Off the Beaten Track (OOC)

Out of character chatter about Off the Beaten Track can go here to avoid cluttering up the Roleplay thread.This is for longer questions and answers related to that Roleplay, general rules questions can go in Help! or in General.

Add a link back to the post in question so we can have context. After posting you can right-click on the orange header and select 'copy link address' (or whatever your browser calls it), then paste that in your OOC post.

I will put together a new thread for dealing with the 'bandit camp' soon. If there is anything you want to finish up you can still do so in the On the Road thread. We can keep that open --running simultaneously-- for finishing stuff that does not directly affect the starting position of the new thread. Let me know there when you are ready.

Cook: We will endeavour to bring you in as soon as possible.
What do you think you are doing at the bandit camp? Cooking? Maybe forced to cook for them, and doing it outside so we can encounter and co-opt you before going further? Something else?

Physically, Cook is not much of a fighter and his bad leg would only slow them down. So, yes, he's left back at the camp where he's cooking, tending any mounts, and not keeping much of a watchful eye at all.

Alycine: Maybe Xana has something to do with your acceptance of Cook? If so, what does she have to say? No need to roll.

As far as not killing Cook, I could see a justification as simple as "it's the end of the day, we're cold and tired and hungry, and he's cooking something. If we kill him, the body will fall in and ruin it". That would enough of a reason to capture instead of kill, and talk to him long enough to find out that he's there against his will.

However, given the fact that Cook isn't much of a fighter and has a bad leg that will slow us down, I think that we need to come up with a reason why the party would take him with them going forward into enemy territory. Maybe he should actually know something about the Temple? Not everything, but enough familiarity to be worth bringing him along?

For mine he doesn't seem like a threat, especially if he reacts to the party with curiosity rather than aggression, perhaps as his way out of here? And agree there'd need to be something offered for the captain to let him come along. Perhaps intel on the bandits and their plans, and/or the temple?

That is a very simple solution. Let's make that our fallback if no one comes up with something more immediate to get Cook integrated. This can supply the time for others suggestions to happen, but think about how much time you want to spend on it.

Cook can know stuff that you need. But there is still a mystery that we shouldn't have answered by 'a character that has been here throughout', so, maybe, Cook would know useful stuff about the bandit camp rather than the 'temple'? He can have rumors about the temple, and can recall more as we play and they become relevant.

Maybe there is a bigger bandit camp that you need to deal with and Cook's location is just a small bivouac being used for cooking (or something else)?

Cook has heard a lot of rumours about the temple. Some of them not meant to be known, mayhaps because they're actually true. Xana must have whispered in Alycine's ear one night about Cook's existence and insists that he be kept alive, to pry these "secrets" out of him.

Alycine will insist the party not kill this man because of her "hunch" that he's involved with the temple (perhaps she's under the mistaken impression that he's a ex-temple caretaker who the bandits has press-ganged into their service as Xana's information is a little misleading that way)

Nanoka: Can do. Unless there are objections we can go with that.

Cook: Are you not just a 'cook'? Do you have other reasons for being here, near the temple?

I don't think I have a reason. Escaped the Inquisitors, captured by the bandits. Nowhere else to go so I remained the cook and camp tender.

It is fine if you don't have any special reason. Feel free to answer --or decline to answer-- any of the below musings. They are just ideas.

How long have you been with the bandit?
How long have bandits been here? Is this 'temple' business new?
Are you a prisoner? (Or maybe just a 'prisoner of circumstance', with nowhere else to go?)
Do you feel drawn to the temple? If so: do you know that it is influencing you?
Have you met our captain before? Would she recognise you now?

Cook has been with the bandits a little less than two weeks.

The bandits have been here, in Cook's estimation, about two months now. The temple business is not new. It's the reason they are here. They've been searching for the temple the entire time (it may be the fog that is keeping them from finding it). They're growing increasingly frustrated. Caravan attacks have been to resupply the camp with food and other supplies as well as taking out their frustrations on others.

Cook is neither prisoner or bandit. He and 3 others escaped the Inquisitors' prison in the nearby city. They were attacked by the bandits as they fled. Cook surrendered immediately, two were killed trying to flee, and one joined the bandits. (Cook was the only one with magical powers. The others were prisoners of circumstance of the Inquisitors.) Having no where else to go, Cook figured that staying with the bandits was as good a plan as anything else.

Cook's mind was broken by the Inquisitors' 're-education'. He remembers very little of his past. He can sense power in the fog, a power that is very familiar to him, but he can't place if that's a good thing or bad thing. He's got some trepidation about that, but no real opinion. He knows nothing about the temple other than the bandits were looking for it and their wild musings -- but it may be something he used to know about. Seeing it may stir memories.

The Inquisitors are fond of making public examples of those in their custody. It's possible the captain may have seen Cook hanging in an anti-magic crow's cage or been present at one of Cook's many floggings. That would have been early in Cook's captivity though, a good 5 years ago. Recognizing this bent, broken old man as the imposing defiant wizard she saw years ago might be tricky.

Cook: 'Cook' is a new name (the other, maybe, lost?)? You would have been known by another name back before your incarceration?

This might sound weird, but it could be possible for Rook to know him? Rook is an ex-street kid, and if this old man was hanging out for public display on the streets of the city five years ago, Rook would have been a teenager, and he and his friends might have encountered him. They might have snuck him food and water, particularly if he was any type of storyteller or something that would keep them entertained. Maybe he's even the one that taught a few of them to read.

I have no issue with this if it adds to the story.

Correct, Cook can't remember his past. When asked his name by the bandits, I'd just stare at them blankly. The bandits starting calling him Cook and that's what he goes by at this point.

As for Rook - my first instinct is to say I was an All Powerful Wizard, more likely to scare the kids away than teach them, but I'll resist that. Since I've already established I don't know Cook's past other than he was a magic user captured by the Inquisitors, I think it would be interesting to say that Cook's backstory is fair game for all of the players.

Hey everyone

I Placed Albert inside the bandit camp with a reason to head towards Cook.
Question is, should I show up there before or after the rest of the party arrives? My current preference is after, because one of them might recognize me as a familiar face.

Paladintodd: What do you think?

Looks like the party is starting to arrive! :)

Not sure if you saw this Rezart, but I was suggesting in TheGenerator's Welcome thread that Rook would be the likeliest person to know Albert, who until very recently used to run an inn on the edge of town, what are your thoughts?

Oh sorry, I did not see that. Yeah, that makes sense to me. Rook can be familiar to Albert.

Perfect!

Basically, anyone who would has plausibly visited the bar is free to say they know Albert

And by 'know' we can also say 'are friends with'. It does not have to be that close, but that does smooth the integration into the party.
Details to be worked out between those players.

You guys can narrate seeing each other across the... well across the empty space.
Cook can respond before or after.
We don't have to post things in the order they happen. But try not change what came before.

paladintodd: Commendations.

GM, does Meht notice anything here? Otherwise he'll go hurry to see what all the 'bandits' are doing.

You say Meht is not good at reading people, so beyond a tingling in the back of the brain that something is afoot, he can not know more than that there might be some weird behaviour. He may put two and two together later, based on his ability to reason about signs and tracks.

Cool, just to clarify tho (and apologies if I'm misreading your intent, and just restating how you're already approaching it), Meht is bad at reading people but trying something specific to learn how to do it: using his existing observation skills, and reasoning by analogy from what he is good at, i.e. reading animals and landscapes for signs. In the past he's largely avoided people, but now he has to find some way to try to understand them, and this is what he's trying for the moment.

In any case, if Meht tries this the question I am asking as a player is not What is the NPC genuinely thinking or feeling? but rather What does Meht see/perceive, if anything, that reminds him of the things he is familiar with in animals and landscapes?

Those perceptions/things could be genuinely useful or completely misleading or both or in between, since people are both similar and unlike other animals and landscapes, and I'm always happy to roll if you'd like that to be random. He's trying to bring INT from a different domain to bear on social understanding, because it's the best he's got to work with for the moment, but there's plenty of ways that can go wrong.. :)

For the moment I'll assume it's just the sense something's wrong, as you said, but he's still at a loss as to what it is.

I don't know that anything is 'wrong' per se, the captain is just behaving slightly out of character for herself, maybe taking this a little more personally than would be expected. Only characters who know her, or have been watching or interacting with her throughout the whole journey, or who are very good at reading people, would know for sure.

If you think this is Meht then you can act upon it and see what comes of it. Or you can use your observations to later justify taking an interpersonal Skill when the time comes.

