chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuqui Q. Koala) (01/08/85)
Here's a good one for the group: As a DM, when you are putting together a
dungeon, how do you do it? I'm starting work on a dungeon of my own
(whether I run it or turn it into a book is still undecided) and I'm
interested in how people actually build the dungeon, balance it for a
particular level of character, how much detail is worked out ahead of
schedule (and how much you do on the fly) and basically how to take a good
idea and turn it into something cohesive, workable, and fun for both the DM
and the players.
A secondary question that comes to mind is that first dungeon? What was it
like being a DM the first time? what mistakes did you make that you would
warn others about? Any traps and pitfalls the novice DM needs to worry
about?
thanks, as they say, in advance (this could be interesting!)
chuq
--
From the ministry of silly talks: Chuq Von Rospach
{allegra,cbosgd,decwrl,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!chuqui nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA
Now look here Mister "I'm not just a word processor"...naivar@dspo.UUCP (01/09/85)
Ah, yes, I remember my first dungeon. It was quite a large dungeon and took me a while to finish. It had two levels and over 150 rooms. I had decided that EVERY room should have a monster and a treasure in it, or at least a neat puzzle to solve. Wellll, to say the least it was not too exciting for the players as they soon got tired of hack and slay all the time(I didn't have too many puzzles.) but they did leave EXTREMELY rich - I didn't really keep track of how much gold was in the dungeon as a whole. I would suggest that for almost any adventure (or dungeon) that you create, you also create at least a small plot line for the characters to follow. This makes for a slightly more exciting game. In one adventure in which I am a player, our group calls itself the 'un-homed' because after a giant storm at sea after a successful quest, we were blown off course and away from the REWARD!($$$) Now we are constantly looking for a way back home, but no one has even heard of the name of our homeland. So far we have been coerced (ie - threatened) into rescuing several important people and saving villages from general evil-doers. For me it has been an extremely interesting game because of all the diversity and action. There's just enough hack 'n slay to hold my interest, but we do spend time plotting our next moves so as not to end up on the wrong end of a sword. Before you even draw up what the dungeon is going to look like, decide on a plot or central theme. Make sure the adventurers aren't going to walk out millionaires after the first couple of rooms and try not to put in too much fighting hand-to-hand with meanies. After about 30 orcs, it starts to get a little monotonous...... Good luck on your dungeon - I've allways enjoyed being the DM (ie - God). :-) Famous last words: "We are a band of hearty adventurers - join us or die!" naivar@dspo -Mark
friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) (01/09/85)
In article <2173@nsc.UUCP> chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuqui Q. Koala) writes: >Here's a good one for the group: As a DM, when you are putting together a >dungeon, how do you do it? I'm starting work on a dungeon of my own >(whether I run it or turn it into a book is still undecided) and I'm >interested in how people actually build the dungeon, balance it for a >particular level of character, how much detail is worked out ahead of >schedule (and how much you do on the fly) and basically how to take a good >idea and turn it into something cohesive, workable, and fun for both the DM >and the players. > I usually start by deciding what the "dungeon" actually *is*, and how it got where it is. Thus I have a large palace once owned my a great sorcerer, but now turned into the headquarters of a (very) minor Chaotic-Evil religion, with many subbasements added by the new owners. They also have made it available as a "sanctuary" for the wierd and ferocious beings that are rejected by human society(monsters). Or perhaps the "dungeon" is a cave inhabited by a tribe of orcs. This approach gives some idea of what sort of things are appropriate. >A secondary question that comes to mind is that first dungeon? What was it >like being a DM the first time? what mistakes did you make that you would >warn others about? Any traps and pitfalls the novice DM needs to worry >about? > My worst mistake was *far* too much treasure, both monetary and magical. Give out *some* to keep it interesting, but do not overdo, especially with magical treasure. Also I paid little to the nature of the monsters I put in; my Chaotic-Evil dungeon had Good monsters!?!? And also 'outdoor-only' type monsters. Second warning - the players will *never* do what you expect, often making your toughest concept useless. Be prepared fopr the unexpected, and reward originality and ingenuity. -- Sarima (Stanley Friesen) {trwrb|allegra|burdvax|cbosgd|hplabs|ihnp4|sdcsvax}!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen
srt@ucla-cs.UUCP (01/10/85)
Balancing a dungeon is tough. Gygax's original idea - having the dungeon
increase in toughness and rewards as one descends - actually works out
rather well, surprise, surprise. For a long time I balanced my scenarios
by using a variant of the Monstermark system published some time ago by
White Dwarf. The idea is to come up with a numerical rating for every
monster (or character) based on their expected battle toughness (i.e.,
average points damage times rounds to be killed by a 1st level fighter
armed with a long sword). This becomes very difficult to calculate for
high-level characters/monsters, but it is certainly a good starting point.
