I'm just looking for feedback.. I'm not stating an opinion as fact..
I'm getting complaints from my players (who are just about through Skinsaw Murders) that they think the maps are too small and crowded.
(Note: My comment has nothing to do with PDF map resolution or other graphic issues, this is all about the maps themselves.)
They're complaining that many fight scenes are squeezed in small tight spaces, and it's a hardship for characters who are in the back of any marching order to actually get involved in a fight. Combat options are limited because there's no room to do anything but slug it out, and so on and so on.. And they don't think that's a tactical issue on their part, but rather because the maps are tight and small where everything is bottle-necked.
Because of my newness with 3.5, I don't know if they're being fair or not, so I wanted to sound out and hear if anybody else has noticed this.. prior to submitting feedback to Paizo.
A couple points where this comment has come up:
* I heard that parts of Thistletop were crowded, particularly the lower levels.
I started hearing it a lot in Skinsaw Murders.
*Habe's Santiarium was 'four floors of nothing and one small fight in a tiny cell'
*Foxglove Manor was tight, but the Haunts (as opposed to actual opponents) made it not so bad.. but when they got to the tunnels underneath it was one close quarter fight after another
*Foxglove's townhouse was a series of small rooms, made worse by medium creatures with 10' reach and combat expertise. The Faceless Stalkers didn't need to worry about setting players up with flanking attacks or feints, because in order to allow every PC a chance to participate in the fight the Stalkers got lots of free A.O.O's as the PCs tried to move around them in very small rooms with furniture.
Again, I am inclined to give my players the benefit of the doubt (it's their experience with the game), but I just wondered if anybody was hearing anything similar?
I used Foxglove Manor - fused with the Vampire Keep from Liber Mortis as the basis for a horror adventure and my PCs really noticed the cramped spaces during some heavy fighting that took place in the manor. Not really a problem as this was new and unusual for my players and some of the fights have been multi-level fights in the manor which worked well with the small building as I could fit multiple levels on the grid, but I could see how this could get annoying if it was constant.
Creative Director
|
There's certainly something to be said about cramped quarters. In the case of Thistletop, that's on purpose; the PCs are fighting goblins, after all, and goblins wouldn't want to make their lair big and expansive to make it easier for invaders to get in there.
But yeah, I can certainly see some complaints being valid about map size and all that. And with larger parties, that problem will only compound. The good news is, though, that the dungeons get a bit roomier after Skinsaw... they have to, what with all them giants!
Ranged attacks, I won't say anything else.
??
Is this like the surrealist joke where the punchline is 'fish'? "Repeat 'Ernie Gygax' backwards three times while walking widdershins, I won't say anything else!"
:D
All kidding aside SirUrza, I'll take your comment as meaning you think the maps are fine as they are. Duly noted.
For everybody else, I'm not looking for advice on behalf of my players on how they might have used better tactics. Have your players complained about the maps being too small and too cramped?
But yeah, I can certainly see some complaints being valid about map size and all that. And with larger parties, that problem will only compound. The good news is, though, that the dungeons get a bit roomier after Skinsaw... they have to, what with all them giants!
You know, I hadn't looked ahead at the future maps... That's a good point about the giants.
The one that's really complaining about the cramped quarters is also chafing at the action versus role-playing balance. I have a couple that like small town politics like the disposition of the Glassworks and Scarnetti scheming.. and I have a couple that like the epic battle against evil. I'm sure that's feeding into this. The ones spoiling for intense cinematic battles aren't getting their fix. The Clocktower should fix that shortly.
I guess it wasn't a problem for my group since we're running with 4 people; a fighter, a cleric, a ranger, and a wizard. The ranger and wizard are usually in the back so space isn't an issue.
How many are you running?
Five.. two fighters, one combat oriented druid (PHBII shapeshifting variant), a cleric of Iomedae (so he's a long sword wielding paladin wannabee, literally waiting to go prestige paladin), and a rogue/wizard.
3 Rogue / 2 Wizard, intending to take the next level as wizard.
Too many tanks, most likely, and I think the rogue started going wizard because he could see they were screwing themselves with no magic support.
Only the druid favors ranged attacks regularly.
I couldn't get anybody to play wizard or sorc to start with. They mistrusted 3.5 to give them an effective character that wouldn't get killed fast. When a fair number of wands got handed out in Chapter One, they were sort of heartened and dismayed that they didn't have more faith.
COCT writers and editors take note! A few wands in the first Chapter to keep the mages effective till they get a couple levels is a good thing! I might have an easier time persuading them now Runelords did that.
