Essays on Game Design

Jack7

First Post
I have decided to write, over time, a series of Game Design articles to complement the other gaming posts I have been making, such as Adventure/Scenario/Mission Ideas. These essays will address various aspects of general game design, but will sometimes concentrate on specific gaming genres, or specific aspects of game type. I'm listing it in this forum because the general thrust of these essays should be applicable to more than one genre, or even to more than one type of game, such as RPGs, ARGs, or even to video and computer games, and to virtual reality.

However, occasionally, I will be writing essays which fix upon a design element or problem peculiar to a particular genre or type of game. Such as this essay about the problems involving Monster Design and the so-called Dungeon Crawl in D&D and other fantasy RPGs.


ESSAYS ON GAME DESIGN

Essay One: Crawling into Oblivion



Some things that have always bothered me about D&D, and indeed most fantasy RPGs, happen to deal with the way monsters and other dangerous types of creatures and NPCs are presented. In D&D the monster has been reduced to little more than a set of statistics, numbers, and aspect summaries, with little if any regard given to even the idea of what the word actually means. What it means to be a monster, and what monsters would be like if they really existed (I'm leaving aside for the moment any consideration of the "human monster" who is often far too real, but is in many instances a good guide for how non-human monsters would behave and operate). For instance many dungeons, adventures, and scenarios are built around the idea that for some unknown (and rarely if ever well-explained) reason, creatures that are hostile and dangerous to people somehow, and usually without prodding, just seem to naturally cooperate with each other to attack adventurers, but not each other. For instance orcs and kobolds can often be found in the same dungeon, no explanation given as to why they would tolerate each other rather than slaughter each other. And many monsters just seem to sit around waiting for the hapless adventure rather than patrolling whatever dungeon they inhabit, with a well-practiced defense or attack plan, cleaning out the other potential hostiles. A typical dungeon filled with a number of different types of belligerent monsters would hardly be a likely, believable, or functional scenario even in the often not very well thought out world of fantasy adventuring. This type of incredulous scenario is especially true of the so-called "Dungeon Crawl." Monsters, because they are monsters, would kill each other off and by the time the party arrived the adventurers would be dealing only with the most dangerous and aggressive survivor. For instance, if the Minotaur and the Chimera both existed in the same Labyrinth then sooner of later only one would be left. Furthermore, monsters, if they were organized by some higher force would not be sitting around in a dungeon room just waiting for the adventurers to blunder into their living area. At the first sign of infiltration the monsters would be on the prowl, seeking out and hunting any invaders without rest until such invaders are slaughtered. Monsters cannot be both hostile, aggressive, full of avarice and greed, hoarders of treasure, and bloodthirstily dangerous, and simply lounging about waiting to see if their lair will be invaded by some dangerous force, while calmly playing gentlemen card games with the goblins in the next room to see who gets to keep the ancient artifact they all covet. It's ridiculous, even in the silliest of fantasy worlds. Without a very excellent and extremely fearful need to cooperate, monsters simply don't. They kill each other instead and eat the remains of the weaker creature.

Another thing that bothers me about D&D is the fact that once you meet a monster, or have read about it in the Monster Manual, from then on, it is far too often simply just a matter of encountering hit point variants of the same creature. Having fought Trolls before you know how to kill them and make them stay dead. (In horror/weird, sci-fi, detective, even some military/modern and superhero games - though superhero games, like fantasy often have on-going baddies whose nature you are already well familiar with - this is not nearly as big a problem because often one is constantly encountering new creatures and beings and enemies about whom you have little, if any, advanced foreknowledge.) Of course historical records could account for certain knowledge about monsters in fantasy game settings, but otherwise because they are monsters they should be unknown or at least little-known entities; a shock to the system, a surprise, and a real danger. And anything you have advanced intelligence on is far less dangerous than the unknown. These problems regarding monsters greatly reduce the tension and sense of danger in playing the game, and for that reason, they greatly reduce the fun.