One thing it took me a while to learn was to keep my dungeons small. I
usually don't put more than ten rooms on a level. Bigger dungeons end up
boring the players (or so I find). Even if the level has some movitivation
or theme, it is difficult to concentrate on that for very long.
Typically I divide my "dungeons" into two groups. The first type is a small,
consistent adventure, basically one-shot with a strong history/theme/purpose.
The second type is the archetypical dungeon - a large, rambling structure
that requires a fair suspension of disbelief. I much prefer the first type -
both as a DM and as a player - but the second type has its uses, particularly
in a long running campaign. Then the dungeon is ready whenever somebody has
a whim to go delving, needs money, or if the DM simply hasn't had time to
prepare anything more specific.
As far as populating dungeons go, I lean toward enigmatic devices and curious
situations. One of my dungeons had in it a statue that answered the first
question put to it by a character. The players spent two years trying to
figure out why the statue only answered some questions (high character
turnover had something to do with that).
More on this subject later.
Scott R. Turner
UCLA Computer Science Department
3531 Boelter Hall, Los Angeles, CA 90024
ARPA: srt@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA
UUCP: ...!{cepu,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!srtcjn@calmasd.UUCP (Cheryl Nemeth) (01/12/85)
Don't forget to look at modules and other people's dungeons. Cheryl Nemeth
richl@daemon.UUCP (Rick Lindsley) (01/14/85)
I've found that the right mixture of puzzles and hacking can be the most
fun. The puzzles should not be so tough as to cause the party to come to
a standstill to figure it out before they proceed. They should be more
of the type where all of a sudden one character will go "HEY! I've seen
that symbol before!"
So I try to think of a central theme ("why should these adventurers WANT
to do this??") and balance it out with sufficiently tough monsters to
warrant what they may find. Occasionally it is useful to add an element
they CANNOT defeat without great loss; give them experience points for
recognizing that and not trying!
I've found that while a map of the dungeon is a must, all a DM need beyond
that is a general idea of the story he wants to tell. Because as DM that's
precisely what you are. Remember stories where everybody gets killed and
stories where everybody gets rich are boring. If you had written down that
there should be 3 trolls in this room but the party has diminished to 3
through unfortunate attrition, it doesn't really have to be 3 trolls. 3
orcs, or 1 troll, or something suitable.
I made one definite mistake in my first dungeon, and that was planning TOO
MUCH! As somebody else has pointed out, your plans will always go astray.
I sent a mother bear and two cubs after a party; the party killed the
bear and tamed one of the cubs! I boobytrapped a chest with 3 or 4 different
traps and filled it with 20000 gold pieces. They (unwittingly!) bypassed
the traps and made off with the gold! (Boy were THEY happy!)
Rick Lindsley
...!{ihnp4,decvax,allegra}!tektronix!richljagardner@watmath.UUCP (jagardner) (01/16/85)
[A line heroically throwing itself in the path of a ravenous line-eater!] I have never DMed D&D, but have been GMing a Champions campaign for about two years and can add my two cents worth to the proceedings, simply because Champions has a number of features that help to break some D&D traditions. Champions is a superhero game. It doesn't make sense to send superheroes out after gold and riches, so a Champions GM is forced to make up real stories: rescuing hostages, figuring out fiendish mysteries, and busting up villainous strongholds. I would recommend the same to D&D DMs -- grabbing up gold and goodies just isn't enough to sustain someone's interest in a campaign. The players also have to accomplish some goal that isn't measured in GP (or experience points). This means that the DM has to set up a scenario that has a beginning, a middle, and an ending. The beginning is what hooks the players: a rumour, a commission from the king, an attractive young woman found beaten half to death in an alley. You have to set up a situation that the players WANT to follow up. I've been in D&D scenarios where the DM says, "There's a cave in front of you; do you want to go in?" The players look at each other and shrug -- if you don't go in, it's going to be a pretty boring session, but why should the characters go in? In hooking the players, I have found that it is better to PULL the players rather than push them. As a simple example, a princess has been kidnapped and the players (being heroes, or perhaps trying to clear themselves as suspects) find themselves obliged to rescue her. The princess is a continual pull -- the characters have to keep going, deeper and deeper into a dungeon if need be, until they've rescued her. This is much different from a push. A simple example of a push would be stepping through the door of a haunted house and having it slam behind you. That's an indication that the GM is going to force the players to do things against their will, and is going to push them through a dungeon. The players have no sense of working toward some desirable goal (yes, getting out alive is a good thing, but it's not as satisfying as accomplishing a real mission). Most DMs and GMs skimp on the beginning of an adventure. They want to get down to the traps and monsters in the dungeon, the things that seem to be the real fun. However, the fun in the dungeon