually joke about sapping my life-force for necromantic rituals etc.
(Also, while I hadn't seen the show and judged for myself, I had to state that there's a very big difference between playing an evil character and playing a dark character. An evil character is one that makes cruel or selfish choices during the campaign (or is implied to be doing them off-screen) - it can be of any race, class, background, aesthetic etc. A dark character is a character whose background, aesthetics and/or arc deal with harsher themes and conflicts. A random elf fighter who acts like a murder hobo cause his player doesn't have patience for talking is an evil character, but not a dark one. A dhampire torn between his barely-controllable bloodlust and his moral principles is a dark character, but not an evil one.
Also, merely playing using an aesthetically dark race/class doesn't mean the character itself has to be very dark.)
You talk a lot about how 'Ravenloft used to be about being the heroes fighting against the darkness, but nowadays every player wants to be the evilest evil that ever eviled!"
And, like...
You're writing this on the message board of the Fraternity of Shadows. A fan organisation literally named after a secret society of mysogynistic dark wizards. The fan organisation before them was named The Kagratane, after an organisation of vampire-simping special agents.
The Ravenloft fandom always had a thing with roleplaying the villains. Frankly, as a player from the VRGtR generation, I was pretty shocked at how older fans casually joke about sapping my life-force for necromantic rituals etc.
(Also, while I hadn't seen the show and judged for myself, I had to state that there's a very big difference between playing an evil character and playing a dark character. An evil character is one that makes cruel or selfish choices during the campaign (or is implied to be doing them off-screen) - it can be of any race, class, background, aesthetic etc. A dark character is a character whose background, aesthetics and/or arc deal with harsher themes and conflicts. A random elf fighter who acts like a murder hobo cause his player doesn't have patience for talking is an evil character, but not a dark one. A dhampire torn between his barely-controllable bloodlust and his moral principles is a dark character, but not an evil one.
Also, merely playing using an aesthetically dark race/class doesn't mean the character itself has to be very dark.)
"Not all that is violet is deadly, and not all that is deadly is violet." - "S", Gaz IV, page 13.
-
Drinnik Shoehorn
- Evil Genius
- Posts: 1841
- Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 6:28 pm
- Location: Tiptree, Home of Jam
Re: Dungeon Masters, Campaign 1: Ravenloft
The old fan-site was called the Kargatane because the writing staff for Ravenloft in the 90s jokingly called themselves the Kargat after Darkon’s secret police. The fansite was named as a reference to that as the Kargatane were controlled by the Kargat.TheArcaneWeirdo wrote: Sat May 16, 2026 1:02 pm Though I do want to point out, that, like...
You talk a lot about how 'Ravenloft used to be about being the heroes fighting against the darkness, but nowadays every player wants to be the evilest evil that ever eviled!"
And, like...
You're writing this on the message board of the Fraternity of Shadows. A fan organisation literally named after a secret society of mysogynistic dark wizards. The fan organisation before them was named The Kagratane, after an organisation of vampire-simping special agents.
When the members of the Kargatane closed the site to write 3rd Ed, Joel and Co. set up the Fraternity of Shadows, named after the secret society. I’m guessing it’s because it already fit the X of Y scheme.
Remember these sites back in the day where primarily for DMs of the setting, and the DM is all about the evil. There were players who visited the site, but it was mostly DMs.
My problem with nu-Ravenloft can be summed up with the new artificer subclass. Having an animated corpse following you like a minion is something that should have every villager in every village chasing you with pitchforks and torches. Raising a corpse is an inherently evil act, and having one that is essentially a damage sponge in combat to protect you could be seen as a callous use of a dead body.
Fine in nu-Ravenloft, but it flies in the face of the old canon. It’s not horror if its everywhere.
"Blood once flowed, a choice was made
Travel by night the smallest one bade" The Ballad of the Taverners.
The Galen Saga: 2000-2005
Travel by night the smallest one bade" The Ballad of the Taverners.
The Galen Saga: 2000-2005
Re: Dungeon Masters, Campaign 1: Ravenloft
I'm a fan of the setting, sure.
Just not a fan of protagonists within a tale being dark and evil.
There are all sorts of ways to tell entertaining stories, though. YMMV.
Just not a fan of protagonists within a tale being dark and evil.
There are all sorts of ways to tell entertaining stories, though. YMMV.
I'm pretty sure it was unintentional (English being a second language), but this choice of language read as confrontational.
