So, I'm running Stonehell. I nearly decided to run Dwimmermount, but Stonehell is much easier to fit into my established Wilderlands campaign. Been doing lots of megadungeon reading & thinking. My Stonehell campaign is going great I think, both the tabletop and online sessions. From what I can see, Stonehell generally gets a fair bit of praise and not much criticism, although the elegant "1 page dungeon" presentation means *extremely* sparse description. It certainly has plenty of "5 rats and 2000 coppers" - yet this doesn't appear to be a problem. Yet Dwimmermount, which was heavily influenced by Stonehell, was mercilessly attacked (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?24293-Joethelawyer-and-Dwimmermount) for, well, being the same as Stonehell (the final version is more verbose, and that gets attacked too).
AFAICT, the criticisms (http://wondrousimaginings.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/played-dwimmermount-last-night-sucked.html) directed at Dwimmermount in Joe the Lawyer's game could just as well be applied by my players to my Stonehell game - no 'story', empty rooms, torch sconces that (usually) don't move - yet they seem to love it, both the grognards I GM for online and the tabletop group who include complete newbies, and three players who came with me through 64 sessions of often-linear Paizo hackfest 'story' AP adventures and seem very very happy with the change of pace, with exploring vast dungeon complexes in search of gold and carting it in triumph back to town.
Is it a group thing? Did Tenkar run a bad game that night? What was the difference, I wonder. Maybe they were looking at it as a one shot, not campaign play. Maybe - I suspect this - they were thinking in Paizo AP or TSR competition module terms, of the dungeon as a place to go to achieve goal X then leave. But megadungeons are environments, not modules. They are a setting, designed for campaign play (Joe Bloch said this in the comments), with a mix of exploration, combat & social interaction - use of Reaction checks (2d6 or otherwise) is absolutely vital IME.
Finally, hostility to James M for the late Kickstarter delivery and/or for his personal qualities (being a traditionalist Catholic, his professorial air, his liking for minutiae) could be a factor I guess.
Anything else I'm missing?
Edit: I was really struck by this line - "Way too many empty rooms. Boring. There's a reason no one uses Gygax's rule of 1/3 of the rooms ought to be empty and boring as shit anymore" - Because Stonehell has pretty much exactly 1/3 rooms empty, and it feels like about the perfect ratio to me.
I just figured it was because people were mad at James. It is like everything on the internet. Once people get mad at you it doesn't matter what you do, 100000 commenters will show up out of nowhere to nitpick and post barely literate screeds about it. It becomes partisan.
Reading his post, he sounds like someone who took a first glance at something and stopped there after finding a reason to dismiss it. Like the players never go and interact with the ghosts, but then he blames the ghosts for being boring?
Stonehell also has non-interactive ghosts right at the start in the outer bastion. My players went "Wow!" looked around, found the skeletons of the dead, buried them in nearby holy ground, laid the ghosts to rest & got some XP. :) The ghosts are in the adventure but no 'solution' - my players came up with one using the environment given.
I think it's a combination of a lot of things.
1) James created (purposely or inadvertently - it doesn't matter) very high expectations. The puffery on the kickstarter was over the top and only fueled this. "legendary" "masterwork"
2) Not only was the puffery over the top, it was materially misleading. This was not some gigantic dungeon developed organically through play as repeatedly stated. It was going to be written essentially as work-for-hire after proven financial commitment from buyers.
3) There were a lot of other people in the OSR who desired the influence James had (again, either purposefully cultivated by him or not doesn't matter), and he either didn't recognize or didn't care that the above was painting a target on his back by elevating himself above the pack as he did through the puffery.
4) His personality wasn't one of perseverance when the going got tough - he wilted when stuff started to go wrong and the reality of the dungeon creation exposed the puffery for what it was. This wilting was where he started to lose the average buyer (as opposed to his frenemies).
5) It is an OK dungeon. Not a complete whiff, but not a revelation. That means he didn't under-promise and over-deliver (or I suppose, Autarch). Which is arguably what Stonehell did even though it's of a similar quality.
"He that shall liveth by the Internet - so shall he dyeth by the Internet."
...or basically what Hannibal said...
When the rubber hit the road, the Emperor had no clothes - and it was more than one kid, there were people waiting for it.
I played a half dozen of Dwimmermount with James as the GM. The way it came across to me was very atmospheric and full of history. There was always stuff to look at and poke at as well as combat and treasure. But that with James as referee as opposed to James as author.
Having ran Barrowmaze and Stonehell, I don't get the criticism of Dwimmermount either. To me Dwimmermount slots in at the same place as those two. Big sprawling dungeons with a distinctive atmosphere.
I do get why people don't like it because James is the author. The kickstarter turning into a fiasco was all on him. He damn lucky that Autarch bailed him out. The only thing to his credit that can be said is that he didn't spend the majority of the money on hookers and blow.
The fighter with the red hair in the image below was my character Argyll Malcolm MacDoughal.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]2003[/ATTACH]
What exactly happened with James? I loved his blog and had no clue anything had happened until I came here, and I only hear it mentioned in vague generalities and whispers like it is something too terrible to contemplate.
He choked on deadlines writing the things, then had some form of mental health episode from the stress of that and family deaths basically. He walked away from everything, handing over the cash to Autarch so they could finish it.
Whether he got more shit than he deserved is up to opinion. The only thing people love more than raising someone up is shredding them as they tear them down, but some people are a little too smug to feel too sorry for. A lot of small-batch RPG writers fall in this category.
Something I noticed today looking through it is that Dwimmermount is not that big - the dungeon is about 1/6 the size of Stonehell, also much smaller than Castle of the Mad Archmage. About the same size as Lost City of Barakus, not usually claimed to be a megadungeon. Not vastly different from Caverns of Thracia.
At this kind of scale, a dungeon looks less like an unclearable permanent feature of the world, capable of sustaining multiple simultaneous PC groups (I have two groups exploring Stonehell currently, and may add another) and more like a campaign adventure of the sort where you go through it to get to the end. But yet the actual contents emulate those of true megadungeons, with lots of empty space and lots of relatively mundane stuff. Maybe that contributed to the mentality that saw it as unsatisfactory.
Quote from: EOTB;10121682) Not only was the puffery over the top, it was materially misleading. This was not some gigantic dungeon developed organically through play as repeatedly stated. It was going to be written essentially as work-for-hire after proven financial commitment from buyers.
Would I be right that he'd GM'd a fair bit of the starter stuff, but the deeper/higher level material still had to be written?
I don't think he actually did delay the writing of Dwimmermount that much. We had a manuscript I think by December, 5-6 months after the KS. Remember that one guy took it and turned it into "Devilmount"
It's just that it never progressed further than that until Autarch took over.
I think it was the money. Stonehell was bascially self-published, I think for Stonehell 2 he solicited some money for a new computer, but even so, it's a remarkably cheap product to buy and I doubt he made any money off of it (vs time spent he could have done for paying assignments).
But when you get close to $50,000 and don't deliver.
And to the criticisms of the content of the module. I think a certain sort of gamer, the sort that finds more than one saving throw confusing or too difficult, doesn't like wasting time on rooms that aren't always exciting and thrilling. Never mind that like drugs, if you have a constant rush fo that stuff it loses the cool effect and you get jaded. But that's sort of what happened with Tenkar
Quote from: estar;1012186He damn lucky that Autarch bailed him out. The only thing to his credit that can be said is that he didn't spend the majority of the money on hookers and blow.
Yes, much credit to them indeed - and they made a nice final product out of it IMO. But also credit to him for handing over the funds. So many kickstarter-ers just spend all the cash and produce nothing.
Quote from: JeremyR;1012240I think it was the money. Stonehell was bascially self-published, I think for Stonehell 2 he solicited some money for a new computer, but even so, it's a remarkably cheap product to buy and I doubt he made any money off of it (vs time spent he could have done for paying assignments).