We noticed the cramped spaces too, but my players like to bottle-neck opponents as a tactic. The tank often puts himself in a doorway, the cleric stays behind him or nearby to buff/heal, and someone with a ranged weapon does what he/she can from there. If there is more than one tank in the group, they will take turns being the front man.
Though I did notice at Thistletop they purposely backed out of a battle to lure some combatants into a better tactical position.
In fact, I've noticed that my players tend to hate big open spaces. At least when they are thinking tactically.
hmm, no complaints about bottlenecked or "cramped quarters" from my group so far. In fact they use the bottlenecks to their advantage quite often.
What bothers me far more, that the basic layout of underground complexes and such tends to become very much rectangular or square, due to the structures extending into odd nooks and loopy bends to fit them into a certain predefined area.
this has drawn some comments from my guys - it was bad in the STAP, where in BWG a player actually remarked that "there should be no further room beyond this one, since we have already found two of the map's outer edges".... which was a true observation, and such meta-gaming thoughts always lurk in players ' minds, whether they are uttered out aloud or not.
Since then I have taken care to twist corridors sideways or mirror-flip them so the basic dungeon layout does not become all that obvious quite as fast.... but this only works for rooms which are not interconnected with areas above or below...
And it's a trend with Paizo-drawn maps, so if you care to do something about it, feel welcome to try.
And it's a trend with Paizo-drawn maps, so if you care to do something about it, feel welcome to try.
Of course..
And I appreciate the feedback (and any more that might continue to come in).
Even with James' kinda admission, I'm not drawing a conclusion as a fact. I'm just bouncing the idea around on the boards to determine whether it's a real concern, or is my Druid just mad that he has to clammor over the fighters to engage the enemy.
The townhouse is an interesting encounter because the Faceless Stalkers have a 10' reach, combat expertise, and a Dex high enough to allow them an A.O.O up to four (different) opponents. In cramped quarters that makes them more dangerous than their stats alone would reflect. SirUzra really did have a valid point about ranged attacks, but the rooms are small enough to have the PCs backed down the staircases, and a Faceless standing in the right spot can really score a good handful of free attacks on anybody moving around them. I think the Faceless are brilliant monsters, I wouldn't change them a bit, but that's a tactical facet of them that doesn't stand out in a casual read, until it's actually played.
The proverbial sword cuts the other way as well... The Dire Dread Ghoul Bat has a great listen, so reasonably can sense the party in the caverns.. but as a large creature occupying 4 squares, it has to squeeze (the technical application of the term) to get at parties that retreat back a little. (And they did use range attacks in that instance!) That was also something that didn't stand out to me till actual play. I found myself wishing I would have had the Bat come up the well and attack outside. Not because I wanted to get the PCs, but I thought it would have made a more interesting encounter.
My players have commented on it, but more in admiration of the tactics of the bad guys for making sure that there isn't a big area where they could be smacked down. After all, if I'm repositioning antagonists for whatever reason I always looks for a solid, defensible position. Particularly if they're expecting a fight it just doesn't make sense for them to be in open spaces where they can easily be surrounded.
Fighting giants will hopefully make your players happier.
We noticed it, and for our large party it's been tactically tricky, but I think my player actually prefers the occasional realistically sized map--he'd been making a lot of snarky comments about how all D&D buildings are built by and for giants.
It does accentuate the weirdness of the 5' spacerequirement, though.
I've had a lot more trouble with the alternating use of 5' and 10' map scales--I know why this is necessary, but I keep missing it. Often the room description implies a normally sized room but the 10' scale map shows an enormous room; this is confusing.
Mary
|
Creative Director
|
What bothers me far more, that the basic layout of underground complexes and such tends to become very much rectangular or square, due to the structures extending into odd nooks and loopy bends to fit them into a certain predefined area... And it's a trend with Paizo-drawn maps, so if you care to do something about it, feel welcome to try.
That's sort of been a curse of the game from the start; the urge to fill a rectangular page with rooms is often too strong for an adventure designer to resist. And if players start to metagame that... you either have to just accept it or start changing things on the fly, as you've done.
Of course, there are a fair amount of dungeons in Runelords that avoid the "rectangular curse," such as Runeforge or the dungeons under Foxglove Manor. But for the most part, since we sort of have to order maps in rectangles and it goes against my better judgement to "waste" that space... rectangular dungeons are likely to remain a part of the equation.
|
Foxglove manor just makes sense though to use that scale.