Re: Dungeon Masters, Campaign 1: Ravenloft
There is a moment in the fifth episode where this gets highlighted.Drinnik Shoehorn wrote: Sun May 17, 2026 4:53 amMy problem with nu-Ravenloft can be summed up with the new artificer subclass. Having an animated corpse following you like a minion is something that should have every villager in every village chasing you with pitchforks and torches.
The characters (a dhampir, a drow grave cleric, a hexborn, and a reanimator artificer ... accompanied by a banshee) arrive at the next set piece: a pastoral* halfling village in the midst of festival preparations.
They spent a moment observing from a distance to get the lay of the land before deciding to mingle in the town and speak with some of the villagers.
One of the actors mentioned something to the effect of "Boy, I bet we look out of place."
It was a 'blink and you'll miss it' throwaway comment, but it highlights a bit of the cognitive dissonance that comes with playing characters like this. The NPCs within the town, in order to proceed without the tale derailing, have to react to the PCs presence/introduction as if it is just a completely normal thing to have folks like this stumble out of the woods and want to mingle with the townsfolk.
*I'm pretty sure that this little village is anything but peaceful and docile. My sense is that the initial description was intended to set up contrast for an upcoming rug pull when the PCs learn the true nature of the village. The cliffhanger comment at the end of the episode all but confirms this.
Re: Dungeon Masters, Campaign 1: Ravenloft
Also ... halflings? In Sithicus?SkiBird wrote: Sun May 17, 2026 8:02 am ... the next set piece: a pastoral halfling village in the midst of festival preparations.
Maybe the DM is setting up the introduction of vampire kender, and the PCs have mistakenly identified the villagers as halflings.
Now that would be a rug pull!
Re: Dungeon Masters, Campaign 1: Ravenloft
Episode six
I watched this one while out of town during a work trip. The note taking was pretty sparse.
Here is what stood out. Strahd (or at least an ethereal projection of him) makes an appearance. Apparently, he is Lord Soth's oldest friend ...
There was a 'split the party' moment that was pulled off quite well. Loving Lividity and how this character is played with a disinterested sort of amorality.
Spells aren't working as they should, that would bother me if I were playing. A pair of characters are falling ... cool ... cast Feather Fall. It catches one, but not the other? So now a different character wants to replicate the effect of Feather Fall ... by casting Hold Person. Hold Person can now be cast as a reaction now I guess? ... and the stated effect of this Hold-Person-as-Feather-Fall spell is to keep the target from falling?. Instead of reminding the players how these spells work ... The DM buys it. Since the character that was falling is the target of the spell ... he rolls a save against his allies' Hold Person ... but he passes his save against the hold person ... and so he falls. The ad hoc manner of what rules apply and when is frustrating. Definitely not a fan of just casting a spell and making up some cool new version of what they do. (the folks at Critical Role do this pretty often as well)
A death's head tree makes an appearance ... haven't seen the stats but I'm not sure I like this version. It could be the DM homebrewing it weird though. Will reserve judgement until I can see the stats. Very nearly a TPK. One character was brought to 0hp remaining twice in the encounter. The dying rules needed to be explained (albeit inaccurately and unsuccessfully) to the new player.
Lastly, there was an incident of what I can only hope is accidental cheating ... I'm willing to chalk it up to playing in a dimly lit room and needing reading glasses. Player tosses a d20 ... the camera very clearly shows that the roll is a 4, but the player announces to the table that the result is a 14, subsequently adds modifiers to this inaccurate number and passes the roll.
The story is still good, but I am less happy with how the juggling act of meshing story with the mechanics of the game is working out in practice.
I watched this one while out of town during a work trip. The note taking was pretty sparse.
Here is what stood out. Strahd (or at least an ethereal projection of him) makes an appearance. Apparently, he is Lord Soth's oldest friend ...
There was a 'split the party' moment that was pulled off quite well. Loving Lividity and how this character is played with a disinterested sort of amorality.
