City Supplements or Adventures

[squeen]

The point is about concept economy. Like a short story, you don't have a loaded gun if it doesn't fire.
If you're going to do a city campaign the city has to justify itself through mechanics/theming or its just window dressing.

But since it's the party that determines which gun gets fired, you need to prep a lot of props---many of which never see the light of day. The DM/designer just sets the stage, we don't write the story. When everything is strictly "functional" you can fall into the trap of imposing an expected result and it can feel very contrived. What's better (IMO) is just have a place loaded up with potential energy for the players to unleash in unexpected ways i.e. lots of loaded guns!

When you say "If you're going to do a city campaign...", I would stop you there because I (as DM) don't decide the nature of the campaign, my players choose what to explore and what directions to go...week after week, month and month, year after year. It's my responsibility to have plentiful dangling-fruit to tempt them, and interesting destinations to explore. As they turn over the various rocks of the world and poke around underneath, there are things big and small to notice and act upon. A small handful are connected (global), but most are just local phenomena.

"Concept economy" sounds like a lot of the D&D blog-advise circa. 2010 that was all about saving the DM effort. I personally don't buy into much of that. I think a proper DM works his arse off (and loves every minute of it)!

@Avi: I have seen that web-app before. It's pretty amazing! No doubt some day soon, AIs will be DM's (and maybe players) too. Have you all seen this about how computer algorithms (Dall-E) will soon be creating illustrations for us?

Robots with Flowers

How would you imagine a painting of a robot with flowers growing out of it? "A happy robot with flowers growing out of his head, clouds in t...

gurneyjourney.blogspot.com

How Smart is Dall-E 2?

Prompt: “Polymer clay dragons eating pizza in a boat” Computer-generated image (Dall-e 2 by OpenAI) For a several years now, computers have...

gurneyjourney.blogspot.com

However, similar to what I'm preaching above, I really do enjoy the (grindy) process of map generation and keying locations. Sometimes what pops out creatively is so surprising, I find myself saying: "Hello! I had no idea you were hiding in there." The point of any hobby is to have pleasant outlet for creative expression. Making dungeons is so very much like making music or art. What joy is there in turning it over to automation?

Unless of course, there are just certain aspects you personally find tedious...but then that's why they invented pre-generated adventures, eh? For me personally, I enjoy preparing the meal for my guests and spreading it out on the table to see what gets eaten. (...vs. fast food from the Drive-Thru?)

 

[Beoric]

The point is about concept economy. Like a short story, you don't have a loaded gun if it doesn't fire.
If you're going to do a city campaign the city has to justify itself through mechanics/theming or its just window dressing.

Yeah, there was a time in my life when I would have roughly sketched the various scenarios, and then have the first session more or less be the choosing of a path. Then plan each session as it came up. It was a bit like laying track in front of the train while it was running. Which is an apt analogy, because players have a way of changing their minds or coming up with new ideas between sessions, which frequently meant you were either ad libbing a session, or leaning on the players to stick with the decision they made last time.

For random city maps (at least on the block level) try

Medieval Fantasy City Generator by watabou

Not a game

watabou.itch.io

This site is great for smaller urban centers. Ooh, I see there is now a neighbourhood generator! No need for geomorphs, maybe?

 

[Evard's Small Tentacle]

I think the biggest difficulty and issue with city supplements and adventures is the show vs. tell. Most default to telling what something is, thus removing all interactivity from the setting. Plus, how useful is 30 pages of city background and history?

 

[Maynard]

But since it's the party that determines which gun gets fired, you need to prep a lot of props---many of which never see the light of day. The DM/designer just sets the stage, we don't write the story. When everything is strictly "functional" you can fall into the trap of imposing an expected result and it can feel very contrived. What's better (IMO) is just have a place loaded up with potential energy for the players to unleash in unexpected ways i.e. lots of loaded guns!

When you say "If you're going to do a city campaign...", I would stop you there because I (as DM) don't decide the nature of the campaign, my players choose what to explore and what directions to go...week after week, month and month, year after year. It's my responsibility to have plentiful dangling-fruit to tempt them, and interesting destinations to explore. As they turn over the various rocks of the world and poke around underneath, there are things big and small to notice and act upon. A small handful are connected (global), but most are just local phenomena.

