What do you think of WotC's new combat encounter or "Delve" format?

[Sir Elton]

Hmmm.

 

[RichGreen]

Hi,

I like the look of it in Expedition to Castle Ravenloft but haven't tried using it yet. I think it would make each encounter loads easier to run and cut down on prep time. I just wish they'd say what book each monster has been taken from.

Cheers


Richard

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I like it. I'd love it if other publishers started doing it as well. Every room doesn't need this sort of treatment -- sometimes, it's just an orc and a pie, after all -- but for complex rooms, it's a life-saver.

 

[MerricB]

Its best use is for linked sets of rooms (done very well in Castle Ravenloft), and for encounters where the terrain really comes into the equation.

 

[PeterGirvan]

I'm a big fan. It presents each encounter in a cinematic fashion that helps pull me into the adventure, just as I hope to pull the players into the adventure. The format is going through some growing pains, to be sure, (needless descriptions of decoration items in rooms, etc.) but overall, it holds a lot of promise and brings a synergy to the latest WoTC products (tiles, minis, adventure) that has been very dynamic at my gaming tables.

-Peter

 

[photon1966]

Dislike of Standardization

Hello there

I dislike this new format because it makes the modules I have seem very compartmentized. Which I dislike. I rarly use modules as is. My campaign world is different then the standard one but I really like ideas that modules give. But this format is too cut and paste for me. You move into room a and thats page 3-4, then leave a and enter b thats 5-6. It seems to me to take away from the fact that the whole thing is one big thing and reduces it to unconnected encounters. It also makes designers, or so it has seemed to me, to make modules along those lines. I really enjoy Dungeon because they have different and varied adventures that take place in different places. My feel of the Barrows and I forget the name of the other one with goblins is just not pleasant and I will not likely purchase anymore unless they really seem interesting and I can gleam a good amount of data out of them.

Thanks

 

[Klaus]

The idea is good. Not all encounters deserve this treatment, though.

And I'd really appreciate it if the stat block in the delve format was somewhat abbreviated. The DMG2 stat block takes up waaaaay too much space for this format.

 

[charlesatan]

The idea is good. Not all encounters deserve this treatment, though.

Agreed. But I think the target segment of WotC right now isn't necessarily the veteran GMs but rather making it more accessible to the newer gamers. I'd like to think of the WotC adventures as introduction games while for the more sophisticated (and lethal) adventures, I'd go Dungeon magazine.

And I'd really appreciate it if the stat block in the delve format was somewhat abbreviated. The DMG2 stat block takes up waaaaay too much space for this format.

I think consuming more space than usual comes with the territory of ease of use. When you start abbreviating, people start asking questions "what exactly is this ability/feat?" I mean personally, as someone who's read a lot of the D&D books, abbreviations came faster to me than others but at times it can still be confusing. The D&D Miniatures game uses abbreviations and I honestly appreciate if it was spelled out more but I understand the space constraints.

I love the new stat block -- it's easier to use. But just like the new delve format, it comes at the price of space. So it's a choice whether you want more content or ease of use at the same price point (I think this is also the argument for MM3 and MM4 although MM4 could have ditched the MM1 monsters). That could be like Merric's 2nd Law or something: "cheap", ease of use, or more content -- pick two. =)

 

[Wurm1234]

I like it alot. I used it for a Halloween running of Expedition to Castle Ravenloft, and my impression was that things went very smoothly. I liked how well the story came together, with the references to the encounter sections separated. I used a Visio flow chart to link together the parts of the adventure we might get to in a one-night event, and then just skipped between the flow chart, and the referenced encounter areas. I also have The Shattered Gates of Slaughtergarde. I haven't played it yet, but I find the format easy to pull encounters from as grist for my DM'ing mill. If Dungeon Crawl Classics and Necromancer Games moved to this format, I'd be a happy DM!

 

[Zaukrie]

I like it. I have Barrow of the forgotten King. The whole flow of the adventure is in the first part, with the tactical encounters later. Do all the encounters need 2 pages? No, but, this is much, much easier to use in practice.

I'd suggest actually owning one of the products before judging it. Even the examples on the site don't work, as you can't see delve in the context of the whole.