I have tried over the years to address these "monstrous problems" in my Campaign setting, and in the adventures I write for the players to undertake. For instance in my world monsters and unique, usually one of a kind creations, much more similar to the monstrosities and prodigies of ancient Greece, than the creations of modern fantasy role play. This means when the party does encounter a monster then in game terms it is a real, dangerous, feral, vicious brute. Really and truly monstrous. It also means you can't pull out the Monster Manual to know best how to fight it or know if it likes laying traps and ambushes or the straight out, let's get bloody, man-to-man brawls. Furthermore it knows where it lives, how it moves, what its tactics are, what techniques it will employ far better than the players. (Which ain't the case most of the time now.) Making it that much more dangerous and lethal because it is an unknown quantity with unknown qualities. You don't know the creature's level, challenge rating, hit point count, what it can do, etc. You just know it bites, claws, and kills. So in that way I've solved the "Over-familiarity/Lack of Danger Aspect" of monster design weakness in D&D. (This is just a general "design principle," and like all design principles it is of course open to whatever the DM and players want to do. If the DM and players want gnolls who dress like circus clowns and eat hay and farm naked molerats for monsters, so be it. I'm talking about game monsters that are truly monstrous, and dangerous, and unknown, not colorful and comic, humorous, and so familiar they might as well be wearing body scales made out of neon glowing statistical probability charts. If monsters were real they would not be "readable and predictable," instead they would be lethal, unpredictable, and stat graphs and hit point counts would be the very least of your worries if you encountered one that was pissed off, moody, or feeling kinda hungry.)

The First Problem though, the problem of "Cooperative Design and Behavioral Unbelieveability," is harder to address, especially when you want to create a "Dungeon Crawl" for your players to game. Because, let's face it, although the standard crawl is silly and extremely weak as normally designed, it is also fun and exhilarating, and is what most people (especially older players) think of first when they think of playing D&D. The common crawl, although utterly ridiculous in many respects, can be a lot of fun if done right.

So, to that end, it seems like if you're gonna create a really first rate Crawl, and I think most DMs should include at least one good crawl (if not many more) in their campaign repertoire, then a few basic design rules would help a lot.

1. Make it as logical and believable as possible, so that even in the middle of a crawl it still seems dangerous and believable. Something where the player wouldn't say to himself, "That's stupid and silly, no orc would ever team up with a gelatinous cube to try and keep me from killing the giant python who lives on top of a pile of gold." So, if there is to be cooperation between creatures whose aims and interests vary, not to mention outright oppose one another, either include a force powerful enough to control and manipulate them all, or use other methods that make it at least seem plausible that the hobgoblin would be working with the Barrow Wight instead of fleeing in horror from such a terrifying and dangerous undead creature.

2. Place in the crawl creatures the players have never encountered before or at least variants of the typical monster types so radical that the players won't really know what they are fighting, or even exactly how to fight them. Bring back the excitement, wonder, horror, and lethality of the monster. He ain't just a giant with 300 hit points, he's a vicious, black-hearted mutha who will snap off your head with his bare hands, drink your blood and grind your bones to make his bread. He means business, he's set traps for you, and if you get close enough that he can catch you he means to rip your arm from the socket and club you to death with it. He enjoys doing that kinda thing because, well... he's a monster.

3. Include tricks, traps, ambushes and other dangerous things that the players are unaware of but the creatures know exist. And let the creatures, monsters, opponents use these traps, tricks, puzzles, and ambushes in such a way as to most damage the party and most enhance their own (the monster's) chances of survival. That is to say the monsters know their environment and how to use it, the players don't. Let the monsters use every advantage they have, especially environmental.