I think Meht would certainly have been watching her closely, because she's in charge and he doesn't have Rook's confidence, but wouldn't be able to pick up anything subtle. So for the moment will assume he sees something that seems out of character, but isn't sure what to make of it.

Meht had also only met her, like, twice? So does not have a lot to judge from.

True, but compared to the other characters he's paid a lot more attention to her as an authority figure - currently he doesn't have much going for him except pleasing those in charge, given his inexperience. But let me know if you'd like me to amend my in-character post.

Not at all. It is completely up to you how much you feel Meht would be aware of, it is only your own characterisation of him as 'not understanding people' --and the fact that we have not seen him interacting much with the captain (which could have happened off-screen?)-- that hinders his interpretation here. If that was not your intent with those descriptions then you are welcome to show us Meht getting better at it quickly (though, WIS would be the main Stat for intuition, INT is often interpreted as the opposite, maybe his INT helps him put two-and-two together later?)

So far there is not much more than hints that the captain has a personal dislike for something related to the tattoo and the temple.

I'd like to use my Awareness skill to examine Jondur's body. Is this something I should say before hand (maybe in OOC?) or should I just write the fiction and you'll tell me when to roll, GM?

The fiction comes before the dice, so tell us what you are doing to 'examine the wounds' (the answers are always based on what is feasible to learn from the actions taken), what you are looking for, and possibly what you think you find (not only do people miss what they are not looking for, but it tells the GM what the player finds interesting).
Then we can see if any rolls are called for, and then if any Skills apply (be sure to call out Skills that you think might apply, in case the GM neglects to check the sheets or interprets things differently).

When doing things like 'examining infected wounds' the GM will let you know about actions that put you at risk (infection and so on) in time for you to change your minds. Unless things go horribly wrong or deliberately risky choices are made, I don't see that happening here.

The PCs can speculate about answers to Albert's question based on Cook's description.

We can see where you all land and some of it may be true.

Yeah, 'Awareness' is not the same as 'Investigation' (what would that be? Decipher, Lore, or Heal in this case?). But maybe your awareness of your god's impression of the situation can be flavouring your interpretation?

Albert can roll +INT for an investigation (their god allowing them to apply Awareness as a Skill) or +WIS if they relying purely on 'prayer' and what their god has to say. The choice of Stat will influence what sort of details can be learned.

I will wait for Cook's answers before replying, but you can add the roll now if you want.

Right, I see what you mean. I figured it was kinda like 'perception' in D&D. But I think you're right, this would lean more towards investigation.
I'd lean towards rolling that instead of +wis.
Do you mean that without a god I wouldn't be able to apply Awareness to this? Cause I'm not trying to bend the rules. If it's not possible then I'm fine with it not being possible. ;-)

And in DnD you have an Investigation skill (based on Int) separate from Perception (Wis), they really should not be used interchangeably, but DnD is a mess that way. :)
"Bend the rules"! Heavens no! Those are precisely what the rules do. :)

This is a Fiction First game, so all the rules and items on the character sheet really do, is give narrative permission to do things in the game. If you have a ladder on your sheet you can easily climb things (though walking around is much harder); if you have a spear you can fight at a bit of a distance, keeping someone with only a dagger at bay, but if the dagger wielder manages to get close they will have an advantage.

Meht, with Heal on their sheet, would be justified in rolling to investigate medical stuff, for instance (I am not suggest he needs to, just illustrating the point). In a case like this it would be more appropriate than Lore (which is probably the more obvious 'Investigation' Skill) or Decipher (which is more specialised).

Similarly Albert's 'Awareness of his god' will influence many of his actions and aid him in a lot of things... if he listens... if Raynor chooses to speak.

Transcribed from PMs so everyone can participate:
Let us know if you want for Cook to meet his end and we can make it happen, but we can also retire him, or redeem him, or find another reason to keep him along afterwards if we want. We may feel differently at the end, so none of this planning is set in stone. "Play to find out what happens".

I like the idea, it's a good way for these ppl who basically don't know each other very well to sit out at least 1 dungeon together. Giving them a chance to bond and become a party.
Do we play this out or just narrate it happening?
As far as I can tell, Cook is kinda jumbled up in his head. Maybe being around the other PCs can slowly start bringing back order in his mind to the point where he feels like he 'needs' them to stay sane.

Indeed. Though getting characters together is more important than making it make sense in the story. Sense is nice when it can happen. :)
What do we all think? How much do we want to play this out? Is there anything anyone still wants to do before we go?
Or maybe --at the player's discretion, and towards the end of the temple adventure-- dealing with the temple lifts the fog from his mind and they can rebuild Cook more capably, or give him a 'good' retirement with the 'problem solved'. It all depends on whether paladintodd decides to keep the character around (maybe with the same history/background but with a fresh start and new stats and picks).

As for Cook, don't know what the future has in store for him. We'll have to play to find out what happens.

That captain is more experience at this sort of stuff, so it is OK for her to understand the dangers better than the PCs? Let me know if her comments make any PCs feel deprotagonised.

It's fine with me, she is in a position of authority over a few of us. And Rook still thinks she knows a lot more than she's saying, no matter what she claims. He's not going to challenge her on it any further at the moment, though

She does 'know' more... or at least she suspects more (but may be wrong).

You all get the impression that she is genuinely wanting to put a stop to something bad.

However there is one thing I want to remark on the earlier discussion.

@paladintodd, I think Cook should probably be more proactive in demonstrating value and helping out the group if we're going to have a reason to keep him around. As it is he comes across very unreliable. Like if he's just sitting there pointing at the temple and mumbling, that's not going to suggest to me that we should drag the old guy along with us, unless there's a reason to think he'll be more help than liability. As it is, he seems barely in contact with reality, and he hasn't shown that he knows or can do anything useful; it seems like it would be a risk to take him along.

It is a bit of a problem. :(

To solve it: We are going to end up being forced to take Cook along with us. Hopefully he can prove useful as time progresses, but his time with us may be short-lived.

Oh yes, definitely. I completely intended for Albert to make a suggestion that could be shut down by the captain. Though in his mind it would have been awesome if the captain had agreed ;-)

I'm not sure if we're still able to get help from PCs currently in the background, but I was thinking that Albert might suggest using the falcon to see if it can head east while we stand still (after a few loops). But Alycine would probably get that idea before Albert does ;-)
Is this something we can still make use of?

It complicates things.

Given that we all know we are destined to end up going round in circles till we recruit Cook, and that neither Alycine nor Meht can change that fate, let's just not mention them and not think about why Meht does not come up with a good answers (this is not natural, so not his bailiwick).

We can work out the details of those PCs' when their players are able to contribute. This is a necessary burden with drop-in-drop-out games. :(

Why does the Captain think the bandits are turning to the camp? We're they not all defeated at the ambush?

We seemed to have stalled out.

I'm feeling that we've figured out the story direction so I am sitting back with my feet up waiting for the GM to throw us the next thing. (GM: ok, you follow the game trail 4 times but end up back in camp each time. In exasperation, the Captain grabs Cook and makes him lead. You arrive at the temple...). Maybe that's not how this works?

Or are you waiting for the players to do that? We're supposed to be contributing something else to move things along?

They were not all killed. The survivors fled and our group followed their tracks in this direction at first. The fact that none of them have made it back is noteworthy, something must have happened.

Weekends and holidays can mess with things.
Agreed.
Yeah, but I still want to allow the players to a chance to try or do something. The above point about the weekend/holiday slowed that down, though. :(
I allowed the players a chance to contribute, and planned to give them a day (this being a post each day game) before moving things forward.

While the captain is technically in charge (of the caravan... does she have any authority here?) I prefer for the players to take the lead. Having NPCs along is always a challenge, and I have thoughts about separating the captain from the group when we get to the temple... but none of them really work all that well.

I don't think Rook would have any reason to think that the Cook will be any more successful than anyone else in getting through the barrier. This is kinda what I meant when I said that he was coming off as too confused and distracted. From Rook's point of view, he's mostly been speaking in nonsense. I'm not sure how we get to the conclusion in game that he can lead us to the temple, instead of just getting us lost more.

At this point, Rook's instinct would be to urge to write the temple off and return to the caravan, but I don't want to post that trying to shut down the adventure. But it really doesn't seem to be much point to him as presented right now - there's no urgent need to be there that he's aware of, nor any path visible to him.

To recap and make sure I have the story straight:
-- The bandits had a map to intercept the caravan
-- Some of the bandits escaped
-- Captain recognized the bandit tattoo but hasn't said anything
-- It's the Captain that wanted to find the temple

Who's Asha? One of the guards? Maybe the Current Party wiki could have an entry for NPCs?

