Monte Cook's new Dungeonaday.com?

[Cergorach]

The niche is those that have enjoyed the products that Monte has published in the past. If he gets Ptolus sales numbers to subscribe to this he is in a very profitable position. It will most certainly NOT be for everyone, but it will certainly be on my list of things I subscribe to. A movie ticket in NYC is 10.50 if you are lucky. 7 bucks for a month of Monte is a bargain from my point of view.

I would like to point out that Ptolus sold atleast a 1000 units through direct preorder through the White Wolf website, those first thousand were signed. Then there where the X amount of copies that went into the retail channel.

If a 1000 lunatics are willing to spend $120 plus shipping (and import fees) on a huge book, sight unseen. Then there will be a 1000+ folks that will spend $7 a month on a web service by Monte, sight unseen.

ps. I'm lunatic #37 ;-)

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

The fact is that rules do matter to a lot of old school players. A lot of things that are more prevalent in old school play - like managing retainers, quickly resolving fights with wandering monsters, avoiding combats altogether, and rolling up characters more frequently to replace the fallen - are handled in a clumsier or more time-consuming way by the newer systems.

This hits the nail on the head; the system influences the adventure design and the game play. That's not to say that such influence can't be overcome, but many times it's an influence that is not even perceived or recognized.

Another example: the role of wandering monsters in the traditional approach is that of a dangerous drain on PC resources that offers no real reward. You don't get much XP from killing monsters in the old systems, and wandering monsters have little or no treasure (i.e. the "story reward" in the old school game where "fortune and glory" is the goal). Thus, they're something to be actively avoided, and encourage efficient use of time, staying on track, et cetera. It also encourages avoiding such encounters, where possible. However, later editions use a different XP scheme for monsters, and this alters the reward/benefit from fighting wandering monsters. They can even become a reward in and of themselves -- something to be sought out, rather than avoided. That's not necessarily bad, but it's not the traditional old-school approach.

Another often overlooked example, not as rooted in system: the use of empty space in the dungeon. The original guidelines suggest that only 1/3 of the encounter areas (e.g. rooms) hold a monster. There's a lot of "empty space" in an old school dungeon. That empty space serves multiple purposes. It acts as a buffer between areas. It encourages big dungeons, which encourages lots of choices for the players (i.e. multiple paths through the complex). It offers a level of uncertainty to the players, and they have to balance their desire to thoroughly search everything and everywhere with the danger of wandering monsters. That means that they may miss stuff, but that's a hallmark of old school play to. The big, campaign dungeon is a place that PCs return to again and again; it's not merely a lair (even a big one). It offers opportunities for repeat play and meaningful exploration and discovery. The empty space also gives PCs the opportunity for meaningful evasion and pursuit. There's actually some room to run, and multiple paths to throw off pursuit. Spells like hold portal start getting used. Food and treasure getting dropped to delay or stop pursuit becomes a good tactic. Et cetera.

The distribution of monsters and treasures in the dungeon is another area where I'm concerned that dungeon-a-day may not offer what I'm looking for. We'll see.

 

[Sammael]

I would commend you on transcending the core D&D experience, but not at the expense of feigning ignorance of the roots of the game.

I'm not feigning ignorance. I know the whole story, Chainmail and all. It's just that it is my firm belief that that particular style of play went the way of the dodo some fifteen years ago. Sure, elements of it persist even today (in 4E more than 3.x), but I have yet to meet a person who likes to play the "all dungeon crawling, all the time" paradigm today. How many people who bought WLD actually played through it? How many gave up after a dozen sessions?

Having said that, since I hate dungeons (both as a player and as a DM), and I am not very good at designing them quickly, I may subscribe to Monte's service to learn from his advice. Because even though I hate them, I think they're still necessary... every once in a while.

 

[carmachu]

I think cri de coeur is a nicer word than "hissy fit," but to each his own.

Some people appear to have misunderstood my points in that post, which were twofold: First, I am naturally suspicious of anyone using the term "old school" in reference to a project associated with v.3.5.

If it wasnt so irrational, ci de coeur might work. But hissy fit seems much better fit.

Second: what are you, the gate keeper of "old school"? More than couple of 3.5 products harken back to a bit of old school.

 

[DaveMage]

Hi. I'm Dave and I like dungeon crawls.

I like big dungeon crawls and I like small dungeon crawls.