4. Use every other trick and technique you have available to make the crawl and believable, but also as risky as possible. Remember the adventurer is infiltrating a place he has never been before, has only sketchy, at best, intelligence on, and is by its very nature supposed to be hostile to unwanted visitors. The characters are going into places dark, deep, and undiscovered. That fact alone, as I know from Vadding, can make the venture very dangerous. Throw in monsters, traps, ambushes, patrols, a coordinated defense response, a generally hostile neighborhood, and other dangers of that ilk and you have a very lethal combination. To say the least. Crawls, to use an analogy of military terms, should be just short of suicide missions, and therefore should perhaps be the most dangerous and enterprising type of fantasy RPG adventure one can undertake. Make the players wish they had prepared as if they were intending to invade hell itself. Because maybe that's exactly what is waiting for them. They don't call them monsters because they look funny, they call them monsters because they are laughing while they eat ya alive.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I have decided to write, over time, a series of Game Design articles to complement the other gaming posts I have been making, such as Adventure/Scenario/Mission Ideas. These essays will address various aspects of general game design, but will sometimes concentrate on specific gaming genres, or specific aspects of game type. I'm listing it in this forum because the general thrust of these essays should be applicable to more than one genre, or even to more than one type of game, such as RPGs, ARGs, or even to video and computer games, and to virtual reality.
Cool idea - but why don't you use the blog feature for that! It's perfect for these kind of posts. On the message boards, your threads will be quickly lost on later pages and go under in the ma(/e)ss of threads and anyone interested will have a hard time finding them.

The blogs give you a place to keep all individual posts together and make it easier to find them. (And you could still keep an "essay" thread online that you update with a link to your latest blog entry if you feel that you need the "publicity" of the General Forums...)
 

I like what you are saying, but think you're making a number of errors in judgment about D&D. Go back and read the 1EAD&D DMG. Gary Gygax explained very clearly what monsters are in that book. In short, they are every creature that isn't you. Having a collection of monsters in a dungeon is not like having a collection of carnivorous animals in a single pen. In D&D terms, Ptolus is an enormous dungeon filled with monsters. I assume most of that work doesn't bother you?
 

Thanks for the idea MR.

I'll admit I haven't been here in awhile and haven't posted in awhile either. So I may be a victim of my own ignorance of site functions, and of thinking in outmoded technological formats.

I'll investigate the possibilities and see what can be done.

Thanks again, it's an interesting idea.
 

I like your ideas and think that you're essential correct, but there's a reason that the things you describe aren't generally done. They're a lot of work, and they are difficult.

A DM can run through most of the monsters in the MM fairly quickly if he keeps using new ones, then you have to make your own for each game, which adds a lot to your work load. Designing a working dungeon society also adds significantly to your workload.

It's worthwhile if you have the time. I love the feeling of depth and verisimilitude you can get from working these things out. It also add to your tactical options: you can use strategies such as, "If we take this guy out, cooperation between these groups collapses and makes our lives easier" or "Let's ally with this group and take out these others"

The other difficulty is in balancing the part against the enemies. You need to balance things so that the party is reasonably challenged by an individual encounter, but they won't be wiped out once the whole area is alerted. This can be tough. It also leads to stealth adventures where you try to take out each group quickly and quietly before they can sound an alert because as soon as that alarm bell rings it's time to run. I think these are a lot of fun - I enjoy the tension - but they're not too everyone's taste.

If you have some ideas about how to design the adventures you describe efficiently, and how to balance things, I'd be interested in hearing about them.

I'd recommend that you start your essays here, then move them over to the blogs. I think you'll get a lot more feedback that way. I didn't even know the site had a blog area.
 

Thanks for the idea MR.

I'll admit I haven't been here in awhile and haven't posted in awhile either. So I may be a victim of my own ignorance of site functions, and of thinking in outmoded technological formats.

I'll investigate the possibilities and see what can be done.

Thanks again, it's an interesting idea.

No problem. ;) The Blog is a pretty new feature on EN World, introduced a few months ago.
 


I like your ideas and think that you're essential correct, but there's a reason that the things you describe aren't generally done. They're a lot of work, and they are difficult.

If you have some ideas about how to design the adventures you describe efficiently, and how to balance things, I'd be interested in hearing about them.


I took care of that problem years ago by developing a set of Classification Traits for Monster Design, and by developing korruh as an after-effect of exposure to Elturgy.

I take creatures from Myth, the Monster Manual, and other sources, then modify the creatures from that point onwards. I also have a built in background/milieu advantage.

In my world, which is actually two different worlds, most monsters (as the term is normally used, not just as a gaming sense or description) come from a world parallel to our own, inhabited by entirely different creatures an beings (Elves, Giants, etc.). In that world magic is real (indeed it is their chief source of power and energy, as chemical sources are to us) and works. However it also has side effects. If any creature, from Elf to Animal to Insect is exposed to powerful enough magic, or to continuous magic (in that world it is called Elturgy) then there is a chance that it will, for lack of a better term, mutate or alter. That process is called Korruh, related to the human word for corruption.