Yes, considering how much Stonehell gives for so little cash (& with adding Book 2 it's a very impressive product IMO) it would surely feel churlish to complain about empty rooms and sparse descriptions - especially as the facing page layout creates something
incredibly easy to run. I have never felt so fresh & energised after GMing a 4.5 hour D&D session for 7 people in a crowded pub room filled with shouting D&Ders as I do when GMing Stonehell. :)
Quote from: JeremyR;1012240And to the criticisms of the content of the module. I think a certain sort of gamer, the sort that finds more than one saving throw confusing or too difficult, doesn't like wasting time on rooms that aren't always exciting and thrilling. Never mind that like drugs, if you have a constant rush fo that stuff it loses the cool effect and you get jaded.
Heh. I was running Paizo's Seven Swords of Sin not long ago, and after several sessions of it the players were sick to death of its ONE MORE COOL THING design - umpteen rooms in sequence each with their COOL ENCOUNTER to slog through. They loved the first 6 or 8 on level 1. By level 3 I was getting complaints.
Quote from: S'mon;1012239Would I be right that he'd GM'd a fair bit of the starter stuff, but the deeper/higher level material still had to be written?
I'm not sure - Rob might know. I don't know if it was Rob that was in the pre-KS PbP that James ran on ODD74 for a very short time before suddenly no longer responding, without any notice or final post from James, or if Rob was in a different game than that which James ran. My personal theory was the PbP campaign ceased as soon as he ran out of pre-written material, his not being able to keep up with the pace of play as he expected, but this is 100% speculation.
Quote from: EOTB;1012258I'm not sure - Rob might know. I don't know if it was Rob that was in the pre-KS PbP that James ran on ODD74 for a very short time before suddenly no longer responding, without any notice or final post from James, or if Rob was in a different game than that which James ran. My personal theory was the PbP campaign ceased as soon as he ran out of pre-written material, his not being able to keep up with the pace of play as he expected, but this is 100% speculation.
That accurate, we only got a couple of level in. But it sure sounded like there was more.
On the topic of empty rooms:
If you're exploring any dungeon of significant size, empty rooms are almost essential if the players are to have any ability to play strategically. They provide room for manoeuvre, lines of retreat, opportunities to rest or regroup.
They also seem fairly necessary for versimilitude, to me.
Back when I was running a dungeon-centric AD&D 1e game, I stuck to the DMG ratio, and it seemed to produce ideal results.
It's also worth noting that "empty" doesn't necessarily mean "bare and featureless". It just means no monster, trick, trap or treasure.
Quote from: Sable Wyvern;1012304On the topic of empty rooms:
If you're exploring any dungeon of significant size, empty rooms are almost essential if the players are to have any ability to play strategically. They provide room for manoeuvre, lines of retreat, opportunities to rest or regroup.
They also seem fairly necessary for versimilitude, to me.
Back when I was running a dungeon-centric AD&D 1e game, I stuck to the DMG ratio, and it seemed to produce ideal results.
It's also worth noting that "empty" doesn't necessarily mean "bare and featureless". It just means no monster, trick, trap or treasure.
The project lead for Diablo was quoted as saying that the player should see blood or fire every 15 seconds. When people weaned on that sort of crap turn to a TTRPG it's no wonder they find it slow.
Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1012335The project lead for Diablo was quoted as saying that the player should see blood or fire every 15 seconds. When people weaned on that sort of crap turn to a TTRPG it's no wonder they find it slow.
Here's the thing, it's a comment on how to always have something to SEE, not always something to do. Blood splatter on the ground, or burning braziers in a pattern are things to see, not because monsters are throwing fire and/or dying. Keep it INTERESTING is the message.
I never have any purely empty rooms in the few dungeons I've run, almost always there's something in it to look at or interact with. In the time I did Undermountain, the first floor map has a MASSIVE section in which there's nothing in there, letting the DM do whatever they want with it, so I started to add stuff.
I had one monster filled room, but leading up to it, I had bodies of dead adventurers, writing on the walls in blood, a set of three braziers with faded chalk linking them to it and that was in the span of two rooms and a hallway. I did a few more things, but I don't remember what. Long story short, by the time they faced the monsters, which had they gone left instead of right (I think. I just remember that there were several times they could have easily just walked on by) and found the encounter, they were so jazzed up about it that they went in with a massive story about how and why the monsters were there that I stole it outright and used it mostly as is, because it was pretty awesome.
And then the players called me a 'Magnificent Bastard', thinking it was my idea all along.
Quote from: CRKrueger;1012217A lot of small-batch RPG writers fall in this category.
We see this now and then with board game designers too. Ive seen some pretty wack-o to outright despicable behavior over the years from both board and RPG.
The road to game design hell is paved with the stillborn games and careers of designers with bad attitudes.
This doesnt even count the rare few actually out to rob you.
Re: empty rooms, I have zero interest in megadungeons, but in life there is seldom such a thing as an empty room. There may be rooms with no one in them but they can certainly still be interesting by way of furniture, wall hangings, graffiti, ornamentation, debris, detritus, etc. If you have an actual empty room in your dungeon, then you're just being lazy.
Good point, makes me think of the video game Dark Souls where the 'empty' rooms are often the most evocative.
As I already mentioned upthread, in this context, "empty" is meant to mean "does not contain a monster, trap, trick or treasure".
It can still contain furnishings, embellishments, detritus, miniature gardens, strange sounds, corpses or anything else the dungeon designer deigns to place there.
Quote from: Sable Wyvern;1012848As I already mentioned upthread, in this context, "empty" is meant to mean "does not contain a monster, trap, trick or treasure".
It can still contain furnishings, embellishments, detritus, miniature gardens, strange sounds, corpses or anything else the dungeon designer deigns to place there.
Running Stonehell level 1 recently, it certainly does a good job theming empty rooms in one line of text, eg 2 random ones:
Eternal Silhouettes: Sooty, man-shaped silhouettes on walls; ancient memorial inscriptions. If wiped clean, the silhouettes always return after 1d6 days.
Devil Gallery: Devils carved in high relief on walls; faint odor of brimstone; empty censers hanging on hooks; bloodstains on floor.
And one of my favourites from last session:
Chamber of the Mountains: Chipped mosaics of rugged mountain crags; plinth with only the feet and ankles of a broken statue atop it.
That's part of a sequence of themed hexagonal chambers, some of which do have monsters in them. The PCs can encounter them from 4 different directions, in many different ways. The 'empty' rooms serve to break up the monster encounters and allow for a lot more dynamism as creatures move around the complex, fleeing or chasing PCs or just going about their daily business.
Quote from: Dumarest;1012668Re: empty rooms, I have zero interest in megadungeons, but in life there is seldom such a thing as an empty room. There may be rooms with no one in them but they can certainly still be interesting by way of furniture, wall hangings, graffiti, ornamentation, debris, detritus, etc. If you have an actual empty room in your dungeon, then you're just being lazy.
My thought is actually if there really is intended to be nothing to do in a room, a bare room is fine. The purpose of the room may simply be part of the mapping challenge, or it may have multiple entrances so it creates a decision point. It may serve as a place where a random encounter might happen in a room rather than a 10' wide passage. Now if the purpose of the dungeon dressing is to help show the setting of the dungeon, or if it might provide clues, then that's also appropriate.
Bit just random description to have not an entirely empty room? I hate that, and I don't want to have to come up with it for every room. If players are trying to solve a puzzle and ask me, "hey, what's in this room", I could see rolling on a table, generating a rotting tapestry hanging from a broken rod, "Hey, can we use the rod as a pry bar?" Or "Hey, that rod might help us hang a rope down into the pit in the next room, will that work", "well, it's broken, it might not hold, let's say it breaks on a 1 on a d6".
But I don't want to constantly describe random crap...
Frank
Quote from: Sable Wyvern;1012848As I already mentioned upthread, in this context, "empty" is meant to mean "does not contain a monster, trap, trick or treasure".