Is it possible to mark the players currently in the background on the wiki?

Correct. Though the map was from the camp, not the temple. There is no evidence so far that the bandits had been to the temple.
Correct. Some of that bandits that attacked the caravan ran away when the fight turned against them.

We don't know if there were more bandits that were not at the ambush.

Calum and his two cronies might be technically-bandits (we are not sure) and they remained back at camp. No one there knows they are suspect...
Yes, though even mentioning 'a mark' seemed to get her attention.
Another PC brought the temple to light, the captain did not know much about it and spoke more about concern about leaving the bandits at their back, or the craziness bandits might get up to at a temple.

The captain was elevated into the position of caring about the temple to support the players' interest, especially after 'loosing' the player that engendered it.

We can make the temple into as large or as small a thing as we want. Feel free to discuss it OOC. I am tying it to Albert and Cook so far. Rook is welcome to create an interest, but it is likely to have 'treasure hoards', from what you have heard.
She is a guard who was impressed with Meht's heroic performance ending the fight. She is following because he is here.
You guys are welcome to make a NPC wikis. I don't know which NPCs you care about. If you engage with them I bring them into scenes, if you don't they fade away.
A wiki page would suggest interest and I would focus on the ones that get attention there.

You can load the full thread and ctrl-f search for Asha to find all the mentions of her. There is not much.
I have struck out Gusset and Alycine. If Alycine comes back we can unstrike her.

We don't have a wiki entry for Rook.

(the temple)

Sure, riiiight.

Todd is pretty convinced that the Captain lead the caravan to the ambush spot and provided the map to the bandits. When the bandits failed to acquire the human sacrifices she wanted, she had to go to Plan B and hand deliver the sacrifices to the temple herself. It's only a matter of time before she transforms into some hideous monster and begins devouring our flesh.

riiight?

I will give the others a moment to react to Cook's crazy outburst before the captain does. :)

This is supposed to say "unlikely", right? Rook would love to find a big horde of treasure, but he's been assuming that if the bandits knew about one, they'd be going after that instead of caravans. He's mostly been tagging along just out of curiosity, and a vague hope that he can find info that incriminates Calum with these bandits along the way

It is a mysterious ancient temple. Don't they all have hoards or treasure?
'Hoards' is relative, 50 gold pieces would a game-changer for you guys. (Literally. It is enough to take you to another level!)
The bandits don't appear to know where the temple is, and definitely have not braved its depths.
The PCs are welcome to imagine wealth beyond measure, even if the players know it will be bounded by the realities of the game-system. :)

I'm with Rook - I don't think Cook can be trusted. It's OK if he gets pushed to the back a bit.

I am not sure anyone can be trusted...

Meht is also in the background until the 21st
So I think I'm the only one approaching the temple.

Is Albert leaving the party behind?
Else I will give a bit more time to see what Cook and Rook do, since the rolls might affect each other.

I'm guessing, since there's a pretty thick fog, that if I'm able to see the temple it's not _that_ far from the rest of the group. So I'm leaving the party but trying to stay within vision range at least.

Can I assume that it's starting to get pretty dark? I believe it was evening when we met up at the camp. Is that kind of thing something the GM decides, or does it automatically happen when a player references that it's dark? (I've never done a collaborative narrative like this before ^^)

If unsure, ask. (That is always good advice:)

I would assume it is dark by now, but there could still be some light if we want it.

If we want it to be sunset or something, we can say it is (though it feels a little later than that). If we just want enough light to be able to move around, the moon can illuminate fog quite a lot, or we can get out torches (this is not Torchbearer, I don't want to track rounds of light, a torch will last as long as the fiction needs it. (6-s can result in torches going out.))

Pay no attention...

That's not ominous at all :S

You wanna be shouting at a 'mysterious temple'... and more importantly: 'adventure site'. But a 5 is pretty good for you. :)

Adventuring without danger is just walking, right? :P

Added +WIS roll to my post

I hope we are OK with my skipping past the jump-scare and discovery that there is nothing there. It did not seem worth drawing out each player's learning this or making rolls.

Feel free to narrate your character's experience of that scare/relief.

Is there an moonlight right now? Or is the torch the only source of light?

I have no objections to moonlight. But note that a close-by-point-source of light tends to make the moon a bit useless (like a candle does not do anything to a room during the day, but at night it can have significant impact), so it might only help when you move a little way away, or if something is silhouetted against the orb.

What are you trying to do?

paladintodd: The problem with unsolicited rolls is that now we have to abide by the results. There is no provision in the rules for ignoring rolls after they have been made and it can cause all sort of problems (political or mechanical) trying to decide with prior-knowledge of the outcome.

Multiple rolls in one go are a problem as well, but we can work around them in this case. Often the later rolls depend on the outcome of the earlier ones, because the later actions depend on the earlier ones.

What we know:

Cook failed to 'shoulder Asha aside' despite the fact that there is plenty of space for him to go round. What happened? Did Cook fall on his ass (not very interesting and might preclude the later rolls in the fiction)? Or did he end up hurting Asha (problematic since it would tend to spawn PvP (Really CvC, but people tend not to know what that means without the PvP context))?

Is Albert going to try to stop Cook from taking the torch (there are more)? If so, then Cook does not have a torch, which is not a proper 6- outcome, it is a nothing, and one of the key parts of PbtA is that 'nothing never happens', so now we need to come up with consequences.

Is Cook still heading into the temple without light? Are the others letting him?

I think cook's bad rolls should result in all 3 of them (Cook, Albert and Asha ... and the torch) falling over. Maybe accidentally stumbling into something important?

I'm seeing it like this: Cook tried to shoulder Asha, not realizing she's a bit tougher than he expected. He starts to fall over and in his fall grabs for something to keep him up straight -> the torch. Albert however doesn't let go of the torch and tries to get Cook to let go. At this point Cook, does some sort of dodge, pulling all of them into a pile. The torch turns flame first towards Cook on their way down.

Just a suggestion :)

Yeah, that can happen. We could use some more details of the fiction first.

Seeing as we are new to this, I don't want to go too hard with this situation, and want to avoid harm where possible. I think I will deal with the first miss, and keep the second miss for after you have all dealt with that complication. The second one will probably be 'reveal an ugly truth' (or am I getting my PbtA and Burning Wheel terminology mixed up?:)

Given the 8 We can say that Cook can make it into the dark temple if he wants while we deal with the mess he created.

Should we play into the already rolled rolls, or just continue as if not knowing?

Are you asking me what happened with Asha or was that an example of the problem of unsolicited rolls?

Would Cook head in without a light? Sure. From your description of his new mental state, I think he would. Also, spending 4 days resolving who has a torch would be boring.

Yeah, tricky. Let's try not to block what we know happens. But it we can not get there we can not get there.

... OK, let's just ignore the torch. Cook did not get it, but you did not lose it... unless you want to (maybe as part of the 'dealing' with Asha situation).

Kinda both. Also pointing out that we since we have to resolve mechanical bits (based on the dice) I need more fiction to do that.

I went ahead and activated Asha as a complication.

Just so you don't use it as an excuse later (though Asha surely will), you are all each still in control of your character's actions, there is just an influence from the temple that makes you really want to get in there, to believe that you are destined to rule it.

It is affecting all of you, but those who got a 7-9 are aware --though only in the back of your mind-- that something is wrong.

We know that Cook does not get the torch from Albert. We can include that failure in the narration of what you do next.

If no one cares enough about Cook to stop Asha from bashing his head in, think about how she will feel afterwards, and do it for her?

I really would like to see Cook work with the party a little bit, and don't want to just kill him ignominiously, but if no one does anything about a telegraphed thread there will be tears.

Will wait for Rook to chime in before pulling the trigger on that. But no pressure.

Kind of hard to work with the party after that?

Seems like Cook is working OK with the story though. He's gotten us to the temple, is pushing hard to get inside, and precipitated some interesting issue with Asha.

But If the characters don't like Cook and are OK with his head being bashed in, I'm good with that as well.

No plans for the moment, and Rook is staying at the edge of the torchlight for now. But he's thinking about slipping into the shadows if trouble does come calling, so I wanted to know how much he could see.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but I don't think any of those tears will be Rook's. He can try comforting Asha afterward if she gets broken up about it, maybe.
The issue with Cook, in my opinion, is that while he's been active, all his behavior forces the rest of the party to focus on him. The situation was set up in such a way that he was vital to getting to the temple, because otherwise the group wouldn't have taken him. He's acted unstable and irrational, and the other characters have been forced to react to that. He's moved to get into the temple, but he's done that by shoving Asha and trying to grab for the torch, again forcing other characters to react to him. It's just a bit much.

