D&D General Dungeon Mag vs TftYP Hill Giant Steading (Spoilers)

[FitzTheRuke]

I'm just starting running a 5e Play-by-Post Against the Giants: Steading of the Hill Giant Chief here on ENWorld.

If you are one of my players, stay out of this thread until we're done playing, please!

Because I want to talk to the community about the differenced between the Tales From the Yawning Portal version, and the Chris Perkins - written 4e version from Dungeon Magazine.

Playing 5e, I had assumed that I would use the TFtYP version. I only looked at the Dungeon one (I had run it years ago, when it first came out, back in 4e) because I like the sweet, sweet Mike Schley version of the map better than the one included in YP, and you gotta use maps in PBP (well, you don't gotta but it saves a lot of back-and-forth).

So I started populating the map from Dungeon, with the monsters from YP. Trouble was, they didn't fit very well. Giants, in 4e were only Large size, and in 5e, they are Huge. So I compared the maps. There are differences, but they're basically the same size. In fact, there's more "room" on the Dungeon one for giants to get around. Let me show you some examples, so you can see how egregious this is:

Spoiler: The Great Hall (and what TFtYP says should be found in it)

Looks like a "fun" fight, right?

Here's what it would look like in 4e:

Spoiler: Great Hall (from 4e Dungeon Mag)

Now, back in 4e, those Hill Giants would not have all been the same, having different abilities to challenge the players.

I have more examples to discuss, but I think I'll stop here to let you chime in. PLEASE, I am not looking for an edition war. I am looking for a discussion of the relative merits of the adventures as they are presented in these two products (AND I'd be happy to hear from someone familiar with the Original!)

Your thoughts?

 

[jasper]

The yawning portal map did not change the scale of the map. Each square should be 20 feet.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

The yawning portal map did not change the scale of the map. Each square should be 20 feet.

Really? It says 10 on it. Is the original larger? (I mean, obviously that would help a lot.) I admit, the first one looks more like the giants are having a party, which is what both descriptions suggest is going on at the time.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Well, I have no experience with AtG from 4E, but I have run the original using AD&D several times and ran the 5E TftYP version once for my 5E group. Here is the map I used for 5E, with each square = 5ft. You can compare it to see how the size "measures up".

View attachment Against the Giants_Hill Giants_Upper Level_low.jpg


Otherwise, I found the TftYP version pretty good as far as the encounters were concerned.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Well, I have no experience with AtG from 4E, but I have run the original using AD&D several times and ran the 5E TftYP version once for my 5E group. Here is the map I used for 5E, with each square = 5ft. You can compare it to see how the size "measures up".

View attachment 156604


Otherwise, I found the TftYP version pretty good as far as the encounters were concerned.

That's a sweet map, much better than the TftYP version, but it's at the same scale with the great hall being 120-feet across. Did you shrink the giants to Large Size? (That would be the easiest, other than doubling the size of the steading).

 

[jasper]

Really? It says 10 on it. Is the original larger? (I mean, obviously that would help a lot.) I admit, the first one looks more like the giants are having a party, which is what both descriptions suggest is going on at the time.

The original is 10 feet per square but 1E had hill giants being only about 10 1/2 feet tall. So most giants back in 1E were large. And no squeezing rule. Most giant minis were one inch by 2 inch base and proper scale was not a thing.
Edit. Also room 5 is missing a door.

 

[DND_Reborn]

That's a sweet map, much better than the TftYP version, but it's at the same scale with the great hall being 120-feet across. Did you shrink the giants to Large Size? (That would be the easiest, other than doubling the size of the steading).

No, I kept it the same size, but I (as a DM) differentiate between the space a creature "occupies" and what it "controls". So, I don't mind squeezing larger creatures together a bit.

But, I generally keep the space RAW. For example, here is a screen shot of my powerpoint for the Frost Giant Lower Level with a frost giant token and the four PCs:

You can see the 5' grid, and the frost giant occupies a 3x3 section while each PC occupies just 1x1.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

The original is 10 feet per square but 1E had hill giants being only about 10 1/2 feet tall. So most giants back in 1E were large. And no squeezing rule. Most giant minis were one inch by 2 inch base and proper scale was not a thing.
Edit. Also room 5 is missing a door.

Yeah, nothing's perfect, and I generally just change anything I don't like anyway, as opposed to be stuck on an adventures flaws, but I found it funny that as written, the TFtYP version - I mean, look at this:

Spoiler: The Kitchen (TFtYP version)

That's a lotta ORCS!

(BTW for anyone following along who doesn't know, in TFtYP it has "Hill Giant Servants" and says "use the Ogre Statblock" - those are my Icons that say "HG Schlub")

 

[DND_Reborn]

Here is the map with the creatures for the great hall laid out using the RAW spacing. It certainly looks "crowded" but that is supposed to be the idea:

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Here is the map with the creatures for the great hall laid out using the RAW spacing. It certainly looks "crowded" but that is supposed to be the idea:

It's true that your "see-through" icons (more correctly reflect the actual size of the creatures, rather than just their spacing) make it not quite so bad. And yes, story-wise it's a feast, so the hall might OUGHT to be crowded. (I really do like your maps. I'm jealous, really, I do what I can with Excel and MS Paint).

It also doens't help how 'dinky' the TFtYP map's furnishings are, either... your tables are so much better.