The map maker could have looked at it and decided to make it larger to accommodate large battles and extra large parties, but that defeats any sense of realism (yeah I know it's D&D lol)
I would not expect a manor house to have rooms that 50x40 feet or 100x300 feet to allow good long range combat. When a ranger enters a house he should better be more than one dimensional if he wants to contribute.
I would expect rooms in a home to be in the range of 10x10 to 30 x30. Much larger and you really are just making the map to accommodate the combat and not the combat to accommodate the map.
Besides these guys are PCs! Creative types! Tell them to think outside the box. 6 players can split up and take two rooms at a time (great fun for a DM lol)
Foxglove manor just makes sense though to use that scale.
The map maker could have looked at it and decided to make it larger to accommodate large battles and extra large parties, but that defeats any sense of realism (yeah I know it's D&D lol)
I would not expect a manor house to have rooms that 50x40 feet or 100x300 feet to allow good long range combat. When a ranger enters a house he should better be more than one dimensional if he wants to contribute.
I would expect rooms in a home to be in the range of 10x10 to 30 x30. Much larger and you really are just making the map to accommodate the combat and not the combat to accommodate the map.
Besides these guys are PCs! Creative types! Tell them to think outside the box. 6 players can split up and take two rooms at a time (great fun for a DM lol)
Ironically, the Manor is where they didn't complain! It really did scare the crap out of them, and they huddled in close.
But, as a serious counter-point, they would also want me to point out to me that there are almost no monsters in the Manor either! You can't engage Haunts in the same sort combat... That kind of defeats what you're saying if you're going to rely on the Manor to make your argument.
I mentioned this in a post, oooh, a while ago. I found Thistletop very cramped, especially the battle against Nualia (it just went back and forth along that trapped corridor, with my scout being the only one participating and everyone else trying to get in behind him).
I'm not exactly sure how many of the Kreegs could have fit into Fort Rannick (yeah, they probably squeezed through the doors, but nine ogres [several of them now dead] in the barracks? That would be like nine humans in a phone booth fighting over a dead horse mask).
I'm guessing that with the "giant-sized" buildings in PF4 and onwards, this will be easier, but the size of a stone giant city could be a bit 'dwarfing' on my characters.
I had one of my old time players start to roll his eyes in Thistletop when I was enforcing some confined space combat rules. I just wrote three words on a post-it and handed it to him and he shaped right up.
I don't know about any other older DMs and Players out there but I remember my gnarly and tough fighter being stabbed/shot/humiliated by kobolds whilst crammed into a teensy little tunnel and rueing the day I ever thought it was a grand idea to walk into Infyrana's lair.
It's always good for players to remember that it could be worse, and to check their poopoo pants comments/actions at the door.
I think that players are apt to complain about anything that is seen as repetitive, although I try not to when I'm a player. Oddly enough it's usually something that we omitted as a minor detail as DMs. We go out of our way to make sure we have varied combats and encounters and styles of adventures and then the 5ft wide hallways get thrown in our faces.
I personally didn't mind narrower hallways in the human-sized areas of the game because it was justified. Any non-poopants player can see that. I hope for your sake Watcher that your PC's were more jabbing and poking at the narrow hallways in a joking manner, because it's hard enough to run an adventure for insane apes (read: humans)without having the carpentry and excavation called into question.
|
The issue I am havening with the maps is that they cross more diagnal squares than right angle squares. Drawing them is a pain in teh arse. I end up redesigning almost all the maps for ease of drawing.
The issue I am havening with the maps is that they cross more diagnal squares than right angle squares. Drawing them is a pain in teh arse. I end up redesigning almost all the maps for ease of drawing.
I'm pretty sure the rules are that if a square is 50% or more open you treat it as a normal square and if its less then 50% open then its verbotten. I find that game wise the split squares are no problem really though I do have a tough time drawing natural areas like caves if things don't more or less conform to the grid.
The cramped quarters have been noticed by me, but ironically not by the group.
I am running with 7 PCs (yes I need my head looking at). We went stock rules only (with the addition of any official Pathfinder and Gamesmaster additions) and were built on 25 points. The party is pretty heavy combat based (1 Human Sorcerer, 1 Halfling thief, 1 Elven Cleric, 1 Human Druid + Dog, I human Barbarian, 1 human fighter and 1 Dwarven Ranger).
So far I am having to throw a few extra monsters into each combat as well, so I tend to add an extra 5' width and depth to each room to make the combats a bit more spaced.
As we are pretty abstract with maps, this part has not noticed yet.
But we do have interesting situations where combat can break out, but the person at the back of the group can't actually see what is going on because he is round a corner.