I don't think you're at all understanding what I'm trying to say, and you've ascribed as style of DMing to me that is not at all applicable.

 

[Maynard]

I think the biggest difficulty and issue with city supplements and adventures is the show vs. tell. Most default to telling what something is, thus removing all interactivity from the setting. Plus, how useful is 30 pages of city background and history?

This is what I was trying to say. If you're going to portray a city in your game you have to do it through the game. Just saying it's a city is meaningless.

In a short story, if you put in a detail that isn't relavent you're just wasting your readers time. Why put a bunch of dungeons in an area and call it a city, why should your players care about it? Giving them a lecture about city history/politics or how the streets are laid out is a waste of everyone's time if they can't engage with it in a meaningful way. If you create the proper connections between the dungeons, do the rumors, have the city traveling encounters, create specificity for npcs, taverns, things to delight the players during downtime - then you've justified your city to the players and they might choose to spend some time there.

 

[squeen]

I don't think you're at all understanding what I'm trying to say, and you've ascribed as style of DMing to me that is not at all applicable.

Sorry. I was not trying to imply anything about your style or intent...just philosophizing at the general ether. No insult intended.

I think I may understand your point, and it's a good one --- but I am trying to take an unconventional position and justify loose Easter Eggs lying in various hidden locations. I feel that sometimes the players need to be conditioned to search for lost treasures without prompting or bread crumbs.

The "connected-ness" or "directness" of most published adventures bugs me in a odd way. Feels off. The vibrant jumble of Operation Unfanthomable is one of the rare exceptions. Disconnected things came at you in it from all angles---with hooks to a larger story your players can choose to pursue (or not). I loved that.

 

[Beoric]

Why put a bunch of dungeons in an area and call it a city, why should your players care about it?

Ah, see, when you mentioned "adventuring locations", I didn't read it as "dungeons". Certainly a bunch of disconnected dungeons don't exactly scream "city adventure".

But wharfs, warehouses, speakeasies, taverns, mansions, run-down tenements, gambling halls, dreamlily dens, arenas, plazas, libraries, markets, temples and yes, sewers that are actually sewers are all locations where adventures can occur. Filling them up with things to discover and buttons to push is all to the good.

 

[squeen]

Ah, see, when you mentioned "adventuring locations", I didn't read it as "dungeons". Certainly a bunch of disconnected dungeons don't exactly scream "city adventure".

But wharfs, warehouses, speakeasies, taverns, mansions, run-down tenements, gambling halls, dreamlily dens, arenas, plazas, libraries, markets, temples and yes, sewers that are actually sewers are all locations where adventures can occur. Filling them up with things to discover and buttons to push is all to the good.

Perhaps there's a difference in playstyle here after all. When things finally clicked for me as a DM much better in the civilized portions of the campaign world, was when the line between how we played "in a dungeon" and how we played "in a city" and even "traveling through the wilderness" blurred. What differs is the danger level, but the way we transitioned between routine actions that are unimpeded (hand waved) and time-critical/significant actions (played out), got to be pretty much the same. There was no big shift in mechanic. There was no obvious (to the players) rumor table, since the only way they learned things in a city or a dungeon was by talking to an NPC or monster. Likewise, there never is any grand exposition about the setting, city or otherwise, it all comes out during play, i.e. asking questions of the inhabitants.

Maybe that's why I use the term city/dungeon interchangeably. How different is it when you are in a safe-zone in the dungeon, chatting with the dwarves who control that sieged stronghold...and when you are in the city chatting with a city guard you think might be a spy? For us, not much.

I think I've said this a few times before, but I learned from my experience as player that the world seems far more real when the DM keeps most of the mechanics close to his chest and the players are largely ignorant of how the game-world "moves". As soon as the curtain is pulled back and the probabilities and judgement calls are all laid bare, most of the magic of emergent play dries up. At least that's my experience, although I know many here have very different opinions about that topic....and a great Fear Of The DM arose in the later edition years.

As to "why should your players care about it?"...there's always just one answer to that question really: self-interest. There's got to be something they want or need -- or why even be there? If players can't be bothered to plan and scheme to get ahead, then they aren't very good players. It's your job as a DM to (partially) frustrate those desires and keep dandling the carrot out in front of them....AND, as we were just discussing, fill up the world with interesting places/stuff and loaded guns for them (and NPCs) to pick up.

