I was looking to run a 5e campaign based around the movie The 13th Warrior. The movie, and therefore this part of the campaign, can be broken down into 3 sections:
- The adventurers are called to a remote town that has been under attack. Houses furthest from the town center have been attacked and the families savagely killed. There’s talk of an old evil that comes out when there’s fog. They investigate the site of the most recent attack and find clues that may support the rumors. The next foggy night, the adventurers lay a trap and fend off a small band of attackers.
- Once they recover from the attack, the adventurers are told to seek guidance from a nearby seer. The seer tells them to track the attackers back to their lair and kill their leaders, a “mother” and a “warlord.” The adventurers find the lair in the nearby mountains, infiltrate, and kill the “mother.” Unable to find the “warlord,” they escape before they can be overrun and return to the village.
- With the “mother” dead, the adventurers know the “warlord” will attack in force the next time the fog arrives. They spend the time they have preparing the village and villagers for the assault. The fog arrives, the “warlord” and his army lay siege to village. Once the “warlord” is killed, the remaining attackers flee with the fog.
The movie has a Norse setting and presents questions about the whether there is actual magic or just fear and superstition involved. In my campaign setting, I haven’t made any thematic decisions yet. Obviously with this being D&D, the attackers can be magical but I think the more magic that’s involved, the harder the campaign could be.
There are some important ways in which the campaign will differ from the movie.
First of all, there are 13 adventurers in The 13th Warrior (a surprise, I know 😏 ), though half of them are dead by #3. There will only be 3-5 party members.
Secondly, the characters in The 13th Warrior are all warriors (once again, shocking news 😏 ), i.e. martial classes, with no spellcasters among them. The party will likely have at least some spellcasters, which can make a big difference in tactics, especially if I keep the attackers caster-free.
Lastly, except for the protagonist of the movie, the warriors are clearly seasoned to some extent, which brings me to my question: Obviously the players will gain levels throughout this adventure, but what is the appropriate level to start this part of the campaign?
I’m always wary of basing campaigns around movies because there’s always the potential that the players will make radically different choices. Like, if the players decide not to stick around for the next fog, will that be okay?
To answer your question, campaign level is a function of the types of monsters you’re looking to include. Since these seem to be mostly humanoid soldier types, you probably want to stay low enough level for that kind of combat to be a danger.
Starting at level 2 or 3 would probably be appropriate to maintain the challenge. On the other hand, if you’re planning to pit the players against an army of dozens of soldiers, you may want to start at level 5 so they can mow them down properly.
Admittedly the rules around the fog are a little loose in the movie. For example, in the movie there is neither darkness or fog when the adventurers are investigating the scene of the attack in #1 and yet we see some of the attackers watching them in secret.
It’s possible they don’t wait in #1 and essentially jump straight to #2. At that point, I may have the attack happen anyway while they’re gone depending on the timing. #2 requires stealth because it’s essentially an attack on a mountain stronghold where they are very outnumbered.
In the movie, the army greatly outnumbers the population of the village in #3, hence the need for preparation. Even if I keep the trope of defeating the “warlord” causes a retreat, I will probably have to greatly trim down the army, depending on the race I choose. Like I don’t want it to be an army of kobolds. Gnolls probably fit the savagery of the attacks but that’s a much higher jump in rating.
I’m always wary of basing campaigns around movies because there’s always the potential that the players will make radically different choices.
We’re doing Lost Mines of Phandelver. Nothing is technically stopping us from just packing up our gear and heading down the coast for shits and giggles. I feel that part of playing a campaign is the commitment to try and follow the story at least in the general sense. And I think part of the allure of DMing is watching your group tackle a story in their own way - which may be very different from what you had imagined.
where do I sign up?
Yo this campaign sounds cool af. I purchased Eaters of The Dead on paperback a long time ago and it was one of the best books I’ve ever read. The film based on that book is absolute trash and still a great fucking film to watch.
Yeah I loved the book and the movie is a guilty pleasure of mine.
Point 1: There’s nothing inherently stopping you from starting with 13 warriors. They don’t necessarily have to follow the player party. During part 1 your group of 13 warriors might split up to guard two or more parts of the town. This gives your player party one or two red shirts for that fight. It’s probably more work for you to play those on top of the enemies but, you can…
Point 2: Nothing dictates that a “warrior” HAS to be a barbarian class melee fighter. If you say that your setting has all kinds of fighting styles and classes then it does.
Point 3: There’s nothing saying that your players have to be ready for the adventure when it begins. Particularly if you fill the party up with higher level NPCs you could definitely give your players the same “arc” as the protagonist had. Starting inexperienced before growing into themselves and becoming an integral part of solving the problem. Might require some behind the scenes fudging of rolls until they catch.
Another idea would be to start ALL 13 characters somewhat underleveled and when a player character dies, they get one of the remaining ones to continue.
True, I could pad the party with NPCs. I don’t know if I need to go all the way to 13, but it could help make up for any deficiencies. I don’t know that I want too many higher-level NPCs though. I don’t want the party to feel like they’re sidekicks to the real hero(es).
Whatever the party size, I think I can adjust the scenarios #1 and #2 pretty easily to match it. My concern is with scenario #3. I want it to feel epic without wiping them out. I need to find a way they can believable fend off an army with fortifications and still reach the “warlord” to kill him.
Once they do manage him to kill him, I can use magic as an excuse for the rest of the army retreating. Maybe he had something on him that gave him the ability/authority to lead and with him dying that ability/authority goes with him.