It can still contain furnishings, embellishments, detritus, miniature gardens, strange sounds, corpses or anything else the dungeon designer deigns to place there.
This is really really important to understand old dungeon modules. Also, these are the rooms you get to fill "on the fly" with Random Encounter checks. I find pre-rolling a list of random encounters ("procedurally generating" them) and then using the top one and crossing it off when the RE check comes up positive is the fasted way to incorporate the new "thing" into the dungeon context nearby the players.
Also, Stonehell is a badass name; Dwimmermount sounds like sickly pony.
JMal presented Dwimmermount as if it was some great megadungeon he'd been running for ages, which of course was bullshit because he'd only even done any old-school gaming for a short while before trying to become the Pope of the OSR.
Then the early material of the product he created made that really, really evident.
Then he stole everyone's money and left Autarch to clean up his mess.
I don't do empty rooms either.
I gotta have something of note, even if its minor details that just add to the atmosphere.
Also, empty rooms is where the wandering monsters roam!!
Quote from: RPGPundit;1013896JMal presented Dwimmermount as if it was some great megadungeon he'd been running for ages, which of course was bullshit because he'd only even done any old-school gaming for a short while before trying to become the Pope of the OSR.
I think this is slightly unfair - I read his blog and it was clear to me he was only then getting into the OSR with the blog (started March 2008). Dwimmermount was presented as a work in progress on the blog as he sought to rediscover the roots of old school gaming.
Somehow people 2-3 years later got a different impression, maybe from the Kickstarter advertising. Dwimmermount was only 'legendary' to regular readers of his blog.
BTW I tried his Dwimmermount PBP but it was very boring. I think that was more his GM style than the content, though.
Yeah, funny that, a guy who spent the better part of his gaming life running White Wolf games would talk big but be a shit D&D GM.
Quote from: Sable Wyvern;1012304On the topic of empty rooms:
If you're exploring any dungeon of significant size, empty rooms are almost essential if the players are to have any ability to play strategically. They provide room for manoeuvre, lines of retreat, opportunities to rest or regroup.
They also seem fairly necessary for versimilitude, to me.
Back when I was running a dungeon-centric AD&D 1e game, I stuck to the DMG ratio, and it seemed to produce ideal results.
It's also worth noting that "empty" doesn't necessarily mean "bare and featureless". It just means no monster, trick, trap or treasure.
Yes, rooms without encounters or treasure are necessary, and can be interesting (B1 In Search of the Unknown is a prime example of this). What I find much less appealing than a dungeon that is 3/4 "empty" rooms of this sort, is a dungeon full of vanilla combat encounters (ie B2 Keep on the Borderlands). A lot of the OSR dungeons I've come across fall prey to mimicking the lamest aspects of old school D&D. Room 4. Rubble in corner. Giant snake. 25 Sp. Room 5. Three orc guards playing dice. 50 sp in a pile. Room 6. Five orcs in barracks. 30 sp between them. Room 7. Storage room with barrels of sour wine. Room 8. Rotted bunks. 3 Giant centipedes. Bronze dagger worth 20 gp.
I have to have "empty" rooms (as in no permanent monsters, traps, treasure, etc.) in a megadungeon. They are the perfect no-mans land between factions and critters. Well they may contain the base of the dungeon food chain, fungi, normal sized rodentia, etc.
They are also a place, as has been mentioned before, for PCs to rest or retreat to. Rooms after room jammed packed with things, seems very odd, especially when these rooms never interact and stand in isolation until the PCs trigger them.
Quote from: Haffrung;1014548Yes, rooms without encounters or treasure are necessary, and can be interesting (B1 In Search of the Unknown is a prime example of this). What I find much less appealing than a dungeon that is 3/4 "empty" rooms of this sort, is a dungeon full of vanilla combat encounters (ie B2 Keep on the Borderlands). A lot of the OSR dungeons I've come across fall prey to mimicking the lamest aspects of old school D&D. Room 4. Rubble in corner. Giant snake. 25 Sp. Room 5. Three orc guards playing dice. 50 sp in a pile. Room 6. Five orcs in barracks. 30 sp between them. Room 7. Storage room with barrels of sour wine. Room 8. Rotted bunks. 3 Giant centipedes. Bronze dagger worth 20 gp.
That sounds vastly better than the typical 3e/PF module in which all 8 rooms would have a static combat encounter, 5-6 of them a single CR-balanced monster.
Not seeing it, what is 'vastly better' about a bunch of generic combats in a box with. a few empty room and rubble between them?
Quote from: Voros;1014658Not seeing it, what is 'vastly better' about a bunch of generic combats in a box with. a few empty room and rubble between them?
(a) Faster combats
(b) More varied combats
(c) Old school non-linear map will allow the encounters to be approached in various orders, bypassed etc
(d) No 'attacks immediately' - you're supposed to roll on reaction chart to see how the monsters react
(e) No multi-page monster stat blocks that are agony to extract info from
(f) Won't fill the session with combat - PCs could spend a session exploring a dungeon with those rooms among other stuff (halls, tunnels, whatever) & with talking to/feeding/fleeing might spend 1/4-1/3 the time on combat, not 80%.
I've been struck by how much more my players & me are enjoying Stonehell, which has plenty of stuff like the above, compared to the last few Paizo adventures we slogged through (Shattered Star #3 & #4, Seven Swords of Sin, Rise of the Runelords #4).
Aside from A and E those are all assumptions. Your criticisms are more rooted in the rulesets and your assumptions of how they are applied (a lack of reaction rolls doesn't force the DM to reduce every encounter to combat unless they are inexperienced or a bad DM) not the dungeon design.
The example said zip about 'old-school non-linear maps' there are loads of old-school linear dungeons, including the actual example of B2. There were also many old-school dungeons that were combat-slogs (Temple of EE for instance).
Quote from: Voros;1014889Aside from A and E those are all assumptions. Your criticisms are more rooted in the rulesets and your assumptions of how they are applied (a lack of reaction rolls doesn't force the DM to reduce every encounter to combat unless they are inexperienced or a bad DM) not the dungeon design.
The example said zip about 'old-school non-linear maps' there are loads of old-school linear dungeons, including the actual example of B2. There were also many old-school dungeons that were combat-slogs (Temple of EE for instance).
Well, at this point I'm not sure you're arguing in good faith, but I have been using the same 5e ruleset for both campaigns (converting from Pathfinder for Shattered Star & converting from OSR/Labyrinth Lord for Stonehell) and I see exactly the differences I described. I don't own Temple of Elemental Evil but I expect you're right, I recall Forgotten Caverns of Tsojcanth looked a lot like that. So some 1e adventures were combat slogs like modern Paizo stuff. Not relevant to the Moldvay-style rooms described unless you insert "attacks immediately" into every entry - which competition modules often did to create a level playing field, and modern adventure writers often do out of sheer idiocy I guess.
Edit: Not sure how you can describe the B2 Caves of Chaos as linear. I feel like you're just trolling.
I think your assumption of a lack of good faith is more you dragging your feelings ftom Pundency into it.
I don't doubt that PF or 3e adventures may suck but praising mediocre 'three orcs rolling dice and empty rooms with rubble in the corner' dungeon design as 'vastly superior' sounds like an overstatement, to put it mildly.
Quote from: S'mon;1014947Edit: Not sure how you can describe the B2 Caves of Chaos as linear. I feel like you're just trolling.
Typically any disagreement with OSR truisms is viewed as 'trolling' on here. I love a lot of elements of B2 but always found the Caves of Chaos the least inspired part of the module, several of them are fairly linear with only one entrance. You've honestly never read any criticism of them before?
