Mike Mearls: Build your Adventures in OD&D
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
I am pro-this. I've got a bit of a knack for doing that usually anyway, so I don't write "as if for OD&D," but I write as if there are no monsters, and no treasure, and no powers, and no encounter set-ups.
Scenery is key for evocative exploration. Ideally, interactive scenery. Even if it doesn't do anything other than look cool.
Scenery is key for evocative exploration. Ideally, interactive scenery. Even if it doesn't do anything other than look cool.
The focus on "stuff that the PCs can poke, prod, and inspect" seems to me a natural for 4e, with the amount of time typically spent in an encounter (especially a combat encounter).
Module B1 goes further than usual in the description department, but there is a shortage of dynamic situations before the DM populates the place. There's a lot of "scenery", not so much in the way of interactive gadgetry. It can be especially disappointing when players spent time getting, say, a locked (and possibly trapped) door or drawer or chest open -- to find it simply and dully empty.
There are rooms that really stand out, indeed are of iconic status, such as the pools. There are some lively features, such as a certain cat. In the end, though, too much is -- considered in abandoned isolation -- just enigmatic rather than engagingly mysterious.
The missing ingredient, of course, is monsters. I think one might profitably regard those also from more of an "Original D&D" perspective at first. Multiplication of combat stats and rules can add a bit of interest, but I see less really exciting variety there than in tactical and strategic considerations.
I mean the considerations that come into play when one considers a creature as a creature. What are its interests, and how will it pursue them? What is its place in the environment, and how does it interact with the other critters and/or beings there?
If it comes down to a fight, then the interaction of monsters and environment can help turn another standard-issue slogging match into an exciting situation.
Module B1 goes further than usual in the description department, but there is a shortage of dynamic situations before the DM populates the place. There's a lot of "scenery", not so much in the way of interactive gadgetry. It can be especially disappointing when players spent time getting, say, a locked (and possibly trapped) door or drawer or chest open -- to find it simply and dully empty.
There are rooms that really stand out, indeed are of iconic status, such as the pools. There are some lively features, such as a certain cat. In the end, though, too much is -- considered in abandoned isolation -- just enigmatic rather than engagingly mysterious.
The missing ingredient, of course, is monsters. I think one might profitably regard those also from more of an "Original D&D" perspective at first. Multiplication of combat stats and rules can add a bit of interest, but I see less really exciting variety there than in tactical and strategic considerations.
I mean the considerations that come into play when one considers a creature as a creature. What are its interests, and how will it pursue them? What is its place in the environment, and how does it interact with the other critters and/or beings there?
If it comes down to a fight, then the interaction of monsters and environment can help turn another standard-issue slogging match into an exciting situation.
"Reading the adventure, even without monsters and treasures, is fun." I guess one of my points is a counterpoint to that. What's most important is not how a dungeon reads, but how it plays. Those can be very different experiences.
For an excellent example with all the pieces in place -- as opposed to the "kit" in B1 -- one might look at C1 The Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan.
Paul Jaquays nails, in my view, pretty much every angle of great dungeoneering in his Judges Guild works Dark Tower and Caverns of Thracia (and the latter was in fact written for OD&D).
For an excellent example with all the pieces in place -- as opposed to the "kit" in B1 -- one might look at C1 The Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan.
Paul Jaquays nails, in my view, pretty much every angle of great dungeoneering in his Judges Guild works Dark Tower and Caverns of Thracia (and the latter was in fact written for OD&D).
Mustrum_Ridcully
Hero
Interesting. Does this mean we can look forward again to new WotC adventures?
Of course, an "interesting dungeon" is one thing. I'd also like an interesting story and NPCs to interact with. I guess the design philosophy can be transferred to that, too. But will it be done?
Of course, an "interesting dungeon" is one thing. I'd also like an interesting story and NPCs to interact with. I guess the design philosophy can be transferred to that, too. But will it be done?
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
That's certainly one way to do it, and well worth trying.
Sometimes, though, the monster(s) kinda have to come first in the design process.
Say for example I've got a particular villain as my starting point; he's been an ongoing nuisance, and I know the party are going after him sooner or later. First, I have to do whatever fleshing out he needs that I haven't already done. I next figure out roughly what he keeps around for sidekicks, henches, staff and pets. Then I start thinking about what kind of complex they'd live in, where it is, and how they might defend it, trap it, etc. Only after all that is done can I start getting descriptive, because only then do I know what I'm trying to describe.
Lan-"I am not a monster"-efan
Sometimes, though, the monster(s) kinda have to come first in the design process.
Say for example I've got a particular villain as my starting point; he's been an ongoing nuisance, and I know the party are going after him sooner or later. First, I have to do whatever fleshing out he needs that I haven't already done. I next figure out roughly what he keeps around for sidekicks, henches, staff and pets. Then I start thinking about what kind of complex they'd live in, where it is, and how they might defend it, trap it, etc. Only after all that is done can I start getting descriptive, because only then do I know what I'm trying to describe.
Lan-"I am not a monster"-efan
