Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="grodog" data-source="post: 2902568" data-attributes="member: 1613">A good point!FWIW, my intent with my &quot;coy&quot; comment wasn't to be accustatory, I just thought you had some secondary motives that weren't present.&nbsp; My apologies if I've derailed your thread more than I'd intended (which wasn't at all).True, however, taken as a full unit across the two sets of maps (which are linked), the kinds of challenges presented by the AoW maps struck me as more indicative of the style of the original maps than most 3.x maps in general do so.&nbsp; Whlie the AoW maps are more stretched out, they feature a lot of vertical challenges, hidden sublevels, etc., like the OP maps when taken as a whole.&nbsp; That said, in execution the AoW maps also take up a lot more horizontal space (they're not sized to 1 sheet of graph paper each), they are pretty much numbered with one challenge/encounter in each room, and they aren't designed to foster exploration in which wandering mosters will play a sizable role (they're still pretty linear).That's one of the things I've appreciated most about Necromancer Games' Tomb of Abysthor and Rappan Athuk serieses:&nbsp; in the intros, Clark and Bill comment that one of the main drivers for play in a dungeon is to provide the players with goals.&nbsp; Players don't willingly enter RA, they are sent there to retrive X from evil temple Y on level Z; or the PCs must secure the services of alien wizard A on level B in order to accomplish unrelated-to-this-present-dungeon-environment goal C; etc.&nbsp; In OP map play, the players' piecemeal exploration of the map over several expeditions would likely provide those kinds of tactical goals directly.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="grodog, post: 2902568, member: 1613"] A good point! FWIW, my intent with my "coy" comment wasn't to be accustatory, I just thought you had some secondary motives that weren't present. My apologies if I've derailed your thread more than I'd intended (which wasn't at all). True, however, taken as a full unit across the two sets of maps (which are linked), the kinds of challenges presented by the AoW maps struck me as more indicative of the style of the original maps than most 3.x maps in general do so. Whlie the AoW maps are more stretched out, they feature a lot of vertical challenges, hidden sublevels, etc., like the OP maps when taken as a whole. That said, in execution the AoW maps also take up a lot more horizontal space (they're not sized to 1 sheet of graph paper each), they are pretty much numbered with one challenge/encounter in each room, and they aren't designed to foster exploration in which wandering mosters will play a sizable role (they're still pretty linear). That's one of the things I've appreciated most about Necromancer Games' Tomb of Abysthor and Rappan Athuk serieses: in the intros, Clark and Bill comment that one of the main drivers for play in a dungeon is to provide the players with goals. Players don't willingly enter RA, they are sent there to retrive X from evil temple Y on level Z; or the PCs must secure the services of alien wizard A on level B in order to accomplish unrelated-to-this-present-dungeon-environment goal C; etc. In OP map play, the players' piecemeal exploration of the map over several expeditions would likely provide those kinds of tactical goals directly. [/QUOTE]

Verification