Quote from: S'mon;1014947Well, at this point I'm not sure you're arguing in good faith, but I have been using the same 5e ruleset for both campaigns (converting from Pathfinder for Shattered Star & converting from OSR/Labyrinth Lord for Stonehell) and I see exactly the differences I described. I don't own Temple of Elemental Evil but I expect you're right, I recall Forgotten Caverns of Tsojcanth looked a lot like that. So some 1e adventures were combat slogs like modern Paizo stuff. Not relevant to the Moldvay-style rooms described unless you insert "attacks immediately" into every entry - which competition modules often did to create a level playing field, and modern adventure writers often do out of sheer idiocy I guess.
Edit: Not sure how you can describe the B2 Caves of Chaos as linear. I feel like you're just trolling.
Oh holy cow, S'mon. No, just... no. I do not know how you misread the situation that badly, but at this point in time to the outside eye it looks like Voros is being upfront, open, and honest, and that you are having a hard time being an adult when that which you prefer is not being treated as inherently better. If I routinely call out a certain new schooler for this type of behavior, I have to be fair and do the same for the old schooler when they do the same.
Voros is correct. In response to his statement, "Not seeing it, what is 'vastly better' about a bunch of generic combats in a box with. a few empty room and rubble between them?," you listed out 6 things which have little-to-nothing to do with the topic at hand, and appear to be knee-jerk opinions regarding new school D&D in general. Some of them are accurate (it's hard to argue that OSR combats aren't faster), some of them are potentially true (certain new school monsters have execrable multi-page stat blocks), and some of them are genuinely not or are artifacts of a certain playstyle which is not inherent to new school (whether new school gamers tend to play in this style is another question) (example: there is nothing about new school d&d which requires things to 'attack immediately.' Nothing.).
I've never played a Paizo module, and I don't have a copy of B2, so I cannot do a comparison. However, if you really want to disprove Voros's points, I would suggest using reason, logic, and comparative examples, not the knee-jerk reactions of your A-F list, nor attacks like implying that Voros is trolling.
I'm genuinely disappointed, S'mon. I've seen you be better than this. And I'm definitely frustrated when those individuals here who complain about the grognards picking on new school games are actually shown to be right. It tends to make my arguments that they are inventing perceived victimhood status simply because it is comfortable to feel like the underdog ring somewhat hollow.
Quote from: Voros;1014959Typically any disagreement with OSR truisms is viewed as 'trolling' on here. I love a lot of elements of B2 but always found the Caves of Chaos the least inspired part of the module, several of them are fairly linear with only one entrance. You've honestly never read any criticism of them before?
There are a whole bunch of caves. You can take them in any order. It's one of the least linear modules ever produced.
Edit: Personally I find the design of Caves of Chaos fairly dull, but it's certainly not linear.
Quote from: Willie the Duck;1014985I'm genuinely disappointed, S'mon. I've seen you be better than this.
Well I'm sorry not all my posts are equally wonderful!
Maybe if Pundit paid me more to shill for the OSR you'd get better quality control. As it is you'll just have to put up with variable quality posting.
I want to show you what a typical Paizo dungeon room looks like, since that was my comparison. Here's one from Shattered Star #4, ie the middle of the AP:
B1. Spirits Cellar (CR 11)
The odor of beer permeates this huge room. Several crates,
barrels, kegs, and racks for wine fill the room--many of which
have been opened, emptied, upturned, and shattered. The floor
is littered with glass shards and corks and strewn with loose
coils of rope.
The main cellar of the abbey, where the local production
of beer had been aging since the first, merry days of
ecumenism, has sadly been ransacked and drained almost
completely dry by Ardathanatus's skulk mercenaries. Only
a dozen bottles and a few casks survive intact.
Creatures: Hollow Mountain hosts several enclaves of
skulks, lithe humanoids with the ability to blend almost
perfectly with their environments. Most of these tribes
survive primarily as a result of their skill at hiding, for
Hollow Mountain is a dangerous place indeed. The skulks
of the Pallid Path are an exception--these worshipers of
Yamasoth have largely forsaken the upper levels of Hollow
Mountain or the ruins of Xin-Bakrakhan for the deeper
caverns, particularly the swampy, stinking caverns of
the Abysmal Slough, where they often war against the
troglodyte tribes of the Deep Pools. When Ardathanatus
encountered the skulks on his journey through Hollow
Mountain, he'd already converted to the worship of the
skulks' god Yamasoth, and the elf was quick to capitalize
on that by presenting himself to the Pallid Path as a
savior. He recruited the entire tribe, and took them with
him on his return here to Windsong Abbey.
The skulks of the Pallid Path have had it hard--they
took significant losses both in the assault on Windsong and
the exploration of these dungeon chambers. (Ardathanatus
was fond of using them to trigger suspected traps). But the
skulks of the Pallid Path are nothing if not fanatics, and
their belief that each of their deaths helps to further the
return of their deity to the world is more than enough to
ensure their continued loyalty to Ardathanatus.
Although they originally numbered well over three
dozen, with a few leaders among their own, today only 16
of the rank-and-file Pallid Path cultists remain. Of those,
six are stationed here to guard the contents of the room--
now that Ardathanatus has explored the dungeons, he
has little further use for the skulks. If the skulks notice
the PCs coming, five of them swiftly hide throughout the
room and watch patiently while the sixth skulk sneaks into
area B2 to lure the clockwork golem there into this room.
Pallid Path Cultists (6) CR 6
XP 2,400 each
Skulk cleric of Yamasoth 3/rogue 2 (Pathfinder RPG Bestiary 2 248)
CE Medium humanoid (skulk)
Init +7; Senses low-light vision; Perception +13
DEFENSE
AC 16, touch 16, flat-footed 13 (+3 deflection, +3 Dex)
hp 74 (8d8+35)
Fort +7, Ref +10, Will +8
Defensive Abilities evasion
OFFENSE
Speed 30 ft.
Melee mwk short sword +10 (1d6+2/19–20)
Ranged +1 composite shortbow with inubrix arrows +9 (1d4+3)
Special Attacks channel negative energy 1/day (DC 9, 2d6),
sneak attack +2d6
Domain Spell-Like Abilities (CL 3rd; concentration +7)
7/day--acid dart (1d6+1 acid), artificer's touch (1d6+1,
bypasses 3 DR and hardness)
Spells Prepared (CL 3rd; concentration +7)
2nd--cure moderate wounds, spiritual weapon, wood shapeD
1st--animate ropeD, cure light wounds, doom (DC 15), shield
of faith
0 (at will)--bleed (DC 14), detect magic, light, stabilize
D Domain spell; Domains Artifice, Earth
TACTICS
Before Combat The cultist casts shield of faith. They remain
hidden as long as possible, for they plan to attack only once
the golem from area B2 is lured into this room.
During Combat Once the clockwork golem attacks, these
cultists hang back to fire inubrix arrows at any heavily
armored PCs. The skulks move after each shot, hoping to
hide again and snipe at the PCs while they are forced to
concentrate on the golem. Hanging back also keeps the
skulks from accidentally attracting the wild golem's attention!
Morale A skulk that is reduced to fewer than 20 hit points
attempts to flee south to area B4 to warn the skulks there
and join in the defense of that area's stairs.
STATISTICS
Str 15, Dex 16, Con 16, Int 8, Wis 18, Cha 7
Base Atk +5; CMB +7; CMD 23
Feats Combat Reflexes, Improved Initiative, Toughness,
Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus (short sword)
Skills Knowledge (religion) +8, Perception +13, Stealth +22;
Racial Modifiers +8 Stealth
Languages Common, Undercommon
SQ aura, camouflaged step, chameleon skin, rogue talents
(combat trick), trapfinding +1
Gear +1 composite longbow with 10 inubrix arrows, masterwork
short sword
Treasure: The arrows these skulks fire have heads
crafted from a form of pale skymetal called inubrix,
known also as "ghost iron." Inubrix is very soft metal, but
it passes through iron and steel as if they didn't exist. As a
result, these arrows deal less damage and are treated as if
constantly broken, but they completely ignore AC bonuses
granted by iron or steel armor and shields. An inubrix
arrow is worth 250 gp. More details on inubrix appear on
page 71 of Pathfinder Adventure Path #61.A typical Paizo adventure has around 40 of these over 64 pages of adventure plus 32 pages of supplementary material. This room is a bit shorter than average maybe, only one page of text though their columns and images caused it to spread over 3 pages - some are shorter (and omit monster stats, referring GM to Bestiary #X), but major villain rooms can run several pages, with up to 3 pages just for the BBEG stat block. An Adventure Path campaign has six such adventures.
