Possible different types of adventures.

[ggroy]

Another adventure type I can think of offhand, would be a spy or espionage type mission. Though something like this would probably be like a lot of role playing and doing skill challenges, than extensive combat. This would probably be more like a short mission, than anything which would encompass an entire D&D module.

But if I really wanted to play a spy/espionage type of rpg game, it may be easier to just open up my old Top Secret or James Bond rpg books, than playing something that is "shoehorned" into a fantasy game like 4E D&D.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Organic adventurers would be very difficult to write because they would depend almost wholly on how the Game Master runs his players through things.

For example, some of the things I keep hearing about are wanting more motivations and roles and options for NPCs. Most NPCs that the players are going to interact with fall into enemy or ally and for the ally part, most of those fall into patron or background/quest giver.

To get into something that would provide a lot of options for a GM would almost be like releasing a book of NPCs with numerous plots and complications that would link them together.

The problem is that it's a 'spider' web type relationship and D&D is fairly a straight up game where level advancement is the true currency of the game.

Having X happen in stage Y and not effect other parts of the 'adventure' would require the GM to have numerous sets of generic stats so that when players had to react in the game towards the individuals, that there would be an appropriate level encounter for them.

In games like GURPS or Hero, while that's true to a point, it's certainly not as ingrained in the game system. A 10th level character and a 20th level character are as different asn ight and day while a 250 point character isn't as powerful as a 275 but they're still in the same.... sphere.

Building non-Dungeon related adventurers would rely on the Game Master being willing to run the campaign more along the veins of open sourced material ala 2nd edition where there were numerous things like the Site books or the various guild books based on the classes with numerous background details and a few bits of crunch.

The problem in those though, is do most games stick together long enough to make running them worth while? Is the GM going to have the same crop of players to allow an 'organic' published campaign to thrive?

One of the strengths of 4e is it's very 'sit down and play' nature. Non-dungeon crawls work heavily against that grain.

 

[ggroy]

Has anyone successfully made an "organic" system of modules + setting books, in the past?

 

[ggroy]

Having X happen in stage Y and not effect other parts of the 'adventure' would require the GM to have numerous sets of generic stats so that when players had to react in the game towards the individuals, that there would be an appropriate level encounter for them.

...

Building non-Dungeon related adventurers would rely on the Game Master being willing to run the campaign more along the veins of open sourced material ala 2nd edition where there were numerous things like the Site books or the various guild books based on the classes with numerous background details and a few bits of crunch.

To do an "organic" system of modules and setting effectively, I would guess that one may very well have to extensively document a lot of the setting's world such as what was done with Mystara or Forgotten Realms. These days it seems like WotC doesn't have the appetite for doing such a thing again. I don't know whether a 3PP company has the fortitude and resources to take on such a huge undertaking.

The downside of a heavily documented world whether through supplement books and/or novels, is how the "canon lawyers" frequently become a menace and completely ruin a setting.

 

[Truename]

The question here is, what types of alternative "non dungeon crawl-ish" adventures are there which could be done within the constraints of the DDI character builder? (That is, adventures which do not resemble WotC 4E style generic "dungeon crawls" and which do not require the addition of new 3pp player specific crunch).

Two words: Willie Walsh.

More than two words: The problem isn't the content, it's the way it's executed. It seems like everybody's interested in being "old school," except than when old school was the only school, being new, innovative, or simply awesome was what was interesting. Nowadays it seems like "old school" means tossing people at a collection of encounters wrapped in a dungeon and dressed up with a bare minimum of backstory and plot.

Give me intriguing dungeon dressing. Give me back story, mystery, and hints I can use to tantalize the players. Use some of the great encounter design vs. player type advice in DMG2. Give me a new way of approaching the adventure, politics, real consequences for failure... heck, real possibility of failure. Stop spoon-feeding me. Build an encounter that's level -6 and make it FUN. Build an encounter that's level +10 and make IT fun. Erase that skill challenge's series of dice rolls and turn it an event. Something we can actually PLAY.