can be amplified if there's a reason for it. Moreover, the dungeon is easier to write. Suppose you're writing a dungeon where the kidnapped princess is being held. Ask yourself what kind of a place that would be. Of course, this mostly depends on the people who have kidnapped the princess. Why do they want her? To force the king to do something? To spill royal blood in some demonic ceremony? To wed an ugly wizard who can't get women any other way? If you know this, you'll be able to figure out the nature of the dungeon: who's running it, what they use the place for, what sort of defenses they'll have, and so on. If you set up the beginning right, the dungeon (which is the middle) will fall out fairly easily. The ending will also take care of itself. When the players save the princess, they will get a feeling of accomplishment. That's what counts. DON'T force the players to go through every room of your carefully constructed dungeon. They're trying to fulfill a mission, not win brownie points for completeness. In Champions, characters are set up with various disadvantages borrowed from the superhero genre. For the purposes of D&D, the most important sort of disadvantage is called a "Hunted". This means that a particular character is being hunted by another person or group, usually for revenge. I think this sort of thing can be very successful in D&D. Suppose your party (or one character in the party) has incurred the wrath of a cult somehow. Then this cult will continue to make attacks on the group, or try some nasty tricks to get the group in trouble. This is a nice justification for, say, being blamed for a crime and having to clear yourself; or being sent on a (supposedly) suicide mission to clean out a haunted tomb; or anything else. Of course, this kind of stuff shouldn't be overdone, but it can add some underlying structure to an extended campaign. It can also add some twists to plots that seem cut and dried. For example: Your archenemies are the Snake Cult. You have been sent by the king to a particular town that has been having trouble with bandits. You find the bandit hide-out in the hills, hack up a few people, collect some gold, and have done with it. You go back to the town where the grateful townspeople throw a big celebration for you. In the midst of the festivities, a sharp-eyed elf in the party notices that every person in town has a snake tattooed on their bicep. All of a sudden, you wonder if you should have drunk the wine so freely... The thrill of recognition is a wonderful thing to foist on a party. If they confront the Snake Cult every time they step out the front door, they'll get bored with the thing fairly soon. If, however, the Snakies show up now and then unexpectedly and give everyone a run for their money, you'll have good material to fall back on. To sum up, every adventure goes better if it makes sense. It should make sense for the characters to get involved. It should also make sense for the villains to be doing what they're doing. Villains are always working towards some end. The DM should know what that end is, and should exploit it. Final example, again somewhat superheroish in nature: an evil cleric is seeking to summon an archdemon to this plane to go on a rampage. In order to do this, he needs a lot of blood for the ceremony. He has sent zombies out to mug people in alleyways and bring their bodies back. One member of your party is attacked by these zombies, but survives when the others come to bail him out. If the group is keen, they'll try to track the zombies back to their lair and the fun begins. If not, perhaps the cleric is worried about his secret getting out, so he sends a more powerful party of evil things out to get rid of witnesses. This keeps on happening until the characters finally decide to cut off the attacks at the source. Throughout the cleric's lair, they find indications that he has been doing some high-powered summoning: various beasties from the evil planes. They also find indications of how he is doing the summoning, what sort of materials he uses, how the ceremony goes, and so on. The final confrontation is with the cleric, of course. If they've read the clues right, they know how to disrupt things before the archdemon shows up. If they just hack and slay, the odds are good they'll be facing some really gross evil that's going to fry them. (Of course, the archdemon doesn't fry them. He has a little quest he wants the party to perform, and if they're good, he'll let them live. Something about kidnapping a princess and delivering her to the Snake Cult...) Jim Gardner, University of Waterloo
ee163acp@sdcc13.UUCP (DARIN JOHNSON) (01/18/85)
> I've found that the right mixture of puzzles and hacking can be the most > fun. The puzzles should not be so tough as to cause the party to come to > a standstill to figure it out before they proceed. They should be more > of the type where all of a sudden one character will go "HEY! I've seen > that symbol before!" I particularly like to throw out the puzzles that my party try to figure out and the put it off. Later they run across a situation that makes the solution obvious. The solution then would have made the trap or encounter avoidable. The party then spends lots of time on problems that are pointless. To be fair to the players, I try to let the solutions that reveal themselves also partly solve the rest of the puzzle. An example of this is a scroll containing a cryptic rhyme describing the major traps of the dungeon. Figuring out one verse (because the fell into the trap) gives clues to the rest of the rhyme. Darin Johnson avoidable