Very disappointed in DU5: Sinister Woods

[Cadfan]

But aren't they limited by their format to... what, 8x8 maximum? I assumed the purpose of the tiles was to give you dressing for a basic green backdrop grid. Is that incorrect?

 

[Thanlis]

FWIW, I printed out 18 tiles from the Fat Dragon Games Forest Adventures set, glued them back to back, and laminated them -- now I have a nice set of nine tiles which can make a 24" x 24" space. The back sides have rivers on them if I need that. So that's one answer.

 

[filthgrinder]

In general, the Dungeon Tiles would be best, if there was a Core line of them, which was always in print, which simply has very basic tiles.

I believe that is slated for next year. They are going to create a "basic dungeons" or soemthing box set and focus on having that always be in print. The focus on the other sets expanding on that.

 

[Jhaelen]

Does anyone else feel the same way?

I think this set would have deserved the name Ruins of the Wild rather than DT4. I still think it's one of the better sets. It combines well with DT4 (which was the best set ever).

It has the same problem as the Streets of Shadow set: one side isn't what I wanted from the set. The SoS set was worse, though. I didn't even buy a single copy because I could see, it would require _at least_ three sets to create a reasonably sized encounter area in a city environment.

These days I'm mostly using poster maps. I finally bought all of the Fantastic Locations and many of them work very well and are pretty reusable especially if you combine them with tiles.

What would have worked well for me:
Just create a set with tiles that contains single trees, undergrowth, or small groups of trees to be placed on top of a set like DT4 - or a battle mat like the one Perram mentioned (which happens to be the one I'm using, as well).

The worst set so far is still Lost Caverns of the Underdark. I only ever used the two biggest tiles. I've literally spent hours trying to recreate maps with them before dismissing them as useless.
The Caves of Carnage set was a lot better (though it has too many tiles with tiny rivers).

As a final remark: The Ashen Crown adventure module has a set of excellent wilderness encounter maps I'd immediately buy if they were available as poster maps.

 

[Huw]

I liked Sinister Woods - but then I already have Ruins of the Wild so I wasn't after plains and light woodland.

One complaint: the woods feel very Zelda like - they're very conveniently square. On the other hand, the ruined castle pieces are excellent, and the set-pieces (the spider webs, the lily ponds, etc.) are nicely done and also fit well with Ruins of the Wild.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I think this set would have deserved the name Ruins of the Wild rather than DT4. I still think it's one of the better sets. It combines well with DT4 (which was the best set ever).

It has the same problem as the Streets of Shadow set: one side isn't what I wanted from the set. The SoS set was worse, though. I didn't even buy a single copy because I could see, it would require _at least_ three sets to create a reasonably sized encounter area in a city environment.

These days I'm mostly using poster maps. I finally bought all of the Fantastic Locations and many of them work very well and are pretty reusable especially if you combine them with tiles.

What would have worked well for me:
Just create a set with tiles that contains single trees, undergrowth, or small groups of trees to be placed on top of a set like DT4 - or a battle mat like the one Perram mentioned (which happens to be the one I'm using, as well).

The worst set so far is still Lost Caverns of the Underdark. I only ever used the two biggest tiles. I've literally spent hours trying to recreate maps with them before dismissing them as useless.
The Caves of Carnage set was a lot better (though it has too many tiles with tiny rivers).

As a final remark: The Ashen Crown adventure module has a set of excellent wilderness encounter maps I'd immediately buy if they were available as poster maps.

Fantastic Locations? Are there any images available on its content? I never picked this up before, and I don't know what to expect in it, but it sounds interesting.

 

[Thanee]

With two sets each of DT4 and DU5 I feel fairly confident, that I can build decent-sized outdoor encounter areas.

But yeah, you really need multiples of some of those sets to make them really useful (luckily they are fairly cheap, while they are new; got two sets of DU5 for €5 each).

And some of the sets really require older sets (like this one requires DT4) to work well.

Bye
Thanee

 

[vagabundo]

I recently bought two sets of the latest D&D Dungeon Tiles release, Sinister Woods. I was very disappointed with the design of the tiles.

The tiles look great, and they're of the same high quality I've come to expect of the line, but they fail a key test of a wilderness set: they don't help build large wilderness battlemats. There isn't a single big "plains/grassland" piece in the set - those that might have been like that are bordered by thick forest on the sides, and too much attention is given to "outside ruins".

Cheers!

Well it is called sinister woods and not sinister grasslands/plains for a reason I suppose...

 

[Adso]

I recently bought two sets of the latest D&D Dungeon Tiles release, Sinister Woods. I was very disappointed with the design of the tiles.

The tiles look great, and they're of the same high quality I've come to expect of the line, but they fail a key test of a wilderness set: they don't help build large wilderness battlemats. There isn't a single big "plains/grassland" piece in the set - those that might have been like that are bordered by thick forest on the sides, and too much attention is given to "outside ruins".

I don't mind specialist tile sets which are mostly given to dressing, but this line doesn't have enough basic wilderness tiles in it. The first wilderness tile set (DT4 Ruins of the Wild) was great; it allowed the wilderness vistas I wanted. Unfortunately, that set is long in the past now. New players starting 4E won't have access to it. As we get wilderness sets so rarely, I want them to have better utility than this.

Does anyone else feel the same way?

Cheers!

You know, when I designed this set, I knew that this would be a complaint.

What I didn’t imagine is that MerricB (a fan whose opinion I respect) would be very disappointed buy it.

We (and more specifically I) didn't want to retread the old ground of DT4 Ruins of the Wild for a number of reason. I wanted a set that would present new terrain types (forest, forest clearings, and wilderness ruins) and create interesting transitional pieces between the wilds and the "dungeon" that would enhance DT4 and other sets. That was the method to my particular madness. Also, we wanted at least one tile (with two sides) that supported some of the immurements in AV2 (see immurement of baleful gossamer page 89 and immurement of the strident statuary page 91).

I have a philosophy (that you may not agree with) that transitional pieces are more interesting and useful than large plain area pieces, especially in outdoor tile sets. It is easier to hand wave large regions of a singular type of terrain (or to own a flip map or similar product with that terrain already printed on it) than it is to do so with transition. DM time and brainpower is taken up is in the transitions of areas and terrain (“this is where the woods end”, “there is a fallen tree here and it is difficult terrain and provides cover”, “the stonework of the ruins starts here” “there is a clearing in the woods here”, etc. and then asking the pesky questions of which square is which when hand drawn lines aren’t quite clear). It’s this philosophy that guided my design decisions for DU5 Sinister Woods.

I also made sure to put forest and clearing tiles on one side and ruins tiles on another side, so to limit some hard choices and guess work when using the set. I’ll freely admit that you may have to buy least two sets if you want flexibility with each type of terrain. Given the price point, the relative ease of storage, I don’t think this is entirely unreasonable. Honestly, I really don’t mind if you buy more.

Hope this helps in understanding why I made the choice I did on this set. I’m sorry if any of you are disappointed by it…that was not my intent.

 

[Twowolves]

I was quite disappointed by the number of ruins on the backs of the tiles as well. They aren't very versitile (they can make one, maybe two layouts), and they just don't look good. I'd have MUCH preferred empty grass spaces, so that you could make tree-lined clearings or more open spaces with multiple sets.

I also thought the set was lacking generic utility dressing bits. Most of the tiles were large, so there were fewer of the smaller odd pieces. The best tile in the set, IMO, is the well. At least that one will see lots of use in multiple settings, not just "woods".