To be honest, having Asha whack Cook over the head and have it sort of "snap him out of it", at least a bit, would be helpful, I think.

Yeah, we're gonna need a way to be happy that Cook is part of the group. Right now he's there by force and he's not making himself very popular ;)
The first real danger that comes up he might be the sacrificial lamb if nobody cares about his well-being. He might become the liability that stopped being useful at some point. Unless that's what you're going for with your character, of course.

I think we're all willing to give Cook a chance and see if he can turn it around, but every action against the party will make it more difficult.

@GM: Does it go against the "play to find out what happens" idea to guide a character to being liked in the party?

No, not at all.

If we want to push the game in a particular direction we should talk about it and try to get there. Somethings we can even assume to be inevitable and not rely on dice or random outcomes to drive them. The characters getting along with each other is an assumed aspect of games, so we really should try to get to the point where we can work together.

---

We have to decide, as players in the game, how much effort we are willing to put into rehabilitating Cook. That does depend on paladintodd wanting Cook rehabilitated, or, at least, worked with. If not, then any effort is pointless. Even if we don't plan to keep the character around after this adventure --especially if we don't plan to keep them around, actually-- we need to make them worth caring about, if all we have is 'the now' with little prospect for 'future', the investment is all about the now, so the now needs to work. If the character is bound to die during this, then we need to care about them before that happens, else it is meaningless.

paladintodd: What do you think about having us 'fix' Cook in the next scene?

We have painted ourselves into a corner, but we could find a connection between Cook's madness and the temple, and find a way to bring him back. If you want we can discover who he really was, reroll the character and find that the crazy ex-magician was not real, and start fresh (even with a physical transformation away from 'old man', if need be).

This would avoid invalidating what we have done so far, but also rescue the situation we have ended up in where the character is not fitting with the party. It would also mean we don't have to come up with an explanation of for a new person out here 'in the unlikelies'.

Cook, after Rook's admonishment, was hanging at the back of the group cowed and silent. It was the GM that declared for Cook that "the others who came here with you do not matter." I played that as bumping into Asha on the way to the temple.

You want to 'fix' Cook but at the same time you've put a dome in front of Cook and declared that he definitely wants to go there. Am I supposed to go there? Are the others players going to then be offended that I'm making them deal with Cook's actions again?

The game is fiction first, right? If so, then no one has to 'like' Cook, we just need to find him interesting to the story. That seems to be a fail on my part.

I think at this point, the best solution I see is for Cook to be over-awed by the temple. He'll stand there silently soaking in the wonder of the place. In the meantime, the rest of you can show me how this is done.

That is my fault, I was not clear enough about what was happening and that you were all still in control your characters and their actions and even their choices. The temple's influence on your characters' minds only motivates them to come to it, it does not control them or dictate their actions.

All we can do now is work out how to move forward from here. I had hoped to see some more proactive choices from Cook once his mind was becoming clearer. I would still like for the character to be actively involved in and contribute to the story and events happening here.

Cook is alone in the temple, but the vine-door will not keep the others out for long. He has a chance to act, to investigate, to try to understand what is happening, or anything else. There is a compulsion on the 'dome' (it is actually a pile of bones, but you can not tell that from this far away) to 'go to sleep' upon it. If you don't want to take any actions, you are welcome to have Cook succumb to that and, incongruously, go sleep, which will reveal a lot to the others.

paladintodd: Are you amenable to trying to purge the crazy from Cook? Either he can help or the others can try to do it while he sleeps. But we need your permission to do such things to your character. Doing it now seems like it will be better than doing it as a result of the temple-quest.

Being 'proactive', if I read Rezart correctly, is the problem. He doesn't want the focus to be on Cook.

Cook is a mentally broken man. Having him suddenly get clearer doesn't make much sense to me in regards to the fiction. If his craziness - which hasn't harmed the party in the least so far and has provided a way to move the story forward - is really that big of a problem then it seems better to me, fiction first, to kill him off.

I think the problem is the number of hoops we have had to jump through to get Cook into the party, which is fine so far, but we do need to move away from how much focus he has been consuming and allow the others to get to drive the story without having to think about 'how will we keep Cook involved'. That effort needs to result in Cook becoming part of the party.

Let's find a reason why the other characters would want to keep him around. One that does not cut them off without him, so not another "we need him n order to progress" like we did with the finding of the temple.

If the character can become proactively helpful rather than an in-fiction drain on the party's energy that would help. There is "crazy" and then there is "so crazy he needs constant care". If we could move Cook from the latter to the former that would allow things to work.

We have a "cleric". Maybe we can "cast out demons" or something? But if you are resistant to attempts to turn Cook into someone who could function in society, then we may not be able to use him.

We need to shape the fiction around what we can actually work with, either we need to fix Cook, or we need to replace Cook (or some other route if anyone can think of one), both are a bit of a stretch to explain. Why would there be another character here to replace him with, why would the others trust someone they meet out here? simplest is to say whoever the replacement is was a fellow guard with the party the whole time. This seems harder than "the temple was messing with Cook's mind (as hinted at before) and now we are here we can fix that".

I don't understand your reply. Further discussion doesn't seem fruitful.

I agree he has had too much spotlight. I agree that he shouldn't be detrimental to the party (he hasn't in any way I can see). I agree the other players should want him around (he knows *something* about the temple and may be helpful). I agree a character shouldn't be distracting from the game (I don't think Cook is. The scream at the Captain was maybe too much). I agree that the player has to make the character fit the group, not the other way around.

If that explanation isn't good enough, kill Cook off. If a crazy old man is a problem for the story, kill him off. There must be a spiked pit around here somewhere.

That is a little bit concerning, but we do all agree that the dynamic needs to change, so let's see what we can do to turn Cook into an equal contributing part of the party.

What is Cook doing inside while the others are discussing their options outside?

Do you even want to continue with Cook, or do we need to work out how to phase him out?
Is there anything the others can do to help make Cook viable?

Rezart: So far as we know, Asha is not a priestess (but we can turn her into one if we want, I already have some ideas since your post).

Maybe Albert is the one you meant to address? He is the "cleric" mentioned earlier as he is a "priest of Raynor".

Oh, sorry, that's my mistake. I thought she was dressed or disguised like a priestess to start with? I can edit it out. I didn't mean Albert, because I didn't believe his faith was common knowledge to the patrons of his bar - though I guess that'd be up to him... Which do you prefer Albert?

Good point, his refaithing is kinda new.

It is up to TheGenerator how much we know at present. Though it will become apparent eventually, we can keep it for a big reveal later.

I updated my post to fit better

I enjoy Cook. Will try to figure out how to proceed with the story as presented without being a spotlight hog.

OK. That is important to know so we can know where to focus our effort.

Sorry, did an edit while you posted that. I'll move it here.

I think it might be best to simply delay here, let the others do what they want to do outside, and wait for them to catch up with Cook. Better than Cook charging ahead and forcing the others to deal with that. Let's just say those vines were thicker than originally thought and Cook is dealing with those until the others catch up?

OK. Let's say that Cook is far enough inside that the rest can consider him 'inside' and out or earshot till they join him. Then we can see if he had done anything when they get there.

If anyone wants to talk to Cook before entering the temple can get arrange that easily enough.

I'm happy with this being known. It would make sense for Rook to know about it if he was a frequent visitor.

Albert can just respond to the call for a priest and then we will all know, irregardless of who knew what before.

Is there any way for Albert to "offset a curse" as Rook suggested? I don't think it really translates to any part of my character sheet. (except if undead are involved)

You could always try persuade Raynor to do that for you? Isn't that what prayer is?
That feels like a +CHA roll?

Gotcha, I added it.

What are you trying to achieve?
What is Albert hoping for, but more importantly, what are you wanting?

Seeing as there's been mention of the temple possibly altering the group's behavior, I'd say some sort of warding from that effect. Maybe it could translate into seeing an oncoming threat just in the nick of time, where otherwise we'd be too preoccupied to notice.

Something in that direction. I'm fine with leaving this up to your discretion. It doesn't have to help right now, just somewhere down the line.

OK. I am trying to come up with a way to 'fix' the Cook conflict, while not making him into more of a 'bad guy' than he already is.

I am scrapping the 'slow reveal' so everyone can participate in the solution.

