Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
IRON DM 2017 Tournament
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Rune" data-source="post: 7305725" data-attributes="member: 67"><p><strong>Judgement for Round 1, Match 1: Iron Sky vs. Yaztromo</strong></p><p></p><p>Participating in the first match of a tournament is always difficult, even for seasoned veterans. For someone who's never competed before at all, it can be especially so. And, for an entry to be submitted so quickly on top of that, (presumably because this <em>is</em> just a game and real life takes precedence) – I have to respect the effort. </p><p></p><p>I want to make clear that I think the author of "ROAD TO GLORY" (henceforth referred to as "GLORY") shows a whole lot of potential (and I'll back that statement up, later). I wholeheartedly believe that. And I need to say it up front, because this is going to sound harsh. </p><p></p><p>I really want to like this adventure. Its skeleton is intriguing and I think, with work, it could be quite a fun adventure. A whole lot of work. After my first run-through, I found myself coming up with a bunch of ways to fix it. That's a good thing! It means I was inspired – and that's probably the most important thing for an adventure to do! I don't <em>want</em> to give up on this adventure. </p><p></p><p>But there are so many structural problems, it might just be easier to take the basic ideas and start from scratch. I'm not even sure where to begin. </p><p></p><p>I guess I'll start with the linearity. I've said before (more than once) that linearity in an adventure is not necessarily a bad thing (but <em>is</em> inherently limiting for both the players <em>and</em> the DM). This assumes, however, that the players at least have the illusion of impactful choices with meaningful consequences. If you take those away, as "GLORY" consistently does, the PCs are irrelevant and the players have no reason to even go through the motions. And this makes life HARDER on the DM, because that's when players are most prone to go off the rails. Or rage-quit. </p><p></p><p>Let's look at some specifics:</p><p></p><p>First, the abduction of the PCs. This is presented as a thing that will happen, and that's that. As an adventure hook (I guess? It's not entirely clear), it works, I suppose, but it could have been so much more if handled differently. </p><p></p><p>For one thing, it would have made a much cooler mid-adventure twist than a starting point, and it would have solved a bunch of other problems with the adventure, too. A lot of the background that would otherwise have to be relayed as exposition would instead become adventure for the PCs to play through. The PCs would be more grounded in the history. They would have a reason to care about the Enemy. And, significantly, they could have the chance to eke out some victory while fighting against their inevitable abduction (although what form that would take, I don't know). </p><p></p><p>Once on the flying saucer/in the underground base, the PCs are automatically captured and forced to run through a pre-ordained course of action. Worse, every single sacrifice they make along the way is pointless; at the end, no matter how it ends, there are no consequences at all. (And never mind that a lot of the tests could probably pretty easily have different solutions.)</p><p></p><p>The reveal of the techie-kobolds just happens. But are the players even going to notice the details? Or care? Why <em>should</em> they care? Better to sprinkle those clues along the way and give the players a chance to piece things together on their own. Give them a reason to be invested in the discovery!</p><p></p><p>And then there's the big one. The PCs are finally confronted with an interesting dilemma (which would be <em>more</em> interesting if the adventure started before the abduction, by the way), in the form of blasting either the Enemy or the astroid with a nuke. Excellent!</p><p></p><p>But then, the technobolds fire a second missile at the asteroid anyway? Never mind (for now) the questions this raises – it completely nullifies the only meaningful consequence the PCs are likely to be confronted with! So frustrating!</p><p></p><p>Speaking of questions, "GLORY" raises a lot of them. And not the kind that lead to further adventures, but the kind that make things confusing and difficult to run. I assume with more time spent things would have been clearer, so I'm genuinely disappointed that that couldn't happen. Because, as I said before, I really do like the underpinnings. But it is often very difficult to sift through the details and figure out who is doing what (or, even, who is whom). It took some effort, for example, to even figure out that the Enemy is not the same group as the Ur-kobolds (and who are they, anyway? Did they come from the Mourning Star?). Or, how about some details for the puzzles?