Today we are looking at The Shadowed Village by John Simpson, a short adventure for levels 3-5 that takes place primarily in a 21-room manor. The author describes the manor as a “puzzle box”.
The setup is kind of cool. The local sorceress, Alana Field, tried to cast a spell to end a drought afflicting the town Handorf. But instead of having the intended effect, it plunged the town into unending, impenetrable darkness. And then monsters start wreaking havoc. So the party is tasked with searching for Alana in her manor and getting her to fix the spell. But what they don’t know is that the sorceress is actually a vampire and the spell of darkness was intentional. She’s been using the darkness as a cover for her vampirey maneuvers.
Before the dungeon proper there are a couple of brief scenes. In the first, the party will consult with a fortune teller to get some clues. An homage, perhaps, to the OG vampire adventure. Most of the clues relate to solving the riddles in the manor. The second scene is traversing the manor grounds, where the PCs must not stray from the railroad path lest they become trapped in the overgrown shrubberies.
The first room has a grandfather clock with hands that move forward and snap back. If they are set to 12:00, it opens to reveal a treasure. The only clue about this puzzle comes from the fortune-teller and there’s only a 1:3 chance of pulling it. Otherwise the only way a player might solve it would be pure dumb luck. That’s not terribly satisfying for the player and the likelihood of anyone finding it this way is low. I think most players would attempt to disassemble the clock, thinking something is inside. It’s counterintuitive – our brains like making connections and good dungeon design is full of connections. This is arbitrary. It is also a sign of things to come.
Following that we get some paintings that speak a series of riddles. Look, if no adventure ever contained another riddle, the hobby would not be diminished by one iota. The issue with riddles is that they are a problem for the player to solve, not the player’s character. This is a roleplaying game. We should focus on problems that can be solved through roleplaying. In other words, problems that are solved through our characters’ actions.
The writing throughout is too long and too descriptive, veering into purple territory. “The timber benches are darkened with old stains that have soaked deep into the grain – the kind that no amount of scrubbing could ever lift.” Good thing the party isn’t here to clean the place. It also reveals too much: “A quiet unease settles over you. This isn’t a kitchen. It’s a butchery.” For one thing, don’t tell the players how their characters feel. For another, don’t give them that revelation – give a few details, allow the PCs to investigate and come to their own conclusions. “Show, don’t tell” is even more important in roleplaying games than other media because you’re supposed to literally experience the world through a character.
Moving on the puzzles get marginally better but it’s very difficult to parse in some places and downright contradictory in others. “The massive wolf is the manor’s guard dog. He will attack the intruders, fighting to the death.” But then, “Any players capable of talking to and/or befriending the wolf will discover he knows the manor well.” Well which is it? If I’m running the game according to the information in the order it’s presented, we’ve already rolled initiative when we get to this point. Too late to sit down and have tea with the murderous wolf. And I hate to be pedantic (actually I love it) but since we’ve been talking a bit about roleplaying and the difference between a player and their character, the character will talk to the wolf, not the player.
Maybe I should stop beating this dead horse, but speaking of horses, how about this puzzle for opening a locked chest? “The carved horse is the locking mechanism. The horse appears to be at full gallop, but its legs are positioned incorrectly. The legs are hinged and can be moved.”
I’m not a horse scientist but I think the primary difference between a horse at rest and a horse at full gallop is the position of its legs. So how can you explain to the players what this horse looks like? You could say just what the adventure says, but that simply gives away the solution. Or you could say, perhaps, that the horse’s mane and tail are flowing. That’s probably what the adventure ought to say, but even that is a bit obscure. Also, there’s nothing of use or value in there, so while we’re revising things perhaps putting some treasure in the puzzle-locked chest would be wise.
Just about every room has some kind of riddle-based puzzle. It’s quite repetitive. Decipher the riddle, do the thing it says. Second verse (and third, and fourth), same as the first. There are a few combat encounters but they are all a single level 3-6 monster and won’t pose a terrible challenge for a level 3-5 party.
And then you get to the final room and things swing wildly in the other direction. The vampire is accompanied by two gargoyles for 19 total levels of bad guys. This will be an extremely difficult battle and up to now there has been no hint that a vampire is present, so the party won’t really be able to create a strategy that exploits its weaknesses. We also get this tidbit: “Alana Field [the vampire] can’t be convinced to remove the darkness spell.” Not sure why you would want to place that kind of limitation on your adventure but the designer clearly wants a fight here.
The imbalanced combat encounters and assumed hostility in every single one betray a broader unfamiliarity with the rule system. There are two magic items in this adventure that offer perpetual light – a cardinal sin in Shadowdark item creation. Traps have “saves”. There are no random encounters. Various effects are measured in minutes when they should be in rounds. And the adventure suggests awarding XP at the end of almost every room. I guess awarding treasure for solving puzzles isn’t completely unheard of, but the game already has a way of rewarding XP that is completely neutral to how players solve puzzles and overcome challenges: you put treasure on the other side of the challenge. I’m not sure what awarding XP for simply moving from room to room is meant to incentivize but it seems like the end result might be players who are a bit passive. And not every room rewards XP. The room the wolf is in doesn’t, for example, so the designer is clearly favoring puzzles over combat. Gold for XP has no such bias.
The final encounter will come as a surprise to the players. Not in an interesting and unforeseen twist sort of way, but in a “who is this vampire and why are we fighting her” sort of way. Very few of the rooms tie into the situation happening in the town or the themes of the adventure. It’s a fun house where each room is a module with no real ties to any other. And the decent setup for the adventure is entirely wasted because the party never has a chance to learn the truth of what’s going on. There are no clues to uncover, not even a journal that explains what’s going on. The session is bound to end with the GM breaking the fourth wall and just laying it all out because none of this information is communicated diegetically.
I would love to see this concept developed more. There’s an opportunity to build the dread slowly as the party uncovers the truth about the situation and the evil behind it. There could be an option to make a deal with the devil and negotiate with the vampire. But instead we have 20 or so rooms with generic puzzles, no reference to the darkness or what’s causing it, ending in an abrupt slugfest with a vampire. This doesn’t feel like a Shadowdark adventure.
On a scale of 2-12, The Shadowed Village gets 3 stingbats.
Leave a Reply