| Author |
 ?Topic? |
? |
|
Shin Okada
Japan
10 Posts
|
 Posted?-?22 Oct 2004?:? 14:08:01 ? ? ?
|
Hi. I have just played this module ran by one of my friend. Here is my impression on this module.
*Good Points
1) Variety of encounters and traps
Thanks to the great original game book, there are variety of traps and it was fun to deal with them.
2) NPCs are nice!
Also thanks to the original book, each NPCs are not just monsters but very characterful personas. I really like that female troll.
*Bad points
1) Maps
Like the first module, the Firetop Mountain, dungeon rooms are too small for their inhabitants. So my friend DM has enlarged the rooms twice as big as the indicated size this time. It worked. I think you would better make each room bigger in future modules. In 3e/3.5e, tactical movement is very important and also a fun part. Small rooms remove this.
And, on the other hand, corridors are too long. There are too many long corridors without any features. It is rather boring to walk down such corridors for a long time while just drawing lines on our map.
In overall, dungeon design is below average level. You would better try more play testing.
2) The rule of the contest
This story works fine when there is only one PC. But "there can be only one" rule of the contest is no good for an adventuring party. My friend has changed the story and make it into a party vs party contest. Without this modification, players did not play this module I guess. You would better think much about the difference between solo adventure and module for RPG which encourages the party cooperation (I mean D&D).
D&D is rarely played only with 1 PC. You would better show more options for using this module with an adventuring party.
*Total score (1 -10)
I say 6. But this is mainly because this module is based on a great game book. As a d20 adventure, I may say 4.
EDIT : Total score meant to be between 1-10, not 1-100. |
Edited by - Shin Okada on 22 Oct 2004 14:35:00
|
|
|
Eryx
United Kingdom
80 Posts
|
Posted?-?22 Oct 2004?:? 14:21:38 ? ? ? ?
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shin Okada
2) The rule of the contest
This story works fine when there is only one PC. But "there can be only one" rule of the contest is no good for an adventuring party. My friend has changed the story and make it into a party vs party contest. Without this modification, players did not play this module I guess. You would better think much about the difference between solo adventure and module for RPG which encourages the party cooperation (I mean D&D).
D&D is rarely played only with 1 PC. You would better show more options for using this module with an adventuring party.
Thats what I did with DD and ToC, made them party v party and it worked well.
You make some good points about the module, but as I have asiad before where these conversions are concerned, they are direct conversions and making too many changes would take away from that. Plus, any DM worth his alt, should go through and make changes to any module that he plans to use.
----
Love is what we're born with. Fear is what we learn here.
Checkout the IceHaven D&D online chat at:
http://www.exodus-chat.org/IceHaven/
|
|
|
|
jamie
United Kingdom
194 Posts
|
Posted?-?22 Oct 2004?:? 20:02:12 ? ? ?
|
Shin Okada wrote:
1) Maps
Like the first module, the Firetop Mountain, dungeon rooms are too small for their inhabitants. So my friend DM has enlarged the rooms twice as big as the indicated size this time. It worked. I think you
would better make each room bigger in future modules. In 3e/3.5e, tactical movement is very important and also a fun part. Small rooms remove this.
And, on the other hand, corridors are too long. There are too many long corridors without any features. It is rather boring to walk down such corridors for a long time while just drawing lines on our map.
In overall, dungeon design is below average level. You would better try more play testing.
Shin-san
Many thanks for your pointers. The map (as Eryx has already mentioned) is an exact replica of the Fighting Fantasy book. If you pick up your game book you can follow my map exactly. If I altered the map in any way, then I would be altering the adventure - something that we promised fans (and Steve and Ian) that we would not do.
Of course, there is nothng stopping a DM from reading the adventure and adding his own bits and pieces here and there. I know that I have never run a pre-written adventure without making loads of modifications and alterations to suit my players.