</p><p></p><p>More problematically, however, are the places that just don't seem to make sense. Like, why is a culture that glorifies dying in combat retreating from combat? If they truly believe in a Valhalla-esque afterlife, why should they fear getting cut down by magic wands?</p><p></p><p>What, exactly <em>is</em> the Law? What does it allow? What does it forbid? What's the point? The tests and the abductions rule out some sort of Prime Directive-thing. So what is it?</p><p></p><p>And, on a related note, if the PCs can fire one missile, and the super-kobolds can fire a second missile, why can't the PCs just fire the second one, too?</p><p></p><p>And why do the nuke-happy kobolds nuke themselves? Couldn't they evacuate in their flying saucer(s)? Even if (for some unexplained reason) they have to leave a bunch of tech behind, couldn't they remotely nuke the base? Or, at least, just leave a skeleton crew behind to do it?</p><p></p><p>Moving on to "The Road to Nowhere" (henceforth, "Nowhere"). Okay. Basically, this looks like a fun adventure. A little tricky to run, perhaps, but with a group willing to buy into its unusual format, yeah. I can see it. </p><p></p><p>Some things do concern me. It is a little disjointed in places. Some of the clues seem a little obscure for the time-pressure the adventure wants. The underlying themes seem a bit muddled (or maybe it's me after spending so much effort on the first part of this judgement!). All in all, though, I think it works. In particular, the clues are plentiful; the PCs can afford to miss a few!</p><p></p><p>And it's got great atmosphere! </p><p></p><p>The ingredients, though? Comparison time:</p><p></p><p>A number of the ingredients in "GLORY" were very weak in the sense that they were basically just names of things that could have been named other things. Even the ones that had some relevance for the PCs tended to be strained in that capacity. In contrast, the ingredients in "Nowhere" are generally (with one exception) more subtle, fairly-well inter-connected, and directly relevant to the PCs' part in the adventure. And, Importantly, far less of a stretch. </p><p></p><p>I'll try to be brief. </p><p></p><p><strong>Whistling Wind.</strong> Naming the kobold Horde after a natural phenomenon that resembles their lifestyle (as "GLORY" does) is weak enough, but the wind doesn't even whistle, does it? How could it, on the plains? </p><p></p><p>Meanwhile, in "Nowhere," the ingredient is a reoccurring clue meant to guide (most of) the PCs to the Veteran. As such, it works. As atmospheric color, it's nicely creepy!</p><p></p><p><strong> Mourning Star.</strong> it took me a few times through "Nowhere" to be sure, but this is undoubtedly Gristlyn. Certainly her (very angry) mourning is important to the adventure (although not quite clear enough how the Veteran is connected). But her stardom doesn't seem particularly relevant. And, with so many other relevant stars in the adventure, it's a little confusing.</p><p></p><p>In "GLORY," similar issues crop up. Even overlooking the stretch of calling an asteroid a star (Meteor? Comet? Sure, those would have worked.), it never explicitly causes any mourning! As near as I can tell, it merely makes things increasingly difficult for the Horde. That said, its relevance to the PCs is clear, so that's something. </p><p></p><p><strong>Law.</strong> This one is obviously important in "GLORY"; it contributes fundamentally to the most significant decision the PCs will have to make. I really wish I knew more about it, but I won't rehash the topic. </p><p></p><p>However, this is unquestionably the best ingredient in "Nowhere." Not only does it provide the framework for the adventure to hang on (if you'll pardon the expression), it also has a built-in sense of urgency. </p><p></p><p><strong>Road to Glory.</strong> As a metaphor for going to the Warrior's afterlife in "GLORY," it works, but the relevance of that is undercut significantly throughout the adventure – not only because the Horde doesn't seem to follow it, but also because the PCs follow it incidentally, without regard to their actions. This seems like a really big missed opportunity; I would definitely want to find ways to emphasize it, were I to run the adventure. </p><p></p><p>In "Nowhere," the road is obvious, and I feel like it is intended to tie into a great underlying theme, but I'm just not quite grasping it. Glory is meaningless? The road to glory leads nowhere? It leads to death? Whose glory are we even talking about, here? Gristlyn's? The Veteran's? The other PCs'? The ghosts'? Of those, Gristlyn seems most likely, but it feels like I'm missing something and I can't quite figure out whether or not there's actually anything to be found. </p><p></p><p><strong>Shallow Grave.