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
D&D Older Editions
Keep on the Borderlands, some observations
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="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 9229883" data-attributes="member: 6799660"><p>I agree that the mapping and movement part of the game seem like an excessive extrapolation of dungeon-crawling rules, and that things work relatively fine if just replace the scale with something else and keeping the caves 11 hours direct march (2-3 days with exploration) from the keep. What bugs me about the existing scale (much more than travel speed, which honestly often felt off in TSR-era D&D) is that 6000 yards, much of it with a road, is too close to have a major hub of brigand activity, plus several man-eater monsters, for the threat to be only starting as 'minor issue the keep is willing to pawn off to adventurers.'</p><p></p><p>Regarding the sparsity of town detail, I think there's room to disagree. Potentially based on what you expect from the towns. Justin Alexander <a href="https://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/tag/keep-on-the-borderlands" target="_blank">posits </a>that Gary "<em>primarily saw cities as the hub around which adventures were based: You came back to the city to get supplies and hirelings. You left the city in order to have adventures.</em>" I can't find it, but in another post I think he highlighted how the description of the keep rapidly provides for the players all the information they need to use the town for that purpose -- the main drag is set up with all the different locations an adventurer would need to know about roughly in the order they would be useful -- Gatehouse where the guards can provide the most basic information on what's happened since the party last visited, then stables, then shops and chapel (for healing) before the inn, with a separate inner baily full of the rich and powerful people which can literally be cordoned off until the PCs finish the quest and earn enough renown to deal with such people (and need future adventure hooks). I think that's a not-unreasonable conjecture about the purpose/logic. It's also worth noting that this is intended as an introductory adventure, where maybe it is okay if the guards are 'the guards' and don't have a backstory or wants and dreams. More importantly, that is the time in your (players and DMS) gaming career when too much detail and diversion from the intended adventure (the Caves) might lead to people getting stuck on side plots and not get to the exciting adventure or something. </p><p></p><p>I don't know. Whenever I've run it, I've given townsfolk names and personalities and plots going on ahead of time, but only revealed them when the players press. It didn't seem hard, but a pre-made write-up (perhaps in an optional extra pamphlet labelled 'adventures in town') would have been helpful for a new DM. </p><p></p><p>What I rather more dislike about the module is the incentivization structure it teaches with meeting strangers. There are <spoilers><span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255)"> three</span> specific instances when they run into people wanting the them to help out, offering to help out, etc.: <span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255)">the hermit, the town cleric, and the lady (medusa) in the jail cell</span>). In each case, the party has to decide whether to trust the person/help them out/accept their help or not. In each case, it is a bad idea. Not in isolation, but I think this did contribute to the murderhobo reputation of that era of gaming, as it at least kinda telegraphed that doing otherwise was a bad idea. In my own games, I tend to give them a random chance of being hostile, neutral, or helpful.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Willie the Duck, post: 9229883, member: 6799660"] I agree that the mapping and movement part of the game seem like an excessive extrapolation of dungeon-crawling rules, and that things work relatively fine if just replace the scale with something else and keeping the caves 11 hours direct march (2-3 days with exploration) from the keep. What bugs me about the existing scale (much more than travel speed, which honestly often felt off in TSR-era D&D) is that 6000 yards, much of it with a road, is too close to have a major hub of brigand activity, plus several man-eater monsters, for the threat to be only starting as 'minor issue the keep is willing to pawn off to adventurers.' Regarding the sparsity of town detail, I think there's room to disagree. Potentially based on what you expect from the towns. Justin Alexander [URL='https://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/tag/keep-on-the-borderlands']posits [/URL]that Gary "[I]primarily saw cities as the hub around which adventures were based: You came back to the city to get supplies and hirelings. You left the city in order to have adventures.[/I]" I can't find it, but in another post I think he highlighted how the description of the keep rapidly provides for the players all the information they need to use the town for that purpose -- the main drag is set up with all the different locations an adventurer would need to know about roughly in the order they would be useful -- Gatehouse where the guards can provide the most basic information on what's happened since the party last visited, then stables, then shops and chapel (for healing) before the inn, with a separate inner baily full of the rich and powerful people which can literally be cordoned off until the PCs finish the quest and earn enough renown to deal with such people (and need future adventure hooks). I think that's a not-unreasonable conjecture about the purpose/logic. It's also worth noting that this is intended as an introductory adventure, where maybe it is okay if the guards are 'the guards' and don't have a backstory or wants and dreams. More importantly, that is the time in your (players and DMS) gaming career when too much detail and diversion from the intended adventure (the Caves) might lead to people getting stuck on side plots and not get to the exciting adventure or something. I don't know. Whenever I've run it, I've given townsfolk names and personalities and plots going on ahead of time, but only revealed them when the players press. It didn't seem hard, but a pre-made write-up (perhaps in an optional extra pamphlet labelled 'adventures in town') would have been helpful for a new DM. What I rather more dislike about the module is the incentivization structure it teaches with meeting strangers. There are <spoilers>[COLOR=rgb(255, 255, 255)] three[/COLOR] specific instances when they run into people wanting the them to help out, offering to help out, etc.: [COLOR=rgb(255, 255, 255)]the hermit, the town cleric, and the lady (medusa) in the jail cell[/COLOR]). In each case, the party has to decide whether to trust the person/help them out/accept their help or not. In each case, it is a bad idea. Not in isolation, but I think this did contribute to the murderhobo reputation of that era of gaming, as it at least kinda telegraphed that doing otherwise was a bad idea. In my own games, I tend to give them a random chance of being hostile, neutral, or helpful. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Keep on the Borderlands, some observations
Top