I've noticed a depressing pattern in Dungeon over the last few years. Too much dungeon!
To clarify, "dungeon" in this context really means "site-based adventure." For example, my most recent issue fearures three adventures, all strongly site-based. Fallen Angel's "dungeon" is a collapsed tower, Touch of the Abyss' is a literal dungeon and Winding Way's in a monestary.
The pattern in clear:
1) Acquire target.
2) Travel to linear enclosed area, beat up target and take its stuff.
The only exception recently has been in the Adventure Path adventures, where we also have:
3) Find out at the last minute that there's an even bigger target lurking in another linear, enclosed area. Go back to step 1 when you get your next issue.
Now, I want to clarify right up front that there's absolutely nothong wrong with this type of play. It represents the core of D&D. Heck, the magazine is called Dungeon! It's no worse than any other style of adventure.
But a non-stop diet of anything is just mind-numbing! Dungeons crawls are not bad roleplaying (despite what some would have you believe), but they are only one kind. Roleplaying as a whole encompasses much more.
What about murder mysteries? Horror (in the true sense, not just D&D with undead monsters)? Tense political maneuvering? Wilderness exploration?
I remember that a lot of older Dungeon issues seemed to have been designed with this principal in mind. One Side Trek I recall was an encounter with a bunch of fueding Viking types squabbling over the carcass of a beached whale. Do the characters save the whale? Help one side or another assert their claim (with force of arms, if necessary)? Try to reach an equitable compromise between all parties? Seize the valuable creature for themselves? You have a tense, challenging (mentally, ethically and potentially physically) encounter with a multitude of possible outcomes and no random monster tables or maps of twisty little corridors in sight.
Is it too much to ask that at least one adventure every issue or three not follow the "kill the Big Bad in the maze" formula? Variety is the spice of life, and too much is too much.
Creative Director
|
It's certainly not too much to ask for less dungeon crawls and more variety in the type of adventures in the magazine. That said, one person's dungeon crawl is another person's murder mystery or wilderness exploration adventure. Touch of the Abyss, for example, certainly has a dungeon crawl in it, but the entire first half of the adventure is focused on role-playing encounters and establishing a creepy mood for a haunted city, so it's not all linear. We've been trying to mix things up a bit; issue #118 has its share of dungeon crawls, but the three adventures also have significant portions of roleplaynig, investigation work, and overland travel. The simple fact is that the dungeon crawl adventures are easier to write, develop, and edit. And finally, we're always pressed for space in the magazine. Linear adventures (of which dungeon crawls are a perfect example) take up much less space than those that are open and freeform, simply because in a linear adventure, the writer roughly knows the course the adventure will follow and can focus his writing along that path. With an open adventure, you've got to cover a lot more ground, which in turn takes up a lot more room.
In a way, you can actually look at the backdrops we've been doing (Isle of Dread, Istivin: City of Shadows, etc.) as more open adventures that aren't dungeon crawls… they just need a bit more work.
Dungeon's certainly run non-site-based adventures in the past. Do you have any in particular that are favorites?
The simple fact is that the dungeon crawl adventures are easier to write, develop, and edit.
Which is, of course, exactly why they're far less useful. Dungeon crawls are fairly simple to write - draw up a map, place a few monsters, sprinkle a few traps. Sure, the crawls in Dungeon are usually more imaginative, the monsters have templates and classes, there's a good rationale for everything being where it is, and so on, but in the end, all too often this great imagination ends up leading to the phrase "...immediately attacks whoever enters the room."
Personally, I subscribed to Dungeon hoping to see more of the things that are difficult to do - villains with complex plans and motives, mysteries with clues that make them solvable, and so on. Things that I can't write myself, or don't have time to write on a weekly or monthly basis.To summarise, I agree with Yamo. And one particular point I've been wanting to make myself is "one adventure every issue." The current format has one adventure each for low, medium and high-level characters. How about each issue having at least one adventure every issue where 75% of the encounters aren't straightforward combat encounters?
