Knights & Knaves Alehouse

1. Come up with something that's never been done.

2. Execute it so brilliantly and unexpectedly that everybody wants a sequel.

ExTSR wrote:1. Come up with something that's never been done.

2. Execute it so brilliantly and unexpectedly that everybody wants a sequel.

These guidelines can also be used for winning the Darwin Awards.

Mythmere wrote:
These guidelines can also be used for winning the Darwin Awards.

You mean, the awards where just about every entry begins with the statement "Hey guys, watch this..."

To quote Jim Rome: Have a take, don't suck.

- Wheggi

Mythmere wrote:

ExTSR wrote:1. Come up with something that's never been done.

2. Execute it so brilliantly and unexpectedly that everybody wants a sequel.

These guidelines can also be used for winning the Darwin Awards.

All kidding aside, I'm not 100% convinced that Frank's points are universally true. I'm not trying to nitpick, but this is the Alehouse, after all. IMO, "brilliant" does not necessarily have to be joined at the hip with "unexpected" or that which has never been done before. I've read some clever adventures that, while entertaining reads, do not correspond with a fulfilling gaming experience. When gamers gather at the table for fun and gaming (and no small amount of escapism from Real Life), there is little doubt (again, IMO) that a traditional set of dungeon levels with all its traditional quirks and flaws (and even a wart or three) is quite conducive to an enjoyable experience for all its participants. I'm not saying one should rewrite Caves of Chaos like it's 1981 for the 28th time(*); rather, that traditional elements coupled with a smattering of innovative thrills and chills can be great heaps of fun.

Cheers,
Jeff Talanian

(*) Bree-Yark!

PS: Frank, good to see you here at the Alehouse, BTW, and I hope you had fun at Gen Con this year. I enjoy meeting you each year, and hopefully I'll see you at Gary Con II.

I'm not at all convinced that frank's points are even remotely true, not for this writing niche at any rate.

In fact, I kind of highly doubt it.

AD&Ders like adventuring in dungeons, fighting monsters, winning treasure.

This is AD&D, not Nobilis or in Nomine or any of that other high handed storytelling junk. AD&Ders have over the years wanted to leap over menacing traps, foil evil wizards, win obscene amounts of loot, and rescue innocent virgin dragons from rampaging fire breathing princesses.

AD&D is a great route to that. The large bulk of Gary's work and the majority of the great modules at TSR under other authors (Al Hammack, f'rex) point to the fact that that formula, while simple seeming, is 100% sound.

I tried a few story elements in earlier modules, these are the elements that people who gave me feedback talked about changing the most to suit their tastes. On the other hand, WGH2 through WGH5 I got universal praise for making great straightforward dungeon adventures. Clearly, what works, works.

I liken it to music. People like certain genres, but they want to see new creative things produced within the confines of these comfortable niches. Heavy metal fans, for example, love to hear different bands do their thing and play their own type of metal (Iron Maiden is different than Metallica is different than Black Sabbath is different than Slayer). Where they start to get a little edgy is when bands they like within the genre start to drift from what they're known for (Metallica going all soft, for example) or when new bands try to pitch something as metal that drifts too far from the traditional sound (Limp Bizkit mixing rap and metal with disasterous results).

- Wheggi

Wheggi wrote:(Limp Bizkit mixing rap and metal with disasterous results)

Anthrax did that better (still not my high on my list, but better)

Philotomy Jurament wrote: Anthrax did that better (still not my high on my list, but better)

My respect for you just went up a level.

Philotomy Jurament wrote:

Wheggi wrote:(Limp Bizkit mixing rap and metal with disasterous results)

Anthrax did that better (still not my high on my list, but better)

I loved their stab at Faith No More (even though i think "The Real Thing" was fucking brilliant):

"All you new jacks/'what is it'/you're kidding me/get off our dicks!"



(And Among the Living and Intro To Reality/Belly of the Beast are their best songs ever...say, Phil, what do you think of Exodus and Nuclear Assault?)

Not a fan of Anthrax's metal/rap (though it was executed much better than the rest that tried it), but Among the Living is five kinds of geeky awesome.

- Wheggi

Wheggi wrote:To quote Jim Rome: Have a take, don't suck.

I was a huge fan of that show in the 90s, up through about 2002 (when both I stopped being able to get it at work and the quality started declining as he focused less and less on listener calls and emails and more on boring athlete interviews and pre-written speeches). I just referenced one of his old lines over the weekend to someone -- errrr, I can't remember what it was. This is going to kill me until I remember it

rogatny wrote:There's small, on the ground stuff that should be included... "If the fight goes badly, the goblins will try to arouse the ogre in Cave E." That's not much different than saying, "If the lever is pushed up, the floor will collapse; if the lever is pushed down, the treasure chest will open." It's staging the scenario.

Excellent point!

rogatny wrote:It's the larger conceptual stuff, especially that which dictates what the players should do... "After the party talks to Goldmoon, they should head to Pax Tharkas. If they fail to do so, the DM should take the following steps..." That's running the adventure for the DM. If the pcs are more interested in fighting the dragon army or figuring out what the dwarves to the south are doing, as opposed to running after whatever macguffin the phony cleric chick is interested in, that should entirely be the players' choice.

Again, agreed. The DM *MUST* let the players choose what to do and not penalize them for failing to do what the scenario specifies and/or what s/he wants. Anything else is masturbation with an audience.

Sometimes I put in major plot devices, with a high level description of what the major action is expected to be. THIS IS NOT BAD! It sets the stage and give me a written understanding of the entire scenario. When the players do the unexpected, *I* have to shift gears and the NPCs react to this. The overall picture helps me react in a "realistic" manner, as opposed to trying to run the adventure just according to each individual encounter and ending up with a hodge-podge.

Gary published modules with large scenes. WG4 -- if the party makes a frontal assault on the temple the module specifies how reinforcements arrive. First time I ran that the first level was one huge battle.

One thing a lot of DMs forget is that not everyone can make things up on the fly. Having a written scenario with an overarching plot is good for such DMs. OTOH, there is nothing stopping other DMs from ignoring the plot and/or cannabilizing it.

I agree that terse is good, both for the plot and individual encounters. Too much detail has the DM focusing on the details and not the game.

1E AD&D is all about giving the DM a framework upon which the story develops. Its not about supplying a story. No matter how interesting, a provided story is always inferior (or at least less satisfying) to one created "in play".

thedungeondelver wrote:…say, Phil, what do you think of Exodus and Nuclear Assault?

I had Bonded by Blood (good t-shirt for that one, too) and Impact is Imminent. I thought BbB was pretty good, but Impact is Imminent never jelled for me. I never followed Nuclear Assault, although I heard them around, of course.