</strong> In "Nowhere," this ingredient is central to the adventure and directly relevant to the PCs. And, as with most of the others, really helps establish the tone of things. </p><p></p><p>Even so, I like the one in "GLORY" more. I would really love to get the PCs involved in a battle, here. As with "Nowhere," the imagery is great and, added to that, the potential for a tactically intriguing battle could be very fun. Regrettably, as written, it <em>seems</em> (once again, I can't be sure) as if the PCs don't enter the adventure until its relevance is passed. </p><p></p><p><strong>Impasse.</strong> As this is closely related to the last ingredient in "GLORY," I don't have much else to say about it; it works, but only if the PCs get involved (and then it complicates things nicely).</p><p></p><p>Yet – I can't seem to find this one in "Nowhere," at all, even after multiple re-reads. A casualty of space and time, perhaps?</p><p></p><p>So..."GLORY" did not do <em>too</em> badly with the ingredients, when taken as a whole. They're actually one of the reasons I see potential in the author. The ones that don't work <em>really</em> don't work, but the ones that almost do have really sound reasons for it!</p><p></p><p>"Nowhere" uses it's ingredients better in total, though, and the adventure is far more solid. <strong>Iron Sky</strong> will advance to Round 2.</p><p></p><p><strong>Yaztromo</strong>, I'm sorry that this first judgement is so rough. I really am! I promise you, you're better at this than my critique makes it seem! You have what counts, and, if you hone it, I have no doubt that your next attempt will be vastly improved. </p><p></p><p>If I might offer you some advice to that end, though, it would be this: </p><p></p><p>First, don't rush things if you don't have to (if you have to, you have to, of course). A lot of the problems could have been polished out, given the opportunity.</p><p></p><p>Second, and far more importantly, trust the players with decisions. Let the consequences matter! Your job as a DM (or as a writer for a DM) is not so much to tell a story; it's to facilitate the other players' telling of a story. This gaming-philosophy has all sorts of implications you can follow that I'm sure could really help you bring out those awesome ideas you've clearly got going on. </p><p></p><p>I'll say it again: you've got what counts.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Rune, post: 7305725, member: 67"] [b]Judgement for Round 1, Match 1: Iron Sky vs. Yaztromo[/b] Participating in the first match of a tournament is always difficult, even for seasoned veterans. For someone who's never competed before at all, it can be especially so. And, for an entry to be submitted so quickly on top of that, (presumably because this [i]is[/i] just a game and real life takes precedence) – I have to respect the effort. I want to make clear that I think the author of "ROAD TO GLORY" (henceforth referred to as "GLORY") shows a whole lot of potential (and I'll back that statement up, later). I wholeheartedly believe that. And I need to say it up front, because this is going to sound harsh. I really want to like this adventure. Its skeleton is intriguing and I think, with work, it could be quite a fun adventure. A whole lot of work. After my first run-through, I found myself coming up with a bunch of ways to fix it. That's a good thing! It means I was inspired – and that's probably the most important thing for an adventure to do! I don't [i]want[/i] to give up on this adventure. But there are so many structural problems, it might just be easier to take the basic ideas and start from scratch. I'm not even sure where to begin. I guess I'll start with the linearity. I've said before (more than once) that linearity in an adventure is not necessarily a bad thing (but [i]is[/i] inherently limiting for both the players [i]and[/i] the DM). This assumes, however, that the players at least have the illusion of impactful choices with meaningful consequences. If you take those away, as "GLORY" consistently does, the PCs are irrelevant and the players have no reason to even go through the motions. And this makes life HARDER on the DM, because that's when players are most prone to go off the rails. Or rage-quit. Let's look at some specifics: First, the abduction of the PCs. This is presented as a thing that