Spells aren't working as they should, that would bother me if I were playing. A pair of characters are falling ... cool ... cast Feather Fall. It catches one, but not the other? So now a different character wants to replicate the effect of Feather Fall ... by casting Hold Person. Hold Person can now be cast as a reaction now I guess? ... and the stated effect of this Hold-Person-as-Feather-Fall spell is to keep the target from falling?. Instead of reminding the players how these spells work ... The DM buys it. Since the character that was falling is the target of the spell ... he rolls a save against his allies' Hold Person ... but he passes his save against the hold person ... and so he falls. The ad hoc manner of what rules apply and when is frustrating. Definitely not a fan of just casting a spell and making up some cool new version of what they do. (the folks at Critical Role do this pretty often as well)
A death's head tree makes an appearance ... haven't seen the stats but I'm not sure I like this version. It could be the DM homebrewing it weird though. Will reserve judgement until I can see the stats. Very nearly a TPK. One character was brought to 0hp remaining twice in the encounter. The dying rules needed to be explained (albeit inaccurately and unsuccessfully) to the new player.
Lastly, there was an incident of what I can only hope is accidental cheating ... I'm willing to chalk it up to playing in a dimly lit room and needing reading glasses. Player tosses a d20 ... the camera very clearly shows that the roll is a 4, but the player announces to the table that the result is a 14, subsequently adds modifiers to this inaccurate number and passes the roll.
The story is still good, but I am less happy with how the juggling act of meshing story with the mechanics of the game is working out in practice.
-
TheArcaneWeirdo
- Evil Genius
- Posts: 736
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2025 1:22 pm
- Gender: Other
- Location: Jerusalem
Re: Dungeon Masters, Campaign 1: Ravenloft
About the spells not working as they should:
The first (and so far only) time DMing a Ravenloft one-shot, I lied to my player that 'advantage' meant rolling to d20s and adding up both results (as opposed to choosing the highest one), so my vampire can succeed a charisma save it was supposed to fail.
I did this because said save was to resist being seduced by the PC, and I really didn't know how to roleplay the vampire suddenly getting flirty.
Was this good DMing?
No. This was cheating and railroading at once.
But when you're trying to keep track of multiple players and monsters' abilities, roleplay stuff with sufficient dramatic flare, keep the story from derailing, balance out the players' needs, get the mechanics right and deal with a storming 'horny bard' joke at the worst possible moment... Sometimes it's just too overwhelming!
My point is, keeping up with what players do and responding appropriately is hard. Juggling is a good metaphor. When the players themselves don't know what they're doing, you often can't correct them because you're getting confused yourself. Sometimes - especially when you have a time limit on session length - you just have to slide stuff that's obviously errondous for the sake of keeping the plot going and keeping yourself sane.
I get that most people on this forum have been DMing since the 90s, but keep in mind that some of us are still learning.
(BTW - if you have any advice on how to deal with situations like that, I'd really appreciate it.)
The first (and so far only) time DMing a Ravenloft one-shot, I lied to my player that 'advantage' meant rolling to d20s and adding up both results (as opposed to choosing the highest one), so my vampire can succeed a charisma save it was supposed to fail.
I did this because said save was to resist being seduced by the PC, and I really didn't know how to roleplay the vampire suddenly getting flirty.
Was this good DMing?
No. This was cheating and railroading at once.
But when you're trying to keep track of multiple players and monsters' abilities, roleplay stuff with sufficient dramatic flare, keep the story from derailing, balance out the players' needs, get the mechanics right and deal with a storming 'horny bard' joke at the worst possible moment... Sometimes it's just too overwhelming!
My point is, keeping up with what players do and responding appropriately is hard. Juggling is a good metaphor. When the players themselves don't know what they're doing, you often can't correct them because you're getting confused yourself. Sometimes - especially when you have a time limit on session length - you just have to slide stuff that's obviously errondous for the sake of keeping the plot going and keeping yourself sane.
I get that most people on this forum have been DMing since the 90s, but keep in mind that some of us are still learning.
(BTW - if you have any advice on how to deal with situations like that, I'd really appreciate it.)
"Not all that is violet is deadly, and not all that is deadly is violet." - "S", Gaz IV, page 13.
Re: Dungeon Masters, Campaign 1: Ravenloft
Assuming it was D&D 5E ... In a social encounter, I would have ruled that the bard's attempt to seduce / be flirty was an Influence action and called for a Cha (persuasion) or Cha (deception) roll with disadvantage at DC17.
[Influence action, Hesitant target & Hostile attitude, Vamp Int score: 17]
Anytime I call for a dice throw, it's because something interesting might happen.
If the bard fails, the vampire might become amused / disgusted (or some other appropriate reaction) and that would flavor the rest of the social encounter.
