Making an interesting dungeon layout, or a fun wandering monster table, or a engaging motivations table are part of the art.

Given the choice, I'd prefer my players to have well designed dungeons, and room flow is part of that.

I reflexively give a -1 reaction for every use of the blog-cabulary term "Jacquaying".

How about instead designing locations so that they make sense. If someone built them or adapted an existing natural feature, they probably did it in a way that had some history of reasons for why they built what, no? And if the current inhabitants are different, they probably chose places to live and do things for some reason, too. And they have patterns of behavior that make use of what is there in ways that make sense. And there are ways they will respond to play situations such as gangs of murdering looting adventurers in ways that make sense, especially if any of them has any tactical and leadership skills.

And that would be why a large complex where things live probably won't be all laid out in one line. In a line of locations, nothing can get in or out without moving through someone else, which sucks even if they are friends. Ever been in a house like that? There aren't many of them, but there are some (one house in rural France comes to mind) - not great for privacy.

A linear layout also means random encounter tables are liable to produce illogical results, if any of the results should interact with each other, especially violently. If you run a location like a dungeon by tracking where the inhabitants are and what they're doing (and hopefully thinking about what they usually do when adventurers are not there), it may become evident what layouts and placements make sense or not, as well as how denizens might move around and behave.

Quote from: Skarg;955945I reflexively give a -1 reaction for every use of the blog-cabulary term "Jacquaying".

How about instead designing locations so that they make sense. If someone built them or adapted an existing natural feature, they probably did it in a way that had some history of reasons for why they built what, no? And if the current inhabitants are different, they probably chose places to live and do things for some reason, too. And they have patterns of behavior that make use of what is there in ways that make sense. And there are ways they will respond to play situations such as gangs of murdering looting adventurers in ways that make sense, especially if any of them has any tactical and leadership skills.

And that would be why a large complex where things live probably won't be all laid out in one line. In a line of locations, nothing can get in or out without moving through someone else, which sucks even if they are friends. Ever been in a house like that? There aren't many of them, but there are some (one house in rural France comes to mind) - not great for privacy.

A linear layout also means random encounter tables are liable to produce illogical results, if any of the results should interact with each other, especially violently. If you run a location like a dungeon by tracking where the inhabitants are and what they're doing (and hopefully thinking about what they usually do when adventurers are not there), it may become evident what layouts and placements make sense or not, as well as how denizens might move around and behave.

Unless I'm misinformed, I don't believe Jaqcuaying precludes dungeon history. Jaqcuaying is a really fast analysis to see what choices (edit: choices regarding where to move) you're giving the players. Nothing else.

It's like music theory. I can analyze the harmony and that will tell me.something. But I should also do a quick and dirty schenkerian analysis too. And while I'm at it, maybe a quick rhythmic composite analysis as well. Each takes two minutes. But then I can see if there's some relationship I've failed to address.

Quote from: gronan of simmerya;955806sweet crom's hairy nutsack, that's considered radical and drastic?

Fuck.

* sets hobby on fire *

someone isn't as experienced as gronan! Get him!!!

Quote from: Justin Alexander;955883What is it with theRPGsite wanting to take every useful of thumb and analyzing it on the assumption that it must be used 100% of the time?

I think it's nerds in general. (Yes, childrens, I'm counting myself)

Quote from: Ashakyre;955948Unless I'm misinformed, I don't believe Jaqcuaying precludes dungeon history. Jaqcuaying is a really fast analysis to see what choices (edit: choices regarding where to move) you're giving the players. Nothing else.

It's like music theory. I can analyze the harmony and that will tell me.something. But I should also do a quick and dirty schenkerian analysis too. And while I'm at it, maybe a quick rhythmic composite analysis as well. Each takes two minutes. But then I can see if there's some relationship I've failed to address.

According to the blog article the OP linked, Jaqcuaying is a term made up for that blog article, and then I was responding to how the OP here was using it, focusing on the idea of having a guideline of three doors per rule.

Of course you're quite right that multiple approaches can be used.

I was just joking about the term, but I think it's confusing and mildly inappropriate to adopt that term from a blog as if it's some pillar of design that should be turned into gerunds and adjectives.

Quote from: Skarg;955955According to the blog article the OP linked, Jaqcuaying is a term made up for that blog article, and then I was responding to how the OP here was using it, focusing on the idea of having a guideline of three doors per rule.

Of course you're quite right that multiple approaches can be used.

I was just joking about the term, but I think it's confusing and mildly inappropriate to adopt that term from a blog as if it's some pillar of design that should be turned into gerunds and adjectives.

Yeah, it's a hella awkward term, but the Alexandrian was one of the first RPG blogs I binge read, so I just kind of roll with it.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;955883What is it with theRPGsite wanting to take every useful of thumb and analyzing it on the assumption that it must be used 100% of the time?

It's not just theRPGSite, it's godsdamn Western culture.  Every fucking thing in the world must be overthought to death and beyond.

Quote from: tenbones;955936While I'm not a million - I'm going to go out on a limb here and also point out that is is largely germane only if one assumes a "dungeon" *is* the "adventure".

Not in my experience. Jaquaying techniques are useful any time you're dealing with a location-based scenario structure, regardless of scale. Here, for example, I describe how the techniques can be applied to a location with only two rooms in order to make that location substantially more interesting in actual play. Jaquaying techniques are about creating environments with complex topography that allow for interesting tactical and strategic considerations.

Quote from: Ashakyre;955948Unless I'm misinformed, I don't believe Jaqcuaying precludes dungeon history. Jaqcuaying is a really fast analysis to see what choices (edit: choices regarding where to move) you're giving the players. Nothing else.

