A Rather Critical Review of Morgansfort

[Hywaywolf]

My immediate response was to ask the reviewer to repeat after me..
It's only a @#$@#ing game!
It's only a @#$@#^%T@ game!
It's only a @#$%@ game!

If I want deep moral dilemnas to wank over feverishly, I'll go watch the latest Daniel Day Lewis movie.

Or write 20 or so indepth blog posts a month that no one reads.

[dymondy2k]

Personally I think everyone is getting themselves worked up over nothing. Honestly I may not agree with the blogger but I applaud her sharing her thoughts on the module. As bad as this sounds always remember this mantra... There is no such thing as bad publicity. Who knows how many people her article may drive to the site. And it shows that the big BFRPG push with the blog posts a few months ago did work. Not everyone who came here because of it became a fan, but we still got them here.

[SmootRK]

Personally I think everyone is getting themselves worked up over nothing. Honestly I may not agree with the blogger but I applaud her sharing her thoughts on the module. As bad as this sounds always remember this mantra... There is no such thing as bad publicity. Who knows how many people her article may drive to the site. And it shows that the big BFRPG push with the blog posts a few months ago did work. Not everyone who came here because of it became a fan, but we still got them here.

Excellent point here. Perhaps if Solo wishes to respond, it could be something as simple as "Interesting observations, and I will certainly consider aspects of what you mention in any future revisions..."

Acknowledges the opinion without really putting up any particular stance... and again, as dymondy2k says, if it puts BFRPG on the mind of someone, somewhere, then perhaps it is a win overall (even if they got here based upon a generally negative perception initially).

[Solomoriah]

I think I'm going to do something like that, yeah.

Thanks, all, for the assistance in sorting this out.

[LibraryLass]

I like to make sure all my fantasy role-playing games are politically correct.


Devil's Advocate here:
It is a bit odd that skin color is mentioned. I do question the use of skin color for these two characters specifically, because it is mentioned nowhere else in the module. None of the people from Morgansfort have skin color mentioned, so it strikes me as odd that the detail was added specifically for these two NPCs. Freudian slip maybe? If you were trying to showcase a specific part of Glain (i.e. the southern tribes), then more details should be provided about individuals from that part of the world rather than skin/eye color.

I've never particularly liked having pregnant anything in my game. It's a game, so I keep it "gamey"...not a "simulation" of fantasy world so I can get my players to question their specific PC's moral quandaries. That's me. That's how I roll. Some other people like having the PCs struggle over killing baby goblins...but I don't get my rocks off that way. I never have. Never will.

As such, any module that has "pregnant anything" automatically gets adjusted so that's it's not pregnant...except maybe the local fauna. There are no humanoid "children" in my games...there are "young"...but no "children". "Young" orcs attack your calves with sharp knives and rocks...better hope your greaves are up to snuff!

See... without the eye rolling and the sarcasm, this isn't far off from what I was going to say. I'm glad you're taking it to heart. (For the record I think it might be somewhat more preferable to discuss the ethnic makeup of the town and its notable individuals than just to say nothing at all about it.)

I'm not a POC, but as a woman, a sexual minority, and a religious minority, I've experienced often that sometimes without meaning anything by it. someone will say something that has just enough awful implications to make me terribly uncomfortable. And I know that when they subsequently dismiss those feelings as me just being irrational or reading too far into stuff rather than taking the opportunity to think about why it gets under my skin, it just makes me feel angrier and more marginalized. I've known you for months, Chris, you're not a dick, you wouldn't want to make someone feel that way.

Edit: And I still think that, Morgansfort being essentially our Keep on the Borderlands, it's worth at least making a note to the effect of reminding new GMs that intelligent monsters are sometimes willing to parley if the PCs aren't obviously belligerent.

[LibraryLass]

Okay, so the author of the review responded to my comment, and I'm not 100% sure I agree with her but I see what she's saying and I'd like to propose how we can work with it while remaining true to the spirit of the original encounter.

