TikkchikFenTikktikk
First Post
This is a poll based on the Legends and Lore column of 29 March by Mike Mearls.
D&D 4E What do you think of the delve format used in 4E adventures?
- Thread starter TikkchikFenTikktikk
- Start date
TikkchikFenTikktikk
First Post
Personally, I think it's a tool that can be used well (as it is in March of the Phantom Brigade, Red Hand of Doom, and The Slaying Stone). But it has been overused by over earnest or lazy editors to bad effect.
Stormrazor2000
Explorer
I like having the very detailed delve format for set piece encounters, or encounters that have interesting tactical/dynamic terrain (my favorite!). But for mundane encounters it is way too much unneeded detail. I really don't need help to setup a toe to toe fight, thanks. I'd rather have the space freed up for more interesting non-encounter content.
Zaran
Adventurer
My issue is that I use their Dungeon adventures in my online game. It's time consuming to have to go to the encounters then go back to the beginning to figure out where the PCs go next. Or when they meet a NPC but all that NPC's personality and knowledge is in another section of the book and I have to go find it. It's probably not near as bad with a physical book but since we aren't getting any physical books anytime soon...
I'd like all the information in the same spot where that information would be encountered. The Delve format doesn't seem to get there.
I'd like all the information in the same spot where that information would be encountered. The Delve format doesn't seem to get there.
webrunner
First Post
The main problem I have with the format is the order. A lot of the time they put them in order by location, even if the plot means that the two first encounters bookend the second half of the book. So you end up with a normal campaign with no sequence breaking that goes:
Encounter 1, 2, 5, 5a, 5c, 4, 3, 5b, 6
Of course, I dont really like premade adventures anyway. Most of the time you have to make up more than half of it on the spot because they didn't expect your players to ask some obvious thing. You can have more than one response per NPC, you know, Mr. Of The Coast.
Encounter 1, 2, 5, 5a, 5c, 4, 3, 5b, 6
Of course, I dont really like premade adventures anyway. Most of the time you have to make up more than half of it on the spot because they didn't expect your players to ask some obvious thing. You can have more than one response per NPC, you know, Mr. Of The Coast.
the Jester
Legend
I like the template 4e modules use for encounters, with separate sections for monsters, features, etc. but overall have grown to hate the delve format.
It seems to encourage such a focus on the encounter that sometimes maps of the big picture aren't even included. Each encounter becomes its own context, and there is a lot of wasted space in making full or two-page spreads with reprinted maps with the monsters tagged on them so that you can't easily use them as battlemats. I mean, come on... it seems like the delve format promotes good encounter design but poor adventure design.
I'd rather have a good adventure than a crappy adventure with a bunch of good encounters, frankly.
Also- the "delve format" seems to encourage overreliance on dungeon tiles. In that column he mentions the importance of good maps. Tiles generally don't make for good maps. They make for adequate battlemats.
It seems to encourage such a focus on the encounter that sometimes maps of the big picture aren't even included. Each encounter becomes its own context, and there is a lot of wasted space in making full or two-page spreads with reprinted maps with the monsters tagged on them so that you can't easily use them as battlemats. I mean, come on... it seems like the delve format promotes good encounter design but poor adventure design.
I'd rather have a good adventure than a crappy adventure with a bunch of good encounters, frankly.
Also- the "delve format" seems to encourage overreliance on dungeon tiles. In that column he mentions the importance of good maps. Tiles generally don't make for good maps. They make for adequate battlemats.
Upper_Krust
Legend
I really like the Delve format, but I think it can easily become a lazy crutch to fall back on. Plus its overuse has seen it become the 'norm'. But there is no doubting the plug and play usefulness of the format.
However, my biggest gripe with the WotC format in general is the lack of artwork. There's a sterility to endless Maps and Stat-blocks which really takes a lot of the fun out of reading official adventures. I understand the idea behind artwork in a seperate book (so you can show the players) but that doesn't make these things any easier to read. Added to which there is an inherent sameness to the official adventures which needs addressed.
However, my biggest gripe with the WotC format in general is the lack of artwork. There's a sterility to endless Maps and Stat-blocks which really takes a lot of the fun out of reading official adventures. I understand the idea behind artwork in a seperate book (so you can show the players) but that doesn't make these things any easier to read. Added to which there is an inherent sameness to the official adventures which needs addressed.
I like it in "Dungeon Delve", but I REALLY REALLY hate the two-booklet adventure system they use with the encounters all separated away from everything else. It makes them a huge pain to read, breaks up the flow, and for me is really hard to use. My heart sinks every time I see it.
Only thing I care about is all monsters/traps for an encounter on one page. If monsters don't fit on a page, it means there are too many different kinds of monsters (which I don't like and some should be cut off), or the monsters have too many abilities or fiddly bits (which I also don't like). It's kind of a nice spacial boundary, not to mention I don't have to flip through pages when running an encounter.