Oh, and not to sound all negative, two good examples recently were Keith Baker's Steel Shadows in #115, which spent half its pages on a murder mystery, and The Death of Lashimire, which was combat focused but completely open-ended in regards to who the PCs decide to kill or ally with.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16
|
Personally my favorite non-dungeon crawls have been Cry Wolf, Lust, and Racing the Snake. Mad God's Key, while incorporating two dungeons also falls into a great mixed up adventure! The dock chase was really cool! Cry wolf's stalk through the marketplace of tents is grand! Dodging arrows, trying to keep a Ranger's animal companion wolf from tearing a Poacher's throat out... good action in a Non-dungeon setting.
However for the most part almost all adventures eventually HAVE to include site based encounters... whether you follow a game trail or a tunnel to get from encounter A to encounter B is irrelevant. It looks the same to the DM (circle line circle).
I rather like the site based adventures, and dungeon crawls. When writing things for my own campaign the site based adventures in Dungeon allow me to concentrate on the bigger picture, and help keep me from rehashing the same dungeon dressings, traps etc.
I say keep 'em coming!
That said though, my favorite adventure in Dragon so far has been Mad Gods Key! :). I scaled it up and worked it into my own campaign with great success. The players loved it!
Contributor
|
Oh, and not to sound all negative, two good examples recently were Keith Baker's Steel Shadows in #115, which spent half its pages on a murder mystery, and The Death of Lashimire, which was combat focused but completely open-ended in regards to who the PCs decide to kill or ally with.
Thanks Stalkre..
I hope you like part 2 as much...There's as little dungeon in it as I could get.
Tim Hitchcock
What about murder mysteries? Horror (in the true sense, not just D&D with undead monsters)? Tense political maneuvering? Wilderness exploration?
It's the latter that has me wishing for more. I adore Dungeon, love the adventures, and really enjoy DMing them, but I have one rather imporatnt player (my fiance) who plays a druid. We're going to be starting "Zenith Trajectory" in the adventure path, and I'm really starting to realize how he doesn't get to shine in his abilities - underground dungeons aren't exactly prime druid material, and it's quite rare that the treasure in the adventure is druid-friendly (which is how the party has hit the discount rate at Skie's - the poor guy is always buying stuff through her or getting it ordered in through Coryston Pike). At least in Zenith Trajectory there's a bit of a wilderness walk to the Pit of Seven Jaws, and I"m going to make it a rainy day for the dragon attack on Crazy Jared just so he can finally call some buffed lightning.
Rangers and Druids shine outdoors - and I've always got my eyes on outdoorsy adventures as a result: the desert adventures ("Obsidian Eye" rocked!) and "Cry Wolf," for example, had enough wilderness in it to make it worthwhile to have a druid or a ranger in the party... and not have them feeling left out.
Rangers and Druids shine outdoors - and I've always got my eyes on outdoorsy adventures as a result: the desert adventures ("Obsidian Eye" rocked!) and "Cry Wolf," for example, had enough wilderness in it to make it worthwhile to have a druid or a ranger in the party... and not have them feeling left out.
Dude I LOVE Druids, and Rangers for that matter. I know how your fiance feels. I played a druid recently in a Frostburn campaign and spent the whole friggin time underground. Sucks.
I am not too big a fan of big Dungeon crawls (a recent exception is Whispering Cairn, which I really enjoyed, though perhaps for its non-linear elements). I also like the outdoors and less multimultimulti room areas. I like a couple of sites of great variety and with ony a few "areas" each and with different types of encounters at each. That keeps me entertained.
Actually the adventures since "Mad God's Key" have been anything but "FedEx" quests (imho).
One way to circumvent this is to line-up some adventures from the issue, and then take one of the same level as the one they are currently trying to do and hook them into it.
For instance:
In how I have things lined up, after the PCs finish up "Unfamiliar Ground" (which I'll be placing in the 'Gnarley Forest' in Greyhawk) they'll be headed to Dantredun and then to Eru Tovar to take on "Fiend's Embrace", but that will be interupted with "Raiders of the Black Ice".
It's all about how you build things up and place them together. I can't wait until we get to "The Obsidian Eye" as I have changed the end of that to be the first appearance of the BBEG for the whole campaign.
We start play (hopefully) the week after GenCon.
The adventures in Dungeon have been great. Looking more at the fluff than it's basic foundation will probably give you a better look at it than what you are seeing. *shrugs* Just my thoughts...
underground dungeons aren't exactly prime druid material, and it's quite rare that the treasure in the adventure is druid-friendly.