Here's an example: I stuffed a Staff of Power in a cave-complex in the bottom of a lake in a (minor) 3-level dungeon. The only way for the players to get to that underwater-complex was to fall off a bridge into a black lake that they were actively trying NOT to fall off into. I never thought that item would see the light of day, it was just fun for me, as a content-creator, to know it was down there---with it's own little secret history.

Here's the convoluted chain of events that got them to retrieve it:

• the low-level party decides to help a long-time and loyal henchmen find his lost kin and complete a quest (promises of treasure reward)
• traveled through wilderness for months along an old river road having many adventures along the way
• passed through the capital city of a kingdom in decline (elves and wizards outlawed, had to disguise themselves)
• the party's theft had acquired enough experience along the way that he could go up a level, he needed to find someone to train him (no overt thieves guild)
• poked around (covertly) in town until he learned about a retired adventurer (thief) who was now a leather worker.
• the retired thief agreed to train him (at no cost!) if he and the party would ask the Goblin King what became of his wife the previous spring
• the ex-thief guides them through the southern woods to a ruined temple and shows them the hidden dungeon entrance
• they go in, cross the lake, and eventually get "captured" by the goblins and see the King and he/it gives them a different task in exchange for letting them leave
• (LOTS OF OTHER STUFF HAPPENS OVER THE NEXT 2-3 YEARS)
• they have finally found the henchmen's kin in the mega-dungeon and realize that they need something they saw the Goblin King wearing
• they go back to the city and back to the dungeon below the ruins, kill the "immortal" Goblin King (with a weapon they found on their first visit) and take the needed item
• the find an old Earth God shrine behind the throne and make a sacrifice that allows them to have a question answered
• the magic-user had been searching for a staff for a long time now, and asks where the nearest one is---I answer truthfully "At the bottom of the Lake"
• the magic-user is now high enough level to polymorph the party into mermen/mermaids (but her spellbook is back in the city)
• lots of logistics to cart merpeople a day's travel over land from the city back to the dungeon---they only have 3 days before word gets out about the Goblin King's death and the various goblin clans converge to fill the power-vacuum, but they eventually start exploring the submerged level containing the staff. All the while they are hunted by the creature that controls the lake and it's minions.
• They eventually retrieve the staff...which is, of course, majorly cursed.

Point being, that there were many years (4,5?) between the time I placed that item (on a whim!) and when it came in to play. There is absolute zero "concept economy" (as I understand it) involved. Quite the opposite. Isn't that a Courtney Campbell or Alexandrian thing? I've come to realize over time that the way I like to do things has little in common with those paradigms---which it probably why I play a different edition than them. They sound good in a blog, but I don't actually think there's much to them. D&D is not storywriting (I understand no one here is saying it is)...that's just a ditch the hobby fell into and is slowly extracting itself from, as folks wake up to the fact that much was lost from the way the original game was played.

The whole Quantum Ogre concept too---it just never came up. Just not a thing in classic play. The world is just there to explore. There's no "DM intent". Nada. That's a corruption that started with the Hickman's storytelling BS (combined with lazy DM prep---i.e. no contingencies).

Also worth noting: city-play, wilderness-play and dungeon-play...all seamlessly identical in feel to the players. (i.e. we don't suddenly drop into "hex mode", or "city mode").

Again, this isn't directed at anyone in particular. It's just that I vacillate between thinking everyone-knows-this-play-style and no-one-plays-like-this-anymore. I can't decide which is actually the case, but it's when I start to suspect the latter that I tend to blather on like this.

Heh. Long post. It's been awhile.

