darkconspiracytherpg.info

Here's a good one: My players have discovered a dimensional gateway. They want to move the anchor (some standing stones) to their HQ for further study. Anyone got any thoughts about this? i.e possible dangers of moving anchors. Would the gate still work if the anchor is moved? Can't seem to find anything on it in the protodimensions book.

Maybe you could use the rules for destroying the gate if they try to move vital parts of it.

Hmm, tricky one...

I can think of three of ways to go with this:

1) the gate works but only if reconstructed exactly as it was at the original location, with all the measurements and distances within a fine tolerance.

2) the gate won't work any more because it requires a combination of the location and the stones to work properly.

3) the gate effect happens only at the original location and the stones are nothing more than markers. This means they lug the stones back to the lab for nothing

Cheers chaps, some good suggestions there.

If you're interested the adventure that we played was Window of the Mind by Michael LaBossiere. I changed the location from rural USA to Dorset with the Special Projects Group being part of the (fictional) University of Wessex.

Opinion is divided in the gaming world on some of Doctor LaBossiere's adventures (some people think he introduces too many of his own creatures) but I have always found his work to be clear and concise and with many good ideas. In general his view of the DC world matches mine, so that's why I'm on his side He has also written some good Cthulhu stuff.

I'd agree that they're clear and concise which makes them easy to fit into an existing campaign but his insistence on a "new monster of the week" is a particularly egregious failing. Most of his creations can easily be replaced by creatures from the book (whether DC or CoC) e.g. In Window of the Mind I replaced the Shadowhounds with Manticores. Inevitibly one ends up wondering why does he bother? In fairness the other monster in that particular scenario, the malevolent psychic entity, was pretty good.

He does seem to be an exponent of the "Quantity has a quality all of its own" school though. You read through a bunch of his adventures and soon clock the repetition of familiar elements e.g. invented monsters, invented monsters with disgusting life cycles (usually involving ripping people's faces off), wise ancient indian tribe and/or shaman, distressed war veteran, standing stones, possessed cutlery and/or tools, different npcs with variations of the same name (William, Will, Bill).

Probably you could put together a Dr LaBossiere random scenario generator using common elements from his work?

Well actually...I was sticking up for the guy I mentioned his tendency to create new monsters because that's what bugs some people, but as you say they can be replaced with stock monsters from the rulebooks. As a fact though, with no personal opinion or bias, the doctor's name is on more monsters on the master list (available for download from the Dark Conspiracy Yahoo Group) than anyone else except maybe Lester W Smith and me

I love his stuff and I would gladly president a fan club. But as a matter of fact I always replace the monsters in every adventure not designed by myslef with the monsters I like. Usually zombies. I love the 'tales of terror' do you know them? I guess you do. They just give a core for an adventure, like Linden's tabloids, and leave the rest to the GM. That's quite good. Thouhgh I like complete scenarios as well. I have not realized that Doctor Evil's NPCs all have the same name. I never use the names anyways.

Morthrai wrote:Well actually...I was sticking up for the guy

He has some good ideas but I think he often spreads himself a bit thin. As exhibit A your honour I present "Thin Jack" (from Challenge #70) in which there are two NPCs, named William Gardner and Bill Newsmith, the latter of whom had a friend called "old Will" who was taken by the monster. So, we have three characters called William or variations thereof in the same scenario. If that's not a sign of someone on autopilot I don't what is.

Also, and no offence meant to you mate, I don't think his inventing a shed load of otiose monsters counts as any great feat. Dark Conspiracy isn't D&D and the last thing it needs is a Fiend Factory or a Monster Manual. How many of the monsters in Dark Races are a complete waste of time? Quite a few I'd argue. Do we need all those different types of Gremlin or Gargoyle? I don't think so.

Actually I'm with you on the Will/Bill thing. Also, if it was me coming up with all those new creatures I'd have used them in more than one adventure each

Linden wrote: Dark Conspiracy isn't D&D and the last thing it needs is a Fiend Factory or a Monster Manual. How many of the monsters in Dark Races are a complete waste of time? Quite a few I'd argue. Do we need all those different types of Gremlin or Gargoyle? I don't think so.

YES! Or probably even YES!! Though the book is not a bad one and I like haveing ideas and rules I can abuse to make my own monsters I totally agree that nobody can handle all these Gremlins. On the other hand, that's the strenght of DC. If you absolutly want to you can play it D&D. If you don't than you can use the Gremlin you like best and frogett the others.

Despite my criticism of the good doctor I have enjoyed a couple of his adventures, in particular The Hum. Although intended for CoC, I've found it works quite well for Dark Conspiracy. Was intrigued to read that there is a real life version, right here in the UK.

Ah, the Hum...is that thing still around?

Morthrai wrote:Ah, the Hum...is that thing still around?

Well, y'know these aliens, they might be mad but they're not daft. Stands to reason they'd keep moving about. Got to stay one step ahead of those minion hunters.

Nice find.