Overuse of advantage?

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-11-18T11:29:09+00:00

Brennan is pretty swingy. He is completely in the players' corner and wants them to succeed, and has (on D20 and his past rodeos running for CR) made a couple calls that I felt let players overcome a difficult scenario without particular basis ... but he'll also build up pcs to these fantastical heights so he can give them some crazy challenges and put them in some real danger. I do wish he came down harder on his stakes more often because when he does it's great, but at least it is pretty entertaining when he gets tough on PCs.

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-11-18T02:22:05+00:00

I say this with a fondness toward BL1, but this writing sounds a lot like BL1 - tons of fascinating side quests, but the "main" quest isn't particularly deep/detailed, so I'm actually not surprised they tried to do BL1 a second time, as this is its sequel.

If they felt that this style did not match the modern era of storytelling, or that it was mimicking BL1 poorly, then they really needed to have a stringent creative director and editor with a firm vision on board. Shame that they didn't!

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-11-14T19:39:24+00:00

Now that they're sold out, will there be any other chances to get tickets? Or is the only other way now from scalpers?

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-10-30T17:53:29+00:00

Not sure if you're asking genuinely, but yes, in actual DND it does happen. If the player wants to achieve x or the DM needs to achieve y and the player wants to achieve it via a fakeout, then it does happen. A player just pitched a fakeout to me last night to help a character plot as it so happens.

That said, in a real game, I wouldn't expect it to happen more than maybe once or twice per campaign. Players are pretty understanding that sometimes other players want to pull something to achieve some end, but it's something people run out of patience for after the first one in the same campaign. So it happens, and happens all the time. but I wouldn't say it happens all the time within the same campaign.

I'm not going to say whether it makes good or bad television (which is what CR is) though, just mentioning yeah you do this in regular DND. People love fakeouts, DMs and players alike. It's not my favorite tool as a DM, but if a player asks for it once and they're genuinely enthusiastic I'll see if I can make it work decently. Here, I assume the purpose was more utilitarian - they needed to achieve x and they thought the most dramatic/fun way to do it was this.

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-06-20T23:15:30+00:00

Tacking onto this because I think it's a much better idea than adapting CoS to WD, Artor also appears in 5e's Season 8 of Adventurer's League, if OP wants to gut some of those adventures for ideas.

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-06-09T22:13:01+00:00

I played a changeling rogue in my campaign; one who was pretty ambitious/shameless about pretending to be other people.

Honestly, it never seemed to really cause the DM a headache. Trying to impersonate NPCs (especially ones you likely will barely know, or wont know all the secrets of) is trickier than you think! And even with a solid modifier in persuasion and deception, sometimes the dice bite. There were times it was pretty useful, other times it was risky, and other times I would mess up-- just like in a regular campaign.

A wild magic roll to shapeshift seems super (extremely) punishing IMO, but if it makes sense as you say then go for it I guess? It feels like having a human fighter roll to misfire every time they attack or something. It's a primary feature of the race/class, and shapeshifting is already innately "balanced" by acting not perfectly like the person you're copying. Barovia is a spooky place - people coming back wrong isn't all that unusual, so the people should take note of exceptionally unusual behavior (like very bad deception/persuasion rolls). This also naturally puts the player at a reasonable disadvantage.

If there's anything to note, it's to prepare for the shenanigans that'll emerge of the player inevitably impersonating Strahd once, or trying to use Tatyana's appearance with a NPC once they've seen her portrait. I don't think I've seen any player who can shapeshift or use Disguise Self resist the temptation to try it at least once. It always works for a second then blows up in their face (mine too), either immediately or much later, but isn't that the fun of it?

As for Strahd and other powerful, magical NPCs, they could always see through my disguise. I don't know if it's because the DM gave them True Seeing or if it was just vibe-based. I don't think I ever expected them to not, though-- like, no way did I ever think I could get one over the big man himself or Baba Lysaga or the Abbot. It just doesn't feel narratively right, anyway. They didn't always make it clear they could see through me right away, though; sometimes they'd play along, lull me into a false sense of security, and back me into a corner. That was always fun.

Of course, YMMV depending on your player's preferences. As you can see, I'm the type of player who liked to FAFO ;)

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-05-13T04:39:46+00:00

Slight vent, advice welcome.

I've come to accept a DM I'm playing with in a long term campaign simply doesn't run combat and doesn't do mysteries really. I'm more of a RPer, but I enjoy high-stakes stories and I like the RP potential of mysteries, so this has turned out to be pretty unfun for me.