I like the World's Largest Dungeon and Rappan Athuk Reloaded.

I like the Tomb of Horrors and Castle Whiterock (and the other 51 DCCs for 3.x).

I like Undermountain and the Lost Tomb of Abysthor.

I even like the Caverns of Thracia and Dark Tower.

I like the dungeons under Ptolus and the Temple of Elemental Evil.


And even with all of that, I still want more.

 

[Odhanan]

Hi. I'm Dave and I like dungeon crawls.
(...)

And even with all of that, I still want more.

I subscribe to this post and add my stamp of approval on it. You and me, Dave. You and me.

 

[catsclaw227]

A lot of things that are more prevalent in old school play - like managing retainers, quickly resolving fights with wandering monsters, avoiding combats altogether, and rolling up characters more frequently to replace the fallen - are handled in a clumsier or more time-consuming way by the newer systems. I'm not saying that d20 or 4E isn't fun, but those games more naturally handle a different style of play.

Well, let's be honest, most of the henchmen (and maybe retainers) that people got back in the old days were used primarily as canon-fodder and treasure mules. Maybe a retainer eventually became the players next PC, but in my experience that wasn't the norm, but rather the exception.

What is the point of a wandering monster, if the goal is the "quickly resolve fights" with them? I mean, if they are a nuisance to the flow of the game, why have them? As living piles of XP?

Oh, and rolling up a new character in 4e is just as fast as one for 1e. So that particular myth about old-school vs. new-school has been debunked.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I have yet to meet a person who likes to play the "all dungeon crawling, all the time" paradigm today.

Your experience is atypical.

 

[JamesM]

If it wasnt so irrational, ci de coeur might work. But hissy fit seems much better fit.

As you wish.

Second: what are you, the gate keeper of "old school"? More than couple of 3.5 products harken back to a bit of old school.

I'm a gamer expressing skepticism at the use of "old school" by a designer whose work I don't think fits my understanding of that term. I'm honestly not sure why this is so outrageous, particularly given that I've also made it clear that I'm nevertheless going to keep an eye on the project before I make a final determination of my feelings on the matter. One of the crazy things about me is that I've been known to change my mind on various matters and admit when I'm wrong, as I have been many times. Go figure.

But, hey, if this discussion is better helped by painting me as an overgrown child pitching a fit, knock yourself out.

 

[ruemere]

Cergorach, in response to my post:

The old 3.5E adventures where $9.99, so $7 is cheaper, but I don't think you can really compare the two. But you fail to see the real value here, for only $7 a month you can have an adventure that will last you years upon years, at this rate you'll have enough material to last you well into retirement ;-) And I seriously doubt that many folks read the boxed text from the adventures, I might have at one time when I was a whee young pup of a DM at my twelve years of age, but that was a long time ago and didn't last long (the reading aloud part).

When you look at base numbers, yes, you may be wondering about me calling 7 dollars a month to be a steep price. However, as I mentioned, I tend to develop material further to encompass current campaign story arcs. And so the books grow. My current adventure purchase rate is around one per 3-4 months. I do buy modules, but only if I really think they offer me something worthwhile - a story, an encounter or similar. Full adventures are not something I need right now (especially since my campaign world of choice, Scarred Lands, have been dead for several years now, and since I have subscribed to Pathfinder adventures since the latest adventure path is likely to provide me with some original ideas).

Adding 7 dollars to this does seem to be bit excessive. Especially, since the materials are going to be of digital variety.

You do understand you can use this to prepare before the session and use a relatively new invention, called a printer, to 'print' stuff to use in your adventures? I generally see these electronic aids as tools to prepare a session before it starts...

You, Sir, underestimate me. I am pretty tech savvy, my sessions are usually prepared via several digital tools and final materials are usually in PDF just in case I needed them. The data is usually printed out (using passable OpenOffice.org template of my design) with various mechanics and statistics included (latest minicampaign is 36 pages long at this moment).
That said, all of this is firmly committed to my memory. As I said, I prefer not to look into docs while the players are waiting for my response - I have to check an odd stat or more vaguely worded stuff from time to time, but I take pains not to browse/click/type during sessions... too much anyway.

For the same reason, I avoid running combats using miniatures (especially, since many of my combat encounters use three dimensions as opposed to two dimensional battlemat).

Regards,
Ruemere