Does that give some inkling why I've come to prefer
Room 4. Rubble in corner. Giant snake. 25 Sp. Room 5. Three orc guards playing dice. 50 sp in a pile. Room 6. Five orcs in barracks. 30 sp between them. Room 7. Storage room with barrels of sour wine. Room 8. Rotted bunks. 3 Giant centipedes. Bronze dagger worth 20 gp?
Quote from: Willie the Duck;1014985(example: there is nothing about new school d&d which requires things to 'attack immediately.' Nothing.).
Have you even read a Paizo module? A 3e or 4e WotC module? How many times do they include stat blocks and NOT say "attacks immediately"? I saw one recently in the 4e module I'm running*, Thunderspire Labyrinth. The Duergar trading post in the Seven Pillared Hall. It stood out because it was so unusual.
Running 3e/PF/4e I often change the module so monsters don't attack immediately, while recognising - and not caring - that this screws up the designers' intent in terms of encounter chain design, resource attrition etc. I do tweak 4e healing surge recovery to compensate.
In practice, new school modules do indeed ape the worst 'attacks immediately' old competition modules of the past, in the vast majority of cases. And there are reasons for this to do with challenge/encounter design - if PCs can avoid fighting a bunch of encounters then the supposedly finely tuned encounter balance will be thrown well off.
*Since 2000 I have run far more 'new school' than 'old school', even counting my current 5e campaign as 'old school'.
Long, detailed descriptions are good, no?
As far I can see Paizo just takes a location and makes clear description, not requiring the GM to make it up fully or partially.
I already like the first 3 sentences of the example you gave, then it goes more into details and history.
Not liking the 'attacks immediately' situation btw, good if there are other options. I never made a Leeroy Jenkins character.
Quote from: joriandrake;1015060Long, detailed descriptions are good, no?
As far I can see Paizo just takes a location and makes clear description, not requiring the GM to make it up fully or partially.
I find in practice it's impossible to memorise all that beforehand for 40+ such encounters, or to find all the stuff I need in play amongst the wall of text - so a lot gets omitted/never presented to the players (& I also have to work hard to find ways to present interesting stuff to the players that Paizo apparently wrote purely for the GM's enjoyment). I also find the detail constricts my own imagination, so I add far less stuff of my own and the setting feels less vivacious. I have run a lot of Paizo adventures - several 32 pagers, all of Crimson Throne, 4 each of Shattered Star and Rise of the Runelords - that's 14 AP books. So obviously it's not all bad. But over time it gets exhausting; whereas I find minimalist OSR stuff stimulates my imagination and creates a campaign that just gets better over time. Plus, the play density of Paizo stuff is about 1/10 that of much OSR type stuff, with higher costs per page due to gloss, art etc the cost is around x20.
That's just me. Obviously YMMV.
...umm, fair point about memorising that, but I doubt it was ever intended for the GM to run the campaign without reading it.
O_o
Also fair point on wanting to change details, but as far I know Paizo has that global campaign thingy running and all GMs have to give the same description/enemies in a module for that, or am I wrong? It's likely the reason for the very detailed info.
I myself also used existing modules to change stories/situations but that is probably the least fitting method for Paizo.
Quote from: joriandrake;1015068...umm, fair point about memorising that, but I doubt it was ever intended for the GM to run the campaign without reading it.
O_o
So the DM is supposed to take a break before the PCs enter each room, just to read the wall of the text? Not that I actually believe you're trying to say that, but it follows from what you just said. (Reading doesn't imply you've memorized it.)
And that's exactly the kind of encounter I hate to run. It's not an outline, it's not a checklist, it's not bullet points. No, it's prose. Florid prose, presented in paragraphs as if it was trying to tell a story. It's designed for the DM read solo, not to actually use in a game. Which is true of an appalling number of adventures. There are all kinds of tricks for laying out instructor materials, and nobody ever uses them.
The old school style of 8 orcs, 16 smelly piles of fur, 3d6 copper in each if the party takes a turn searching, and a gold box with something special inside it buried in the dirt under #3, isn't designed any better. But it's much briefer, which allows the DM to skim a line, get all the essential details, and then improvise. That relies on the DM or dice to determine reactions, a lot the flavor, clever quips, and so on. But it's much better than spending time telling the players to wait while you dig through paragraphs of text trying to refresh yourself on all the relevant bits. That completely kills the flow of the game.
Not that the Pazio example has a lot of information (that could be distilled into 2-3 sentences), but if there is a lot of information, it should be presented in a way that can be grasped at a glance. Dump the box and text format for bullets, icons, player handouts, DM cheat sheets with interjections if the players are spinning their wheels, tactical maps, and so on.
Quote from: S'mon;1015053Creatures: Hollow Mountain hosts several enclaves of
skulks, lithe humanoids with the ability to blend almost
perfectly with their environments. Most of these tribes
survive primarily as a result of their skill at hiding, for
Hollow Mountain is a dangerous place indeed. The skulks
of the Pallid Path are an exception--these worshipers of
Yamasoth have largely forsaken the upper levels of Hollow
Mountain or the ruins of Xin-Bakrakhan for the deeper
caverns, particularly the swampy, stinking caverns of
the Abysmal Slough, where they often war against the
troglodyte tribes of the Deep Pools. When Ardathanatus
encountered the skulks on his journey through Hollow
Mountain, he'd already converted to the worship of the
skulks' god Yamasoth, and the elf was quick to capitalize
on that by presenting himself to the Pallid Path as a
savior. He recruited the entire tribe, and took them with
him on his return here to Windsong Abbey.
The skulks of the Pallid Path have had it hard--they
took significant losses both in the assault on Windsong and
the exploration of these dungeon chambers. (Ardathanatus
was fond of using them to trigger suspected traps). But the
skulks of the Pallid Path are nothing if not fanatics, and
their belief that each of their deaths helps to further the
return of their deity to the world is more than enough to
ensure their continued loyalty to Ardathanatus.
Although they originally numbered well over three
dozen, with a few leaders among their own, today only 16
of the rank-and-file Pallid Path cultists remain. Of those,
six are stationed here to guard the contents of the room--
now that Ardathanatus has explored the dungeons, he
has little further use for the skulks. If the skulks notice
the PCs coming, five of them swiftly hide throughout the
room and watch patiently while the sixth skulk sneaks into
area B2 to lure the clockwork golem there into this room.
IME all the text above added nothing to the game, with one exception - the summoning of the golem. From the player POV these skulks are just disposable mooks who fight to the death, like everything else in the module except the surviving priests the PCs can rescue.
I give my group far more of the background info than Paizo give me means to do so, especially on the villain, but even I couldn't find a plausible way to tutor the players on the details of these unimportant creatures and their former life hundred of miles from the adventure location.
Quote from: Pat;1015079So the DM is supposed to take a break before the PCs enter each room, just to read the wall of the text? Not that I actually believe you're trying to say that, but it follows from what you just said. (Reading doesn't imply you've memorized it.)
I think the GM indeed is supposed to?
It was a while since I played but I did play 2 Paizo campaigns and one official Pathfinder Society one. That's still not much so I can absolutely be wrong by how I remember it.
Nobody actually reads large chunks of text out loud. You just take the important bits and use those.
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1015097Nobody actually reads large chunks of text out loud. You just take the important bits and use those.
As I wrote, I'm not certain about the whole PFS (Pathfinder Society) thing, but I browsed quickly and this is what I found.