It's like music theory. I can analyze the harmony and that will tell me.something. But I should also do a quick and dirty schenkerian analysis too. And while I'm at it, maybe a quick rhythmic composite analysis as well. Each takes two minutes. But then I can see if there's some relationship I've failed to address.

That's the most basic element of the Jaquaying the Dungeon: A diagnostic tool paired to a discussion about the benefits of non-linearity in location design.

But those aren't the only lessons learned from Jennell Jaquays' work: Part 2 looks at different types of advanced, complex topographical relationships. Part 3 talks about how non-linear design relates to real world architecture; the importance of not losing all structure and "flattening" your dungeon while pursuing non-linearity; and the use of landmarks to orient and lock-in the topographical relationships for the players. Part 5 looks at how Jaquays uses topographical themes within a dungeon to give it a unique "calling card". And the Dungeon Level Connections addendum lays out a whole bunch of different unusual ways for dungeon levels to be connected to each other (including ones designed to trick the players).

"But that's all obvious stuff! Why can't you just design locations so that they make sense? I've been playing for 30 years and when I just think about how a dungeon should be I get good results!" That's nice. You might want to give some thought to how your 30 years of experience might be impacting how "obvious" things are to you. And you might want to reflect on the general efficacy of, say, an English teacher telling their students, "Why can't you just write better words? It's easy for me!"

Quote from: Justin Alexander;955980"But that's all obvious stuff! Why can't you just design locations so that they make sense? I've been playing for 30 years and when I just think about how a dungeon should be I get good results!" That's nice. You might want to give some thought to how your 30 years of experience might be impacting how "obvious" things are to you. And you might want to reflect on the general efficacy of, say, an English teacher telling their students, "Why can't you just write better words? It's easy for me!"

Not just the experienced, but some people have internalized certain knowledge without analyzing it. Like, (Completely made up example.) if you live in New York and have lived there all your life, you might have this kind of "sixth sense" about the public transit system, and how to hail a cab. You can get from A to B without even thinking about it.
Someone new to New York would have to look up the bus schedules, cab fare rates, etc... Our hypothetical visitior might not even realize that there might be a task involved, if they live in a small town where everything is within walking distance.

Now, if you're going to explain commuting to visitor person, you're going to have to go into the kind of detail that our native New Yorker doesn't even think about.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;955980"But that's all obvious stuff! Why can't you just design locations so that they make sense? I've been playing for 30 years and when I just think about how a dungeon should be I get good results!" That's nice. You might want to give some thought to how your 30 years of experience might be impacting how "obvious" things are to you. And you might want to reflect on the general efficacy of, say, an English teacher telling their students, "Why can't you just write better words? It's easy for me!"

Exactly. This is the reason why I posted something about it rather than just assuming everybody knows all this stuff already. Maybe you guys do, but if I had like, just got to this site and I was asking myself "what do these boards have to offer me?", I'd walk away from this post and these article links having learned something valuable.

Also, it's super awesome you're posting in this thread Justin. Your articles are extremely informative and useful in practical application.

You can (and should) apply the same design logic to the campaign as a whole, not just a dungeon/adventure area. I.e. multiple directions (both literal and conceptual) the PCs can take things.

While it's "obvious" to some of us, for players (and DMs) used to "the adventure" or "story" telling them where to go and what to do, having more than one clear path to choose from is challenging and novel. People talk about railroading for a reason - it's pretty much how most people play their games.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;955883What is it with theRPGsite wanting to take every useful rule of thumb and analyzing it on the assumption that it must be used 100% of the time?

"Make sure you drink lots of fluids."
"MY GOD MAN! IF YOU STICK A GARDEN HOSE IN YOUR MOUTH AND TURN IT ON FULL BLAST FOR 24 HOURS YOU WILL DIE!"

Hahahah still laughing at this.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]873[/ATTACH]

Here it as after being fleshed out a bit. It's comin' along nice.

Player choice is a very important feature in adventure design, but architects in the game world don't design structures for this meta-purpose. Places are constructed for a purpose and X number of exits included purely for for player choice are sometimes at odds for that purpose.

When designing an actual dungeon that was used for locking away persons who displeased a king,
 why on earth would the place be designed as a maze with many interconnected rooms and shitloads of exits? A functional dungeon for keeping prisoners might be better served as a dead end cell block with the only exit being through a guard chamber. That makes more sense if the dungeon is being built for actual use rather than as an amusement park for a bunch of murderhobos to wander through.

Sometimes a labyrinth with dozens of exits & passages designed by a deranged wizard with too much time on his hands is just what is called for but the majority of structures are or were probably built to serve an original purpose even if it has been forgotten over the centuries. Player choice is about more that just which direction to go. It also involves what to do exactly if there is but one way forward. Do you continue knowing that the further you go, the more cornered/trapped you might become, or do you fall back and explore other opportunities?

Why would a tomb designed as a death trap for grave robbers be designed with multiple exits & escape routes? The whole purpose of building the tomb was to entrap & funnel invaders toward deadly guardians & traps. How would providing a multitude of avoidance avenues serve the tomb's purpose?

You should really watch Prison Break sometime... New season just started, but in each season "the prison" featured (real places) had interconnected internal areas at at least 2 ways in/out. Now, getting around without the guards jumping on you was always a problem, but those locations show the same design elements we are talking about (layered old construction, places not on the current blueprints, guard blind spots, weak points between 'unrelated' rooms, etc).