If the bard passes, great, the bard just convinced the vampire that they were attracted to them and seemed eager to explore that. Remember, the influence action does not change what a person is ... it just changes something that they believe. Successfully doing the horny bard routine with a vampire doesn't make the vampire like the bard ... it convinces the vamp that the bard likes it.
Vampires are essentially apex predators, and have on occasion, been known to play with their food.
Perhaps this successful flirting causes the vampire to pull up short, assess the situation a bit. Maybe they even let their soon-to-be meal live/escape, as they could now be a source of petty amusement ... or perhaps even a new pet to brave the centuries with.
I would definitely turn it into a careful what you wish for moment.
[Influence action, Hesitant target & Hostile attitude, Vamp Int score: 17]
Anytime I call for a dice throw, it's because something interesting might happen.
If the bard fails, the vampire might become amused / disgusted (or some other appropriate reaction) and that would flavor the rest of the social encounter.
If the bard passes, great, the bard just convinced the vampire that they were attracted to them and seemed eager to explore that. Remember, the influence action does not change what a person is ... it just changes something that they believe. Successfully doing the horny bard routine with a vampire doesn't make the vampire like the bard ... it convinces the vamp that the bard likes it.
Vampires are essentially apex predators, and have on occasion, been known to play with their food.
Perhaps this successful flirting causes the vampire to pull up short, assess the situation a bit. Maybe they even let their soon-to-be meal live/escape, as they could now be a source of petty amusement ... or perhaps even a new pet to brave the centuries with.
I would definitely turn it into a careful what you wish for moment.
Re: Dungeon Masters, Campaign 1: Ravenloft
Episode Seven
(This one was also watched during a work trip. Yay airline WiFi! But note-taking was sparse)
Death is not the end. The cliffhanger from last episode resolved itself. Our at-risk-of-death PC died. But the hamhandedness with which we arrived at this conclusion makes me feel like it was a pre-coordinated goal all along (I give in to Strahd ... the other heroes save you ... Well, after they save me I give in to Strahd again). So I guess now we have a full on vampire in the party (along with two banshees). The cleric that hates undead is cool with it though, so we have that going for us.
The PvP was upped a notch (different characters roleplaying how they felt about the PC death and bossing other PCs around / yelling at them in character). Not a fan.
The vampire wakes up, DM very clearly says they are not hungry. First thing the vamp does? Feed. It reminds me of when I was a newer player and you had that one player (we all know the type), the one that started fights in every tavern, the one who shook things up just because they were bored. The one that thought the only way to enjoy the game was to do something outrageous and then revel in the chaos of the moment.
The internal logic of the tale is starting to unravel a bit. I cannot for the life of me understand why this town is completely fine with the characters coming in and completely upending the status quo. These guys showed up at the halfling villager's doorstep ... completely ruined everything for the town ... openly fought their patron ... destroyed their sacred tree and stole the one thing that kept their village safe ... but then in the aftermath, when they party needed help ... the villagers were only too happy to give it (one of them even volunteering their life to feed the new vampire). A headscratchingly large amount of handwavium is being used in this tale.
"Venture Forth" made an unironic appearance from one of the BG3 actors. Made me grin. I like when they can add in little winks like that for the audience.
Loot drop. A neat way to introduce treasure appeared in this episode. In any traditional sword & sorcery tale, having your PCs discover some loot during their time spent adventuring is commonplace ... but it's something I struggle with in a horror tale without straining the genre. Definitely made some mental notes on how this was handled.
(This one was also watched during a work trip. Yay airline WiFi! But note-taking was sparse)
Death is not the end. The cliffhanger from last episode resolved itself. Our at-risk-of-death PC died. But the hamhandedness with which we arrived at this conclusion makes me feel like it was a pre-coordinated goal all along (I give in to Strahd ... the other heroes save you ... Well, after they save me I give in to Strahd again). So I guess now we have a full on vampire in the party (along with two banshees). The cleric that hates undead is cool with it though, so we have that going for us.
The PvP was upped a notch (different characters roleplaying how they felt about the PC death and bossing other PCs around / yelling at them in character). Not a fan.
The vampire wakes up, DM very clearly says they are not hungry. First thing the vamp does? Feed. It reminds me of when I was a newer player and you had that one player (we all know the type), the one that started fights in every tavern, the one who shook things up just because they were bored. The one that thought the only way to enjoy the game was to do something outrageous and then revel in the chaos of the moment.