I played a Halfling druid for a long time. Boy, did I ever get gypped on "found" treasure. Not only did it have to be for druids, but weapons had to be small-sized.
I am not too big a fan of big Dungeon crawls (a recent exception is Whispering Cairn, which I really enjoyed, though perhaps for its non-linear elements). I also like the outdoors and less multimultimulti room areas. I like a couple of sites of great variety and with ony a few "areas" each and with different types of encounters at each. That keeps me entertained.
For low level adventures, I love Dungeon Crawls. They are also great for new DMs. I do agree, that they can be plot imapired. I thought that the Whispering Cairn was one of the best ones I've seen a long time. With it's side quests that take the plarty back out of the Dungeon, it was a real treat.
I think that is what more Dungeon Crawls need. A variety of encounter terrain along with internal plot twists and character PC interaction. Under ground is fine, as long as there is more than kick down the door and loot. I had fun woth Depths of Rage, where an Earthquake changes the way back out. Lord of the Scarlet Tide was nice as well.
I think it is nice when adventures have both location and timed encounters.
ASEO out
|
|
I think that is what more Dungeon Crawls need. A variety of encounter terrain along with internal plot twists and character PC interaction. Under ground is fine, as long as there is more than kick down the door and loot. I had fun woth Depths of Rage, where an Earthquake changes the way back out. Lord of the Scarlet Tide was nice as well.
I think it is nice when adventures have both location and timed encounters.
ASEO out
I was a player in Lord of the Scarlet Tide, and I really enjoyed it. I also ran a few of my players through "Depths of Rage", and I think it worked out really well.
I think having timed encounters does make a big difference. A "static" dungeon is boring quickly. Whenever I use a Dungeon, I always try to anticipate how it will change if the PCs leave for a day, three days, a week, a month, etc. I can reuse a dungeon that they've "cleared" if things make sense.
For example, I ran my players through some of the adventures that Wizards of the Coast published. I can't remember the title of the adventure, but it involved entering a dwarven mine and encountering a black dragon. The party failed to eliminate the dragon, but decided to go back when they next got the chance (and a couple of levels).
The environment was different the next time through. Although there were no orcs guarding the fortress, there was a giant spider. The number of encounters was much less (since they had killed most everything else), but the Duergar were still there, and even more ornery.
In any case - dynamic environments are a must even if the PCs encounter it for only a brief period of time. Too often I see a group of six goblins that wait in their 15' x 15' room until the PCs open the door, and then they fight to the death.
Why are they waiting in the room? Why not patrol?
I know that I am a mean DM because I allow my intelligent bad guys (like orcs and goblins) to do smart things, like coordinate their attacks if the PCs reveal their presence. I'm not going to send 3 goblins at a time if the PCs announce their presence unmistakably.
So, yes, I vote for including more information about how things will change over time, and that should be considered a "must". Fewer people should just sit around waiting for the PCs to show up.
Dungeon's certainly run non-site-based adventures in the past. Do you have any in particular that are favorites?
Non-site adventures aren't the be all, end all of creating nontypical dungeon crawls, but they do help overcome the crawl stereotype. Some of my favorites:
#87 Valley of the Snails was a great low-level outdoors adventure wherein the PCs discover the ominous figure stalking them is actually the "lost" ranger they have been tasked to find. The nasty goblin witchdoctor and his madness inducing poison turns the hunters (the PCs) into the prey.
#96 Pandemonium in the Veins was a mid-level mystery that had the players going undercover as gladiators to find out why gladiators are dying outside the arena. I hope the upcoming AoW adventure dealing with gladiators is half as fun as this one; non-linear; pit-fighting for the adulation of the crowd; tracking down a psychopath; and a climax that literally brings down the house.
#104 Dragon Hunters has the players tracking down a "dragon" that is attacking the fort of an extremely antisocial exile. The discovery of the why the "dragon" (which is actually a tyrannosaurus rex) is attacking the fort leads the PCs to question if they are on the correct side. The open ending leaves the PCs to figure out how to best mitigate the conflict between the antisocial prince and the centaur natives.