You would have discovered something along the lines of this:

• Cook has some aspect about him that disrupts magical effects.
• A long time ago (in your father's time, or your father's father's time? (or, like 30-40 years ago?)), an (unspecified) enchantment was placed on the temple to keep people safe from its influence.
• Coincidentally, Cook has been in the area for a few weeks, and his presence has disrupted the protection, allowing people to become aware of the temple.
• This has changed the bandits behaviour from normal highway-robbers to tomb-raiders. But they --as a group-- have not found the temple, though they have schismed and suffered.
• Something has stopped Cook's aspect temporarily. You are all clear-headed again. Even Cook who is not all that clear-headed, was made worse by the temple's influence and can operate better with it turned off.
• The captain seems to have felt the draw of the temple from further away than most. There is some connection there which none of us understand.

This is just a suggestion on my part, but it might be helpful if Cook was able to communicate with the group in words as well. If there was some interaction, some conversation with a bit of give and take where Cook discusses what he's thinking, it would be helpful in making some sort of group bond.

Hopefully we can arrange for Cook to be more human with the mind-fog being lifted.

I'm not really interested in "fixing" Cook - whatever that means. I like Cook. Cook needs to not be in the spotlight so much, shouldn't be a distraction or PITA, needs to be helpful to the story, needs a reason to be in the story. None of that requires changing Cook. If we still feel broken Cook is a problem, I prefer to kill him off. I think he can work, but I'm fine if you guys feel different.

Still waiting for the others to get inside before I press on too much (again).

Could we maybe reverse that? The power of the temple messes with peoples' mind. Cook's power stops the temple from influencing him. Cook sees other's being influenced, which allows him to recognize an old evil in the temple that has gotten loose and which he'd want defeated. Cook's power maybe helped free Asha from the enchantment when she got closer to him.

Or am I stepping on toes again?

And one last FYI, I leave on vacation next Friday, will be gone for two weeks. So maybe you don't want to expend the effort.

That's fair enough, it's your character after all :). Could you describe how you see Cook being part of the group in a way that he's not just there because they are, in a way, forced to take him along? I think it would be nicer to want to be together in stead of the "ugh, we don't like him but he's here because we need him" scenario. Or is that exactly what you're trying to go for?

I'm asking because if I know what your view is on this, I can change my play style accordingly. At the moment I'm assuming Cook will become more friendly and reliable in the future so Albert is kinda going easy on him so it doesn't escalate into an unfixable argument in-game. Also it might become a hassle to RP arguments between them all the time, slowing down the story. What's your take on this?

And then? What would Cook do? How would Cook work with the party to defeat the old evil?

We could maybe do that. But that is a lot of rolling back of events, and we need to know that it will work before expending the effort.

How do you see this working? The biggest problem we are seeing is that Cook does not feel like a 'person', they don't talk to anyone (or at least not coherently) and the others can not understand them nor form a bond with them.

'Talking' is just the obvious example of this and not the whole picture. He feels more like a mcguffin or item to be puzzled over than a character with his own motivation. If you can tell us what you want to achieve with the character we can try to make that happen.

Also think about why the other characters would want to keep someone like what you have in mind around. 'Useful' is not a good reason, they need to want to for the basic RPG-party-dynamic to work.

Nobody is forced to take Cook along. That's on me. If the others decide it doesn't make sense for Cook to be there, that's fine. Cook seeming to know something about the temple seems like a good reason. Why does Cook want Albert or Rook to come along?

Why do you expect Cook to be more friendly or reliable? He hasn't been unfriendly or unreliable so far. He was an asset in getting to the temple.

Yes, constant in character arguing would be a hassle. Did I miss a Cook argument somewhere? Not sure why this is a concern.

How would Cook work with the party to defeat the evil? I don't know yet. Don't we play to find out? Cook wants this evil defeated. Why do Albert and Rook want to be involved with this temple? Seems like Cook has more reason than anyone else.

I'm not seeing what "rolling back" is needed. The temple influenced us all, Cook's weird power counter-acted it for now, we press on. Maybe I missed something.

Cook's motivation is to survive, which is difficult in his condition. And also, to defeat the evil in the temple he seems to have experience with. What's Albert's or Rook's motivation? Seems like Cook has more motivation than anyone other than maybe the Captain.
Waaaa? Being useful to the story is not a good reason? Why do they keep Raistlin around? Why do they keep Han Solo around? Why do they keep Wolverine around?
---------------------

The temple influenced us and created some bad behavior. Cook's weird power counter-acted it, for now. Cook has had some experience with this thing, whatever it is, but doesn't fully remember it in his condition. He knows it's Bad and wants to stop it. Can we not move on from there?

Because this is a cooperative game and all players are expected to make characters that are able to work in the group. I am sorry if that was not made clear enough and was just assumed, that is on me.
Probably a poor choice of words, and probably based on assumptions that things will end up there... assumptions based on past experience, I dare say. :(

I have tried to avoid using the term because it is pejorative, but may have caused more harm by avoiding it. This is a version of the 'lone wolf' style of character: one that does not fit with the party and has no reason to be adventuring with the party, or would not be tolerated by the party if the players were not forced to play together. Fortunately, with the internet opening up our options beyond the kids we can collect in our neighbourhood, we don't have to play with the group we have and can work to find a group that wants to play the sorts of games we each want to play. It is possible you can find a play-group that will want to have Cook along.
That phrase is not a free-ride, it needs to, at least, be feasible for a solution to be viable, and, as things stand, I don't see a way forward.
Does he? Nothing we have seen leads us (players or character) to think that, so far.
The question is why this party would be involved, not why they are involved in the current scene. If we had not forced the issue earlier, they would have left Cook at the camp and done this without him. Can you see that that is a problem?
All 'lone wolf' characters. Kept around because the story demands it. If a character is not fun to play with, or redeemable (as with Han... very soon after the start) they should not be in a game. Games are a much larger investment of time, and there is no promise that a lone wolf character will be worth the work it take to keep them in the story, in a book or movie the audience can assume the author will make it worth their while, and it is easy investment, or they can leave it (many did over Raistlin). We have no right to force that choice on other players in our game.
And does that result in his behaviour improving? His was the only 'bad behaviour' that we needed to change. It was for his redemption that any of this existed.
Given how this discussion appears to be going nowhere, if you don't see Cook changing to work as a more normal character, maybe we should 'vanish' him and you can try making a character that does fit? We don't have to do anything as final as killing him, we can simply have him not be in the temple when the rest enter, that way you can try to bring him back later (redeemed), or introduce him into another game where he does fit.

LOL, lone wolf. Cook literally wouldn't go anywhere by himself.

Don't know how I went from commendations to problem child, but here we are. This isn't much fun at this point, probably not for anyone else either, so I guess I bow out at this point. Good luck to all of you.

Sorry it did not work out. Hope you can find other groups that scratch the itch you are after.
No hard feelings.

I seem to be posting quite a bit more than Rezart is, is that okay with you Rezart? If you want me to wait for you, let me know I can slow down :)

I will let Rook add anything they know or can guess about the goat-horned-wolf symbol if they want. No pressure.

It's fine with me, post all you want. I don't have any issues weaving my actions into the existing narrative. I'm fine following along, as long as I don't get eaten by a grue or something in the in between sections.

Alright, good to know

If there was an upvote button on this forum, this post would get it from me :D

It strikes me that those recovered mugs might be just the thing. They are both 'a symbol of celebration after conquest', so close to Raynor's heart... and 'items claimed' (and, dare I say: sanctified) as 'spoils of war' (and 'acts of valour and bravery')... TWICE claimed, thus?

Let us know when Albert realises this (maybe only at the close?). Or not, your call.

Yeah they might just do the trick. I like the idea. But I think it's too early to know what to do yet. Are there more rooms to discover or is this where the temple adventure should end?

There might be something under the dome. But we don't have to explore it if we don't want to. It is up to the players how big a deal this temple quest is. You can choose to 'cleanse' it via the top room, and be done; or you can choose to find that you need to go deeper to actually get the job done.

We can also come back if we find that the evil below is too strong to be permanently 'cleansed' and your efforts are akin to what was done before: capping it off and blocking its influence.

There can also be multiple or just one large room up here, it does not make much difference... unless we make it be important.

I've been thinking more about this. I believe the cleansing ritual should involve Albert burning his mugs. It'll be both an offer of significance to Raynor and a goodbye to Albert's life as a bartender. Confirming his return and dedication to the faith.
I'm not 100% sure where I would want that to go either. Do you have plans for what's next in the adventure? Was this temple just a detour to the bigger story? If so, we can keep it quick and simple.

