Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
IRON DM 2013--Entries, Judgements, Commentary, & Trash-Talk
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Rune" data-source="post: 6156610" data-attributes="member: 67"><p><strong>Round 1, Match 4 Judgement: Mike Myler vs. Dragonwriter</strong></p><p></p><p>Once again, we have one entry that is a lot more polished than the other. I suppose I could be grateful that with the trouble we've had scheduling this last match I've got two entries to judge, at all. But this is IRON DM. It's got a time-limit for a reason—it's supposed to challenge contestants' skill <em>and</em> discipline.</p><p></p><p>So what am I looking at, here? “Quadrial's Tower” takes us on a journey as a sentient golem turns into an enlightened spirit. “The Mortal Coil” throws PCs into a death-trap, where they ultimately confront an aberrant mindflayer intent on becoming divine. One of these adventures is much tighter than the other, but they both have some fundamental problems.</p><p></p><p>Both adventures are strikingly linear (even if they spiral). This isn't necessarily bad design, but it does mean that the DM's options are no less limited than the players. In the case of “The Mortal Coil,” (let's just call it “Coil”) that doesn't leave much, because the adventure is little more than a single scenario in the first place. Sure, it's a super-creepy and fun scenario, but it's still just a single scenario. “Quadrial's Tower” (I think I'll call it “Quad” from now on) has slightly more going on, combining a chase with another chase, so the PCs get to simultaneously be hunters and prey.</p><p></p><p>The hooks in both adventurers are pretty weak. In “Quad,” we're given a standard, wizard-is-missing-go-find-him hook. “Coil” uses a more interesting, but heavy-handed and, frankly, only slightly more interesting get-trapped-by-a-book hook.</p><p></p><p>And then “Quad” presents another problem—once the PCs figure out what happened to the wizard—fairly early on—they have no real motivation, save curiosity, to finish the adventure. This could be enough <em>if</em> they were being presented with clues that their actions were leading to the enlightenment of the golem—but they aren't! All they have a chance of knowing is that every time they destroy the thing it comes back bigger. And just as murderous.</p><p></p><p>On the other hand, the PCs are presented with an interesting option at the end of “Coil.” <em>After</em> they have killed the Mind-Flayer-Thing, that is. Getting there is an atmospheric trip, but it there isn't much choice in the matter. Once they kill the aberration, however, they are presented with an interesting opportunity—and not without cost. Light at the end of a long, spiraling tunnel.</p><p></p><p>I've been pretty harsh, so far, but there are some things that I definitely liked in both entries. I'll focus on those a bit before we get into the largely disappointing uses of the ingredients. First, “Quad” has some <em>very</em> good flavor text. Now, understand something: I say that as someone who generally has no use for flavor text. I almost always present the players with their surroundings in a more free-form and, sometimes, subtle way. But this stuff is very evocative. It makes me wish the rest of the adventure was written in the same style and tone. You know, instead of having all of those stat-blocks dominating the second half. Still, the stat-blocks may well be useful for someone running the game. So, there's that.</p><p></p><p>“Coil” has a great feel to it. It's weird and creepy and, somehow, also haunting. I <em>like</em> what I see there, I just wish there was more to see. I <em>also</em> like how well-formatted and how <em>tight</em> the scenario is. The background tells only what it needs to. Sblocks are used as side-bars to condense the entry. It was easy to read. It doesn't feel like there's any wasted space.</p><p></p><p><em>And then there was some stuff about ingredients:</em></p><p></p><p>I have to say, I felt that there were a lot of missed opportunities in these ingredients. Some of these ingredients were ripe for creative interpretation, but...</p><p></p><p>The <strong>Point of Origin</strong> in “Quad” is nothing but a mine in which the Asmov Ore is found. It's relevance to the PCs is completely nonexistent. In “Coil,” it is the center of the death spiral? That's it?</p><p></p><p><strong>Transcendence</strong> is one of those thematic ingredients I like so much. I like them because they have a lot of potential for weaving into and throughout an entry. They're the kind of thing you can hang an adventure on. I almost got that with “Quad.” Almost. It felt like that was what was <em>supposed</em> to be there, but it was, unfortunately, mishandled. In order for the PCs to get a sense of the golem's transcendence, they need to actually <em>see</em> it happening—and not just the physical enlargement. If an alignment shift from Chaotic Evil to Lawful Good is in the works, let the PCs in on it! And if it's coming about because of the PCs' actions, they need to see that, too! Otherwise, it's just wasted potential!