Shin Okada wrote:
2) The rule of the contest
This story works fine when there is only one PC. But "there can be only one" rule of the contest is no good for an adventuring party. My friend has changed the story and make it into a party vs party contest. Without this modification, players did not play this module I guess. You would better think much about the difference between solo adventure and module for RPG which encourages the party cooperation (I mean D&D).
Sorry... I liked this additional rule. After all, it as a DEATHTRAP DUNGEON. If the traps and monsters dont kill ya, then why not your best friend?
I would roast my granny for 25000gp 
Jamie Wallis
Author
Myriador LTD |
|
|
|
|
Shin Okada
Japan
10 Posts
|
Posted?-?22 Oct 2004?:? 23:32:24 ? ? ?
|
quote:
Originally posted by jamie
Many thanks for your pointers. The map (as Eryx has already mentioned) is an exact replica of the Fighting Fantasy book. If you pick up your game book you can follow my map exactly. If I altered the map in any way, then I would be altering the adventure - something that we promised fans (and Steve and Ian) that we would not do.
Yeah, but the original game book does not say anything about exact size (in feet or meters) of each room. Just saying "small room", "large cavern" or something. So there is no need for you to make each rooms that small.
When we have played Warlock of Firetop Mountain, PCs were in slightly higher level than the default level of the module. So the DM has followed the instruction in the module and advanced the monsters. There was a room where a giant spider was living. And, we found that the spider almost completely fill that room by it self and actually cannot go out from that room :)
Now, small rooms are troublesome especially when we are using 3.5e rules. Now large upright creatures such as Ogre or Giant occupy 2x2 squares. You would better make maps this fact in mind.
quote:
Sorry... I liked this additional rule. After all, it as a DEATHTRAP DUNGEON. If the traps and monsters dont kill ya, then why not your best friend?
It is fine if the module is played as a one-shot adventure. I think I (and my friends) have just made a non-good PC and played it. But many people play modules as one of the adventures in their ongoing campaign. Actually, we have played this module after conquering the Firetop Mountain. IMHO, it is perfectly OK to make it the default story line. But it is much better if you include an article how to adjust this module for that kind of play.
For example, if I were you, I will include this kind of article and show the 2 sets of stats for other "rival" adventures. I mean, a 4th-7th level rival NPC is fine when only one 8th level PC plays this game. But if the same module is played by 4 men adventuring party of 6th level characters, it is much better that each "group" of rival adventures are composed of a quartet of 2nd-5th level characters. (Sorry I don't know how much was the exact level of rival Ninja but hope this makes sense.)
It is perfectly fine to just emulate the original game book. But adding "modification" articles for users who play the adventure with usual adventuring party will never harm anything.
|
|
|
|
|
jamie
United Kingdom
194 Posts
|
Posted?-?23 Oct 2004?:? 11:03:46 ? ? ?
|
Sin Okada wrote : Yeah, but the original game book does not say anything about exact size (in feet or meters) of each room. Just saying "small room", "large cavern" or something. So there is no need for you to make each rooms that small.
You are missing one small point: Space with the adventure. I realise that this is a crap reason, but non-the-less it is a valid one. Most publishers (Myriador included) have space constraints within their modules/ source books/ adventures etc.. (This I know as fact due to running my own Type setting Company). The map had to fit on a single US Letter sized page. For the amount of encounters that Deathtrap has, it would have been impossible to make the rooma any bigger on the map. That, however, does not stop a good DM from altering the size of them.
Shin also wrote:
It is fine if the module is played as a one-shot adventure. I think I (and my friends) have just made a non-good PC and played it. But many people play modules as one of the adventures in their ongoing campaign. Actually, we have played this module after conquering the Firetop Mountain. IMHO, it is perfectly OK to make it the default story line. But it is much better if you include an article how to adjust this module for that kind of play.
For example, if I were you, I will include this kind of article and show the 2 sets of stats for other "rival" adventures. I mean, a 4th-7th level rival NPC is fine when only one 8th level PC plays this game. But if the same module is played by 4 men adventuring party of 6th level characters, it is much better that each "group" of rival adventures are composed of a quartet of 2nd-5th level characters. (Sorry I don't know how much was the exact level of rival Ninja but hope this makes sense.)