The temple should at least try to defend itself in some way, I think. Some kind of physical combat or mental challenges maybe?

Cool idea. Let's aim for that in the end. (Or end of this level.)
I have no idea what we would do next. :)
We can rejoin the caravan if we want, but will have to come up with whatever the next exiting thing is. So far the caravan, the bandits' ambush, and the temple have been based on things the players said --either in passing or outright choices.

I have not thought past the temple, so we are not 'wasting time' here. But I can easily come up with something once we are done, so don't feel like you guys have to spend more time here than you want.

There is probably a whole mega-dungeon down below, but that only matters (or gets created) if you want to explore it. No pressure.
It will. The extend of that defence depends on how much time we (the players) want to spend here.
Or both. :)

I'm fine with turning this into a proper dungeon. I'd like to find out what that wolf head is all about. "Mega" might be a bit much though ;)

Let's wait a bit and see what Rezart thinks.

Downgrading to "mini".

There will probably be more of a chance to collect more coins later, if you clear the bones out.

---

TheGenerator: What is your intent with the coins Albert picked up? Is it more than just desire for silver?

If you are mostly after the reward we can work out the value and be done. If your plans are deeper then we can wait till later to determine the details.

If you are mainly taking 'old coins', then we can either do it now, or wait till you get to a big town or city before we value them, they will be worth more to a collector than they are out here. Probably by 10x, but you might never get to spend them.

---

Rezart: Is Rook more interested in immediate value? We can estimate the value of jewels and maybe even gold (though there is little chance of people who carry gold coins ending up here) and you should be able to exchange them for reasonable value anywhere. Is Rook sharing what he finds or keeping the best stuff for himself?

Rook is gleefully looting all for himself, and fully expecting the others to do the same. He's focusing on high cash value items, as long as they are something that could be sold off easily. Coins are great as well if they're in pouches or stacks.

Noted. Let's wait and see if there is opportunity to go through the whole pile (maybe after a rest) and then roll to find out how much we each get.

Right now it's the monetary value for Albert combined with an interest in the history of the coins.

As a player I picked them up with the idea that they might be useful in the cleansing ritual in some way, but I'm not sure about it yet. It also wouldn't hurt to have some loot. Albert is running low on funds.

If you can just give me the number of coins that Albert found. The value of them is not important until we get back to a town.

I think it would be interesting/useful to find something that gives Rook a more personal reason to be here. Like a note from a relative, or an heirloom, or some kind of omen that appeals to him?
But I'd need Rezart's input on that.

If Rezart isn't interested in something like that, it could link to Asha or the captain instead. Or possibly Meht (he mentioned returning around the 21st in his post)

OK, we can worry about that once the job is done. There will be more where that came from if you finish cleansing the temple.
The captain seemed less-than-interested in the value of the single coin she picked up. Later there may be investigation into historical significance.
That was why I asked. We can bring that back when we get to it.

"Cup & Coin" seems like a thing?
Only a problem when you get back to town. But there will be better chances for riches if you choose to delve the depths.
I was going to be subtle, but there's always a risk --in RPGs in gerneral, but in PbP especially-- of it never seeing the light of day. So here is a spoiler:The captain will have thoughts about these things, and this can lead to follow-up (or just later) quests.
I, too, have been watching the calendar over the past few days, thinking about slowing things to wait for fated day.

Sounds great. Albert will definitely be sleeping in the temple if there's a reasonably safe-looking spot.
We can keep hovering around the entrance for a bit still, I think.

I can mention Albert finding something that may or may not have significance in the future. If anyone wants to claim it as a tie-in they are welcome to. Albert already has a reason to journey deeper into the dungeon.
What do you think?

I think we can keep moving at the pace that comes naturally. We can reintroduce Meht while, or after, we sleep. Maybe we say they were with us the whole time or we can have them arrive back when ready. Either way we will include them in the rest of what is happening.
Nah. We can always flashback-alter one of the incidental 'coins' he picked up as turning out to be important, but the same is true of everything anyone picked up.

I don't think Rook needs a personal connection to the temple, I think he probably pushed the bounds of believability with his connection to Albert and to Cook. A personal connection for the Captain makes the most sense to me, since she's displayed the most interest in the temple.

The dream temptation seems good to me though, that's the sort of thing that is likely to peak his interest.

My next action kinda depends on what the others are doing. If they are going back to sleep, Albert will try to plug the hole with something for now and watch it while the others sleep. Otherwise he'd help investigate.

Indeed. My responses have been limited by not knowing if you are going back to sleep or investigating.

It was a long day for everyone, and some were in a battle before this started. You have only had two or four hours of sleep so not sleeping will leave you tired tomorrow. If you choose to sleep again you will be rested tomorrow.

I can work with both options.

Rook will wait on Albert's judgement of the situation. He is tired though, and it's only been a couple hours for him, so he will take the opportunity to fall back asleep if the Albert tells him he can handle things.

Let's have Albert give us a roll of some sort to see what he can glean about the groupings.

What you roll is up to you, and will affect the type of information gathered. Optionally: feel free to add another post to substantiate the roll in the fiction if what you have already said does not not feel like enough.

Just how bad is it?

OK, not too bad. Whew.

Yes, that could have gone way worse. Haha :D

Indeed. 6s are good here. So: warnings and time to prepare.

Gonna wait for the rest... um the Rezart, to react and then we will see what happens next. Looks like a fight?

Fly, you fools!

Running away is a valid strategy. Leave it for someone else to deal with, if you want.

I mean, there's at least 40 of them. Rook doesn't see us winning a fight with 40 flesh and blood foes, let alone ones who are already dead but don't know it.

Yeah, though who knows how many of the piles will awaken before you can put a stop to it.
Running away will give you space, and room to breath and time to plan, but will also give them more time to animate.

If you think you can come up with a clever plan to deal with more numbers later, then that is a completely valid strategy. We can make both staying or going work... or at least give you a chance either way.

Rezart: Just to make sure we are all on the same page.
The vines are on the outside of the temple. The bones are inside. You will need to leave the temple (uncontested) in order to climb. If you do, you will notice that you don't see any bones outside, do with that what you will.

Anyone outside will have limited --at best-- visibility about what is happening inside. Actions can be taken to mitigate this.

TheGenerator: Would Albert follow Rook, or would he stand against the dark? What would Raynor say about this choice (your god, your call). Asha will stay with you, whatever your choice.

Rezart: If the others choose to stay inside the temple, Rook will have the option of climbing to safety, or returning. We will try to make whichever happens be fun and rewarding.

Albert: Turn Undead is traditionally +WIS, yes.

Though I would definitely think +CHA makes sense as well, and let the player choose. I don't see this being about your force of personality and all about your god, so going with +WIS works.

I'm fine going with Rezart's idea and have added my action to suit it.
I don't think they are abandoning the temple, it seems like more of a tactical regrouping for Albert. He's also worried about Asha. So I think Raynor wouldn't object, but if he does, Albert is prepared to suffer the consequences.

Would Raynor have a problem with such actions... presuming that it is about tactical positioning and then returning?

If not, Albert has the Deception skill, so he can always try to convince Raynor that it is a tactical retreat... but that will bite you later. :)

Albert has every intention to return to the temple and finish the job. I think Raynor would be able to see his resolve from the prayers he's done the past 24 hours.
If that were to change, then yes he'd have a problem with it.

That being said, if Albert were to be stopped by an invisible barrier (physical or mental) at the entrance, that could lead to an interesting situation as well ;-) But we could also keep such a thing up our sleeves for later.

'Conquest' is not about standing and fighting, it is about 'winning'. If you intend to return and conquer then I don't see Raynor blocking you here. Yeah?

I agree :)

I misunderstood, I thought there were vines growing all over the temple. But that's fine, Rook is running to the entrance. His ultimate goal is to find a place where they can't surround him, or find a way to hide from them.

How come the captain doesn't (want to) take charge? Wouldn't she have an advantage in terms of tactical ideas, even if facing an unknown foe? Is it purely a way to let the players call the shots?
I'm asking cause Albert is kinda looking at her for leadership but seeing none or hardly any.

Mainly a reminder that the players should drive the action, yes.

She is just an NPC, so use her for in fiction 'tactical ideas' if you want, but she is not the hero of the story and has just wanted to leave since the mental compulsion drawing her here was lifted.

It is important to remember that any suggestions the NPCs make is not the GM saying that that is a good solution. You can not trust NPCs for valid opinions, they have options but most of them stink.