</p><p></p><p>And what about “Coil?” As motivation for the aberration, it works, but it's a little dull. Once again, it isn't something the PCs have any real interaction with, except to stop it. But it really could have been any ritual that needed to be stopped. Transcendence need not have factored into it. Once the aberration is dealt with, however, it gets interesting. The PCs have the opportunity to complete the ritual themselves and become just as wickedly divine as the aberration would have. <em>That's</em> interesting!</p><p></p><p>The <strong>Aberration</strong> in “Coil” is both an aberration in D&D terms, but also an aberrant. I was hoping to see something like that. Unfortunately, the fact that the aberration is an aberration doesn't factor into the adventure at all—it is merely motivation for the NPC. But, at least, it's clever (and flavorful). Sticking creatures with the <strong>aberration</strong> sub-type in a dungeon and having them hunt the PCs (as “Quad” does) isn't that creative a use of the ingredient. Now, if the golem were an aberration (as implied in the entry), that might have worked, but I saw no way to actually take the golem as such. The metal, for instance, was specifically described as being/causing <em>any</em> golems made from it to be Chaotic Evil. That could so easily have not been the case and the ingredient would have worked.</p><p></p><p>And that leads to some disappointment with the <strong>Death Spiral</strong>, as well. First of all, for those of you who don't know, this is another ingredient with multiple definitions. Not only is it a figure-skating technique, but it is used in to describe a situation in which insurance costs rapidly increase because low-risk policy holders change policies or drop them altogether. It has, of course, a similar meaning in gaming: a character acquires penalties through failure (often in the form of wounds), that make success (and, frequently, survival) increasingly less likely. Both entries chose to go with a more literal interpretation. I'm fine with that.</p><p></p><p>What doesn't work for me, however, is what “Quad” does: having a golem die of natural causes in a spiral dungeon and calling it a death spiral. “Coil,” on the other hand, actually has a very interesting take on the spiral dungeon with death in it. It actually sucks the life out of those trapped in it. Good thing, too. Because that's pretty much the entire adventure!</p><p></p><p>“Coil” uses <strong>Sentient Prey</strong> as fuel for the transcendence. On the whole, it's not bad. “Quad” has the PCs hunt a sentient while being hunted, themselves. That has good adventure potential, right there.</p><p></p><p>But where's the <strong>Tasteless Joke</strong>? I've read “Quad” thrice, now. Still—nothing. The best I can figure is that the name of the killer-golem is supposed to be the joke. But it's only tasteless in that it seems to reject themes that Asimov pretty consistently explored. “Coil” actually includes some (pretty tame) tasteless jokes. I can't say I was terribly impressed with the implementation of them as a (heavy-handed) hook to start things off, but, hey...it's something.</p><p></p><p>[spoiler]Mike Myler, you have some strengths that you can build upon for future tournaments. First of all, your vision was a good one. Having the PCs chase a foe while being chased makes for a potentially fun scenario and following the golem as it grows up has great potential, as well. Not to mention a good way with words! If only some more time had been spent in exploring and polishing these elements—and if only the relationships between the ingredients and their relevance in the adventure had gotten a bit more attention...I feel like a second attempt would capitalize on some of the good things you've got buried beneath the surface. That said, I'm afraid that second attempt can't happen in this tournament. Dragonwriter's entry utilizes the ingredients better, and is a tighter, more usable entry. Even if it is a little too small.</p><p></p><p>Dragonwriter, I loved the feel of your entry, but, please, give us some more, next time. And, if I may offer a little advice, pay a little more attention to the ingredients. They are what they are for a reason. Think about <em>several</em> possible interpretations and the implications that they would have for the adventure as a whole. Figure out how these implications might impact a bunch of PCs who blunder into them. You showed some skill in doing this already, but I think you're capable of more. Obviously, this advice applies to all of the other remaining contestants, as well. Dragonwriter advances to Round 2.