QuoteGMing PFS is different to running a home game as you can't change creatures, stat blocks, DC's etc and have to run it as written. This is so players get pretty much the same experience no matter which gm they get. Is this what you mean about changes on how to run the game? There is some scope for some table variation, and GM's can add circumstance bonuses, environmental effects, alter tactics, starting locations and cater for creative solutions to encounters if they think it will make the game more enjoyable. But it is a quite a rigid style of gming that's different to running a home campaign. However, it does make it fair for everyone. There aren't many changes to the Core rules for pfs. Some things aren't allowed like crafting (probably because people would exploit it to get lots of loot) but most rules are the same. PFS is different to playing a full home campaign, it doesn't have the immersion and freedom you get with a home game but pfs has its place.
Quote1. Are u allowed to tweek anything to flesh out what gms get to see as in what i was talking about?
...
1) There are usually various knowledge checks throughout the scenario, especially at the beginning of the game, that can give the players a better idea of what the scenario is about and what they might be facing. You can also give general Golarion info to set the scene too. Later season scenarios (4 and 5) will often have handouts that tie the scenario events into the over arching storyline for that season. By all means give out extra info if the players specifically go looking for it, have a bard with bardic knowledge, and/or make good roll knowledge/gather information checks. Its also perfectly acceptable to give a epilogue of the scenario background at the end to clue the players up on what was going on. But, don't add events to the scenario - as Skellan says, you should run it as written with the only areas you are allowed to modify being tactics and use of the environment during encounters.
At the time I was playing there was no other Hungarian player for PFS and there was a bit of pushing by some people to make me into a GM and try to gather more players, hold events, but I'm not in the capital and there were just no players for this in my area and I was just not willing/able to pay to go to Budapest and hold some there. (just to compare: a train+bus ticket from my location to Budapest costs more than a ticket I can buy to fly from Budapest to Brussels or London)
Quote from: S'mon;1015053I want to show you what a typical Paizo dungeon room looks like, since that was my comparison. Here's one from Shattered Star #4, ie the middle of the AP:
Spoiler
B1. Spirits Cellar (CR 11)
The odor of beer permeates this huge room. Several crates,
barrels, kegs, and racks for wine fill the room--many of which
have been opened, emptied, upturned, and shattered. The floor
is littered with glass shards and corks and strewn with loose
coils of rope.
The main cellar of the abbey, where the local production
of beer had been aging since the first, merry days of
ecumenism, has sadly been ransacked and drained almost
completely dry by Ardathanatus's skulk mercenaries. Only
a dozen bottles and a few casks survive intact.
Creatures: Hollow Mountain hosts several enclaves of
skulks, lithe humanoids with the ability to blend almost
perfectly with their environments. Most of these tribes
survive primarily as a result of their skill at hiding, for
Hollow Mountain is a dangerous place indeed. The skulks
of the Pallid Path are an exception--these worshipers of
Yamasoth have largely forsaken the upper levels of Hollow
Mountain or the ruins of Xin-Bakrakhan for the deeper
caverns, particularly the swampy, stinking caverns of
the Abysmal Slough, where they often war against the
troglodyte tribes of the Deep Pools. When Ardathanatus
encountered the skulks on his journey through Hollow
Mountain, he'd already converted to the worship of the
skulks' god Yamasoth, and the elf was quick to capitalize
on that by presenting himself to the Pallid Path as a
savior. He recruited the entire tribe, and took them with
him on his return here to Windsong Abbey.
The skulks of the Pallid Path have had it hard--they
took significant losses both in the assault on Windsong and
the exploration of these dungeon chambers. (Ardathanatus
was fond of using them to trigger suspected traps). But the
skulks of the Pallid Path are nothing if not fanatics, and
their belief that each of their deaths helps to further the
return of their deity to the world is more than enough to
ensure their continued loyalty to Ardathanatus.
Although they originally numbered well over three
dozen, with a few leaders among their own, today only 16
of the rank-and-file Pallid Path cultists remain. Of those,
six are stationed here to guard the contents of the room--
now that Ardathanatus has explored the dungeons, he
has little further use for the skulks. If the skulks notice
the PCs coming, five of them swiftly hide throughout the
room and watch patiently while the sixth skulk sneaks into
area B2 to lure the clockwork golem there into this room.
Pallid Path Cultists (6) CR 6
XP 2,400 each
Skulk cleric of Yamasoth 3/rogue 2 (Pathfinder RPG Bestiary 2 248)
CE Medium humanoid (skulk)
Init +7; Senses low-light vision; Perception +13
DEFENSE
AC 16, touch 16, flat-footed 13 (+3 deflection, +3 Dex)
hp 74 (8d8+35)
Fort +7, Ref +10, Will +8
Defensive Abilities evasion
OFFENSE
Speed 30 ft.
Melee mwk short sword +10 (1d6+2/19–20)
Ranged +1 composite shortbow with inubrix arrows +9 (1d4+3)
Special Attacks channel negative energy 1/day (DC 9, 2d6),
sneak attack +2d6
Domain Spell-Like Abilities (CL 3rd; concentration +7)
7/day--acid dart (1d6+1 acid), artificer's touch (1d6+1,
bypasses 3 DR and hardness)
Spells Prepared (CL 3rd; concentration +7)
2nd--cure moderate wounds, spiritual weapon, wood shapeD
1st--animate ropeD, cure light wounds, doom (DC 15), shield
of faith
0 (at will)--bleed (DC 14), detect magic, light, stabilize
D Domain spell; Domains Artifice, Earth
TACTICS
Before Combat The cultist casts shield of faith. They remain
hidden as long as possible, for they plan to attack only once
the golem from area B2 is lured into this room.
During Combat Once the clockwork golem attacks, these
cultists hang back to fire inubrix arrows at any heavily
armored PCs. The skulks move after each shot, hoping to
hide again and snipe at the PCs while they are forced to
concentrate on the golem. Hanging back also keeps the
skulks from accidentally attracting the wild golem's attention!
Morale A skulk that is reduced to fewer than 20 hit points
attempts to flee south to area B4 to warn the skulks there
and join in the defense of that area's stairs.
STATISTICS
Str 15, Dex 16, Con 16, Int 8, Wis 18, Cha 7
Base Atk +5; CMB +7; CMD 23
Feats Combat Reflexes, Improved Initiative, Toughness,
Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus (short sword)
Skills Knowledge (religion) +8, Perception +13, Stealth +22;
Racial Modifiers +8 Stealth
Languages Common, Undercommon
SQ aura, camouflaged step, chameleon skin, rogue talents
(combat trick), trapfinding +1
Gear +1 composite longbow with 10 inubrix arrows, masterwork
short sword
Treasure: The arrows these skulks fire have heads
crafted from a form of pale skymetal called inubrix,
known also as "ghost iron." Inubrix is very soft metal, but
it passes through iron and steel as if they didn't exist. As a
result, these arrows deal less damage and are treated as if
constantly broken, but they completely ignore AC bonuses
granted by iron or steel armor and shields. An inubrix
arrow is worth 250 gp. More details on inubrix appear on
page 71 of Pathfinder Adventure Path #61.
My that is...verbose. I would not want to quickly locate the important information inside that wall of text
Quote from: S'mon;1015053Well I'm sorry not all my posts are equally wonderful!
Maybe if Pundit paid me more to shill for the OSR you'd get better quality control. As it is you'll just have to put up with variable quality posting.
I want to show you what a typical Paizo dungeon room looks like, since that was my comparison. Here's one from Shattered Star #4, ie the middle of the AP:
B1. Spirits Cellar (CR 11)
The odor of beer permeates this huge room. Several crates,
barrels, kegs, and racks for wine fill the room--many of which
have been opened, emptied, upturned, and shattered. The floor
is littered with glass shards and corks and strewn with loose
coils of rope....one page later....
.... More details on inubrix appear on
page 71 of Pathfinder Adventure Path #61.
