Go Back   EN World D&D / RPG News

Thread: D & D Megadungeon Sandbox and 4E
View Single Post
Old 14th February 2009, 06:34 AM   #110 (permalink)
howandwhy99
Community Supporter
 
howandwhy99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 2,561
Blog Entries: 93
howandwhy99 Goblin Sharpshooter (Lvl 2)
Quote:
Originally Posted by crash_beedo
There are still problems... what if the PC's find the different ways down to the second dungeon level (the actual "megadungeon" is below the sewers) - but they choose to clear out additional "delves" in the sewers without taking on greater risks? I plan on giving them compelling plot hooks; clearing out some of those delves naturally - for instance, rival adventurers got there first; making the monetary rewards dwindle.
A dynamic dungeon is going to fill up again (I use the word dungeon for any setting element). Just remember, nature abhors a vacuum. That means whatever's next door over might fill it in or have it out with any other nearby whatevers to fill it in. (Or whatever method(s) you choose for monster/NPC groups to return the total space/world back to equilibrium)

For the "too much XP from wandering monsters" problem, I would look at the AD&D XP tables. They are logarhythmic. So killing wandering monsters doesn't necessarily help you reach next level. Especially if you keep WM's to a finite number and include them on the total level monster list. (WM's might stop wandering too for different reasone). At some point in an excursion their may be no more WM's. And by the principle above about vacuums, if you don't go to them, they may come to you.

EDIT: More clearly, with the log-based XP chart they'll want to leave easier monsters behind if advancement is important to them. Not just sit grinding one level as it won't help.
__________________
Apparently Reagan never played RPGs ...but he liked to watch.
Spoiler:
Participants in the Pentagon simulations were sometimes of very high rank, including members of Congress and White House insiders as well as senior military officers. The identity of many of the participants remains secret even today. It is a tradition in US simulations (and those run by many other nations) that participants are guaranteed anonymity. The main reason for this is that occasionally they may take on a role or express an opinion that is at odds with their professional or public stance (for example portraying a fundamentalist terrorist or advocating hawkish military action), and thus could harm their reputation or career if their in-game persona became widely known.
(cut)
...former US president Ronald Reagan was a keen visitor to simulations conducted in the 1980s, but as an observer only. An official explained: "No president should ever disclose his hand, not even in a war game". Para,6

Last edited by howandwhy99; 14th February 2009 at 06:41 AM..
howandwhy99 is offline   Reply With Quote
 

And yet another word from our sponsors
Visit Our Sponsors
Visit Our Sponsors... Again
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:10 PM.


Site Contents © 2008 ENWorld
PHP Ajax Multimedia Web Framework © 2008 Digital Media Graphix
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

"Vault Data" powered by VaultWiki v2.5.1.
Copyright © 2008 - 2009, Cracked Egg Studios.