[/spoiler]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Rune, post: 6156610, member: 67"] [b]Round 1, Match 4 Judgement: Mike Myler vs. Dragonwriter[/b] Once again, we have one entry that is a lot more polished than the other. I suppose I could be grateful that with the trouble we've had scheduling this last match I've got two entries to judge, at all. But this is IRON DM. It's got a time-limit for a reason—it's supposed to challenge contestants' skill [i]and[/i] discipline. So what am I looking at, here? “Quadrial's Tower” takes us on a journey as a sentient golem turns into an enlightened spirit. “The Mortal Coil” throws PCs into a death-trap, where they ultimately confront an aberrant mindflayer intent on becoming divine. One of these adventures is much tighter than the other, but they both have some fundamental problems. Both adventures are strikingly linear (even if they spiral). This isn't necessarily bad design, but it does mean that the DM's options are no less limited than the players. In the case of “The Mortal Coil,” (let's just call it “Coil”) that doesn't leave much, because the adventure is little more than a single scenario in the first place. Sure, it's a super-creepy and fun scenario, but it's still just a single scenario. “Quadrial's Tower” (I think I'll call it “Quad” from now on) has slightly more going on, combining a chase with another chase, so the PCs get to simultaneously be hunters and prey. The hooks in both adventurers are pretty weak. In “Quad,” we're given a standard, wizard-is-missing-go-find-him hook. “Coil” uses a more interesting, but heavy-handed and, frankly, only slightly more interesting get-trapped-by-a-book hook. And then “Quad” presents another problem—once the PCs figure out what happened to the wizard—fairly early on—they have no real motivation, save curiosity, to finish the adventure. This could be enough [i]if[/i] they were being presented with clues that their actions were leading to the enlightenment of the golem—but they aren't! All they have a chance of knowing is that every time they destroy the thing it comes back bigger. And just as murderous. On the other hand, the PCs are presented with an interesting option at the end of “Coil.” [i]After[/i] they have killed the Mind-Flayer-Thing, that is. Getting there is an atmospheric trip, but it there isn't much choice in the matter. Once they kill the aberration, however, they are presented with an interesting opportunity—and not without cost. Light at the end of a long, spiraling tunnel. I've been pretty harsh, so far, but there are some things that I definitely liked in both entries. I'll focus on those a bit before we get into the largely disappointing uses of the ingredients. First, “Quad” has some [i]very[/i] good flavor text. Now, understand something: I say that as someone who generally has no use for flavor text. I almost always present the players with their surroundings in a more free-form and, sometimes, subtle way. But this stuff is very evocative. It makes me wish the rest of the adventure was written in the same style and tone. You know, instead of having all of those stat-blocks dominating the second half. Still, the stat-blocks may well be useful for someone running the game. So, there's that. “Coil” has a great feel to it. It's weird and creepy and, somehow, also haunting. I [i]like[/i] what I see there, I just wish there was more to see. I [i]also[/i] like how well-formatted and how [i]tight[/i] the scenario is. The background tells only what it needs to. Sblocks are used as side-bars to condense the entry. It was easy to read. It doesn't feel like there's any wasted space. [i]And then there was some stuff about ingredients:[/i] I have to say, I felt that there were a lot of missed opportunities in these ingredients. Some of these ingredients were ripe for creative interpretation, but... The [b]Point of Origin[/b] in “Quad” is nothing but a mine in which the Asmov Ore is found. It's relevance to the PCs is completely nonexistent. In “Coil,” it is the center of the death spiral? That's it? [b]Transcendence[/b] is one of those thematic ingredients I like so much. I like them because they have a lot of potential for weaving into and throughout an entry. They're the kind of thing you can hang an adventure on. I almost got that with “Quad.” Almost. It felt like that was what was [i]supposed[/i] to be there, but it was, unfortunately, mishandled. In order for the PCs to get a sense of the golem's transcendence, they need to actually [i]see[/i] it happening—and not just the physical enlargement. If an alignment shift from