The internal logic of the tale is starting to unravel a bit. I cannot for the life of me understand why this town is completely fine with the characters coming in and completely upending the status quo. These guys showed up at the halfling villager's doorstep ... completely ruined everything for the town ... openly fought their patron ... destroyed their sacred tree and stole the one thing that kept their village safe ... but then in the aftermath, when they party needed help ... the villagers were only too happy to give it (one of them even volunteering their life to feed the new vampire). A headscratchingly large amount of handwavium is being used in this tale.
"Venture Forth" made an unironic appearance from one of the BG3 actors. Made me grin. I like when they can add in little winks like that for the audience.
Loot drop. A neat way to introduce treasure appeared in this episode. In any traditional sword & sorcery tale, having your PCs discover some loot during their time spent adventuring is commonplace ... but it's something I struggle with in a horror tale without straining the genre. Definitely made some mental notes on how this was handled.
Re: Dungeon Masters, Campaign 1: Ravenloft
Episode 8, Chapter 1 Finale
The tale came to a riveting end in the final episode.
A shipborne battle with a 'countdown' mechanic was used. That is, you have until 'X' to finish what you are doing ... then it gets really bad ... so do what you can to keep that from happening. It was a good way to add external pressure to the scene and make the encounter feel as if someone had their foot on the accelerator. I'm going to do more of this in my games.
Then the battle went under the lake ... and I realized that I really, really don't make my PCs fight underwater as much as I should. This part went by a little too quickly though, and so did not feel as scary as it could have been. It ended abruptly with a 'rescued by giant eagles' trope (not actual giant eagles, but you get the idea) where the DM ended the encounter by fiat. I'm not a fan of that, but I get it ... you can't get bogged down when you have a timetable to keep (and this being the finale, the gang had an appointment to keep at Nedregaard Keep).
It bothers me more than it should that Guidance cantrips in this tale applied to attack rolls, saving throws and ability checks. The players were walking all over the DM here. If the players needed to roll a d20 ... the next thing they would often ask is 'can I have guidance on this?' and the answer was always yes. Deep breaths, SkiBird. Deep breaths.
There were also a few instances of the DM putting their thumb on the scales in favor of the PCs (in a little too obvious fashion for my taste). Heroic Inspiration was passed between PCs, passed from NPCs to PCs. Bardic Inspiration was passed from the PC it had been given to to another PC, that kind of stuff. You could tell the DM really needed one of the PCs to pass a roll, so they gave the character like three tries to pass it. I'm all for letting up on the gas when needed ... but I am also a staunch believer that your players should never know that you are mashing the easy button for them.
The sorcerer was next to useless in the final battle though, so that might have been the impetus behind making the fight a bit easier for the others than it should have been. The character had full spell slots and full sorcery points and basically only popped off a couple of cantrips during the boss fight. I don't mind new players finding their way to the game (all of us, of course, were new at some point), but I do feel like steering a new player toward a less resource-intensive build would have been a better introduction to the game.
The dying rules got misapplied again ... but the end result (character death) was the same as if the rules had been applied correctly, so I guess it's not that big of a deal.
Setting the rules-lawyery stuff aside for the moment ... I really enjoyed this tale. I thought it was a well crafted weekend-in-hell adventure. It had solid bones, memorable set pieces & villains, and could easily be transported with very few tweaks to someone's home game (which I'm sure was one of the goals of the podcast ... sort of a demo to show people what sorts of tales could be done).
If I'm being nitpicky about the meat of the story ... I would have liked a teensy bit more exposition and world building done to explain the who/what/why of Sithicus and Lord Soth. The PCs basically knew that he was a) a bad guy, and b) undead ... and then we moved on. To my mind, one of the best selling points of the Ravenloft setting is the length, breadth, and depth of the backstories that guide these villains. It seems a shame to invite players to your table, use one of these great villains, and leave the majority of that stuff unintroduced.
I hope these tales continue, and will definitely tune in for the next one when it is announced.
The tale came to a riveting end in the final episode.
A shipborne battle with a 'countdown' mechanic was used. That is, you have until 'X' to finish what you are doing ... then it gets really bad ... so do what you can to keep that from happening. It was a good way to add external pressure to the scene and make the encounter feel as if someone had their foot on the accelerator. I'm going to do more of this in my games.
