Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Imaculata" data-source="post: 8308792" data-attributes="member: 6801286">The three situations described in the OP, are basically why I never run published adventures. Sooner or later you run into something janky that justifies a rewrite, which can then quickly escalate into several rewrites. And I know I wouldn't have any of these issues if I just wrote the whole damn adventure myself.This sort of railroady design is very common in published adventures. The adventure will have situations that can be solved in one way only, which may not be apparent to the players at all. Players don't always think like the designer after all. Still, it surprises me that such a recent adventure contains such bad design.Not every adventure needs to be a sandbox, but as I understand it, this particular adventure module is actually intended to be like a sandbox. Which makes the railroading even more baffling.Here is how I would fix the issue with the door, and it is an example of how I design dungeons:The door can only be opened by either a knock spell, or by solving a puzzle. The clues for the puzzle are found elsewhere within the same dungeon, in a location they cannot miss. So the players either stumble upon the clue for the puzzle first, or they stumble upon the door first. Either way, they still need to explore a large portion of the dungeon to progress.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Imaculata, post: 8308792, member: 6801286"] The three situations described in the OP, are basically why I never run published adventures. Sooner or later you run into something janky that justifies a rewrite, which can then quickly escalate into several rewrites. And I know I wouldn't have any of these issues if I just wrote the whole damn adventure myself. This sort of railroady design is very common in published adventures. The adventure will have situations that can be solved in one way only, which may not be apparent to the players at all. Players don't always think like the designer after all. Still, it surprises me that such a recent adventure contains such bad design. Not every adventure needs to be a sandbox, but as I understand it, this particular adventure module is actually intended to be like a sandbox. Which makes the railroading even more baffling. Here is how I would fix the issue with the door, and it is an example of how I design dungeons: The door can only be opened by either a knock spell, or by solving a puzzle. The clues for the puzzle are found elsewhere within the same dungeon, in a location they cannot miss. So the players either stumble upon the clue for the puzzle first, or they stumble upon the door first. Either way, they still need to explore a large portion of the dungeon to progress. [/QUOTE]

Verification