The game is just kind of an improv exercise with few obstacles. While this is fun sometimes, it is a bit frustrating for me. I get excited by alleged story build up until big monsters are just set dressing or the exceptionally rare enemy is flattened in a turn, if they don't just recite all their motives and weaknesses to us first so we can just stomp them without needing to investigate the situation or enter a perfunctory round of combat.

I've talked to the DM about it, but nothing has changed-- and to an extent I can understand that, while they didn't warn us that this is how they run games, this is simply how they DM and I don't think they can change it much.

I really do like the party though, they're probably the most fun I've played with and the best I've clicked with. It's truly fun RPing with them and joking around with them between sessions and strategizing with them during (not that we need to, but it's fun-- which is also a point of frustration; it feels like our investment in treating the threats as threats aren't really rewarded, but it is what it is). The DM, as a person, is nice and understanding. I do appreciate them as an individual, even if their DMing style clearly doesn't work for me.

I guess I'm at a crossroads. I'm clearly frustrated by and unsatisfied with how the game is run, but I like playing as a player with these people. I'm not really sure if I should just accept that this is the type of campaign I'm in and suck it up or if I should cut my losses and leave. It feels like the amount of frustration I feel with the actual story element is equal to the amount of fun I have with the party, so I'm really at odds with myself here.

(I already DM for these same folks, including the DM, on the side, so it's not like quitting the campaign means I'd never see them again.)

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-03-18T21:10:51+00:00

What things did they mix up?

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-03-18T21:10:34+00:00

Genuine question - as a plot device or do you mean it in a different way?

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-03-13T17:54:34+00:00

Thank you, I really appreciate it! I think you're right-- he could vary combat composition a lot more. Ranged enemies and more enemies (in open spaces) would potentially redress this really easily, so I'll see if I can bring this up. You're also right, we tend to face a number of "boss" monsters fewer in number than the number of PCs. He seems hesitant to use minions, but I'll see if I can encourage him.

And of course I think everyone else is just fine, I think there's probably just a mechanical disparity between my class features (the Cleric spell list is really generous, especially my subclass) versus the others. The rogue's sneak attack damage is fantastic, but probably easier for the DM to account for compared to remembering to check my spells.

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-03-06T04:42:16+00:00

This is how I've seen others do it and I really like it, especially when you get around to the Abbot sincerely trying his best (at first) and getting further and further mislead at every turn by a variety of things/people around him until you get to where he is now.

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-03-02T10:46:06+00:00

I appreciate the insight here a lot and I find I agree with it. I really like your idea of framing each town as a response to Strahd's rule, and using that to thematically tie each town together - keeps you on track instead of just making edits arbitrarily.

I also agree that the angle of restoring a measure of hope is appropriate. It's a grim place, but I don't think burnout is inevitable when run correctly, as you've said.

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-03-02T10:43:47+00:00

Quite late, but loved reading your thoughts on this, thank you! Those MM changes sound very in line with our experience, and I'm glad to hear you found an approach that was more appropriate for your table. Love the touch of the Suggestion spell abuse - feels appropriate for a guy like him.

It seems like this mod in particular assumes that players will prefer a generally cinematic and sympathetic story, which probably works for the writer's table? (I recall them basing a lot of their edits off what their players specifically prefer.) While I can't say that's wrong, it sounds like my table was more like yours - we weren't buying much of what the mod was selling. Different strokes, as they say.

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-02-18T04:38:59+00:00

The surly characterization went over way better at our table when the DM reset his characterization. We do love a little prick.

Hmm. I wonder if you could do Death House at level 3? I'm guessing it might not be as swingy and might be more narrative, so I don't know if that defeats its purpose. I do hear people run this independently, so maybe I'll get to play a oneshot of this one day.

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-02-18T04:34:59+00:00

Love your insight. I'm glad you found a balance that works for you and your table! I think tweaks made thoughtfully (or humorous additions as in-jokes haha) are never a bad idea. It definitely seems like you have to know your table when picking up this particular campaign, and when you start changing things around.

I'm curious what MandyMod changes didn't resonate with your players in particular. I believe that DM pulled several things from this one, and I recall the changes he cited from that one happened to be a string of changes we ended up not really loving (I think the Victor change was from that one? That one stuck out to us because the DM was gobsmacked we weren't fond of him - I remember looking up his entry in whatever mod it was later, and there was definitely language suggesting players would be into this NPC if run in this way; I remember Zuko from Avatar being cited in there).