will happen, and that's that. As an adventure hook (I guess? It's not entirely clear), it works, I suppose, but it could have been so much more if handled differently. For one thing, it would have made a much cooler mid-adventure twist than a starting point, and it would have solved a bunch of other problems with the adventure, too. A lot of the background that would otherwise have to be relayed as exposition would instead become adventure for the PCs to play through. The PCs would be more grounded in the history. They would have a reason to care about the Enemy. And, significantly, they could have the chance to eke out some victory while fighting against their inevitable abduction (although what form that would take, I don't know). Once on the flying saucer/in the underground base, the PCs are automatically captured and forced to run through a pre-ordained course of action. Worse, every single sacrifice they make along the way is pointless; at the end, no matter how it ends, there are no consequences at all. (And never mind that a lot of the tests could probably pretty easily have different solutions.) The reveal of the techie-kobolds just happens. But are the players even going to notice the details? Or care? Why [i]should[/i] they care? Better to sprinkle those clues along the way and give the players a chance to piece things together on their own. Give them a reason to be invested in the discovery! And then there's the big one. The PCs are finally confronted with an interesting dilemma (which would be [i]more[/i] interesting if the adventure started before the abduction, by the way), in the form of blasting either the Enemy or the astroid with a nuke. Excellent! But then, the technobolds fire a second missile at the asteroid anyway? Never mind (for now) the questions this raises – it completely nullifies the only meaningful consequence the PCs are likely to be confronted with! So frustrating! Speaking of questions, "GLORY" raises a lot of them. And not the kind that lead to further adventures, but the kind that make things confusing and difficult to run. I assume with more time spent things would have been clearer, so I'm genuinely disappointed that that couldn't happen. Because, as I said before, I really do like the underpinnings. But it is often very difficult to sift through the details and figure out who is doing what (or, even, who is whom). It took some effort, for example, to even figure out that the Enemy is not the same group as the Ur-kobolds (and who are they, anyway? Did they come from the Mourning Star?). Or, how about some details for the puzzles? More problematically, however, are the places that just don't seem to make sense. Like, why is a culture that glorifies dying in combat retreating from combat? If they truly believe in a Valhalla-esque afterlife, why should they fear getting cut down by magic wands? What, exactly [i]is[/i] the Law? What does it allow? What does it forbid? What's the point? The tests and the abductions rule out some sort of Prime Directive-thing. So what is it? And, on a related note, if the PCs can fire one missile, and the super-kobolds can fire a second missile, why can't the PCs just fire the second one, too? And why do the nuke-happy kobolds nuke themselves? Couldn't they evacuate in their flying saucer(s)? Even if (for some unexplained reason) they have to leave a bunch of tech behind, couldn't they remotely nuke the base? Or, at least, just leave a skeleton crew behind to do it? Moving on to "The Road to Nowhere" (henceforth, "Nowhere"). Okay. Basically, this looks like a fun adventure. A little tricky to run, perhaps, but with a group willing to buy into its unusual format, yeah. I can see it. Some things do concern me. It is a little disjointed in places. Some of the clues seem a little obscure for the time-pressure the adventure wants. The underlying themes seem a bit muddled (or maybe it's me after spending so much effort on the first part of this judgement!). All in all, though, I think it works. In particular, the clues are plentiful; the PCs can afford to miss a few! And it's got great atmosphere! The ingredients, though? Comparison time: A number of the ingredients in "GLORY" were very weak in the sense that they were basically just names of things that could have been named other things. Even the ones that had some relevance for the PCs tended to be strained in that capacity. In contrast, the ingredients in "Nowhere" are generally (with one exception) more subtle, fairly-well inter-connected, and directly relevant to the PCs' part in the adventure. And, Importantly, far less of a stretch. I'll try to be brief. [b]Whistling Wind.