QuoteDungeons
The term "dungeon" is often used for a
simple fantasy adventure. In the typical
dungeon, the players wander from room to
room, killing monsters and grabbing trea-
sure. There is often no rhyme or reason to
the contents of the rooms - in children's
fantasy games, every encounter may be
rolled randomly!
But a dungeon setting is good for a
beginning adventure; it teaches the basic
game mechanics quickly. And an under-
ground labyrinth does not have to be "kid
stuff - it can be part of a very realistic
background.
A "dungeon" can also be a building,
battleship, space station, etc. If the players
are dropped into a limited area, with little
or no goal except to grab what they can
and get out alive, it's a "dungeon."
A dungeon is easy to map, since its area
is limited. When players go too far, they
just run into a blank wall and have to turn
around. The typical dungeon is a collection
of rooms, connected by corridors, shafts or
tunnels.
Dungeon Inhabitants and
Plot
The GM should populate his dungeon
(or building, or whatever) with appropriate
men, beasts and monsters. If you are just
creating a "hack-and-slash" dungeon, you
don't need to worry about what they are
doing there, what they eat, why they attack
the party, or anything else - just stock the
rooms and go.
Likewise, the "plot of the story" for a
hack-and-slash adventure will be very simple.
"Joe the Barbarian, with his friends Ed the
Barbarian and Marge the Barbarian, went
down into a cave. They saw lots of
monsters and killed them and took their
treasure. A dragon ate Ed. Joe and Marge
ran away. The End."
If you want to play on a more "mature"
level, and create a situation that actually
makes sense, you have advanced to the
level of adventure design. Congratulations.
Read on ...

Quote from: J Arcane;686411What are some other examples you've come across?

QuoteBeautiful Ladies, Glorious Lords,

(...)

Forgive if I will continuously compare my system to other fantasy RPGs, but the birth of this world makes it necessary. I have to puke out my guts whenever I see ideas like an inn in every village, a "tavern" filled to the brim with "adventurers". Of course, the creators of AD&D could defend themselves by claiming it was their world and that's how they created it, and I should shut my mouth.

Well, sure. But for me, it is not real that so many experienced warriors should just march around and undertake secret assignments or as common thieves from here to there, and back again. Feudalism, the main characteristic of mediaeval society, manifested in hierarchical relations. The serfs served their petty nobles, who served their own sires, who served the greater nobles, who served the king, who served the emperor. Someone who stood outside the chain of fealty could be killed with impunity, he was alone, vulnerable, on the edges. So, these are yourt AD&D adventurers.

Defrocked priests, assassins who have left their guilds, elves and dwarves who have wandered far from their home. Nice and quaint, but why would a god continue to support a priest who was no longer in touch with the head official of his monastery? How could a knight in full armour mount his horse without the aid of his servants? He probably could not even dress! Why would anyone tolerate a tavern collecting potential troublemakers on his feudum? And why would we want to force 21st century ideas of freedom on mediaeval circumstances? We shouldn't do it, and we shouldn't be afraid of our character having a feudal master, nor to play a noble who has underlings.

Sure, I can't deny either that even in the Middle Ages, there were people outside society, like robber knights, mercenaries, criminals, or we could even mention the assassins' "guild", the justly famous Hassassins, the etymological root of the English word 'assassin'. But we must make limits, and we can't have every village be filled with adventurers. And let's just realise there were no typical inns with tables and rooms on the second floor. Mediaeval travellers knocked on the doors of monastic orders, slept in the stables with pigs and horses, or huddled together in the forest. In a few cities, they built an inn before the gates for those who arrived after darkness had fallen and the gates were shut. There is no bar counter at these places, there is only filth, straw on the floor where one may even sleep, no waiter girls, no separate rooms with a double bed. Forget these stereotypes. Or go play AD&D.

(...)

(Long rant about how city guards are also not realistic)

Quote from: estar;686418I saw that back in the day and promptly ignored it.

Since then I learned that Steve Jackson intensely dislikes D&D and its tropes.

I suppose SJ Games makes up for it for having to treat it seriously in GURPS in their various Munchkin products.

Quote from: Melan;686433This kind of anti-AD&D sniping has been present in quite a lot of Hungarian RPGs, never mind the fact that AD&D has not been in print since 2000. To cite one of the worst offenders, Koleria, a game released in 2011, had the following gems in its foreword (!):


(paragraphs mine)

Granted, the game kinda sunk immediately after its release. It also makes a great case for playing AD&D.

Quote from: Melan;686433This kind of anti-AD&D sniping has been present in quite a lot of Hungarian RPGs, never mind the fact that AD&D has not been in print since 2000. To cite one of the worst offenders, Koleria, a game released in 2011, had the following gems in its foreword (!):


(paragraphs mine)

Granted, the game kinda sunk immediately after its release. It also makes a great case for playing AD&D.

Quote from: David Johansen;686434I think you broke my sarcasm detector.  Munchkin is nothing more than Steve Jackson hating on D&D and getting rich doing it.

Quote from: Melan;686433It also makes a great case for playing AD&D.