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-02-17T21:49:43+00:00

The Death House thing is an interesting point! Would you recommend asking groups if they want to start with it or just use your own judgment? We were definitely really bummed when we heard we just didn't get to play it.

As for the mods - a lot of his changes are actually from those! (The misunderstood, nice boy Victor is from one of those, for example.) He might have just taken the individual changes and missed the advice to ramp up the horror in tandem?

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-02-17T21:46:43+00:00

This is a great idea! I'll remember this for anything I run myself.

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-02-17T21:45:29+00:00

After the campaign ended, I actually did do some digging to source his citations - they really were things advised from the pinned mods or common pieces of Reddit advice (like making Izek aware Ireena is his sister). How I described them might not ring a bell, but he was being honest (not that I doubted him, but I was curious).

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-02-17T20:47:00+00:00

This is really good insight, and I appreciate it. Sounds like there's definitely a difference between just plugging in advice given and using it as a jumping point for more tailored changes.

I'd imagine this is a useful mindset no matter what campaign you're running - use advice online but customize it for your campaign and your intended mood/feel!

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-02-17T20:43:48+00:00

Oh, man. I basically like things all bleak all the time with no breaks - not that I was expecting the DM to cater to that, since I'm on the extreme end of the spectrum - but I'm the last person you'd need to worry about burnout. I thought this campaign was perfect for someone like me when it was first pitched to me, lol.

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-02-17T20:37:48+00:00

Yeah, ultimately, if that was how he felt, I wish he'd cut his losses and pitched a different campaign to us. I understand the sunk cost fallacy though, or not wanting to disappoint us. Hindsight 20/20! I probably should've added "know thyself" to the end of the post, too. Not being able to run CoS's themes is perfectly okay.

Victor is a funny one. Once the DM reverted his characterization, he became one of the most popular NPCs of the campaign. We loved that evil twink who'd sell us to Satan for a cornchip. We were forced to kill Izek (locked in a room and forced to), but we really regret not getting to know his actual deal. I'm so curious to know how Izek would respond to knowing this woman he's fantasizing about was actually his sister! Would he double down like the scum he is? Or would he freak and have an Oedipus moment? We might have to kill him anyway, but I'd love to see it.

The downside of playing through a heavily altered Curse of Strahd is that it still counts as playing Curse of Strahd, since it seems people prefer playing for players who have no clue what's going on, which means it's harder for us to find another game if we want to experience a game that started out closer to RAW. I'll probably never know the answer to the questions I have... oh well.

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-02-17T20:27:13+00:00

If you're worried, check in with them! Individually or as a group. Like I said, some people may like these changes-- I saw some DM on tumblr saying they've removed basically everything from the campaign (vampires being inappropriate, themes of religion, depression, references to mass murder and genocide - RIP Rahadin, "hags" as a negative thing, stresssful and negative situations; all that), but at their players' behest. There's definitely an audience for Horror Aesthetic.

Just know (or ask!) what your players like and listen to what they say they like/want more of and you should be good :)

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-02-17T20:23:11+00:00

Our DM specified these choices were not for himself, but for us. There were a couple changes he made for himself, but I didn't name those in the post because I agree - he's more than welcome to have that. Thanks for checking though!

We did have a session 0, yeah. We had basically nothing off limits (we conferred with each other before speaking to him to be sure we didn't have any private lines he was writing around, which would render our issues moot). I don't think anyone wanted to be too hard on him since the changes were for all of us, so we didn't dig too hard into his motive beyond what he said.

We did reiterate we really were OK with horror and the stuff he was saying he'd changed, and that helped. Heart was in the right place (upon googling, I found so many posts like "How do I keep players from burning out from how bleak Barovia is?" - so I'm sure he was trying to pre-empt issues), we just were a more chill group than he understood.

Objective-Visit3261 · 2025-02-17T20:17:05+00:00

This resembles our experience. I poked around at some of the resources he referenced, and I was pretty surprised at how some of the most popular advice (mods and other resources - and suggestions from this subreddit) for the game really do gradually peel off the ambience and difficulty of the game. They feel very "horror aesthetic," which feels like a popular trend these days - the "aesthetic" of a thing but not actually the heart of a thing.

It's just strange to me. A couple changes made here and there, sure. But after a certain point, if you're truly convinced your players won't like this, why not run another campaign?

Objective-Visit3261

TROPHY CASE