I noticed it in Thistletop and, in fact, it bothered me so much (especially with the room with a certain bugbear and his "companions") that I got a whole bunch of cardboard stock and drew out the map 50% larger. I also took the liberty of un-diagonalizing the bridge.
To be honest, the diagonal rooms bother me more than the size. The sizes I can adjust on the fly if need be. It's a complete pain in the ass to change a diagonal room to an orthogonal one, and it's even MORE of a pain in the ass to try to adjudicate a diagonal room as-written. The Glassworks was a really bad example of this.
|
Creative Director
|
To a certain extent... the artificial construction that only one Medium creature can stand in a five-foot square is the problem. Try it out. Draw out a five-foot square on the floor. It's bigger than it looks. You can certainly fit lots of people into that area, ESPECIALLY if they're not fighting or doing jumping-jacks or whatever. The fact that the game doesn't really admit that you can have more than one person in a five foot square at a time is, I feel, a fault of the game, and a cop-out intended to solve the difficult question of "How do I fit two minis into one square without one falling over?
My suggestion... allow Medium creatures to share space in a square, but treat it as if they're squeezing.
To a certain extent... the artificial construction that only one Medium creature can stand in a five-foot square is the problem. Try it out. Draw out a five-foot square on the floor. It's bigger than it looks. You can certainly fit lots of people into that area, ESPECIALLY if they're not fighting or doing jumping-jacks or whatever. The fact that the game doesn't really admit that you can have more than one person in a five foot square at a time is, I feel, a fault of the game, and a cop-out intended to solve the difficult question of "How do I fit two minis into one square without one falling over?
My suggestion... allow Medium creatures to share space in a square, but treat it as if they're squeezing.
That is a good point regarding the arbitary declaration that one square is 5' to make the mini's work.. I never quite thought of it that way.
The comment my players made about Thistletop was the sheer number of halls and doors. They started making jokes about how the goblins were part of a vast conspiracy to increase the sale of doors.
.
Mine didn't make that comment, but I sure did! Partially due to the Rogue went through this mantra of:
"I check to see if the door is locked. I check for traps. I check to see if the door is locked. I check for traps." Fair enough, but repeat that for every door. Over and over and over... And I can't blame him, some darn door might be trapped someday!
When I got to Foxglove Manor, I wised up. I told him to assume most doors were unlocked, and I would allow him a detect roll on any door that actually ends up being trapped (of which there is none) prior to an effect taking place. It saved me and the other players a lot of tiresome checking.
(However, I've told him he has to be in front of the marching order, and he is still responsible for stating he was checking any other area or objects for traps).
I periodically had a Manor door stuck due to swelling.
To a certain extent... the artificial construction that only one Medium creature can stand in a five-foot square is the problem. Try it out. Draw out a five-foot square on the floor. It's bigger than it looks. You can certainly fit lots of people into that area, ESPECIALLY if they're not fighting or doing jumping-jacks or whatever. The fact that the game doesn't really admit that you can have more than one person in a five foot square at a time is, I feel, a fault of the game, and a cop-out intended to solve the difficult question of "How do I fit two minis into one square without one falling over?
My suggestion... allow Medium creatures to share space in a square, but treat it as if they're squeezing.
I've continued to think about this.
When I reviewed Skinsaw Murders I was pretty critical on the technical errors. I do love the module, but I thought there were issues that made it fall short of perfect.
One thing that I took into account is based on what you've stated above.
Spoiler Tags to protect the victims:
I'll admit, I feel guilty for holding it against the module (though I didn't take a star away just for that, it was an accumulation).
Is this one of the instances where you think the fault is with how the game deals with miniatures? Or, say in a perfect world, that encounter would have more space?
|
While there were some cramped spaces in the modules we completed (we're only on mod 4 now), we generally used that to our advantage to protect our spellcasters where we'd otherwise get swarmed.
I would say it created some good tactical situations. I recall one character getting ready to cast a summon monster spell, only to have a door shut in his face, cutting off his line of sight. Our party was bottlenecked in the corridor, with a celestial badger appearing behind us at the end of the conga-line as a result.
I couldn't help but laugh.
Regarding the Shadow Clock, what is the transition between the last E2 hallway and the entry to E3? does the stairwell end at a trapdoor that allows access to the E4 or is there an outside scaffolding or staircase that leads first to E4 and continues up E6?
I am assuming that most of the conical roof of E6 has deteriorated and Xanesha flies freely into and out of her lair.
Thanks.