Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BookTenTiger" data-source="post: 8935884" data-attributes="member: 6685541">Here's my FINAL REFLECTION. I'm also going to post this in Spoiler Tags in the first post for those who want a TLDR version.So, overall, I'd say this was a real success! If I were to go over this adventure again, sand down some rough edges, make a few more connections between NPC's, settlements, and the dungeon, I think this would be a solid, fun adventure for these characters. There's nothing here that doesn't make sense in a D&D world, and nothing feels too repetitive or too "bespoke" for the characters. The problems can be solved in multiple ways, the villain is engaging, and the treasure could benefit multiple characters.Some of my favorite parts of this adventure:1) The Gargoyle DoorsI am definitely using these gargoyle doors in an adventure some day. I really enjoyed the puzzle aspect, and the option to just ignore it and break through. I think rolling two options for how problems can be solved really helped me create obstacles that would engage player creativity.2) The BBEGValhaxron, stone giant illithid, is my new favorite BBEG. I love this guy. He's creepy, would be fun to roleplay, and fits into the world so well. I want to know more about him!3) Connecting to BackgroundsI loved it whenever I rolled a player's Background or Background Feature into the game. In the Camp, I rolled Danara's Background Feature of Retainers as a reward. It was fun to come up with an NPC who could supply new retainers to the group. This really made me think of how often I don't consider my PC's Background Features when creating adventures!Some Thing I Would Do Differently1) Backward DesignI started this process with developing the town, then the wilderness, then the entrance to the dungeon, the next level, the boss level, etc. The next time I try this, I want to go in reverse! What if we start with the BBEG and work backwards? I think this would provide more connections to the NPC's in town, challenges in the wilderness, etc.2) "Class Features"I had a category I rolled in called Class Features that was really just a mish-mash of spells, Background Features, and things characters could do because of their class. I had to reroll this a couple times when the results just didn't make sense. I think I would take this feature and write it out differently... maybe come up with categories for spells ("Conjuration spells" instead of Unseen Servant, for example) or describe things differently. I'm not sure.3) Player InputSomehow I would want to include player input in this process. Now obviously for this experiment, my players were imaginary. But it might be worthwhile for players to come up with treasure, NPC's, or enemies they want to encounter, and feed that into the lists.ConclusionAs I worked on this adventure, I realized it was just a massive expansion of the philosophy of "Shoot your monks." That is, the monk has an ability to deflect missiles, so you should attack them with ranged attacks so they can do cool things.This whole adventure is full of stuff that would allow these four adventurers to do cool things with their abilities. I think that's honestly the highest level of success I could have hoped for.Now this experiment was an extreme version of the process. I don't think every adventure needs every single NPC, challenge, and reward to be 100% based on the characters' features. Every once in a while you want to throw in an Alchemy Jug as a reward just because it's fun.But... the next time I'm designing an adventure, I'm definitely leaving in gaps and pulling ideas from the characters!</blockquote>

Verification