smithh65

Is the interior art as it is in the standard Keeper's Rulebook for 7e, or have a number of the pieces been redone?

Crimson Letters from the Keeper's Rulebook is a solid choice for that.

Having played through a few more times, I have found another hyperlink that needs fixing. Entry 210 hyperlink to entry 240. Hope these comments are helpful.

I did note the links that I found. The following hyperlinks are broken: Entry 101 hyperlink to entry 90. Entry 17 hyperlink to entry 35. Entry 81 hyperlink to entry 24. Entry 77 hyperlink to entry 140. As Grimmshade noted, that is no big deal. While I generally love the products that you all put out, I have to say I am fairly disappointed that a number of the entries in this one are clearly written as if the PC is a male character. I would prefer the entries to be more neutral, as is the case through the excellent Alone Against the Frost, or have varied entries offered for both male and female PCs (more effort, but doable with replication of some of the problematic entries with slight modification). I should note that I played through this a couple times with my partner and her perception was the same, which she also found disappointing.

Edit: disregard post, misread your comment.

I'm going to disagree. I've run this and the scenario works best with a smaller group of players if the players take the documentary crew. The cleaners are just an excuse to get the characters to the cottage and look around. But once done that (and the documentary crew will be with them the whole time if they are following their own motivations) the cleaners have a very weak motivation to actually investigate and look for clues in the surrounding locations. The documentary characters on the other hand have a very strong motivation to do so. In short, I found the cleaner pregens to be weakly motivated to engage with the majority of the scenario. I would suggest allowing them to pick from among the documentary crew and NPCing the cleaners.

If you can get your hands on it, "Tell Me, Have You Seen The Yellow Sign?" from Tales from the Crescent City sounds like a good fit. It definitely should last you multiple sessions and can then be followed up by its sequel in the same book. However I don't think it is on roll20, so might require more work on your end. Alternatively, as they are coming from DnD and you have already run them one very action focused scenario, Dead Light could work well.

In Ties That Bind, Alfred Hackett is incorrectly called "Hawkins" in the italic note at the bottom of page 93 where Sanity Rewards are listed.

I have searched the forums for an errata thread for the starter set, but have been unable to find one. Apologies if I have overlooked a relevant thread in my search. There is a typo on page 5 of the starter set handouts pdf in Handout Edge 2 (part 4). The journal entry and the list of names with death dates both list Marion Allen's death as August 1877. However, the newspaper clipping 'taped' to the journal referring to Allen's death is dated August 14th, 1887. Either the two dates should be changed to 1887, or the newspaper date should be changed to 1877. This error also exists on page 27 of the scenario booklet pdf file, where the handout has been replicated.

Sorry to revisit a long dead thread but I noticed a few things while looking over Servants of the Lake. They aren't all necessarily clear errors, but I've noted them below for your reference. Dialogue is italicized throughout the scenario, with the single exception of the Brophys' responses to potential questions on page 61, which are written in the form of dialogue but not italicized. Perhaps for consistency this should be altered? As the text on page 61 refers to the Brophy 'brothers' having been concerned and burying James due to that, I wonder if it would make more sense to use "the Brophys were concerned someone might come..." rather than "the Brophys are concerned someone may come...". Again on page 61, it should read "(STR roll required to break down)" in brackets, not "(STR roll breakdown)". There's a significant error on the guest sign in handout (page 65). Jacob signs in right under Abe. However in the scenario Jacob is not 100% sure Abe was at the motel. Surely if he signed in right under his lover he would have noticed this? I think the error could be rectified by just removing Abe from the top of the handout and noting the 'brothers' remove pages whenever they disappear a guest, which would explain why Jacob didn't see Abe's name. The scenario is ostensibly set in the 1920s as written. However Bill's car is listed as a 1930 yellow Buick Marquette (page 64). He should not have this car given the decade the scenario is set in. Sarah and Bill have cars listed on page 64. Jacob, despite having also driven there, has no car listed. Listing a car for him as well would be helpful for a keeper describing the parking lot on the fly. Our group had an excellent time with this scenario. In my opinion, any minor alterations made in relation to the above comments would only further improve a strong product.