[/b] Naming the kobold Horde after a natural phenomenon that resembles their lifestyle (as "GLORY" does) is weak enough, but the wind doesn't even whistle, does it? How could it, on the plains? Meanwhile, in "Nowhere," the ingredient is a reoccurring clue meant to guide (most of) the PCs to the Veteran. As such, it works. As atmospheric color, it's nicely creepy! [b] Mourning Star.[/b] it took me a few times through "Nowhere" to be sure, but this is undoubtedly Gristlyn. Certainly her (very angry) mourning is important to the adventure (although not quite clear enough how the Veteran is connected). But her stardom doesn't seem particularly relevant. And, with so many other relevant stars in the adventure, it's a little confusing. In "GLORY," similar issues crop up. Even overlooking the stretch of calling an asteroid a star (Meteor? Comet? Sure, those would have worked.), it never explicitly causes any mourning! As near as I can tell, it merely makes things increasingly difficult for the Horde. That said, its relevance to the PCs is clear, so that's something. [b]Law.[/b] This one is obviously important in "GLORY"; it contributes fundamentally to the most significant decision the PCs will have to make. I really wish I knew more about it, but I won't rehash the topic. However, this is unquestionably the best ingredient in "Nowhere." Not only does it provide the framework for the adventure to hang on (if you'll pardon the expression), it also has a built-in sense of urgency. [b]Road to Glory.[/b] As a metaphor for going to the Warrior's afterlife in "GLORY," it works, but the relevance of that is undercut significantly throughout the adventure – not only because the Horde doesn't seem to follow it, but also because the PCs follow it incidentally, without regard to their actions. This seems like a really big missed opportunity; I would definitely want to find ways to emphasize it, were I to run the adventure. In "Nowhere," the road is obvious, and I feel like it is intended to tie into a great underlying theme, but I'm just not quite grasping it. Glory is meaningless? The road to glory leads nowhere? It leads to death? Whose glory are we even talking about, here? Gristlyn's? The Veteran's? The other PCs'? The ghosts'? Of those, Gristlyn seems most likely, but it feels like I'm missing something and I can't quite figure out whether or not there's actually anything to be found. [b]Shallow Grave.[/b] In "Nowhere," this ingredient is central to the adventure and directly relevant to the PCs. And, as with most of the others, really helps establish the tone of things. Even so, I like the one in "GLORY" more. I would really love to get the PCs involved in a battle, here. As with "Nowhere," the imagery is great and, added to that, the potential for a tactically intriguing battle could be very fun. Regrettably, as written, it [i]seems[/i] (once again, I can't be sure) as if the PCs don't enter the adventure until its relevance is passed. [b]Impasse.[/b] As this is closely related to the last ingredient in "GLORY," I don't have much else to say about it; it works, but only if the PCs get involved (and then it complicates things nicely). Yet – I can't seem to find this one in "Nowhere," at all, even after multiple re-reads. A casualty of space and time, perhaps? So..."GLORY" did not do [i]too[/i] badly with the ingredients, when taken as a whole. They're actually one of the reasons I see potential in the author. The ones that don't work [i]really[/i] don't work, but the ones that almost do have really sound reasons for it! "Nowhere" uses it's ingredients better in total, though, and the adventure is far more solid. [b]Iron Sky[/b] will advance to Round 2. [B]Yaztromo[/b], I'm sorry that this first judgement is so rough. I really am! I promise you, you're better at this than my critique makes it seem! You have what counts, and, if you hone it, I have no doubt that your next attempt will be vastly improved. If I might offer you some advice to that end, though, it would be this: First, don't rush things if you don't have to (if you have to, you have to, of course). A lot of the problems could have been polished out, given the opportunity. Second, and far more importantly, trust the players with decisions. Let the consequences matter! Your job as a DM (or as a writer for a DM) is not so much to tell a story; it's to facilitate the other players' telling of a story. This gaming-philosophy has all sorts of implications you can follow that I'm sure could really help you bring out those awesome ideas you've clearly got going on. I'll say it again: you've got what counts. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
IRON DM 2017 Tournament
Top