This isn't a 4e vs. 3e thing. I love 4e. It's not about DDI or not DDI. Great adventures aren't about the ruleset or the crunch; they're about the creativity. Stop phoning it in.

(PS: Whatever did happen to Willie?)

 

[MichaelSomething]

I wonder if Open Design successfully fills the desire for "non-WOTC" type adventures? From the grumbling I see online, I guess not

But if I really wanted to play a spy/espionage type of rpg game, it may be easier to just open up my old Top Secret or James Bond rpg books, than playing something that is "shoehorned" into a fantasy game like 4E D&D.

Ever consider Spycraft?

 

[S'mon]

Personally I'm interested in wilderness hex-crawl, naval sea-crawl, underdark cave-crawl, urban pub-crawl... - basically anything but the standard WotC/Goodman Dungeon-crawl.

Edit: WotC/DCC dungeons aren't really 'old school' because they tend to be linear sequences of set-piece encounters, without the strategic depth you get in a good old-school dungeon. In my last campaign I ran two old-school modules, B7 Rahasia and B5 Horror on the Hill, followed by 2 DCCs. The DCCs' design proved very lacklustre in comparison to the old TSR mods, often devolving to fight-fight-fight. By contrast the TSR mods had an emphasis on exploration and a very wide variety of choices in what to do and where to go.

I think good module design is an art that has rather been lost. The Necromancer 3e mods come closer than the DCCs, but even they feel a bit lacking IME. Even with the mods up on Dragonsfoot, I think the ones that feel really fresh and also strategically interesting tend to be the "This is my dungeon from 1978" ones, like The Endless Tunnels of Enlandin, rather than more recent efforts.

 

[ggroy]

Ever consider Spycraft?

I have some of the older 1st ed Spycraft and Shadowforce Archer books. But I have not been able to convince my present group or previous gaming groups to play it. My previous gaming groups were more interested in Top Secret for a spy/espionage type game.

 

[ggroy]

Personally I'm interested in wilderness hex-crawl, naval sea-crawl, underdark cave-crawl, urban pub-crawl... - basically anything but the standard WotC/Goodman Dungeon-crawl.

Edit: WotC/DCC dungeons aren't really 'old school' because they tend to be linear sequences of set-piece encounters, without the strategic depth you get in a good old-school dungeon. In my last campaign I ran two old-school modules, B7 Rahasia and B5 Horror on the Hill, followed by 2 DCCs. The DCCs' design proved very lacklustre in comparison to the old TSR mods, often devolving to fight-fight-fight. By contrast the TSR mods had an emphasis on exploration and a very wide variety of choices in what to do and where to go.

I think good module design is an art that has rather been lost. The Necromancer 3e mods come closer than the DCCs, but even they feel a bit lacking IME. Even with the mods up on Dragonsfoot, I think the ones that feel really fresh and also strategically interesting tend to be the "This is my dungeon from 1978" ones, like The Endless Tunnels of Enlandin, rather than more recent efforts.

When do you believe the "art of good module design" started falling to the wayside and lost?

I suspect the "art of good module design" started to fall by the wayside when the Dragonlance modules came along. I don't remember many AD&D modules being excessively railroady before Dragonlance. I felt the quality of the AD&D modules got progressively less interesting as time went on. By the time 2E came around, the "art of good module design" was probably more or less "lost" by then.

 

[mevers]

I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it until someone listens and put sit out so I can buy it, but I want short side treks. Something I can drop into my campaign and deal with in a session (or two at the most), that allows me to weave the rest of the campaign around it and doesn come to dominate the entire campaign.

Link enough of these together, and the players get the sense of a "sandbox" type campaign, even though i lack the ability to actually run one.

I detest these modules that dominate my campaigns by taking 3 - 4 levels to complete. I detest even more DUNGEONS that take more than 1 level to complete. I don't even like taking an extended rest in a dungeon.