Korruh can be benign and have effects as simple as being forever after extraordinarily sensitive to the presence of magic, or as malignant as turning ordinary creatures into monsters, chimeras (as the Greeks meant the term, for a monstrosity which is a combination of different, usually animal traits), gargantuan monstrosities, or even elves and such into vicious, murdering, bloodthirsty brutes. (For instance their are no Hobgoblins in my setting, instead there is one Hobgoblin (that is what humans call him, elves call him by another name, and that single Hobgoblin is a serial killer, has skin that can camouflage itself and change color, he is extremely stealthy, cunning, and a very large predator who is strong and loves to murder for sport) and that Hobgoblin is extremely dangerous and brutal. He has murdered scores of both Eldeven peoples and humans. So I took the Hobgoblin of legend and myth, and from the Monster Manual and created an entirely unique and vicious monster who operates like a recurring NPC of a very evil and treacherous nature. So although there are no Hobgoblins, there is a single and more than dangerous enough Hobgoblin. He's far more powerful, cunning, and vicious than Hobgoblins in the Monster Manual, and although he is very much a monster, he is very much a different kind of monster than the typical MM hobgoblin.

So it is korruh that creates the monsters, and every such monster is a unique creature, though I can also use other sources to provide the monster templates. Once though you have the classification trait system all you really have to do is allow for the physique and appearance features, size, and what exactly the Korruh has done to the victim to create the monster, and then you have your monster. Korruh can create monstrous beasts who are basically benign, but outcasts because of appearance, and it can cause a person to remain absolutely unchanged in appearance and still be hideously twisted and evil on the inside. So the players cannot guess either the traits it will impart, or who is really a monster, because aside from those creatures it has changed in appearance, a monster could be anyone. Or anything. Korruh can also cause great pain, make one suspected to injury or disease, or make one long-lived and practically immune to most diseases, can make some clever, some cunning, and some mindless brutes.

But it is pretty easy to create monsters with such a system.
It is also easy to develop unique character traits and abilities through such a methodology. For instance an elf exposed to powerful magic might develop the ability to see in the ultraviolet spectrum, or developing hearing like a wolf, or skin as tough as tree bark. So it can have detrimental effects, and useful effects, and it can create both unique monsters and unique character traits as well.

On our world, the human world, magic or elturgy is non-existent, but Thaumaturgy, or Wonder-Working, or miracles, or Divine magic, is real. It does not cause korruh, but then again monsters from the other world can escape to our world, and creatures form our world can make it to the other world. So a lion or tiger, which is to us a dangerous beast would seem a monster in the other world, where they have no lions, or tigers, or bears. then once there (in the other world) a man, a lion, a tiger, or a bear could become a monster by being exposed to elturgy in the same way native peoples and creatures are exposed. So monster creation is an on-going process. And every monster created is in some way unique to itself. (Thaumaturgy though does not always work like typical D&D Divine magic. It comes from God and God determines what the spell effects will be and so forth. If a cleric has been exemplary and good then a spell might increase in effect, act as a higher level spell, last longer, or act upon everyone surrounding the cleric, even non-intended targets. It might even develop into another spell entirely. If a cleric has sinned or been lax then a miracle might backfire, might act as a curse, might have diminished effects, or might fail entirely. God, or gods in the case of pagan divine magic, determines the ultimate outcome of the spell, not the cleric. So Thaumaturgy has peculiar and unforeseen side-effects much as elturgy does, but different in outcome. Sometimes clerical magic works just like in the book, and sometimes God rewards good behavior and punishes bad clerical behavior by altering their miracle working abilities.)

In my setting though monsters are rarely encountered, maybe one or two per dungeon or ruin (as an generalized example) but when monsters are met the party has to try and determine if the monster is a real, or an apparent threat, what it really is, and what it can do (none of which they know beforehand). If it is a real danger and a threat, then it is a very, very dangerous threat indeed. One or two monsters per adventure would be the equivalent of all the monsters in a typical, commercial adventure. Or you might think of it as in mythical terms. One Hydra is more than a handful for Herakles and his entire party. An entire expedition is built around one miniature, or one chimera, so dangerous and vicious are they, including the dangers of environmental advantages and elements in which they live and operate.

