Jump to content
vincentVV

A Dance in the Blood

Recommended Posts

vincentVV

SPOILERS ALERT!

 

So... I finally have read this purist scenario. It is really nice. It has space for investigation, for roleplaying and some tough choices. It is creepy and disturbing in some places.

 

And it has a BIG NASTY FAIL right from the start. =(

 

What I mean is the whole adventure hook.

The PCs don't know each other but they all arrive at the same time in the same town. Ok. Maybe it is not a coincidence but a call of blood, fate or fatum. Let it be.

 

And then they see a photo of themselves aged 2-5. And from this they get an idea that they are connected.

 

WTF???

 

How can a person totally not remember himself at such an age?? I don't remember my childhood day by day, but hey! I'm pretty aware of where I was and what people were around me.

 

I could understand if the person don't remember himself at the age of 1 month, 10 months, 1 year - that's pretty ok. But in this case I don't think the players can recognise themselves at the photo at all!

 

And this little fact ruins can ruin the whole scenario if played as written!

 

So, has anybodye made any twists or changes to this scenario to void this fail?

 

I think about a letter from a dying priest who summons all the PCs to a town. By the time the PCs arrive the priest is dead, of course, but they can investigate and find his notes about church records and birth/death book, and after they look at these books - they find their names and dates of birth and have a vague idea that they are connected. And investigating deeper - they find out that at the age of 0,5-1 year they were all given away to other families.

 

And then the scenario goes on...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mulciber

Hmmm, well, obviously it doesn't work for you but I think I'd make a virtue out of the fact that the characters *can't* remember the incident of the photo or any time previous to it. It has the potential to be reasonably unsettling in it's own way, surely, if like you say people should remember details of themselves from that age.

 

I have to say, beyond the vaguest of things I honestly couldn't recall much detail of my life before I was four or five.

 

In any case, if you hate it, change it. Your solution sounds workable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vincentVV

I have to say, beyond the vaguest of things I honestly couldn't recall much detail of my life before I was four or five.

Well, you may not recall ALL, but I'm pretty sure you can recall where you lived and at least what your house was like.

 

And such a major event as changing a family? Can it pass unnoticed to a child?

 

As for the "They *can't* remember" - that's quite an option, but there is not a word about it in a scenario.

 

Again, it may be mysterious and creepy to players - but the Keeper *has* to know why they can't remember their childhood and why they doesn't it bother them.

 

All in all I mean only that it is an interesting scenario with a major flaw that can ruin it right from the beginning. =)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
numtini

Yeah. I thought not remembering was meant to be ominous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GBSteve

It was fine when we played it but if it lacks verisimilitude for you then there's no problem with changing it. The characters were adopted at a very young age which is why it is suggested they don't remember much. I've got a pretty good memory but I don't remember much from the age of 2 or 3. And these characters have not only been separated from each other but haven't seen early photographs either. I recognise myself in early photos, but I've seen them many times. We had a recent quiz at work where we had to recognise our directors from their childhood photographs. There were a few where it was obvious but nobody, out of around 200 entries, got them all right.

 

All the priest, if you use that device and set it in England, is likely to be a vicar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vincentVV

Well, I only mean that adopting, been separate from mother and father at the age of 2 or 3 - how can it be forgotten? In the scenario it is described pretty good how the PCs *remember* the house and small details and that's OK for me, but the main event... I just can't buy into it. =)

 

Yeah. I thought not remembering was meant to be ominous.

 

Yeah, that's ok, but WHY? It is not explained.

 

It was fine when we played it but if it lacks verisimilitude for you then there's no problem with changing it. The characters were adopted at a very young age which is why it is suggested they don't remember much. I've got a pretty good memory but I don't remember much from the age of 2 or 3. And these characters have not only been separated from each other but haven't seen early photographs either. I recognise myself in early photos, but I've seen them many times. We had a recent quiz at work where we had to recognise our directors from their childhood photographs. There were a few where it was obvious but nobody, out of around 200 entries, got them all right.

 

Well, and then why shold PCs recognize themselves on photographs if they haven't seen themselves on the photos of the same age before?

