Dragon Mountian is totaly generic in setting, but it can easily be placed in Greyhawk with little conversion, since the mountain magicaly appears every so often... Just pick a fairly remote place to have it appear and go from there.
Is this adventure set in the Greyhawk World?
If not, does somebody any opinion how to run it in the Greyhawk World?
I've run it in my home grown campaign, and it is a great adventure. IMHO the scenarios leading up to getting into the mountain itself are the best part, that and the confrontation with the Dragon.
I'd run it over a period of time, breaking up the various sub adventures leading up to the discovery of Dragon Mountain. As for the Mountain itself, I'd put it somewhere remote. The Lortmils would not be a good choice--the local governments would quickly intervene with the kobold raids IMHO, and react to a dragon flying about. I wouldn't run it out of Geoff or the Yeomanry--too much instability there to start with, makes it harder to run the adventures leading up to finding the Mountain. Same goes for the Glorioles. The Barbarian states are just too remote--though thay might do.
I'd use the the Yatils and run things out of Highfolk, first choice. Second choice, I'd use the Crystalmists and run things out of Bissel. Third choice would be the Abbor alz and run it out of Hardby or Greyhawk.
I've run it in my home grown campaign, and it is a great adventure. IMHO the scenarios leading up to getting into the mountain itself are the best part, that and the confrontation with the Dragon.
Dragon Mountain has some serious design issues, mainly related to the use of Kobolds to challenge 10th level + PCs. What is at first an attempt at a Tucker's Kobolds scenario, and may have actually been an homage to that, quickly descends into rampant bending and even breaking of the AD&D rules to try and make <1 HD monsters a suitable challenge for high level characters.
Unless this sort of thing doesn't bother you, or you're prepared to do massive rewrites of large sections of the adventure, you might want to just pass on DM altogether. _________________ All shall love me and despair!
Dragon Mountain has some serious design issues, mainly related to the use of Kobolds to challenge 10th level + PCs. What is at first an attempt at a Tucker's Kobolds scenario, and may have actually been an homage to that, quickly descends into rampant bending and even breaking of the AD&D rules to try and make <1 HD monsters a suitable challenge for high level characters.
Unless this sort of thing doesn't bother you, or you're prepared to do massive rewrites of large sections of the adventure, you might want to just pass on DM altogether.
I didn't see it so much as rules bending as an attempt to force the players into role playing situations with pesky little monsters who aren't noted for being talkers. Kobolds aren't that smart, and the idea of complex political intrigues between the various tribes in the setting was stretched a bit thin, IMHO. And the dungeon crawl itself is just plain tedious and deadly. When I ran the Mountain itself, I streamlined the encounters with the kobolds, and cut to the chase with the encounter with the Dragon--and left the players an escape route: a wand that teleported them through time and space to get them out of the hole they (literally!) dug themselves into (I used the D-Hopper from the Myth Adventure series as the magic item). By the time they got back to their own time and haunts, they'd picked up an implacable enemy (the Dragon) who became the villain behind the scenes for later adventures, and showed how dangerous dragons can really be when GM'd cleverl as opposed to being treated as disposable villains.
Like I said earlier, the prelude adventures work fine as they are. Streamline the dungeon crawl, and the set works great. I put hardly any work into that at all, took a year to run the whole thing, and my players had a ball.
Kobolds, as presented in the current edition of D&D at least, are every bit as intelligent as humans. Their average INT is 10, and when played as a PC, they recieve no penalty to their INT score. Average WIS is 9, no penalty to WIS for Kobold PCs.
The idea that humanoids are inherently less intelligent than humans is incorrect. Less educated? Perhaps, depending on how much education you assume for the average human in your campaign (in a realistic middle ages/ dark ages setting, even humans are going to be very low on the formal education), sure. But not less intelligent. The game does not support that conclusion. _________________ All shall love me and despair!
Kobolds, as presented in the current edition of D&D at least, are every bit as intelligent as humans. Their average INT is 10, and when played as a PC, they recieve no penalty to their INT score. Average WIS is 9, no penalty to WIS for Kobold PCs.
