Poll: Ruins of Undermountain III Adventures Booklet

[Halaster Blackcloak]

Ok, poll time!

So, I was working on the Adventures Booklet for Ruins of Undermountain III: The Deadly Levels and I was thinking about what those adventures should entail. We're going to have just 3 "adventure-ettes", for lack of a better word, in the Adventures Booklet. The original RoU had a handful, but some were just a few paragraphs long. I prefer 3 adventures decently fleshed out, maybe 4-5 pages each. I think it's better to have several cool mini-adventures than half a dozen idea hooks so to speak.

Anyway, one adventure details a tiny sub-level infested with undead known as the Level of the Damned, and it's a tribute of sorts to one of my original Undermountain players. Very nasty level with some cool traps, cool new monsters (undead) and a neat story behind it.

The other is a secret - it deals with, well...I'd have to kill you all if I told you, then delete my forum! So no, that's staying a secret. Let's just say I'm correcting a major error TSR made, and in a way that works well.

Finally, I had planned an illithilich farm of sorts, although I'm not sure I want to do that since there are mind flayer areas on Level 8. Trying not to be redundant here.

My original idea years ago was to have 3 adventures linked to outside Undermountain. One was a gate to a crypt in Mulhorand, one was a gate to an icy area in the Sea of Ice by Icewind Dale, and the other was a link to a dungeon below the Citadel of the Raven. Not sure we should detail adventures outside the dungeon though.

So what do you all think? That last trio of adventures I described might be fun, but I prefer keeping it "in dungeon" so to speak. Any ideas for a mini-adventure set in the Underhalls?

[Halaster Blackcloak]

Duh! I forgot a major question!

I had an idea about something we discussed in the developer forum awhile back. Let me explain.

In the original RoU, they describe Halaster's original apprentices, known as The Seven (since there were 7 of them). The ones described in the original RoU are:

Trobriand
Arcturia
Muiral
Jhesiyra Kestellharp

Kestellharp left Undermountain, went on to become the Magister and later died.

So that's 4 of the 7. It mentions that 2 of them died while following Halaster into Undermountain. So that brings the total up to 6 of 7. One has never been accounted for.

Until now. I designed him, he's very secretive and powerful, and reclusive. Which is why no one seems to know much about him.

He, unlike the other still living apprentices, dominates a sub-level as opposed to a main level. There's a reason why.

So, that means that the identity of 5 of the 7 will be known:

From Ruins of Undermountain:

1. Trobriand
2. Arcturia
3. Muiral
4. Jhesiyra Kestellharp (Magister, dead)

From Ruins of Undermountain III:

5. [Name Withheld] - the apprentice we're revealing in this product, on the sub-level

Then there are the two dead ones. Well, one of them still has a presence in Undermountain, so to speak. I'll say that much. I've decided on how he died and what became of that. However, he would have died on the upper levels (Levels 1-3) in order to fit the history of UM. We are detailing Level 7, Level 8, and a sub-level that branches off Level 8. Too deep to detail what happened to the dead apprentice I designed.

So...would any of you consider it inappropriate (for lack of a better word) to set one of the mini-adventures in the booklet on an upper level (say Level 2 or Level 3)? I was considering (strongly so) including the fate of this apprentice as part of RoUIII. Then I realized he had to have died on the upper levels and was going to detail him when and if we ever get to re-doing RoUII. However, considering how long RoUIII is taking, RoUII may never happen. It's a huge undertaking, one I would love to do. But I'm not sure if we should just reveal the fate of one of the dead ones now (as one of the mini adventures) or wait and properly place him in the re-done RoUII.

Thoughts?

[slade88green]

I think the adventures in UM III should be limited to the levels contained in the set. I would love to see more adventures in Undermountain, but they should be implemented as separate adventures.

[Tawnos76]

I think the adventures in UM III should be limited to the levels contained in the set. I would love to see more adventures in Undermountain, but they should be implemented as separate adventures.

You can always add them on like the old Lost Levels were added in for Undermountain.