 

[squeen]

A similar rant in Prince's blog. It goes after the conceit of roleplaying as primary game-focus:

That is why you fail – An analysis of the corrosive effect of Artpunkmanry in the essay ‘Never As Written’ by Luka Rejec

A reader linked me to a recent article by UVG author, 3rd generation Artpunkman and indie darling Luka Rejec, wherein he attempts to cope with what appears to be a perfectly reasonable if subjectiv…

princeofnothingblogs.wordpress.com

The goal of playing an rpg is not roleplaying anymore then the goal of diplomacy is to impersonate 19th century military officers. Roleplaying is an outgrowth, an adornment of the act of playing the game of DnD that arose spontaneously and can add a lot, but in 9 out of 10 cases, it is not the goal of an rpg. If one was playing World of Darkness storygames then perhaps, we could say that roleplaying could be the goal, but in case of most games, and certainly the OSR, XP is given for killing monsters and obtaining treasure, so that should be the metric of ‘playing well.’ Did your party just die again to an easily avoidable encounter that you could have known was too tough? Did the blue-haired overweight flower-child select Tenser’s Floating Disk again instead of Sleep because it ‘better fits his character concept?’ Then you just lost at rpgs bitch! This entire position is centred around an ‘everyone gets a prize’ mentality that incentivizes being lazy, not figuring out how the fucking rules of the game work

 

[squeen]

In a short story, if you put in a detail that isn't relavent you're just wasting your readers time.

I am reading Lovecraft (Case of Dexter Ward). I think a good case could be made that much of his work is full of only spurious detail! (H.P. wasn't too nimble with plot development.) Likewise, Tolkien's world comes alive because it's filled with all that rich history of the earlier age's that is only hinted at or touches the story very tangentially (Bombadil, mo'fo's!!). Not appreciating those elements, and what they add to the ambiance of a setting (when well written) is a crime.

I don't have much interest in reading/watching "utilitarian" stories in which only plot-important details exist. They bore me because they feel too contrived. Think about the rich settings and odd tangents of truly great movies vs. a formulaic Hollywood "product" in which a minimalist/utilitarian approach to checking plot-boxes is taken (e.g. the original Star Wars vs. Independence Day---Jawas? out! Sand People? out! Biggs? out!...err, wait.). Those little non-central pieces that can be used as a spring-board to establish character get dumped in "just the main points please" model.

I will add that Jackson's LotR sucked precisely because it was so hacked-up/utilitarian. Zero artistry. Zero ambiance. Everything shoved in your face blantently like a brightly lit road sign.

 

[Beoric]

Perhaps there's a difference in playstyle here after all. When things finally clicked for me as a DM much better in the civilized portions of the campaign world, was when the line between how we played "in a dungeon" and how we played "in a city" and even "traveling through the wilderness" blurred. What differs is the danger level, but the way we transitioned between routine actions that are unimpeded (hand waved) and time-critical/significant actions (played out), got to be pretty much the same. There was no big shift in mechanic. There was no obvious (to the players) rumor table, since the only way they learned things in a city or a dungeon was by talking to an NPC or monster. Likewise, there never is any grand exposition about the setting, city or otherwise, it all comes out during play, i.e. asking questions of the inhabitants.

Maybe that's why I use the term city/dungeon interchangeably. How different is it when you are in a safe-zone in the dungeon, chatting with the dwarves who control that sieged stronghold...and when you are in the city chatting with a city guard you think might be a spy? For us, not much.

I think I've said this a few times before, but I learned from my experience as player that the world seems far more real when the DM keeps most of the mechanics close to his chest and the players are largely ignorant of how the game-world "moves". As soon as the curtain is pulled back and the probabilities and judgement calls are all laid bare, most of the magic of emergent play dries up. At least that's my experience, although I know many here have very different opinions about that topic....and a great Fear Of The DM arose in the later edition years.

As to "why should your players care about it?"...there's always just one answer to that question really: self-interest. There's got to be something they want or need -- or why even be there? If players can't be bothered to plan and scheme to get ahead, then they aren't very good players. It's your job as a DM to (partially) frustrate those desires and keep dandling the carrot out in front of them....AND, as we were just discussing, fill up the world with interesting places/stuff and loaded guns for them (and NPCs) to pick up.

Here's an example: I stuffed a Staff of Power in a cave-complex in the bottom of a lake in a (minor) 3-level dungeon. The only way for the players to get to that underwater-complex was to fall off a bridge into a black lake that they were actively trying NOT to fall off into. I never thought that item would see the light of day, it was just fun for me, as a content-creator, to know it was down there---with it's own little secret history.

