@surfbored
Sorry, I must have misunderstood you comment. A failed rescue attempt is an interesting approach I hadn’t considered. I’m going to put that one in my DM bag of tricks and use it down the road. Thanks.

“@surfbored
I’m not a big fan of family ties as a motivation. “All the original PCs step aside as their younger brothers and cousins step up.” It worked when I was 13, but after 20 years of playing this doesn’t do it for me any more. However, in some circumstances the easiest and more obvious solutions are often the best ones. I’ll give this some thought. Thanks.”

…Is that what I suggested? ;D

I’m not a big fan of the family ties approach either. Having to say, “Hey, ain’t you Krog’s boy/brother/cousin?” over and over would be tedious to be certain.

You need a quick, easy way to replace all the original heroes with new heroes, hence my suggestion of a new party to rescue the old party — but they “fail” and therefore feel obligated to pick up the torch.

It’s also a good way to pass on crucial props (“the sacred charm that must be returned or the “only existing map of the ruins”) without having to explain how a unique item suddenly has a twin. Just have the new party loot the old party.

You could also setup some kinda of old-hero-reincarnated scenario. I’d even consider (at some critical point) rewarding the characters with a free multi-class feat to their old character’s class to reinforce the feel that this character shares something of the old character.

The original motivation for the campaign/quest has indeed shifted as the story progressed, but this friend is still at the root of it.

The camping is set in Eberron. But we’ve been playing in Eberron for years so I don’t think it’s just that. The campaign has been full of political intrigue and non-combat interactions. I think that aspect has appealed to the players.

Thanks for your thoughts on this.

@skallawag
1) I rarely tweak the rules themselves. The only modification I make (occasionally) is to add an extra monster or take one away.

2) This is where I need to buckle down. I need to offer more closure more frequently. This is especially important if we only play once a week or even less often.

3) I find that at paragon level most PCs are already decked out with so much swag that more treasure carries little value, at least when I’m a player. But you make a good point. Rewarding all the PCs with something every week is a good way to keep them interested.

Great feedback as always.

@Smerg
The characters from the original adventure were so unique and so different compared to the new characters that any connections would feel stretched or forced — but it is something I’m looking at.

I’ve already followed your advice about keeping the old characters current. I’ve made it very clear that they can change back to the old PCs if they want to and the old PCs will be level-appropriate.

@begindnd
We had a similar change when the hybrid rules were released. One of the PCs who just got retired went from a Bard to a Swordmage/Bard. It was a better reimagining of his 3.5e character into 4e.

@Thadeous
I was going to do a slow and phased in approach, but once I realized the players weren’t enjoying themselves I buckled and let two switch one week and two switch the next week. Like taking off a band aid, I thought doing it quickly would be less painful.

@panzerleader
“I am essentially calling all players a bunch of power-hungry appeasers. “
I see you know my players.

We looked at the “kill them all and let The Silver Flame sort them out” approach, but in the end decided not to kill everyone off. This allowed for the possibility of going back to those PCs if they wanted to at a later point.

@surfbored
I’m not a big fan of family ties as a motivation. “All the original PCs step aside as their younger brothers and cousins step up.” It worked when I was 13, but after 20 years of playing this doesn’t do it for me any more. However, in some circumstances the easiest and more obvious solutions are often the best ones. I’ll give this some thought. Thanks.

@Chromed Cat
Honestly, I don’t think there were any story problems. It’s a pretty straight forward treasure hunt/quest set in Eberron. The interesting elements my players seem to really enjoy revolve around the assortments of reoccurring NPC heroes and villains they’ve encounters across the continent. They also seem to enjoy the political intrigue. Of course these things can be reworked fairly easily into a new campaign, which was why I originally suggested just starting anew, at the same level, and still in Eberron. But the PCs want to stick to the quest.

I think the new PCs need to find some kind of motivation that is completely devoid of the precious party’s motivations. They need to get involved with the quest to find the treasure, but for their own reasons. Having one of the original party members still in the group opens doors and provides access to the foundation already created over the past 12 levels.

I really like the idea of messing with the timelines. I’ve been thinking about that since reading your comments and feel that might be the best way to shake things up but keep the story alive.

@Feyrath
I think the players want to make a clean break. And having them in reserve eliminates the likely hood of old PCs in the new PCs body angle (but it is an interesting approach).

@Dungeon Newbie
I think we’re going to have the old PCs become benefactors of the new party. Some of them are indeed Dragonmakred and have powerful connections. Thanks for the suggestions.

Visit my blog at:www.dungeonnewbie.blogspot.com

With out those STORY specifics, it seems you will need the direction of the previous PCs to have some impact on the current PCs. Something that the players can buy into. Unfortunatly this campaign will not benefit from the ‘Yes” rule, the players will have to conceed to some restrictions on choosing their background. Or else the campaign looks scrapped, bar being in the same setting.

Perhaps mess with the timeline enough to have the current PCs being the disciples/inheritors of the past PCs motivations. Using such hooks as; new PCs are members of a faction started by the previous PCs or an opening ‘encounter’ reinvesting the animosities or ties experienced by the previous PC’s. Or taking a leaf from Wimwicks book. To which i’m refering to his article; Hey, Isn’t That My Character: Using Retired PCs As NPCs.

What ever the hook, it seems there needs to be some kind of legacy from the previous PCs. The players don’t need to be painted into a corner, but they will be required to come to the party, so to speak.