Holy **** that's excessive, maybe the definition of prolix, lacking organization and layout. The detail can be nice, just needs to be organized elsewhere like an appendix.
Quote from: Bren;1015145My that is...verbose. I would not want to quickly locate the important information inside that wall of text
I'd narrate to the players "You encounter a Wall of Text, make a save to avoid confusion." The wall of text, the most dreaded of dungeon encounters. At least the Wall of Sleep is cool and bright.
Quote from: Xanther;1015167At least the Wall of Sleep is cool and bright.
Wall of Sleep is lying broken.
That sort of prosaic introduction seems like the kind of thing that is really cool the first time you encounter it, but just gets old after you notice that the players never interact with all this backstory that apparently only exists if someone decides to use Speak With Dead to discover those details instead of just ganking the loot and moving on.
Quote from: fearsomepirate;1015200That sort of prosaic introduction seems like the kind of thing that is really cool the first time you encounter it, but just gets old after you notice that the players never interact with all this backstory that apparently only exists if someone decides to use Speak With Dead to discover those details instead of just ganking the loot and moving on.
that, or Know History spell, Touch of History spell, Know the Enemy spell (on people/creature), divination, bardic knowledge ability, History as skill, Historian trait (making History a class skill with +1 modifier), ect
QuotePC's want to know old lore? History check. Has anyone heard of that bandit gang before? Doesn't it have the name of a super old evil wizard? Isn't that wizard a lich now? Local knowledge followed by a few history checks.
I believe the modules are written assuming that at least one PC is going to know the info from some source, allowing the GM to tell the whole to all players at the table. That assumption is usually right as there are a dozen+ methods to get lore for the characters in Pathfinder. More likely every single character has its own way to get the lore than the chance none of them do. (There are also whole archetypes or classes focusing on lore like Historian/Archeologist/Loremaster as far I can remember)
I think I've encountered exactly one fan of PF on the forum, so shit talking a system no one here likes or plays is just a circlejerk.
Quote from: Voros;1015223I think I've encountered exactly one fan of PF on the forum, so shit talking a system no one here likes or plays is just a circlejerk.
You're only happy when someone is vociferously disagreeing with you?
Quote from: joriandrake;1015202that, or Know History spell, Touch of History spell, Know the Enemy spell (on people/creature), divination, bardic knowledge ability, History as skill, Historian trait (making History a class skill with +1 modifier), ect
It's fine for a dungeon to have backstory, but it is really an issue of placement. If you want to give the story of how skulks came to live in the dungeon, place that in the introductory chapter. I'll read and digest it ahead of time, and I can use it as needed during the session. Room descriptions are for quick reference during play.
My other issue with the backstory is that seems to exist to explain why the monsters are automatically going to fight the PCs, and why they will fight to the death down to the last skulk. It's nice that they provide some strategy for the skulks, but it mostly boils down to the first round of combat. After that, they fight on until the death like robots. It is an initially interesting session that will continue on after the PCs are clearly winning with several rounds of tedious mop up because the skulks won't flee or surrender.
And even if the players use some special ability to divine the skulks backstory, there isn't really any way to use that information in dealing with the skulks. It provides no angle for diplomacy or tip the players off to a weakness. It is just wallpaper that explains why the attackbots are acting like attackbots.
Quote from: Voros;1015223I think I've encountered exactly one fan of PF on the forum, so shit talking a system no one here likes or plays is just a circlejerk.
If we were talking simply about mechanics, I would agree, but the kind of bad adventure writing that Paizo uses is found in other versions of D&D, so I think there is value in discussing the problems with it.
Quote from: Voros;1015223I think I've encountered exactly one fan of PF on the forum, so shit talking a system no one here likes or plays is just a circlejerk.
I like it. I don't love it but I do like it. I also like to read the discusion about it and how others think of certain systems. I might or might not agree wit hthem, perhaps I would adopt a rule or two from their own house rules, and if I ever get to play with them as GM I would have a better understanding on what to expect.
Quote from: Baulderstone;1015246It's fine for a dungeon to have backstory, but it is really an issue of placement. If you want to give the story of how skulks came to live in the dungeon, place that in the introductory chapter. I'll read and digest it ahead of time, and I can use it as needed during the session. Room descriptions are for quick reference during play.
My other issue with the backstory is that seems to exist to explain why the monsters are automatically going to fight the PCs, and why they will fight to the death down to the last skulk. It's nice that they provide some strategy for the skulks, but it mostly boils down to the first round of combat. After that, they fight on until the death like robots. It is an initially interesting session that will continue on after the PCs are clearly winning with several rounds of tedious mop up because the skulks won't flee or surrender.
And even if the players use some special ability to divine the skulks backstory, there isn't really any way to use that information in dealing with the skulks. It provides no angle for diplomacy or tip the players off to a weakness. It is just wallpaper that explains why the attackbots are acting like attackbots.
Isn't that information also useful if you plan to charm/dominate/frighten them, or disguise as NPCs?
That wall of text is not particular to PF it's basically the same style pursued by TSR and successors from late 1E onward with the addition of vastly over detailed statblocks - not a new thing statblocks make old Runequest modules pretty boring to read. One of the greatest things about the OSR has been the effort people have made to figure out the best way to impart the minimal necessary information to run a scenario.
Quote from: ligedog;1015250That wall of text is not particular to PF it's basically the same style pursued by TSR and successors from late 1E onward with the addition of vastly over detailed statblocks - not a new thing statblocks make old Runequest modules pretty boring to read. One of the greatest things about the OSR has been the effort people have made to figure out the best way to impart the minimal necessary information to run a scenario.
I think it's also in part due to creators of the module not wanting the players to use unexpected resolution to situations/combat/dialogue or use of surroundings. The more information you give the cleared the
'allowed story routes' are.
Quote from: joriandrake;1015249Isn't that information also useful if you plan to charm/dominate/frighten them, or disguise as NPCs?
It could be, but I still feel it is poorly placed as part of a room description. By they time I am running a session and checking the contents of Room
x, I should already have an idea of the history and background of the monsters in the dungeon.
Quote from: ligedog;1015250That wall of text is not particular to PF
Sadly this is true.
Quotestatblocks make old Runequest modules pretty boring to read.
I'd say that depends on the particular supplement or scenario. One nice thing is that, at least as they were done up through the end of RQ2 most of a RQ stat block need not be read and can be quickly skimmed unless the PCs contest or combat the NPC. By RQ3 standardized templates e.g. Poor, Fair, Good, and Excellent Warriors were often used so the statblock didn't need to appear in the main text (only the exceptions to the standard template needed notation).
Quote from: Baulderstone;1015266It could be, but I still feel it is poorly placed as part of a room description. By they time I am running a session and checking the contents of Room x, I should already have an idea of the history and background of the monsters in the dungeon.
And the room description should be short and easily laid out so I don't need to reread a fricking wall of text or memory something as long as the Bhagavad-Gita every time I want to run a published adventure.
Quote from: Baulderstone;1015266...By the time I am running a session and checking the contents of Room x, I should already have an idea of the history and background of the monsters in the dungeon.
I could be totally wrong about this due to wrongly remembering, but I think the modules had such info previously printed at the back? If I'm right it's because GMs forgot/overlooked the pages that they placed the informations inside the relevant location(page)
Someone would need to verify this, I did have a few talks with higher ranking GMs when they tried to recruit me as PFS GM but it's pretty blurry now.
EDIT: back to megadungeons
Did anyone else try the method of having a starting point deep in the dungeon for the characters, and then getting them move out of it? (which I mentioned earlier)
Quote from: joriandrake;1015299Did anyone else try the method of having a starting point deep in the dungeon for the characters, and then getting them move out of it? (which I mentioned earlier)
One of the first games I ever played in had that happen accidentally. We had a ship that could sail through the earth, but we couldn't really control it well. It sailed over a dungeon and sank, all the way to the bottom. The ship was our base of operations while tried to explore and find a way out.