 

All the priest, if you use that device and set it in England, is likely to be a vicar.

 

That would be a notable and atmospheric detail, thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gaffer

I have read accounts of people being removed from a family around 3 and not remembering them at all, especially if the new family never mentions it. Certainly there have been studies where false memories are implanted, even in adults. I have photos in which I can recognize myself at age 2-5, but none of the people in the photo with me, who were probably neighbors or friends of my parents.

 

Maybe the first person (or the oldest) to see the photo recognizes himself, turns it over, and there are the first names of these others that he thought were strangers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vincentVV

One more thing to consider - why give yur children away to another family? What's the point? To keep them away from their destiny?

 

And the main question - where are all other worm-people? Are they real at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The_Tatterdemalion_King

One more thing to consider - why give yur children away to another family? What's the point? To keep them away from their destiny?

Maybe you can't change their diapers when you're a worm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tony Williams

One more thing to consider - why give yur children away to another family? What's the point? To keep them away from their destiny?

 

And the main question - where are all other worm-people? Are they real at all?

 

To spread the worms around the globe ?

 

SPOILERS...

 

Once you change into a worm in the scenario you go under the earth to live so any worm people still above ground look "normal" because they haven't mutated yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vincentVV

but how many are they?

We have Jack. We have Geoffrey. But not a word about the others.

Why did they ruin the village? HOW did they do it? Why once in 119 years?

Did they simply start to borrow and the houses collapsed and they killed all who survived?

It is said that they do it to "claim their land" - but how do they claim it? They kill everybody - and that's it. Then they leave and go underground for another 119 years - so what did they claim?

 

Is it an army of creatures going from underground rampaging? Or is it just 4-5 of them, strong enough to kill maim and destroy?

Or are they supposed to be an unseen everpresented menace not showing their faces at all?

 

Again, after Jack contacts PC they may easily aim for finding him. Then what?

 

Maybe you can't change their diapers when you're a worm?

 

Maybe, but thay adopted the children of age 3-4-5. ))))
 

To spread the worms around the globe ?

 

But it looks like they always return to Manesty when time comes and the worm-people reside under Mannesty and the only purpose of their existence seems to be destroying Mannesty once every 119 years. =) Sounds very Gygaxish ;) A monster in the room for the sake of monster.

 

Once you change into a worm in the scenario you go under the earth to live so any worm people still above ground look "normal" because they haven't mutated yet.

 

That's right. But what provokes the mutation?

 

Geoffrey is a brother of one of the investigators - so he must be between age 30-35 as suggested in "Creating your own investigators" part.

 

Jack was born in 1870 (see timeline). When he married Mary he was 55 and he disappeared 4-5 years later - at the age of 49-50. 

 

So, looks like Age is not a push for mutation. Then what? =)

 

All the above questions are not to ruin the scenario or to show how incosistable it is.

 

All those questions are for new Keepers to keep in mind so that they are more prepared for their games. I hope this tread would be of help to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FreddieF

I've run this scenario twice now as written with no changes and it has worked beautifully each time. The players tend to go with the concept.

 

Also, as GBSteve has mentioned, we often don't directly remember much of what happened to us when we were 2-5, just snatches of memory that are compounded by the things we are told by family members - parents, older siblings etc. If the investigators are removed from their parents and home at an early age, separated from each other and moved to other families, then it is less likely that they remember each other and their initial childhood. 

 

The scenario plays on this by making the reveal that all the investigators are related to each other (and at the beginning most will only think it is a potential relation - the fact it is real will increasingly dawn on them over the course of play) weird and unsettling. Also, those snatches of memory from an earlier life come out in play - memories of the wallpaper in their old home, those that hark back to days in the old schoolhouse and so on.

 

In reference to why the children are given away - this is clearly explained in the scenario. Victoria, the first wife, sends them away for adoption without her husbands approval in order to try and remove them from their destiny to become the monsters they are bound to become. This makes the fact that the investigators have all been drawn back to the Lakes all the more creepy and ominous, especially when they discover Geoffrey and the fact that he is undergoing the change...

 

However, as others have said, if you don't find something in a scenario to fit with how you think if should go, simply change it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.