Otherwise the party (during an adventure) fights human enemies (Persians for instance, or Vikings), against or with Elves and Giants, etc., against criminals, pirates, mercenaries, traitors, barbarians, and so forth.

Often it ends up something like this, the details varying but the general elements usually coherent: the party fights against human or non-human enemies, while simultaneously having to eventually engage a monster (or having to engage a monster in a series of running and pitched battles throughout the entire course of the adventure - I usually run monsters not as mindless brutes but as cunning and clever, and well aware of the tactical advantages of ambush, surprise, retreat, and on-going harassment, unless trapped monsters do not fight to the death and to their own disadvantage, rather they fight to kill), while also having to achieve their mission, and sometimes engaged against supernatural foes, or operating with supernatural allies. And often, given the nature of the missions the party has to accomplish, their work must be done covertly or at least as quietly as possible.

So the monster part is usually the easy part of the equation as far as my players and I are concerned.

But by designing monsters in that way things like hit points and armor class and challenge rating become far less important than questions like; is this thing really a monster or does it just look like one, how much can I trust this thing, what can it do exactly, how dangerous is it, will it try to eat me, and how can I use this thing in some way to my best advantage?


In short, they are every creature that isn't you.


I agree with this idea, generally speaking, but I wasn't talking about "alien-ness" or non-human-ness in monster design, I was speaking of the qualities and traits which actually constitute what makes a monster specifically different from a person. For instance in game terms a war-hound which has been let loose against you is a monster, if you have to fight it to prevent it from mauling or killing you or a comrade. But if it is your war-hound, and fights alongside you as a partner, then it is not a monster despite the fact it is not a human.

Elves who are allies are not monsters, Drow who are raiding villages, hanging children, and raping women obviously are.

And those traits are what I was discussing, the actual traits that constitute not alien or monstrous appearance, but alien or monstrous behavior.
It is behavior in my opinion that creates a monster, not mere appearance, which although it might be odd, disturbing, or even outright monstrous to the sight, might not describe the true nature of the beast, but only his outward aspects.

And that is what I'm talking about by saying many fantasy RPGs, and D&D in particular have become little more than vehicles to confuse appearance and other tertiary aspects of gaming capabilities, such as hit points, armor class, alignment, etc. with what really constitutes a monster - with how dangerous a monster would really be, and how it would actually behave. Maybe I should have made that clearer or explained my actual point in a better fashion, or maybe it is just one of the built in limitations of language, that people can easily misunderstand what you thought you made clear through no real fault of either party.


The Blog is a pretty new feature on EN World, introduced a few months ago.


I've already started the devising of such a blog on this site, which I've decided to call Tome and Tomb.
It will detail my writings on gaming and design, and possibly some other material on subject matters like history, politics, religion, art, science, and pop culture.

I've always wanted to do a blog on Gaming related matters, but just didn't really have the time to create a new one with my work schedule, and I didn't really know how to go about marketing it or developing a readership base. It seems like here that it might have a built in audience.

We'll see anyways, and thanks again for the help.

I've got to get back to work. If one of us doesn't yak again before Thursday then Happy Thanksgiving everyone.
 
Last edited:

If anyone, board member or moderator, can answer this question then I'd appreciate it.

If I post an essay to this thread, or another thread, then post the same essay to the Gaming Blog I am starting here, is that considered bad form, or double posting?

Should I post either to the blog, or a thread, but not both?
Or does it matter?

Thanks for your help.
 

If anyone, board member or moderator, can answer this question then I'd appreciate it.

If I post an essay to this thread, or another thread, then post the same essay to the Gaming Blog I am starting here, is that considered bad form, or double posting?

Should I post either to the blog, or a thread, but not both?
Or does it matter?

Thanks for your help.

Nope. The forum and the blogs are independent (and one reading the blog might not see the forum and vice versa).

Been doing that practice for my weekly podcast report.
 

Remove ads

Top