Has the "Delve" format worked for you?

[MerricB]

Wizards have now used the "Delve" or "Tactical Encounter" format in a number of their adventures: the four Expeditions, Scourge of the Howling Horde, the DD trilogy, and a few more.

So, here's the question: Have you DMed an adventure that has used it, and how have you found it in play?

I've given a number of options, including a few for those who have only read adventures with the format and not DMed them yet.

A couple of notes...
Reading the adventure is when you have the adventure and you're trying to work out what it's about. Your initial impressions through to preparing the adventure for actual play.

DMing the adventure is what happens when you're actually running the adventure at the table.

Any comments you can give about the format would be welcome!

Cheers!

 

[Scribble]

I've given a number of options, including a few for those who have only read adventures with the format and not DMed them yet.

From your wording, it sounds as if you forgot to add a poll?

I haven't seen the delve format yet, as I don't usually buy adventures...

 

[MerricB]

From your wording, it sounds as if you forgot to add a poll?

I haven't seen the delve format yet, as I don't usually buy adventures...

The poll takes time to set up, so the post goes first, and the poll follows.

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

My answer was "It makes the adventure harder to read; I haven't DMed one yet".

I'd really like to run something using the new format soon, just so I know what it's like... but I haven't yet. However, just picking up the new Expedition books and attempting to work out what's going on in them is a little challenging. Partly that may be the structure of the adventure in general, but the way the tactical encounters break up the text is often frustrating. (I'd prefer they all be at the back rather than in the middle of the other chapters...)

Cheers!

 

[Scribble]

The poll takes time to set up, so the post goes first, and the poll follows.

Cheers!

Come on, speed it up man, we don't have all day on the internet you know...

 

[NiTessine]

It's harder to read - having the encounter data split between two places, with its relevance to the plot and place in the adventure being outlined in one place and the actual content of the encounter in a different part of the book makes it a bit cumbersome to work with when trying to get a good picture of what happens in the adventure. It also eats up page count like mad.

However, it does make for swifter DMing when I have all the necessary stats, tactics and map layout on the same two-page spread. It speeds up play, no doubt about it.

My experiences, though, are based only on playing and later running Scourge of the Howling Horde. I've yet to tackle any of the more complicated modules using the format.

 

[Neil Bishop]

I really don't like the format largely because I like to use published adventures for inspiration for my own games and the overwhelming amount of space "wasted" on each encounter means less space for what I really am interested in.

Even when I run a published adventure I tend to change things "on the fly" anyway so the delve format is really not that helpful. What I would prefer are downloadable stat blocks (ideally in a format where they can be edited so that they can be corrected and/or adjusted for my game).

 

[Anguish]

I... don't know what to pick. I kind of like it, but I wish they'd stop lumping the delve pages together, after a descriptive series of explanations about the encounters. I still find myself flipping back and forth to see if such-and-such a detail I remember reading is on the delve summary/tactics/conclusion/about-this-area portion, or if it's in the Encounter A1: Something Attacks the PCs.

Delve makes running an encounter easier in a strictly tactical sense. But it makes it harder to set up and collapse the encounter.

I don't have a better idea. Page space is an issue, but perhaps if immediately after the descriptive overview of an encounter they put the delve pages...?

 

[Lidgar]

I *really* do not like the Delve format. I have now DM'ed a couple of different modules with it, and find it both harder to read (for obvious reasons) and to DM - for some of the same reasons. For example, while running Ruins of Greyhawk, I have to flip back and forth not only while reading, but while DM'ing. This is because the room encounters are totally separated from the descriptions. I find I more often leave out descriptive details because I forget to flip back to the description *after* the battle. I also really hate having the maps embedded in the book. Please bring back an old fashion module with the map on the DM screen and all the room descriptions in one place! I don't need to know where to place the miniatures - I can decide on what make sense for the encounter. D&D is not Warhammer, or a board game.

 

[Beginning of the End]

So, here's the question: Have you DMed an adventure that has used it, and how have you found it in play?

The Delve format convinced me that WotC is schizophrenic.

Here's David Noonan:

Powers unique to the new monster are often better than spell-like abilities. At first glance, this principle seems counterintuitive. Isn’t it easier and more elegant to give a monster a tried-and-true power from the Player’s Handbook? On the surface, sure. But watch how it works at the table. The DM sees the spell-like entry, grabs a Player’s Handbook, flips through it to find the relevant spell, reads the relevant spell, decides whether to use it, then resumes the action. See where I’m going with this? That’s a far more cumbersome process than reading a specific monster ability that’s already in the stat block. Heck, the physical placement of one more open rulebook is a hassle for a lot of DMs.

Ignoring the fact that David is throwing the baby out with the bathwater here, he's absolutely right: It's a lot easier to have all the information you need on one page.

But at the same time that the design department was coming to that conclusion with monster stat blocks, they were simultaneously re-designing their adventure format so that the information necessary to run any given area of the adventure would be consistently split up across multiple pages.

Sheer brilliance there. (/sarcasm)

There's lots of things about the actual information contained within each encounter -- and the modular and clearly-labeled fashion in which that information is presented -- that's all to the good. But splitting the information up like they did makes no sense at all.

I also really hate having the maps embedded in the book. Please bring back an old fashion module with the map on the DM screen and all the room descriptions in one place!

Amen to that, too.