zedturtle wrote:
Sorry Blubbo, I know it's all fancy, but that's the Journey. Feedback extremely sought after...
No worries zedturtle, it is really looking awesome.
As far as feedback:
If the heroes are unable to get information from Rathwulf about The Falrock, it feels a little forced for them to get the information randomly from one of the other characters. I would almost say that the thieves do a terrible job of hiding their tracks (at least at first in their haste to get away), and that their real advantage is their lead. The fact that the thieves went north should be a given (in the end). This section of the adventure should be a chase. I think that it not only adds more tension, but it also helps you tie your Encounters to the subsequent retrieval together very nicely:
After the crowds announce that the Sickle has been stolen, and its time to begin the investigation, the PCs could all make an Insight roll before doing anything. Success here gives them hints or helps them figure out who to interview first. As Pangea just wrote, and I agree with the assessment, rather than 3 successes to know whether an NPC was lying, they should have a regular Encounter. If they succeed in their first Encounter, perhaps with the NPC who only has a little information but is more willing to help, that NPC can point to another potential witness like Torbald (a 2nd interviewee less willing to help, but able to provide better information). Finally, success in the 2nd Encounter can lead to the last interviewee like Rathwulf, who knows the truth but is lying.
If the PCs fail at that initial Insight roll, or during the Encounters, they will just waste more time talking to the wrong people (people who just know rumors, people who know nothing, etc) ... but eventually they WILL get to interview those 3 main witnesses. And, again, if they fail at those 3 main Encounters, they will eventually at LEAST find out that the thieves went north, find the trail easily, and can begin their pursuit... but at a great disadvantage and a big Lead.
What shouldn't be a given is how much information the PCs learn about what happened (the details), the true facts of the case, and how quickly they are able to get it. With enough failure, the PCs might really believe it was a pack of Orcs who stole the sickle, or all kinds of perhaps crazier ideas.
To summarize:
More failed Encounters equals less facts/more false information, and a bigger Lead for the thieves.
More successes in all of the Encounters (total) equals a strong understanding of what really happened, and a smaller Lead for the thieves.
The more true information provided about the facts can simply be an in-story benefit, but if you want to add mechanical benefits, you can equate this information with success dice that can be used in recovering the Sickle - whether the dice are used in the chase or the battle.
Sorry, I know I'm rambling here, repeating myself.