Then the battle went under the lake ... and I realized that I really, really don't make my PCs fight underwater as much as I should. This part went by a little too quickly though, and so did not feel as scary as it could have been. It ended abruptly with a 'rescued by giant eagles' trope (not actual giant eagles, but you get the idea) where the DM ended the encounter by fiat. I'm not a fan of that, but I get it ... you can't get bogged down when you have a timetable to keep (and this being the finale, the gang had an appointment to keep at Nedregaard Keep).
It bothers me more than it should that Guidance cantrips in this tale applied to attack rolls, saving throws and ability checks. The players were walking all over the DM here. If the players needed to roll a d20 ... the next thing they would often ask is 'can I have guidance on this?' and the answer was always yes. Deep breaths, SkiBird. Deep breaths.
There were also a few instances of the DM putting their thumb on the scales in favor of the PCs (in a little too obvious fashion for my taste). Heroic Inspiration was passed between PCs, passed from NPCs to PCs. Bardic Inspiration was passed from the PC it had been given to to another PC, that kind of stuff. You could tell the DM really needed one of the PCs to pass a roll, so they gave the character like three tries to pass it. I'm all for letting up on the gas when needed ... but I am also a staunch believer that your players should never know that you are mashing the easy button for them.
The sorcerer was next to useless in the final battle though, so that might have been the impetus behind making the fight a bit easier for the others than it should have been. The character had full spell slots and full sorcery points and basically only popped off a couple of cantrips during the boss fight. I don't mind new players finding their way to the game (all of us, of course, were new at some point), but I do feel like steering a new player toward a less resource-intensive build would have been a better introduction to the game.
The dying rules got misapplied again ... but the end result (character death) was the same as if the rules had been applied correctly, so I guess it's not that big of a deal.
Setting the rules-lawyery stuff aside for the moment ... I really enjoyed this tale. I thought it was a well crafted weekend-in-hell adventure. It had solid bones, memorable set pieces & villains, and could easily be transported with very few tweaks to someone's home game (which I'm sure was one of the goals of the podcast ... sort of a demo to show people what sorts of tales could be done).
If I'm being nitpicky about the meat of the story ... I would have liked a teensy bit more exposition and world building done to explain the who/what/why of Sithicus and Lord Soth. The PCs basically knew that he was a) a bad guy, and b) undead ... and then we moved on. To my mind, one of the best selling points of the Ravenloft setting is the length, breadth, and depth of the backstories that guide these villains. It seems a shame to invite players to your table, use one of these great villains, and leave the majority of that stuff unintroduced.
I hope these tales continue, and will definitely tune in for the next one when it is announced.
Re: Dungeon Masters, Campaign 1: Ravenloft
Just when you thought they were done with the tale ... an interlude!
Earlier in the Sithicus storyline (the scene at the Lake of Sorrows), the heroes found themselves submerged for a short time during an underwater encounter. They survived, and when they surfaced, the DM informed them that their memories of the encounter beneath the waves were hazy and quickly fading as they emerged.
The heroes (and the tale) moved on without referencing this again.
The Sithicus storyline wrapped up with episode 8 ... but the good folks at Dungeon Masters have just introduced an entirely new (and I'm assuming, self contained) adventure that occurred within that lost time. This is an absolutely fantastic idea that I will incorporate into my game as soon as I can figure out a good place to drop it in.
There were lots of wisdom saving throws in the interlude's first episode ... and passing them wasn't always a good thing. I found to be a neat things-work-differently-here touch that kept the player's on their toes.
Ladies and gentlemen, it turns out that the gang went to Innsmouth. Strap in, it's about to get weird.
Earlier in the Sithicus storyline (the scene at the Lake of Sorrows), the heroes found themselves submerged for a short time during an underwater encounter. They survived, and when they surfaced, the DM informed them that their memories of the encounter beneath the waves were hazy and quickly fading as they emerged.
The heroes (and the tale) moved on without referencing this again.
The Sithicus storyline wrapped up with episode 8 ... but the good folks at Dungeon Masters have just introduced an entirely new (and I'm assuming, self contained) adventure that occurred within that lost time. This is an absolutely fantastic idea that I will incorporate into my game as soon as I can figure out a good place to drop it in.
There were lots of wisdom saving throws in the interlude's first episode ... and passing them wasn't always a good thing. I found to be a neat things-work-differently-here touch that kept the player's on their toes.
Ladies and gentlemen, it turns out that the gang went to Innsmouth. Strap in, it's about to get weird.