Here's the convoluted chain of events that got them to retrieve it:

• the low-level party decides to help a long-time and loyal henchmen find his lost kin and complete a quest (promises of treasure reward)
• traveled through wilderness for months along an old river road having many adventures along the way
• passed through the capital city of a kingdom in decline (elves and wizards outlawed, had to disguise themselves)
• the party's theft had acquired enough experience along the way that he could go up a level, he needed to find someone to train him (no overt thieves guild)
• poked around (covertly) in town until he learned about a retired adventurer (thief) who was now a leather worker.
• the retired thief agreed to train him (at no cost!) if he and the party would ask the Goblin King what became of his wife the previous spring
• the ex-thief guides them through the southern woods to a ruined temple and shows them the hidden dungeon entrance
• they go in, cross the lake, and eventually get "captured" by the goblins and see the King and he/it gives them a different task in exchange for letting them leave
• (LOTS OF OTHER STUFF HAPPENS OVER THE NEXT 2-3 YEARS)
• they have finally found the henchmen's kin in the mega-dungeon and realize that they need something they saw the Goblin King wearing
• they go back to the city and back to the dungeon below the ruins, kill the "immortal" Goblin King (with a weapon they found on their first visit) and take the needed item
• the find an old Earth God shrine behind the throne and make a sacrifice that allows them to have a question answered
• the magic-user had been searching for a staff for a long time now, and asks where the nearest one is---I answer truthfully "At the bottom of the Lake"
• the magic-user is now high enough level to polymorph the party into mermen/mermaids (but her spellbook is back in the city)
• lots of logistics to cart merpeople a day's travel over land from the city back to the dungeon---they only have 3 days before word gets out about the Goblin King's death and the various goblin clans converge to fill the power-vacuum, but they eventually start exploring the submerged level containing the staff. All the while they are hunted by the creature that controls the lake and it's minions.
• They eventually retrieve the staff...which is, of course, majorly cursed.

Point being, that there were many years (4,5?) between the time I placed that item (on a whim!) and when it came in to play. There is absolute zero "concept economy" (as I understand it) involved. Quite the opposite. Isn't that a Courtney Campbell or Alexandrian thing? I've come to realize over time that the way I like to do things has little in common with those paradigms---which it probably why I play a different edition than them. They sound good in a blog, but I don't actually think there's much to them. D&D is not storywriting (I understand no one here is saying it is)...that's just a ditch the hobby fell into and is slowly extracting itself from, as folks wake up to the fact that much was lost from the way the original game was played.

The whole Quantum Ogre concept too---it just never came up. Just not a thing in classic play. The world is just there to explore. There's no "DM intent". Nada. That's a corruption that started with the Hickman's storytelling BS (combined with lazy DM prep---i.e. no contingencies).

Also worth noting: city-play, wilderness-play and dungeon-play...all seamlessly identical in feel to the players. (i.e. we don't suddenly drop into "hex mode", or "city mode").

Again, this isn't directed at anyone in particular. It's just that I vacillate between thinking everyone-knows-this-play-style and no-one-plays-like-this-anymore. I can't decide which is actually the case, but it's when I start to suspect the latter that I tend to blather on like this.

Heh. Long post. It's been awhile.

I'm not seeing how anything you wrote is different from anything I wrote, except for using more words.

 

[squeen]

I'm not seeing how anything you wrote is different from anything I wrote, except for using more words.

It's not. Agreeing. (less! win!)

 

[Beoric]

It's not. Agreeing. (less! win!)

What is this "agreeing" you speak of?

 

[Beoric]

Likewise, Tolkien's world comes alive because it's filled with all that rich history of the earlier age's that is only hinted at or touches the story very tangentially (Bombadil, mo'fo's!!). Not appreciating those elements, and what they add to the ambiance of a setting (when well written) is a crime..

I have to disagree with you that Tolkien contained a lot of stuff that was irrelevant to the story (Bombadil excepted). An awful lot of that detail and history is relevant to, or outright drives, either the plot or character motivation. Other bits tell us how the world works, and how the characters fit into it. Pretty much everything (except Bombadil) has a purpose.