It is perfectly fine to just emulate the original game book. But adding "modification" articles for users who play the adventure with usual adventuring party will never harm anything
Again.... we had space constraints. I had to leave out several of the smaller encounters already. There was just not enough room to add anything else.
None of the playtesters survived the Deathtrap Dungeon. It is poossible to do it, just needs a little thought and planning. However, It is NOT an adventure to send your fav characters into. They WILL die...... almost certainly (unless they are one of the few brave souls).
Jamie Wallis
Author
Myriador LTD |
|
|
|
|
Shin Okada
Japan
10 Posts
|
Posted?-?23 Oct 2004?:? 11:56:28 ? ? ?
|
quote:
Originally posted by jamie
You are missing one small point: Space with the adventure. I realise that this is a crap reason, but non-the-less it is a valid one. Most publishers (Myriador included) have space constraints within their modules/ source books/ adventures etc.. (This I know as fact due to running my own Type setting Company). The map had to fit on a single US Letter sized page. For the amount of encounters that Deathtrap has, it would have been impossible to make the rooma any bigger on the map. That, however, does not stop a good DM from altering the size of them.
I see the problem. But have one suggestion for future modules. You don't need to draw maps always on 5ft. grids. It is perfectly OK for you to write things on 10ft grids. DMs and players draw each rooms or their floor tiles anyway. Please consider this or find other ways to make each room wider.
quote:
Again.... we had space constraints. I had to leave out several of the smaller encounters already. There was just not enough room to add anything else.
Hmm. Maybe you can create and post some "web enhancements" for each adventures just like WotC is doing so for many of their books.
|
|
|
|
|
Grieyls
Australia
4 Posts
|
Posted?-?25 Nov 2004?:? 08:35:02 ? ? ? ?
|
Interesting points being raised here but I would just like to add one little tid bit to all concerned. It is plainly stated in many RPG games that the "Rules" are meant as only as a "Guide". Thus if something does not meet with your idea on things you are free to change, alter, or do whatever you want to do to meet your own expectations. Being that I have been RPG'ing since very early in the game (first game way back in the early 1980's) I can say that this was always the case. This also goes as far as pre made modules. They are only a guide created to take the hassle and the time that any DM takes in creating his or her own. Thus any real creative DM can and does make changes to any bought product if it does not meet their exact idea for their campaign.
As such, putting publishing hassles aside, I have to say that the people at Myiador are doing a fine job. Certainly I plan on using their conversions in my game and yes there will be changes made to them all in order to incorporate them into it. However the changes will be a lot less work than if I had decided to make these conversions myself from scratch. Thus I tip my hat to those who did go to the effort and made my life that much easier.
|
|
|
|
|
jamie
United Kingdom
194 Posts
|
Posted?-?27 Jan 2005?:? 19:50:18 ? ? ?
|
Grieyls,
I realise you wrote this a while ago and my replying has been crap as of late (there is no excuse for this guys - a good reason, but no excuse) and I promise to do better.
Adding to what Grieyls has said, how many of you play D&D with house rules? I can almost guarentee that we all play a slightly different version of the classic game. We used to have body hit locations and armour points in my old games (bless the 1980's) which made playing pre-written adventures a pain in the arse due to the amount of changes and alterations that needed to be made.
Going back to the maps and Shin Okada's points, we use dungeon tiles and miniature figures in our games to represent the room sizes etc. I know (because I DM all the time) that the room shape and size which i create on the table bares little resemblence to the shape and size drawn on the map. I guess I am just having a little trouble with the 'complaint'.
Jamie Wallis
Author
Myriador LTD |
|
|
|
|
Eternalknight
Australia
119 Posts
|
|
|
Balgin
United Kingdom
63 Posts
|
Posted?-?27 Jan 2005?:? 22:15:15 ? ?
|
quote:
Originally posted by jamie
Adding to what Grieyls has said, how many of you play D&D with house rules? I can almost guarentee that we all play a slightly different version of the classic game. We used to have body hit locations and armour points in my old games (bless the 1980's) which made playing pre-written adventures a pain in the arse due to the amount of changes and alterations that needed to be made.