I don't remember much more than that... and the 'holy shit!' reaction as we sank past the levels on the way down.
Quote from: joriandrake;1015299I could be totally wrong about this due to wrongly remembering, but I think the modules had such info previously printed at the back? If I'm right it's because GMs forgot/overlooked the pages that they placed the informations inside the relevant location(page)
Someone would need to verify this, I did have a few talks with higher ranking GMs when they tried to recruit me as PFS GM but it's pretty blurry now.
The classic TSR model was to have all the backstory at the front of the module and new monster descriptions in the back.
As for the rationale of sticking it in a room description as GMs were overlooking it when it was elsewhere in the module, I have to wonder how much it was GMs actually overlooking it and how much was GMs simply being unwilling to read that vast wall of background in a Paizo adventure. I don't have any Pathfinder stuff, but I do still have Dungeon Magazines from the Paizo era.
They are painfully over-written when it comes to background detail. There is so much to read and so little of it applicable in play. It sounds like rather than doing some serious editing and cutting back the word count, they decided to keep all that bloat that used to be at the front and spread it evenly though the whole adventure.
Quote from: joriandrake;1015299Did anyone else try the method of having a starting point deep in the dungeon for the characters, and then getting them move out of it? (which I mentioned earlier)
I'm generally reluctant to do that in D&D type "You start at level 1" games because the PCs are already at their weakest starting out, and starting them in such dire straits feels like pouring salt in the wound. I'm fine in a start-at-heroic system, eg I ran d6 Star Wars "Starfall" where the PCs begin as prisoners of the Empire, having to navigate the interior of a dying Star Destroyer, and it was great.
I did run an OGL Conan adventure using 2e AD&D scenario "Thief's Challenge: Beacon Point" where I began with the PCs as survivors of a pirate attack, washed ashore on a strange island. That also worked well.
Quote from: S'mon;1015309I'm generally reluctant to do that in D&D type "You start at level 1" games because the PCs are already at their weakest starting out, and starting them in such dire straits feels like pouring salt in the wound. I'm fine in a start-at-heroic system, eg I ran d6 Star Wars "Starfall" where the PCs begin as prisoners of the Empire, having to navigate the interior of a dying Star Destroyer, and it was great.
I think the other issue is that I think it keeps gameplay more interesting if players can leave the dungeon from time to time and have some wilderness and town encounters. A well enough designed megadungeon can overcome this, of course. It's just something to think about if you do it.
Quote from: S'mon;1015309I'm generally reluctant to do that in D&D type "You start at level 1" games because the PCs are already at their weakest starting out, and starting them in such dire straits feels like pouring salt in the wound. I'm fine in a start-at-heroic system, eg I ran d6 Star Wars "Starfall" where the PCs begin as prisoners of the Empire, having to navigate the interior of a dying Star Destroyer, and it was great.
I did run an OGL Conan adventure using 2e AD&D scenario "Thief's Challenge: Beacon Point" where I began with the PCs as survivors of a pirate attack, washed ashore on a strange island. That also worked well.
In my previous example I mentioned the possible background story that the characters were for various reasons in cryosleep. (due to uncurable illness, being sentenced as criminals, as top priority officials needed to be kept alive)
In this case their location might be either a city which was originally above ground but with time passing (and due to war/ruin of civilization) its remnants are now deep underground, or perhaps the underground location was a top secret facility.
Let's say it was actually a hi-tech hospital in a city. So when they emerge from sleep they find themselves in the ruins of said hospital inside the city which is in some kind of cavern system, underground. Why there were woken up isn't really important, let's say the power just got dangerously low and the AI/system security decided to trigger emergency wake up protocol. The building looks more hitech than what they knew in their time, and they might had been asleep for many centuries during which the tech evolved (their sleeping bodies could've been transported here from other locations too, would explain why criminals, scientists, ill people and politicians/soldiers are all there)
They aren't ill anymore, as the ill characters notice (got cured with futuristic methods). Now they explore their current location, the hospital, they find things they keep like the pistol in a doctor's office desk, various medicine, drugs, basic clothes, canned food. They find some weak enemies which could be anything from normal sized rats to blue slime or undead (skeletons, zombies). Then they find a keycard or such and leave the building, and notice various ruined buildings (the city) where they meet stronger or faster, or bigger (or a mix) enemies, but still few and somewhat easy opponents. In the city they can get even more old food, clothes, perhaps guns from a shop (all looking pretty scifi to them), bedrolls, ropes, ect. As they wander they notice the whole city is underground (maybe they attempted to get on top of a skyscraper first) and the GM can be vague about their location before that, perhaps saying it's likely that deep dark night with no stars in sky is above them. They will attempt to leave the city, automated defence might be activated or they meet remnants of humanity here (or some semiclever monster clans) which they have to overcome to pass through, but that also means they go into more a dangerous area, the cavern system where the creatures and other dangers which didn't get into the city ruins (or weren't interested in it due to lack of prey) lurk. As they go more closer to ground level they find various signs of former ages and technology, of wars, layers of earth/dirt/ash and as the closer they get to the top they might see degenerated tech like steam warengines or near top swords/spears and iron armor.
In this example I tried to describe the underground city ruins (and hospital inside it) was the safest area in the underground, ideal for level 1 characters. In fact the early treasures and gear they can find if they look around is more advanced and worth than what they find as they go upside/outside. They can find kevlar armor, guns, ammo, maybe laser weaponry and personal energyshields with some battery power in them, a working 'hoverjeep', water/various flavored drinks and canned food (not to mention flavor/background info in datapads, history books, ect). As they get more distant from the city they use up food, energy/ammo, fuel for the hiverjeep and they find more things like crossbows, leather armors, terribly tasting monsters (to refill food rations) and perhaps also magic using enemies (magic could be psionic power too, depending on how much you want to keep the story pure scifi).
When the characters get outside their 'city resources' are almost all used up, the jeep is properly left behind a long time ago, they had to eat food what they found or hunted, and drink water from underground rivers/lakes (or refill from various other ruins). Ammo, energy shields with battery, medicine, even canned food that the players/characters saved for later will be a boon in the more (assumedly) primitive society and among monsters they will find above. They might even be able to use old medicine found in the ruins as cure for a plague for a village.
This story/setup would mean the safest place for beginners was in the deepest place where their own tech/culture, or one close to it (maybe more advanced) was easier to reach and gain. As they go out their resources become more limited, ruined warm clothes can't be easily replaced, and the actual adventure starts above, but the characters already gained experience by then and flavor/knowledge wisely placed in ruins (or wherever ele they wander down there or meet other things) means they have a good idea of the history for that 'postapocalyptic' world.
(I'm tired, please excuse me for any typos. I hope this is still somewhat readable)
That is a great idea for a campaign I think, Jorian! Would suit eg Mutant Future or similar very well.
I would probably have some NPC sleepers wake alongside the PCs, for roleplaying opportunities and possibly for replacement PCs.
I've wanted to do a 'sleeper' campaign for a long time, this does seem like a very viable approach.
Quote from: S'mon;1015336That is a great idea for a campaign I think, Jorian! Would suit eg Mutant Future or similar very well.
I would probably have some NPC sleepers wake alongside the PCs, for roleplaying opportunities and possibly for replacement PCs.
I've wanted to do a 'sleeper' campaign for a long time, this does seem like a very viable approach.
That's a good idea, also include some broken cryotanks/beds with skeletons or dust in them. More effective if some players met the NPC characters which are now dead before sleep.
Quote from: Voros;1015223I think I've encountered exactly one fan of PF on the forum, so shit talking a system no one here likes or plays is just a circlejerk.
Pathfinder is D&D, no?
Quote from: Dumarest;1015370Pathfinder is D&D, no?
In all ways except legal ones. It's a retroclone of 3.5 edition D&D, spiritual successor, unofficial sequel, or the equivalent.