So I agree with @Maynard that every element in fiction should be placed there for a reason. I also understand the relevance of this point of view to non-Classic/OSR playstyles. But I agree with @squeen that they have no place in a Classic/OSR game except to the degree that you are making stuff up immediately before the players are expected to encounter it.

 

[squeen]

I have to disagree with you that Tolkien contained a lot of stuff that was irrelevant to the story (Bombadil excepted). An awful lot of that detail and history is relevant to, or outright drives, either the plot or character motivation. Other bits tell us how the world works, and how the characters fit into it. Pretty much everything (except Bombadil) has a purpose.

It's done so unobtrusively you hardly notice it. The songs they sing in Rivendale? The details of ring lore (who made what)? The history of the sinking of Numenor? They touch ever so lightly or inform the plot, but there are far more expeditious ways of accomplishing all of that. Heck, you hardly really need a Saurman!

The unnecessary depth distinguishes great works from the lesser. God is in the details.

 

[Beoric]

The unnecessary depth distinguishes great works from the lesser. God is in the details.

If the unnecessary depth is required for it to be a great work, then isn't it kind of ... necessary?

 

[squeen]

Doh!

How about...yes and no. Necessary for whom? A lot of television and movies strip it down to "the basics" due to budgetary or time constraints. Most folks consume it happily (like Jackson's LotR). There's a lot of supercilious stuff one can easy point to and many say "Would it really be that much worse without this?", and maybe you can get away with it once or twice---but too often and those-in-the-know will complain that you've gutted the heart out of a thing.

Bringing it back to Adventure Writing: wall-of-text backgrounds are obviously too much non-game-able detail. Terseness is valued for utilitarianism. "This used to be..." gets out of hand, etc.

BUT, what about adding well written, actionable detail that doesn't make a bee-line towards the adventure's big-boss-fight?

That's the extra detail I often think is missing. Because that adds variety and player choice in the path they choose while climbing the mountain---basically interesting stuff they can walk past without it mattering, but if they choose to take the Long Way, adds flavor and potentially affects the outcome.

Too often, because it is auxiliary, it never gets fleshed out enough to be playable and interesting. The details are dropped. One example that comes to mind in Prince's PouR is the Necropolis. That might have been a location for extended adventuring, but lacked enough detail for the players to linger/explore. Despite being a fascinating location, it's depth was kept to a minimum and there was no unexpected "deep layers" to unravel. What I'm looking for (as a player) is the opportunity to get so lost and involved is a side-project, that I almost forget my original reason for being there. Otherwise everything starts to feel like hollow "props"---buildings without backsides.

Am I making much sense?

I'm asking for these things because of how they often play out in the good gaming sessions I've been involved in. Haven't you ever looked back with your players and collectively thought, "Wow! I can't believe we wasted so much time on that...but I'm glad we did!"

I mentioned Operation Unfathomable, but it has that potential energy and when I read it, I was reminded of my Great DM's dungeons (except he had bottomless file cabinets of it). It's chocked full of weird distractions that tug at you to "forget your quest" and get lost in them. If nothing else, these side-jobs opens the door for a refreshing change in tone and clears the palette and helps prevent the campaign from becoming a one-note slough-towards-Mordor. Bombadil, Rivendale, Moria, Lorien, the Ent Moot, Shelob, etc. are places your mind wishes it had more time to linger.

 

[Two orcs]

Am I making much sense?

Perfectly. My first direct experience with D&D was playing Baldur's Gate 2. The game is littered with qeusts, you have the feeling that wherever you poke your nose you'll get dragged into some adventure grand or small. Often you find a quest during or on the way to another quest. One of your first overarching goals is to gather 20,000gp, I remember vividly how I got lost in the game and finally remembered that quest, looked at my gathered treasures which not amounted to 400,000gp. And the quests are the opposite of formulaic (in contrast to modern rpgs or open world games), some are a few dialogue options while others include NPC companions or several hours long dungeon delves. This is the feeling I'm trying to evoke in my home campaign, almost every dead end hides the entrance to another (sub) dungeon. Almost any NPC has a finger or a stake in some other adventure. The players leave a lot of loose ends, but I hope it contributed to the feeling of depth you're talking about.