Warhammer fantasy Roleplay and Runequest used a locational armour system and both were very good games (and still are:)).
With regards to playing AD&D 3rd Edition (and 3.5, I play with two different groups and whilst one uses one set of rules the other group use the other) we have a number of house rules based on who's the GM.
I only really have two house rules:
1 (not really a house rule but more a point of historical accuracy): The morningstar. It's not a mace! A spiky mace is just a mace with spikes on it. Maces may be smooth, plain, spiked or flanged (or most of those at the same time). The morningstar is a chained weapon as without the chain it simply becomes a mace. Now historicaly the term morningstar refers to the head of the weapon wether it is hafted or chained but the flail is a threshing implement used by farmers to separate the wheat from the chaff. It has a very short chain and is basicaly a masher. Now we all know that fantasy characters love going round with big spiky balls on chains and mutilating poor innocent monsters with them. A flail is not a weapon, it is a tool and of severe inferior quality when used in combat which is clearly not what the PHB depicts therefore they obviously mean a chained morningstar. So the morningstar is a martial weapon and may be light or heavy (exactly what they try to call a flail). It is not a martial weapon.
BTW, that missconception first turned up when someone writing Demons and Demigods decided that the picture of the bugbear god would be leaning up against a long spiky mace when it said morningstar in his description even though the same author had included information in the then current PHB about the weapon having a chain.
So it is not a mace!
House rule 2: The GM may require the players to make a roll without explaining his reason to them. Therefore if he wants them all to make listen checks to hear something without getting the players too suspicious then he may simply ask them to make a die roll (and check his copy of their character sheet), ask them to roll in advance (I recall a GM asking for initiative rolls without telling us that that was what they were and then waiting whilst we explored a bit before using them in the first encounter we waded into). The GM could even roll secretly (but fairly).
Apart from that it's pretty much by the book (and I only deviate from the books when they are clearly wrong such as some authors not knowing that Medusa was one of the three gorgons. The brazen bulls from the legend of Talos do not have a specific name but it's certainly not gorgon as that refers to a hideous woman with ugly snaky hair (dreadlocks?), wings and metal feet). So terminology is often corrected.
|
|
|
|
|
Eryx
United Kingdom
80 Posts
|
Posted?-?02 Feb 2005?:? 12:44:21 ? ? ? ?
|
quote:
Originally posted by Balgin
1 (not really a house rule but more a point of historical accuracy): The morningstar. It's not a mace! A spiky mace is just a mace with spikes on it. Maces may be smooth, plain, spiked or flanged (or most of those at the same time). The morningstar is a chained weapon as without the chain it simply becomes a mace.
It really is refreshing to know that at least one other person knows the difference between a mace, morning star and flail.
I do not know why Americans (no offence intended guys) seem to get them mixed up.
----
Love is what we're born with. Fear is what we learn here.
Checkout the IceHaven D&D online chat at:
http://www.exodus-chat.org/IceHaven/
|
|
|
|
|
Balgin
United Kingdom
63 Posts
|
Posted?-?03 Feb 2005?:? 07:45:22 ? ?
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eryx
I do not know why Americans (no offence intended guys) seem to get them mixed up.
How about because they never had any in America to learn the difference between them? It was all cowboys and american indian cultural stuff over there.
quote:
America: The only country to have gone from barbarism to decadence with no interveening culture.
Robin Williamson
That guy's got a great sense of humour :).
|
|
|
|
|
jamie
United Kingdom
194 Posts
|
Posted?-?03 Feb 2005?:? 18:40:11 ? ? ?
|
Brilliant
Jamie Wallis
Author
Myriador LTD |
|
|
|
| ? |
?Topic? |
? |
?
?My impressions on Deathtrap Dungeon