The captain wants to leave, but she does not understand that there is hero work to be done. As player (even if not as player characters) you know that leaving is an option, but you --and the world-- will pay the price later. As the GM I don't mind either way, if you don't deal with this now, we will come up with something else you have to deal with. ;-)


I don't know what you want to do, now that you have climbed up here.
Your characters will notice that the undead don't appear to be able to leave the building. But who knows how long that will last (well, we do, it will last till the dice come up 6- and their breaking out seems apropos).

What do you do?

Ah, I see. So the PCs are the ones to take charge. It just seemed a bit odd (in character) for Albert to take charge over a literal captain. But now that undead and Raynor's tasks are involved, he'd be more than willing to do so. He also doesn't want to step on her toes.

However in terms of tactical knowledge it seems useful to asks the captain for help. And it makes sense that her ideas would be good ones. Is it possible to do a roll using her stats or something like that? It just seems odd to me that a captain would go "Well guys, this isn't my kinda thing. You go on ahead and I'll be in the back watching you make tactical blunders." if you get what I mean.

---

I assumed Rook wanted to do a tactical retreat. Maybe see if the skeletons stop being animated after an amount of time. Or come up with a plan on how to handle this.
If an npc wants to leave, Albert won't stop them, but he's pretty set on getting rid of this evil. (I was gonna add "or die trying" but I don't think he's at that stage yet :p)

What's your idea, Rezart?

But, literally the "captain of the guards of a merchant's caravan" only. If you want, we can play out the awkwardness of Albert taking charge of this situation...
... especially with how out of her depth she is with all this.

Albert still needs to impress her to get a job. She is not his boss yet. :)
She is generally competent, and I try to play my NPCs like real people, so her advice is of some value, but this is not her area of expertise, so she would not have a lot of direction to provide. Once the PCs decide what they are aiming for, she can serve as an asset, either in terms of adding to your rolls, or in terms of being a better than average fighter with a much better sword than you have seen so far.
As an NPC, she does not have stats, but if you need to roll for answers, consulting her could count as being Skilled at that roll, or provide a situational bonus. But there isn't really a "what should we do now?" or "is this a good idea" style of roll in these games.
Yeah, I was trying to be subtle, with her being withdrawn and such, but also dropped hints that she had some vague thoughts, but nobody has spoken to her much. Now might be the time?
The captain has being saying since last night that she wants to leave, but she is not in charge and will follow your lead. Part of this was that I want to give Albert the opportunity to choose to be heroic here --while others are not being. She is not telling anyone to do it, but she will support whatever choice you make.

---

Rook does not feel very 'heroically motivated', right? What will it take to get him invested in the quest to cleanse the temple?

Was there something in his dream that he 'just knows is down there' and is willing go after? 'Lost love' is a little hard to work in, but we can try.

In the sunlight you can see that one or two of those coins are GOLD! None of you have even seen gold coins before, and there were more in the pile, and probably LOTS more in the catacombs beneath. Just saying.

I see. Thanks, that gives me a better view of the captain. I was seeing her as an experienced veteran. I guess that's fine for Albert to be thinking up until now.
I think it's a good idea for Albert to ask the captain what her motive is and then realize she's not going to take control at all.
This might lead to Albert not being impressed with the captain instead ;)
That is true. I'll try and get her more involved.
Sounds good. He's got the resolve to step up.

Undead freak people out. She is doing rather well, all things considered. :)

... And, of course: If the players want to the PCs to be ordered into the fray, that is always an option. Just ask.

I know I shouldn't, but I did an edit to my last post cause I forgot half a sentence. Just fyi :)

Sometimes it is necessary. Just let us know so we can go back and find it if we have already read the post. I did notice the stick hanging above your head like the sword of Damocles. :)

I sure hope not :s I guess we'll find out :D

Well, it was unfinished, and therefore undecided. It is no longer that way. :)

I think he would be hesitant, and probably more afraid of meeting a dead girl than finding a live one. He hasn't liked this place from the beginning. On the other hand, he has been very motivated by coin, so seeing that gold lying around is likely to make his greed compete with his caution. And he probably feel some shame if Albert were to head down alone and Rook abandoned him, so that shame is likely to push him over into a decision that he might regret later.

Coin and shame. Both good motivators.

Maybe Rook can get a taste for heroics, later? But saving the world... out here where no one will ever know is probably not gonna give us that. :)

Ah, my gold mentions were only here in OOC.

Rezart: Go ahead and narrate Rook making this discovery when you are ready (some time before the question of who is going down comes up).

I don't think he'll ever get motivated by heroics for its own sake, or glory without a bit of fortune to go along with it. In D&D terms, Rook is def True Neutral.

Fair enough, and good to know what we should not waste time trying for such motivations.

I'm thinking, the outline of a tower that Albert sees could possibly be a floating tower or room above the temple. I've left it as a possibility in my description. That might be a cool addition to the temple?

I mostly Yes And'd Generator's stuff, let me know if you want me to add more info, or to decide what the structure actually is

Good stuff.

Let's go there and see.

Should we hold off on entering the temple in that case? I think Albert will wait for Rook to climb first either way, if that's the way we're heading.

Maybe 'don't rush'. But I don't want to pressure the new player to hurry for fear of keeping us waiting.

When the time comes, we can flashback from wherever we are, or find some other way to explain the meeting.

Sorry for the delay, I should be able to post more from now on.

He's in the temple already, trying to map it out. Does the temple have an enchantment that switches the rooms and corridors around? If so, he's having a really hard time mapping it out and trying to find a pattern to it.

"Do the vines come in through the window?":

While none of the vines grow into the window on their own, you could always try dragging some of them in to use as clumsy ropes.

Cool. Good to have you.
The other characters spent last night in the temple. So that is not very feasible.

Unless you mean Dirk is below the temple, in whatever is down there. We could do that, but the others would be well within their rights to be very suspicious of anyone they meet down there. It might not make for the best integration with the party.

There is also the issue of Dirk already knowing about what is there while the others (and we the players) are discovering it for the first time. If he is down there, he will not have been for long, or will not have discovered much.
I had not thought so.

---

sunnyVoid: Are you set on this? Can we rather have Dirk meet the others outside, and form a bit of trust before we go down? We can have them see him approaching from their window and call him over, then we are all together for the descent and discovery.

I mentioned Albert spotting a shape outside, maybe we can use that?
The captain is still climbing up at the moment, she could spot Dirk.

Indeed. It would be easy to do either of those. Or just to handwave it.

That's a good point it would be better to enter at the same time with the others, I guess we'll go with-
If he saw people he'd try to avoid them. I guess he's deep in thought looking at the notes he wrote about the temple when he stumbles into the group.

Excellent.

Does Dirk climb up to them or do they come down to him?

It would be nice to have a bit of chit-chat between old friends before we go down.

I think Dirk spots Albert while Albert is climbing the minaret and calls out to him. It's odd to Dirk that he sees his old bartender climbing an old temple.

No kidding! :)

Go for it.

perfect :D

sunnyVoid: Don't hesitate to ask for more details if you can not recall or make sense of what we are talking about. Playing a scene and reading a scene are very different levels of engagement.

Also, don't hesitate to correct us if we get something wrong. You have just read it, and it was --possibly-- months since we thought about it. :)

How many people exactly are entering the tower? Albert, Rook, the captain, Asha, and Dirk, a group of five?

Yes, it's the 5 of us. The captain and Asha are NPCs.

I think Rook should take the lead down or up the stairs. He's the most nimble and familiar with scouting.
How wide are the stairs? Is it possible to walk side by side or only in a row?

sunnyVoid: You can make up some things that Dirk 'knows' about the temple, and choose what he tells the rest. Some of these things may even end up being true. :)

Hmm... Let's say they are designed for single file, but are not so narrow that two could not walk abreast (or pass one another) if they were willing to venture close to the edge. That sound good?

Check!

Dirk also has rope. It is good to have a professional on the team. :)

Dirk does of course, only have 20ft of rope. If you tie it to part of the building you can only get, like 6 meters away from that point.

You will need to come up with something clever.

Is it OK to assume that Rook has gone down lower to scout?

I prefer not to assume player's characters are doing things the player did not say they were doing.

Are we not interested in checking upstairs? Are we done with the bell?

We can, unless otherwise indicated, assume characters tell each other what they each know in reasonable time. If we want to keep information siloed then that gets complicated and should be explicit.

If Albert shows interest in the bell, there is information he is uniquely able to learn.

---

Rezart: What is Rook doing?

If we don't hear from Rook's player (weekends can be slow), we can decide if the rest of us are going down, and may learn that Rook scouted ahead when they return.