The idea that humanoids are inherently less intelligent than humans is incorrect. Less educated? Perhaps, depending on how much education you assume for the average human in your campaign (in a realistic middle ages/ dark ages setting, even humans are going to be very low on the formal education), sure. But not less intelligent. The game does not support that conclusion.
I don't mean to say that all humanoids are inherently less intelligent than humans. I think some humanoids are equally intelligent despite their barbarity. But I don't count kobolds among them, despite what the current version of the Monster Manual says. Dragon Mountain was a 2nd ed product, written when kobolds were still considered to be of low average intelligence, which to me is an IQ of about 60.
I think the only reason Kobolds were given a higher INT was to 1) let players have them as a racial choice, and 2) because they are noted to have sorcerers among them and a decent INT score is required for magic use. It was purely for mechanical functioning, and not campaign plausiblity. Just my opinion.
because they are noted to have sorcerers among them and a decent INT score is required for magic use. It was purely for mechanical functioning, and not campaign plausiblity. Just my opinion.
Sorcerors dont rely on INT for spellcasting. _________________ What would Raxivort do?<br />
In 1E, kobolds, goblins, and orcs were listed as having Average-Low (8-9) intelligence. In 2E, this was improved slightly to Average (8-10) for kobolds, while goblins were reduced to Low-Average (5-10). This makes the kobolds of Dragon Mountain (which, admittedly, I've never read) as intelligent as the average human peasant (80-100 IQ).
Dragon Mountain does indeed have very overt and blatant rules "changes" to help the Kobolds.
It denies fighters their multiple attacks. This is the equivalent of taking away iterative attacks and the cleave and great cleave feats in 3.5, without any reason or compensation.
It lets the kobolds make overbear attacks without being subject to interference, and with automatic bonuses for helpers. This is the equivalent of denying the use of AoOs and the Combat Reflexes feats in 3.5.
It lets the kobolds use pole arms, and gives them a special attack with them. This is the equivalent of giving them three feats in 3.5, Monkey Grip, Improved Trip, and Combat Expertise which is needed for Improved Trip.
It uses unmapped secret "tunnels" to give the kobolds excessive freedom of movement that the players are denied any means of correcting. It essentially declares that every single space on the map has a secret small sized exit tunnel that only the kobolds can use.
The kobolds with levels aren't too bad, although they do violate the 2nd ed rules at the time, but they are another example of how forced the situation is.
Trying to get past all of that to appreciate Dragon Mountain was just not possible for me, no matter how much I like Monte Cook's work.
Dragon Mountain does indeed have very overt and blatant rules "changes" to help the Kobolds.<many examples snipped
The scenario was rigged in favor of the kobolds to get the players to think their way past the encounters, and not hack and slash their way through. Players who try to fight their way in will invariably lose, and that was the whole point. The authors created complex tribal rivalries in the hopes the players would figure them out, and attempt to play one side off the other to get to the Lair. The players are also intended to make more than one trip to make their way completely in, though there is a time limit before the Mountain disappears again.
I didn't have a problem with rules changes in favor of the kobolds; they are in their home turf and should have the advantage. I just thought the idea of complex politics with kobolds was a bit silly.
If they have to be rigged like that, then the whole reason for using such low level critters is lost. You can get the same effect using masses of bugbears without rigging anything.
Skip Williams managed the same thing in Axe of the Dwarvish Lords with only one significant rules cheat (using pikes in the dungeon), and minor rules tweaks (like close order formations and alternative magic item types) that wound up being included in 3E.
The complex politics were one of the good things, reflecting the difficulties inherent in such societies. The only down side is that everyone feels the need to overuse it these days.
they are in their home turf and should have the advantage.
Ok, but that advantage should come from ambushes, fortifications, and mastery of the traps the Dwarves built. Not from breaking the rules of the game. _________________ All shall love me and despair!
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises
