Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Quasqueton" data-source="post: 2902472" data-attributes="member: 3854">The maps you link to look very different than the maps in the OP (and not just in the artistry/technology of their cartography). The maps linked look like straight-forward adventures -- no unnecessary rooms, tunnels, etc. It looks like every hall on the maps takes the adventurers directly to a room, and each room has some encounter (not necessarily a combat).The OP maps have lots of winding tunnels with dead ends and loop backs.Like I said earlier, the OP maps look like they were designed for a group of Players with lots of time to "waste" wandering about without any real direction or agenda. The maps you link to look like they were designed for a specific direction and agenda (plot).Melan makes a good point:That is very different than the AoW adventure path. Note that AoW is even called an "adventure path". The maps in the OP would be called simply a "dungeon". Both could have the same amount of fun and excitement for a D&D group, but it is likely that each would be fit for two entirely different kinds of groups -- those who enjoy the adventure path style probably would get bored and annoyed with the dungeon style, and those who like the dungeon style probably would get bored and annoyed with the adventure path style.I think I fall somewhere in the middle. I think the adventure path style might start feeling like a railroad pretty quick (as I've experienced with one "modern" adventure path series), but the dungeon style I think would wear soon enough too, just because I don't want to waste time wandering around in a maze for my D&D gaming.Quasqueton</blockquote>

Verification