Has the "Delve" format worked for you?

[Mouseferatu]

Here's the conundrum.

1) It's helpful (for many people, if not all) to have all the info for the encounter in one place, on a single page or two-page spread.

2) It's difficult to have the encounter info separate from the actual room description.

Unfortunately, those two objectives are absolutely incompatible. It's not possible to put the encounter with the room description, because of space/layout issues. (After all, if a room description takes two paragraphs, and the encounter takes a page, how do you put those together with other room descriptions?)

Not sure there's an easy solution, really. I like the delve format's ability to keep all the combat info in one place (and it's inspired me to make more use of terrain and environment, as both a DM and a writer). I agree that it sucks to have it split off from the room material, but I don't see any other option.

 

[MerricB]

Not sure there's an easy solution, really. I like the delve format's ability to keep all the combat info in one place (and it's inspired me to make more use of terrain and environment, as both a DM and a writer). I agree that it sucks to have it split off from the room material, but I don't see any other option.

I think there have been some clumsy usage of it so far, as well. We're still getting used to the idea of writing adventures in that format. Well, you're getting used to it, Ari.

What I'd really like to see is that the adventure written as normal (without tactical encounters), so all the development, treasure, clues and such be in the regular room description, along with a monster line, "2 Orcs" or "Count Strahd", etc.

Then the tactical encounters are laid out.

I think this is being done, but there are exceptions: I can think of a couple of examples from Castle Ravenloft where important development text was only in the tactical encounter. No... please put it in the room text.

I think the tactical encounter format will also improve once we get shorter statblocks (although that may reduce the need for it!)

Cheers!

 

[Mouseferatu]

I think the tactical encounter format will also improve once we get shorter statblocks (although that may reduce the need for it!)

Your lips to God's ear...

 

[MerricB]

Erik was commenting on Canonfire about X2 Ruins of Greyhawk, and how he wasn't able to put in an encounter against a bunch of adventurers because the statblocks wouldn't fit in the Delve format...

"Just as well!" was my response. I've run enough high-level encounters against groups of wildly disparate NPCs - particularly in Dungeon adventures - to know how much of a pain it is. There's only so many special abilities you can track at once...

Seeing a statblock spread over three pages of Dungeon Magazine does not make me want to run that encounter. It makes me wonder what unnecessary guff the editors have left in. When I run an encounter, I don't really need to know how to advance the monster...

Cheers!

 

[Crothian]

I think it is brilliant. I ran eyes of the Lich Queen and that was smooth sailing. I read through the module just fine. I start by reading through all the text and then I read through the encounters. Sure I have to flip pages but that is something I'm used to. When modules are run page flipping is always needed.

 

[Settembrini]

The poll is part of the problem.
The DM´s perspective!

As a player, I can assure you, the Delve format kills all strategy, and turns the game into a string of overdesigned encounters.

It´s horrible.

 

[FireLance]

As a player, I can assure you, the Delve format kills all strategy, and turns the game into a string of overdesigned encounters.

It´s horrible.

Really? Why?

Regardless of how the encounter information is presented to the DM, surely an encounter is still an encounter.

Adventures that emphasize combat over other types of challenges may be a valid complaint, but that has nothing to do with the Delve format.

 

[Settembrini]

Imagine the Keep on the Borderlands, Lost City or The Hill Giants in Delve format.

Look at Lich Queen!

Fancy room with two exits!
It´s ridiculously linear, and:

It´s like there were strings going back to Seattle. The DM is basically programmed with this. If the adventure is chunked into overdesigned encounters, ther is no strategy, because there aren´t parties, tribes, plots & schemes. instead there are connected set-pieces.

That sucks big time!

 

[The_Gneech]

I got Slaughtergarde and was so put off by the format that I gave up a few pages into it. Stuff was scattered all over the place, I couldn't figure out what attached to what, and I couldn't "see the forest for the trees". I like seeing the big picture first, and then narrowing down, not trying to put together the adventure like a jigsaw puzzle. Haven't seen any other delve format stuff, but I'm just as happy not to if that one experience is any indication.

-The Gneech

 

[Crothian]

It´s like there were strings going back to Seattle. The DM is basically programmed with this. If the adventure is chunked into overdesigned encounters, ther is no strategy, because there aren´t parties, tribes, plots & schemes. instead there are connected set-pieces.

That sucks big time!

I don't know how your DM is doing things but for us there was plenty of plots and schemes. My players really enjoyed it.