Firstly can I say that this was a great read and thank you Melan for all the obvious effort that went into your starting post.
It's threads like this and poster's willing to give so much of their thought and time that makes ENWorld such a special place.
Secondly, I'm not too sure that linearity is as evil as people sometimes make out. The example given by ironregime is a case in point:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ironregime What if I designed a really awesome, multi-dimensional dungeon map with lots of ways the players could go, and then instead of making a key of encounters, I just sat down and made a list of all the fun and important encounters that the PCs should experience before they got to the end?
Then no matter which way the players went, they would still end up fighting the kobold sentries, solving the riddle of the magic pool, talking to the prisoners who give the PCs clues about the BBEG, finding the secret door, killing the guardian of the helm of brilliance, and then using it against the half-dragon lich in the final encounter.
Now this might sound like railroading, but it results in a cool adventure. Much more fun than if the players completely bypass the clues, miss the helm, and become lich-food. |
For a lot of players this level of DM direction is a good thing. A lot of fun can be had purely by the great encounters planned and the non-stop action. However, there is one important ingredient that this approach is vacant of. Action and reaction. Without this, the depth of the game maintains a tepid consistency. In subtle ways, people wonder: what would have happened if their PCs had have zigged instead of zagged? Well, they would have gone up that tunnel and taken on the Sentries through the other door. Would this affect things much? Maybe but not really. It is more a cosmetic fascade for an encounter that was always going to happen.
I believe the thing that can make a game special is when the DM alters the finish line, introduces another "player" in the game or reacts in some way to what the PCs are doing. Entire arcs may appear or disappear depending upon whether a PC forgets to write that letter, goes out of their way to make a snide remark to an NPC with a long memory or perhaps befriends someone for information rather than capturing them. These are the elements of a game which to me make it fun and more involving. I believe players talk about what their characters are going to do, much more so than what cool encounters they have endured.
Now, what I believe Melan has successfully done is shown how this selfsame principle is embodied in the layout of "good" dungeons. It is certainly something I think worthy of further exploration. While it is generally far more practical to have linear elements in published adventures, perhaps some of the more complex elements have momentarily faded from the screen? Or perhaps these are the things good DMs will augment their adventures with anyway?
Best Regards
Herremann the Wise
And yet another word from our sponsors
