How dungeons have changed in Dungeons and Dragons

[Nikosandros]

I think my point on elegance in initiative stands: if the rules for AD&D initiative aren't clear, they can't be elegant!

Elegance in game design is fascinating and I greatly admire 3e for its extremely elegant design. However a game can be very enjoyable even if it's not designed elegantly.

That said, the rules for initiative in 1e are a big mess!

 

[MerricB]

Elegance in game design is fascinating and I greatly admire 3e for its extremely elegant design. However a game can be very enjoyable even if it's not designed elegantly.

That said, the rules for initiative in 1e are a big mess!

Oh, they so are.

I consider the Moldvay edit of Basic D&D to be elegant; some delightful rules there. AD&D shows too little real editing of the books - there's a lot of kitchen sink material that really has no business being there. The MM and PHB are actually quite good, but the DMG is a disaster.

Cheers!

 

[Melan]

Elegance in game design is fascinating and I greatly admire 3e for its extremely elegant design. However a game can be very enjoyable even if it's not designed elegantly.

That said, the rules for initiative in 1e are a big mess!

This pretty much sums up my perspective.

 

[tx7321]

Melan, just fall back on 1d6 per side, high role goes first, ties are simo (make WSF and charging rules optional) and your as BTB as anyone).

MerricB: "Err... this is a feature that has been around since G1, actually."

Give me a break. Those can't be compared to 2E and 3E railroading modules (not even Dragon Lance). In those early style 1E modules, most players could care less about the plot, and had there own motivations for going. There was no involved "path" as you see in later material.

 

[Glyfair]

The MM and PHB are actually quite good, but the DMG is a disaster.

I think part of the reason the DMG came out that way is because it was being rushed out the door. Remember the complaints from gamers when 3E was released that they had to wait a month for the DMG and month for the Monster Manual (or was it the other way around)? The AD&D DMG was released around a year after the AD&D PHB was released and that was about a year after the AD&D Monster Manual was released.

 

[Hussar]

Melan, just fall back on 1d6 per side, high role goes first, ties are simo (make WSF and charging rules optional) and your as BTB as anyone).

MerricB: "Err... this is a feature that has been around since G1, actually."

Give me a break. Those can't be compared to 2E and 3E railroading modules (not even Dragon Lance). In those early style 1E modules, most players could care less about the plot, and had there own motivations for going. There was no involved "path" as you see in later material.

Ok, I gotta call this one.

Slave Lords of the Undercity - the party is stripped naked and forced to adventure through dungeons more than once. Choo choo!

Queen of the Demonweb Pits - once you activated the iron rings, you were teleported to the Abyss and couldn't leave.

Isle of the Ape - Transported, stripped naked, couldn't leave.

Tomb of Horrors - One and ONLY one path would succeed on this trip and if you stepped off the path, you died.

Land Beyond the Magic Mirror - Transported to an alternate reality, only one path to follow (more or less) and can't leave until you complete all the steps.

There's eight 1e modules that are lockstep railroads from beginning to end. I'm fairly sure there are more.

Compare to Lords of the Iron Citadel where the party doesn't even know where the dungeon is in the first place, must explore a honking big iron cube before finding it and then may proceed through several passages to find their goal.

 

[Psion]

Compare to Lords of the Iron Citadel where the party doesn't even know where the dungeon is in the first place, must explore a honking big iron cube before finding it and then may proceed through several passages to find their goal.

While I'm on board with what you were saying about the 1e adventures, I think Lord of the Iron Fortress was very weak on character motivation.

 

[diaglo]

Tomb of Horrors - One and ONLY one path would succeed on this trip and if you stepped off the path, you died.

<snip>

Compare to Lords of the Iron Citadel where the party doesn't even know where the dungeon is in the first place, must explore a honking big iron cube before finding it and then may proceed through several passages to find their goal.

actually, they have the same exact mechanic in the beginning. with S1 Tomb of Horrors you have to find the entrance in the first place.

 

[tx7321]

Hussar, Every dungeon has one path basically, (with one final big treasure at the end that must be found if you want to advance); dungeons, after all, are nothing more then a set of rooms and halls leading to a final showdown, and yes, many side paths are dangerous and trapped and are best avoided (as in your tomb of horrors example, which is more devilishly dangerous than most). But, thats not what people mean when they talk module railroading. I'm not saying railroading is a bad thing, alot of people like that sort of designed module, hell they sell like hot cakes, they're just not for me. I prefer a greater since of freedom as a player.

Your other exmples of being stuck on an island or "other world" and needing to find some key to get out is not the same as railroading either, and, if you think about it, is not much different then going into a dungeon and having the main door lock shut, or the entrance hall collapse . Of course you'll have to find another way out. Read these modules they are still very skeletal. The PCs and DM make the story as they go, there is no heavy "guiding" or story (other then a very basic plot line (as in White Plume: recover a 3 magical weapons). Compare that to later dungeons.

 

[Qualidar]

I think you're mistaken on what most people mean when they say "railroading".

~Qualidar~