Chaotic Evil to Lawful Good is in the works, let the PCs in on it! And if it's coming about because of the PCs' actions, they need to see that, too! Otherwise, it's just wasted potential! And what about “Coil?” As motivation for the aberration, it works, but it's a little dull. Once again, it isn't something the PCs have any real interaction with, except to stop it. But it really could have been any ritual that needed to be stopped. Transcendence need not have factored into it. Once the aberration is dealt with, however, it gets interesting. The PCs have the opportunity to complete the ritual themselves and become just as wickedly divine as the aberration would have. [i]That's[/i] interesting! The [b]Aberration[/b] in “Coil” is both an aberration in D&D terms, but also an aberrant. I was hoping to see something like that. Unfortunately, the fact that the aberration is an aberration doesn't factor into the adventure at all—it is merely motivation for the NPC. But, at least, it's clever (and flavorful). Sticking creatures with the [b]aberration[/b] sub-type in a dungeon and having them hunt the PCs (as “Quad” does) isn't that creative a use of the ingredient. Now, if the golem were an aberration (as implied in the entry), that might have worked, but I saw no way to actually take the golem as such. The metal, for instance, was specifically described as being/causing [i]any[/i] golems made from it to be Chaotic Evil. That could so easily have not been the case and the ingredient would have worked. And that leads to some disappointment with the [b]Death Spiral[/b], as well. First of all, for those of you who don't know, this is another ingredient with multiple definitions. Not only is it a figure-skating technique, but it is used in to describe a situation in which insurance costs rapidly increase because low-risk policy holders change policies or drop them altogether. It has, of course, a similar meaning in gaming: a character acquires penalties through failure (often in the form of wounds), that make success (and, frequently, survival) increasingly less likely. Both entries chose to go with a more literal interpretation. I'm fine with that. What doesn't work for me, however, is what “Quad” does: having a golem die of natural causes in a spiral dungeon and calling it a death spiral. “Coil,” on the other hand, actually has a very interesting take on the spiral dungeon with death in it. It actually sucks the life out of those trapped in it. Good thing, too. Because that's pretty much the entire adventure! “Coil” uses [b]Sentient Prey[/b] as fuel for the transcendence. On the whole, it's not bad. “Quad” has the PCs hunt a sentient while being hunted, themselves. That has good adventure potential, right there. But where's the [b]Tasteless Joke[/b]? I've read “Quad” thrice, now. Still—nothing. The best I can figure is that the name of the killer-golem is supposed to be the joke. But it's only tasteless in that it seems to reject themes that Asimov pretty consistently explored. “Coil” actually includes some (pretty tame) tasteless jokes. I can't say I was terribly impressed with the implementation of them as a (heavy-handed) hook to start things off, but, hey...it's something. [spoiler]Mike Myler, you have some strengths that you can build upon for future tournaments. First of all, your vision was a good one. Having the PCs chase a foe while being chased makes for a potentially fun scenario and following the golem as it grows up has great potential, as well. Not to mention a good way with words! If only some more time had been spent in exploring and polishing these elements—and if only the relationships between the ingredients and their relevance in the adventure had gotten a bit more attention...I feel like a second attempt would capitalize on some of the good things you've got buried beneath the surface. That said, I'm afraid that second attempt can't happen in this tournament. Dragonwriter's entry utilizes the ingredients better, and is a tighter, more usable entry. Even if it is a little too small. Dragonwriter, I loved the feel of your entry, but, please, give us some more, next time. And, if I may offer a little advice, pay a little more attention to the ingredients. They are what they are for a reason. Think about [i]several[/i] possible interpretations and the implications that they would have for the adventure as a whole. Figure out how these implications might impact a bunch of PCs who blunder into them. You showed some skill in doing this already, but I think you're capable of more. Obviously, this advice applies to all of the other remaining contestants, as well. Dragonwriter advances to Round 2.[/spoiler] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
IRON DM 2013--Entries, Judgements, Commentary, & Trash-Talk
Top