However, in MF, it’s there in the text that the players need to kill all the pregnant orc women; they’ll backstab the players if they’re left alive. I think the text, by specifically punishing the players for being merciful, crosses the moral event horizon here. I’m not saying that the GM can’t run it the way they like, but rather it should be left more open ended to begin with.

The described reaction, while understandable, is also kind of... well, like she said, it pretty much excuses wiping the tribe out entirely. All well and good if Orcs are inherently a blight upon the land, but even the slightest bit of nuance can throw that into uncomfortable relief. I think something like "If their menfolk are slaughtered, the rest will be understandably angry and vengeful towards the party, a situation that may have to be remedied." I'd also like to propose that Orcish culture (such as it is) being a warrior culture prone to infighting, it's not unreasonable that they might have some system of compensation for violence. Weregild or a favor to the deceased's next of kin or whatever, that we might suggest PCs who want the Orc women off their backs without violence might be willing to accept.

Especially with such a young tribe who will have, at this point, already lost a big chunk of their population, a false surrender is just putting more lives they can't spare at risk.

I dunno, more than being problematic to me (though I understand why someone would feel that way) it just doesn't make sense to me in terms of how people, even dishonorable ones, act.

[Solomoriah]

I'll be posting a new copy of BF1 tonight. Honestly, I think it's better this way... allowing for the possibility that Gwelayn might be saved makes the whole thing more interesting.

EDIT: Here's the revised pregnant-orc text. I'm comfortable with it.

Orc women do not go around armed most of the time, but Badushna insisted on arming the women of her new tribe to allow them to better protect their young. This tribe is still new, so there are not actually any offspring to protect yet, but the five not-yet-pregnant females will fight to protect the thirteen pregnant ones. The pregnant females will surrender and beg for mercy if the females protecting them are slain.

Of course, you can’t trust an orc even when she surrenders... if the player characters do not drive them out of the dungeon, they may choose to attack the player characters when they are vulnerable (such as when they return from the lair of Zelinth). They will only do so if they are certain they will win.

[MedievalMan]

Sounds better to me. Though you could also possibly add a line about them trying to escape at the earliest opportunity (and perhaps cajoling the first group of warrior orcs they come across into hunting down the PC's).

Personally I don't feel right killing any monster that is helpless or that has surrendered. Killing enemies in their sleep just never sat well with me.

[lars_alexander]

Hi,

I'm a bit late for the discussion, but I'd like to add a word or two.

My players are currently exploring Morgansfort, and The Cave of the Unknown is going to be explored sooner, or later.
While reading through the text I was reminded of an introductory adventure for the German roleplaying game Das Schwarze Auge (The Dark Eye) where a similar situation was described.
A roleplaying game allows for different approaches to a given situation. Unlike computer games where there are options written into the program. So, the players have all options to solve the encounter, just as the GM has all the options to roleplay the reactions of the orcs.
Moral issues do have a place within roleplaying games, since many of the quests deal with fighting evil, protect those in need, defending yourself, and the like.

Then, and I think this is important, the player characters are trespassing on the territory of the orcs, breaking into their home; so why should the orcs not defend themselves, and fight the intruders? Especially if they fear for their offspring -

The option of parley, reaction rolls, and such ought to be mentioned, as this would help beginning players, and game masters.

I found that many new players when thrown into any game world felt that they had to fight, plunder, murder and thief their way around. (Wonder where that comes from ...) So, show them more options. (I'll probably write a blog post on that topic.)

And possibly mention the fact, that XP can be gained by solving the encounter peacefully.

Take care,

Alex

[JoeCarr28]

I'll be posting a new copy of BF1 tonight. Honestly, I think it's better this way... allowing for the possibility that Gwelayn might be saved makes the whole thing more interesting.

Ooo! Does that mean my existing print copy becomes a collector's item?

You should definitely change the colour of the front cover in true Palace of the Silver Princess style ...