A few posts ago I said
Cause to Albert "it's just a bell...". That's not what he's here for.
If Rook hasn't mentioned the upstairs, then Albert would want to check that way first.

However if you say it would lead to more information if we go up, then I'd be happy to take it that route. :)

If you put effort into it it will yield something, if you do nothing about it it will fade into the background. It may come back later to bite you, or may be immaterial if you completely solve the temple problem by other means.

If you are all set to go into the bowels of the earth, then it might not mater --or merely provide a bit more flavour or background, which can still happen from being told about it-- it could be part of a partial or temporary 'solution' if we choose not to (or can not) put an end to the temple.

If the players are not interested in a thing, it becomes insignificant. The bell-tower/lighthouse was a player created idea that I fleshed out a bit, but I have no investment in it.

If we are going into the undercroft (or whatever is below), I will start a new thread for that, the Off Beaten Track is getting long.

We can continue posting in this thread if find we would have done something more before going down.

I'm not sure what to do here.
In my head, Albert is not very interested in a bell. As a player I am definitely interested in finding out what's up with that bell ;)
Do I just make Albert have an interest? (I don't want to 'meta' my actions too much) Alternatively, if someone else suggests to go up, Albert might find it interesting when seeing it.

If you want I can add a draw to get Albert interested.

That could help :)
If any other PC (or NPC) wants to go up and check it out, that would work just as well.

I am wondering... Do we want Albert to roll the Die of Fate? Something dramatic could happen, or not, your call.

Also, there is no sound of a bell tolling, just the sound of the mechanism moving. Just so we don't think it is a sound-dampening-field or some such.

Of course!
Should I roll it here or in the RP thread? It's just 1D6 right?

Roll it there, in the RP. Yes, 1d6.

Drat these luke-warm rolls. It is hard to do anything with a fate of 3. :)

I added the complication of losing the stick (for now) I thought that was fitting.

Can I do a Lore roll on the bell? It would make sense for Dirk to go up and inspect it considering that it seems to be a strange artifact.

You can go up and take a look. Until you do you can not make any moves about it. You will need to justify any 'lore check' in the fiction, else I can't know what sort of information you might know.

I am also not sure there is too much more that can be learned from looking at it that I have not already told the players, so you are welcome to assume that Dirk, due to his Lore Skill, knows anything I have hinted at maybe more. That way we can bring this to the characters in a definite way.

Not sure I follow, does that mean that once I go up there I can make a lore check?

To be more precise, I intend to have Dirk go up and check the bell for any letters, markings, or decorative flourishes that might hint at it's purpose. Would that constitute a lore roll?

It means first do it in the fiction and then we can talk about if dice need to be rolled.

If you go up there, there will be such opportunities to learn more, if you don't there still might.

Sorry I have updated now. Yeah, weekends are a bit harder for me.

Rezart: Are you going down? Is this after the two at the top are done with their investigation? Or are you scouting ahead again, so you can be ready before they need to descend?
If you are splitting from the party, do you want any (NPC) backup?

sunnyVoid: I admit I have no idea what will happen when you ring that bell. :)
What are you hoping for? What is Dirk hoping will happen?

Do you want to roll the Die of Fate so we can see how it turn out in relation to those sets of hopes?

He's really curious about the bell, he's run into a dead end in figuring out the bell, so he's "poking it with a stick" to see what it would do. The fact it has no clapper means that whoever made it doesn't want it to make a sound.

I guess what he's really hoping would happen is more information at the bell's purpose.

Rook is moving forward with investigating the stairway. He told the new guy the place was cursed, warned him to keep his voice down, if he's going to actually try to attract trouble, Rook would rather not be nearby when it showed up. I think he'll go forward alone, thinking that he can move more quietly on his own.

That ship has sailed. :P
Albert just shouted down the stairwell because he lost his broomstick.
That seems likely. I think with Albert nearby, sneaking is going to be a difficult thing to do.
We've talked about the fact that Albert's mugs (being of great personal value) would somehow be part of the cleansing of the temple. Maybe the sound of the bell can resonate with some item(s) for each player, making it vibrate and signifying that we will need to use those in some way? Or perhaps charging the item with this resonance.
What do you all think of this idea?

Works for me. :)

The light on my broomstick wasn't meant to last. Is it ok if it's gone by now, or is there a significance to the fact that it hasn't dimmed?

How well lit is the area? If it's dark, Dirk has lit a torch to light up the area.

As you dropped below the height of the windows --and the wan sunlight they allow through-- it would be very dark without a torch. That is the only reason Rook could see the slight glimmer from Albert's staff. (With torches down here, the glimmer is not visible anymore.)

It will, presumably be even darker once you pass the door and and no longer have a medallion of light above you in the stairwell.

Yeah, I think the broomstick still has to be glowing, that was why Rook picked it up

EDIT: Assume Rook's back is turned while they are messing around with the well

I totally forgot that Rook picked it up. Sorry about that! I'll edit my post accordingly.

Right, so it's still glowing, but in the torchlight it's not visible. Presumably it will fade as time passes.

Or it might be permanent? Who knows? Maybe your god knows? Maybe only time will tell?

I can work with that as well. :) Let's wait and see then.

Rook: Do you want to give us a description of what you are doing with the lock? (That is a question, not a passive-aggressive suggestion:) It is up to you.

‣ Are you continuing to work on it while Albert does his violence?
‣ Are you wanting to get it done before that happens? If so, are you telling them to wait or rushing to get done first?
‣ Are you still trying to be quiet about this? No real need to roll, since you have the stealth Skill, but your aims could affect the outcome.

We know you are almost definitely going to end up on the other side of the door (deadends are boring), but a few rolls are in order to work out the details. Maybe a study roll of some form, and/or (or followed by) the directing of some assistance, followed by a 'Tinker' roll? The Stats used are up to you, based on the actions described.

Albert: I have almost no idea what would happen if you hit a magic rope with a magic stick. :)

Though, the likelihood of the bell falling is very low. It is heavy, and crude human effort alone will not add much to the strain on the bearing surfaces.
‣ Are you (the player) wanting it to tumble?

We might need to wait to hear what @Rezart plans with Rook's actions, but then I think we will need to roll the Die of Fate (or an action). (Don't add it now, it may influence the door decision).

Honestly, I have no clue either. I think there's 3 kind of scenario's
- Nothing happens (or nothing noticeable)
- My broom breaks
- The rope breaks

Albert's intention is to break the rope and stop the bell from swinging. As a player I don't want the bell to fall, but I'm open to the idea if it creates something we can build on. Like it could come rolling down the stairs giving Rook a timer to open the door lest we be crushed.

I think Dirk's mention of his machete vibrating could be an interesting addition. The broom might not do the trick, but a machete might. But Albert doesn't know about it.

Another idea I had was that this tendril is somehow connected to the moan that was heard earlier and that hitting/severing it would make whatever that was angry.

Many possible ways to go :)

Wouldn't you be? :)

If some group of bozos woke me up with a loud noise in my own house and then cut off one of my fingers? ... Yeah I think I'd be pretty p*ssed! :D

Let's wait and see what the other players think should/could happen :)

OK, I posted some detail on what Rook is doing. He was too distracted working on the lock to realize you all were gonna go crazy again, so now he's panic lockpicking so that there's an escape route in case this all goes to shit.

Oh, forgot to add a roll, I'll add that in now

Probably a smart move :D

Though, not such a smart move adding a 5. :)

Albert Do you want to roll the Die of Fate in your post, let's see how bad it is. Maybe with a 6 you stop the bell (for a while) with a 5 you learn something important, and with a 1 things fall on you? The between numbers will be less dramatic.

Done (and luck was on my side ;) ).

I also added a line to involve Roald (@Airshark).

If I understand correctly the stairs above me close like a diaphragm. They are not breaking and crumbling down into the hole.
Something like a slow camera shutter closing?

Exactly. :)
Correct. All they are doing is blocking your way out, they are not a danger that needs to be dealt with.

Nah, that does not seem very interesting at this time, either way you get down there, right? :)

You are welcome to describe Roald taking a tumble or slip if you want, but it should not have any mechanical effects. (no HP loss, HP loss is serious stuff.)

If you want to fall in the water, you can do that, then we will deal with that as a whole new thing. But I have no plans for people doing that and will have to come up with something. :)

---

FYI: There is an OOC button on the toolbar above where you write posts. That should be simpler than changing the color and writing 'ooc:'.

If you are not using the buttons then is is also simpler to surround the text with [ ooc] ... [ /ooc] rather than [ color="blue"]ooc: ... [ /color].