 

[Malrex]

Maybe that's why I use the term city/dungeon interchangeably. How different is it when you are in a safe-zone in the dungeon, chatting with the dwarves who control that sieged stronghold...and when you are in the city chatting with a city guard you think might be a spy? For us, not much

I get what you are saying, but I find it slightly different between a city and a dungeon. In a dungeon, the 'chatting' or rumors is more focused because the walls of the dungeon force things to be more focused. This is also due to monsters owning territories--so rumors may not spread much past a territory that one owns. In a city without dungeon walls, there would be a lot more noise and distractions. You may be chatting with a city guard who you think might be a spy, but during the questioning, 2-3 more adventure hooks or clues might be dropped because there is no constrained territory except for the city, where things should be REALLY busy.

Bringing it back to Adventure Writing: wall-of-text backgrounds are obviously too much non-game-able detail. Terseness is valued for utilitarianism. "This used to be..." gets out of hand, etc.

I've been struggling a bit about this lately. On one hand, I totally agree. On the other, a wall-of-text background that has some historical components can make the adventure feel more alive or feel bigger in my opinion. I'm not talking about every single room--"This used to be..." etc. But I'm talking about the DM's "Welcome Mat", where a little history in the initial adventure background/summary can enrich other components in the dungeon. It should still be short, but throwing in a few more tidbits and maybe even adding some of the spices into the rumor table can make the adventure more memorable in my opinion. For example, In Search of the Unknown...the historical tidbits about the 2 past owners (as well as some of the clues in the rooms about their past or who they were) makes some of the rooms a little more interesting to me, rather than saying nothing and it just being another castle/dungeon.

BUT, what about adding well written, actionable detail that doesn't make a bee-line towards the adventure's big-boss-fight?

Basically...side quests or side explorations. I wish more adventures did this. People speak of having empty rooms for pacing....side quests/explorations keep the initial quest fresh because it can potentially allow a break in the main quest. I totally agree with squeen that this stuff is important and makes an adventure better.

One example that comes to mind in Prince's PouR is the Necropolis. That might have been a location for extended adventuring, but lacked enough detail for the players to linger/explore. Despite being a fascinating location, it's depth was kept to a minimum and there was no unexpected "deep layers" to unravel.

I remember talking to Prince about adding a few mini-dungeons (3-5 rooms) within the necropolis. A building with a few floors, or some sort of lair that had a few rooms, or a table of random things that could be discovered if searching through some of the buildings. I was thinking more of a base/hideout for the Sial-Atun or even a bigger type lair for the 9. But I think the idea was that the necropolis was just a model of a city--an artwork piece, so it made some sense that it lacked depth. Why would Uyu-Yadmogh bother with such intricacies for those of lower stature than himself?

However, the cavern it was located in could of maybe had some other things going on...a small island in the mercury lake to explore, or a few cave complexes within the cavern walls.

BUT, and yes, I may be sounding like a hypocrite here, but I also wonder if that would diminish the vibe? I'll be honest, PoUR's vibe is uncomfortable to me, which is a weird way of complimenting Prince because capturing a vibe and sticking with it is pretty powerful. If I can feel that vibe, then it might be doubled for players who know nothing about the place until they stumble into things. There is no ogre putting on minotaur horns because it thinks they look cool, or easy/gratifying monsters to kill...all hope and conquest just seems like a dull glimmer in that adventure. I've only read a few other adventures that give me that vibe of uncomfortableness although I can't recall what they were at the moment.

What I'm getting at is, although I think side quests/explorations are important and make an adventure better (and I totally prefer it), I also think that it could also kill or diminish a vibe if not done right. Did anyone else get a vibe of uncomfortableness from PoUR or was it just me? Maybe my head was just in it too deep.

 

[squeen]

But I'm talking about the DM's "Welcome Mat", where a little history in the initial adventure background/summary can enrich other components in the dungeon.

I don't think anyone is against that. Certainly not me.

What I'm getting at is, although I think side quests/explorations are important and make an adventure better (and I totally prefer it), I also think that it could also kill or diminish a vibe if not done right. Did anyone else get a vibe of uncomfortableness from PoUR or was it just me? Maybe my head was just in it too deep.

Yes. It was all Frodo-and-Sam-in-Mordor. Heavy.

Did it run into the problem of "what's grander than grand?". I don't dunno.