Why you shouldn't use 5 ft corridors

[Bagpuss]

Realism? I understand it, but this is a game. We're here to have fun.

Please designers, don't use 5' corridors unless it's only for a couple of encounters. They suck the fun out of a game.

I'm with you totally, the only thing worse than 5ft corridors is 5ft corridors with difficult terrain, in darkness. 1/4 movement rate, still on the plus side at least we weren't attacking up hill as well for 1/8 movement rate. The one combat took several hours to sort out and most of the characters just shuffled about at the back.

 

[Klaus]

Err... I think you'll find that when it comes to combat, players like the rules to be more strict than when you're handling the role-playing elements of the game.

Would you like it if two Ogres suddenly were squeezing together because it's "common sense" and bashing you to a pulp?

House rules are fine and all, but you can't assume their use as a designer. As a designer, you need to assume the RAW.

Two Ogres can fit in a 5x10 space each if they're squeezing.

As for "there's no thing as a half-square", tell that to a Tiny creature and his three Tiny friends who share the same 5ft. square.

My guideline is: if there's two ways to read a rule, go with the one that makes most sense.

 

[mhensley]

D&D is a RPG not a boardgame...

Not according to the RAW.

 

[Schmoe]

I'd like to make this very, very clear:

One or two encounters in an adventure in cramped quarters are fine by me.

I love tactical challenges. It's when an entire session is given over to one tactical challenge that it becomes extremely dull.

Fair enough. But the encounters you've mentioned are just one dungeon in an adventure that includes an assault on an anchored ship, a romp through a pirate cave, and opening a family crypt, as well as a large amount of city-based investigation and role-play. In addition, the dungeon isn't entirely given over to cramped quarters and 5' corridors.

It just seems to me that your tolerance for cramped spaces is excessively low.

 

[Templeton580]

*

 

[Schmoe]

Repeatedly attempting to bullrush. An enlarged barbarian may help (sic)

Not in those tight of quarters.

A Large barbarian could still squeeze, and squeezing doesn't affect bullrush attempts, AFAIK. Regardless, a normal-sized raging barbarian should have a bullrush check of at least +5, maybe +6, which hardly puts bullrush outside the realm of available tactics. A fighter with the foresight to choose Improved Bullrush would probably have a +7 to the check, at least. Again, certainly a reasonable approach.

Without either a barbarian or someone with Improved Bullrush, you could still use the Aid Another action, potentially yielding a total check of +7 or more.

 

[Storm Raven]

This is one of the worst encounters.

The (red) creature has a +8 modifier to avoid being Bull Rushed. The green positions are where PCs can stand and see the monster. The yellow positions are where two PCs must stand... unable to even see the monster and thus participate.

Why not simply withdraw to the larger room? Either the opposition will follow the PCs, and give up their terrain advantage, or they won't, and the party can organize themselves for an encounter they know the location and nature of. If the bad guy remains static, he gives up the tactical initiative (not "game initiative") ceding the ability to prepare and optimize the method of attack to the PCs.

 

[catsclaw227]

House rules are fine and all, but you can't assume their use as a designer. As a designer, you need to assume the RAW.

I am not sure if James ever claimed working outside the RAW, even though there have been many different suggestions by other posters that certainly fall within the "go-with-the-flow" mindset.

But if you consider that the underground complex was a series of basements, connected after-the-fact by 5' corridors, and that (as a den of thieves) it is intended to be constrained, then in my opinion the design is quite good. This part of the adventure is only about 1/4th of the FIRST installment of Savage tide, is not indicative of the AP as a whole, and constitutes about 1-2 game sessions of a LONG campaign arc. I must say, IMHO, this complaint feels more like quibbling.

Err... I think you'll find that when it comes to combat, players like the rules to be more strict than when you're handling the role-playing elements of the game.

You may want to revise this as saying that YOUR players like the rules to be more strict... My players are OK with trusting my instincts as a DM, and sometimes that requires winging the tactical part of the game if it suits having fun or making the flawed parts of the RAW more playable.

As I said earlier, all campaigns are played differently, so if your group didn't like it, then that's a bummer.

 

[Shazman]

As a player, I always hated fights in 5ft corridors too. One person fights, while everyone else readies actions and twidles their thumbs. BORING!!! I know it's not very "realistic" to have 10 ft hallways, but their needs to be some compromise between "realistic" and fun for PC's.

 

[Storminator]

This is the section of the dungeon that really irritates me, btw:

Especially the 2x3 room with the 1x1 room above it; the monster began right outside the door when it was opened. The PCs entered from the west, and only 3 had LOS to the room.

Cheers!

This part of the adventure made me want to claw my eyes out. Not because it's cramped and limited, but because my players invariably asked:

"Which side are the hinges on? Which way does the door open?"

PS