Flavour First vs Game First - a comparison

[Raven Crowking]

That sounds familiar.

I assume you are claiming that I am being hypocritical, rather than agreeing that you have asked Hussar to do the same. Fair enough.

But the DM changing stuff made it seem poorlyt desihgned when the module made perfect sense.
You cannot see through or hear through a waterfall. Thus they had to warn the people inside.
The Slinger was a guard for outside.

It would be like complaining that a Holy Avenger is too low level when your DM changed it to level 1 item.

I don't think so.

Well designed would be: We're hiding inside a waterfall, so we put sentries outside to slow invaders while having other sentries (plural) whose job is to alert us immediately when there is trouble. The sentries to alert should be in hidden positions, close to the waterfall where they can immediately step inside and warn us. Or they should be on ledges higher up with something, such as big horns or drums, that can easily be heard over the waterfall.

"We don't go out no matter what" doesn't make sense. Full stop.

"We wait to make sure we are losing to get help" doesn't make sense. Full stop.

Justify it however you like, but this is not good design.


RC

 

[Herremann the Wise]

suppose that is true, the middle ground usually is. but take it from a staid fanatic of "flavor first", you can be assured that given a solid fulcrum of rationalization and long enough lever of credulity, you can reconcile the most divergent of mechanic / flavor.

You're most probably right. In two years time, I'll most likely look at the 4E healing overnight thing and go "yeah, that used to grate but I suppose I'm over it now", similar to how I view the plethora of 3.x HP issues.

I suppose when the mechanic and its flavour is fresh, you just end up thinking "but why oh why could they not have done that differently?" as if you could have changed it in some way. The buzz of transition and improvement (or lack of) is still in the air.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Hussar]

I assume you are claiming that I am being hypocritical, rather than agreeing that you have asked Hussar to do the same. Fair enough.



I don't think so.

Well designed would be: We're hiding inside a waterfall, so we put sentries outside to slow invaders while having other sentries (plural) whose job is to alert us immediately when there is trouble. The sentries to alert should be in hidden positions, close to the waterfall where they can immediately step inside and warn us. Or they should be on ledges higher up with something, such as big horns or drums, that can easily be heard over the waterfall.

"We don't go out no matter what" doesn't make sense. Full stop.

"We wait to make sure we are losing to get help" doesn't make sense. Full stop.

Justify it however you like, but this is not good design.


RC

So, instead of Schrodinger's Hit Points, it's Schrodinger's waterfall?

These are kobolds, not crack military units. They aren't the brightest things in the world. They put a guard outside the waterfall to warn them if trouble comes, then go back inside and rest.

Like this never happens? Where did they get the horn? They made it? Bought it? Same as the gong? There's some kobold metalsmith back there that made it for them? Oh, wait, no there isn't. So they had to find that gong or horn somewhere.

That's more realistic than "Hey, Churtle, you're the smallest and stupidest, get your scaley butt outside and warn us if anything comes."?

Because, y'know, kobolds would NEVER do something like that.

Heck, at least they HAD guards outside. There are loads of modules that don't even have that.

The situation is perfectly reasonable - not terribly intelligent humanoids post a lone guard outside a waterfall. Wow, never, ever could see that happening.

Now, if these were hobgoblins, then you'd probably have a point. But they're not. They're kobolds. Wis and Int not so high. Making tactically stupid decisions is not unrealistic.

See, the thing is RC, I know you stated you'd have to do all this work to make the WLD work. But, that's you. That's not true of everyone. The modules in the WLD are, by and large, workable. ((With some notable exceptions)) That you think they are poorly designed doesn't make them so.

 

[Raven Crowking]

You're most probably right. In two years time, I'll most likely look at the 4E healing overnight thing and go "yeah, that used to grate but I suppose I'm over it now", similar to how I view the plethora of 3.x HP issues.

I suppose when the mechanic and its flavour is fresh, you just end up thinking "but why oh why could they not have done that differently?" as if you could have changed it in some way. The buzz of transition and improvement (or lack of) is still in the air.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

Seems wise to me.

 

[pemerton]

"We wait to make sure we are losing to get help" doesn't make sense. Full stop.

Justify it however you like, but this is not good design.

Let's put to one side bigger issues of fantasy story design, such as "Is the successful passage of Frodo and Sam through the pass of Cirith Ungol poorly designed, because it depends upon an authorial conceit of the guards all killing one another over the treasure?"

Just focus on waiting to make sure we are losing to get help - isn't this plausible for a unit motivated by (i) honour or (ii) overwhelming fear of superiors?n At least one of the above is plausible for most D&D humanoids, isn't it?

 

[Hussar]

Let's put to one side bigger issues of fantasy story design, such as "Is the successful passage of Frodo and Sam through the pass of Cirith Ungol poorly designed, because it depends upon an authorial conceit of the guards all killing one another over the treasure?"

Just focus on waiting to make sure we are losing to get help - isn't this plausible for a unit motivated by (i) honour or (ii) overwhelming fear of superiors?n At least one of the above is plausible for most D&D humanoids, isn't it?

Aw crap. Now you've done it. Don'tcha know that invoking the Professor is just like waving raw meat to the lions.

Spoiler

((Heh, I wonder how this plays out since I'm pretty sure RC still has me on ignore and won't see my little prediction. I predict a rather lengthy spiel on how it's perfectly reasonable for Tolkien to do this and is the epitome of excellent writing. Let's watch shall we?))

 

[Fenes]

Just focus on waiting to make sure we are losing to get help - isn't this plausible for a unit motivated by (i) honour or (ii) overwhelming fear of superiors?n At least one of the above is plausible for most D&D humanoids, isn't it?

It just seems that most of the "dungeon crawl" adventures are designed in similar "don't let enemies help each other" ways, be it from foes living next to each other to morals that sound like "honor dictates we let our vanguard die" or "we're evilllll, mwahahaha, we like to watch our people die!!!!"

 

[Fenes]

I am not a lazy DM, nor do I advocate lazy DMing.

Well, I am a lazy DM, and advocate lazy DMing - if done in a smart way, aka "don't waste your time on stuff your game does not need". (Even wrote a blog entry about it.)

But it's because I am a lazy DM that I dislike bad modules, too much work to make them work, even more to make them fit the group/campaign/player desires.

Not much of the published stuff meets my group's and my own falvor expectations.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

It just seems that most of the "dungeon crawl" adventures are designed in similar "don't let enemies help each other" ways, be it from foes living next to each other to morals that sound like "honor dictates we let our vanguard die" or "we're evilllll, mwahahaha, we like to watch our people die!!!!"

Yes, that seems too often the case. At least in "classic" dungeons.

Keep on the Shadowfell seems to attempt making a good reason for all this, as do the later H series modules as far as I have seen.

But still, I can't shake off the feeling that often it would be better to avoid the entire large dungeon paradigmn. Keep them smaller so that you can cover your dungeon with one large encounter, or make it so big that there is enough room between potential or actual allies that they can't be alerted that easily.

 

[Fenes]

But still, I can't shake off the feeling that often it would be better to avoid the entire large dungeon paradigmn. Keep them smaller so that you can cover your dungeon with one large encounter, or make it so big that there is enough room between potential or actual allies that they can't be alerted that easily.

The "large dungeon" itself might have come as flavor after the mechanic (a way to have several smaller fights in the same place) was set.