http://theangrygm.com/welcome-to-the-megadungeon-critical-path/

Angry talks about the contradiction of his mega dungeon approach in this latest update.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;859291http://theangrygm.com/welcome-to-the-megadungeon-critical-path/

Angry talks about the contradiction of his mega dungeon approach in this latest update.

Wait. D&D dungeons are inspired by video games? It`s it the other way round?

The amont of work this guy is doing seems incredibly pointless.

The whole thing seems incredibly pointless, including his shifting of word definitions.

So an autistic video gamer is telling people how to generate an algorithm in which to best facilitate the proper amount of utility within the rpg paradigm.

Quote from: Daztur;859311Wait. D&D dungeons are inspired by video games? It`s it the other way round?

As I read it, he's saying that his specific adventure module (which he happens to dress up in megadungeon clothing) is inspired by videogames, not that (mega)dungeons as a whole are.

Quote from: Daztur;859311The amont of work this guy is doing seems incredibly pointless.

So very, very true...

But I think I finally got the reason for that in the start of his "F$&% Philosophy" section.  He seems to be operating under the assumption that, to be a viable product, a megadungeon needs to have a specific, structured "adventure" in that dungeon for the GM to lead the players through.

However, there are several existing, published products which are megadungeons presented solely as setting.  While they often have some level of "story" embedded in them in the form of the site's history and what the current occupants are doing, they don't have a "critical path" or other assumptions about how the PCs are "supposed to" get from the beginning of the megadungeon to the end of it.  (Indeed, they often don't even have a "beginning" or an "end" in the first place.)

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;859316The whole thing seems incredibly pointless, including his shifting of word definitions.

Yeah. It's almost amazing. On the other hand, I just learned there was a point to the whole model railroad thing besides watching trains go around the table in a circle while saying "Choo Choo." So I'm trying to be more tolerant of other people's ideas of fun.

Quote from: nDervish;859362As I read it, he's saying that his specific adventure module (which he happens to dress up in megadungeon clothing) is inspired by videogames, not that (mega)dungeons as a whole are.



So very, very true...

But I think I finally got the reason for that in the start of his "F$&% Philosophy" section.  He seems to be operating under the assumption that, to be a viable product, a megadungeon needs to have a specific, structured "adventure" in that dungeon for the GM to lead the players through.

However, there are several existing, published products which are megadungeons presented solely as setting.  While they often have some level of "story" embedded in them in the form of the site's history and what the current occupants are doing, they don't have a "critical path" or other assumptions about how the PCs are "supposed to" get from the beginning of the megadungeon to the end of it.  (Indeed, they often don't even have a "beginning" or an "end" in the first place.)

Yeah he calls those, games where you have to "find the fun" after poking around for hours, instead of actually having it be fun from the start. Same with hexcrawls. The fun is hidden from the player and they must wrestle it out of the game like it was a grudge.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;859377Yeah he calls those, games where you have to "find the fun" after poking around for hours, instead of actually having it be fun from the start. Same with hexcrawls. The fun is hidden from the player and they must wrestle it out of the game like it was a grudge.

That seems to be an attitude of a lot of people nowadays...fun is something that should be IN YOUR FACE. I've heard people complain about reading a book because they "just wanted to know the whole backstory instead of figuring it out from context." God forbid you actually have to use your fucking brain. Probably the same reason these sorts of people hate sports because they're hard and it's not "fun" unless you win, but winning takes a lot of effort, so why bother?

Quote from: Brad;859381That seems to be an attitude of a lot of people nowadays...fun is something that should be IN YOUR FACE. I've heard people complain about reading a book because they "just wanted to know the whole backstory instead of figuring it out from context." God forbid you actually have to use your fucking brain. Probably the same reason these sorts of people hate sports because they're hard and it's not "fun" unless you win, but winning takes a lot of effort, so why bother?

Some folks were weaned on advice from the 4E DMG which had a whole section on " finding the fun". It was so incredibly useful. :rolleyes:

 It defined fun for you, told you what was fun and what wasn't, and provided instructions for how to skip all the stuff that just simply wasn't fun and no one would enjoy such as role playing an encounter with guards at a city gate.

Quote from: Brad;859381That seems to be an attitude of a lot of people nowadays...fun is something that should be IN YOUR FACE. I've heard people complain about reading a book because they "just wanted to know the whole backstory instead of figuring it out from context." God forbid you actually have to use your fucking brain. Probably the same reason these sorts of people hate sports because they're hard and it's not "fun" unless you win, but winning takes a lot of effort, so why bother?

To be fair there is a good way to start off sandbox campaigns with a hexcrawl setting, and a way that just leaves it totally to chance.

The good way, the one that I found drives players to act for themselves, is to give them a suitable background for their characters that leads to adventure. I call the whole thing the initial context.

It doesn't need to be overly detailed, often a paragraph will suffice but it does require some thought so that the player is motivated to pursue the initial leads for adventure.

But doing what this guys is doing for his megadungeon is way overkill and has its own problem. Namely that despite all the work the whole thing just sucks like a bad computer game, bad novel or a bad movie.

I have a friend who likes the idea of Dwimmermount of being a complete megadungeon but find the actual details boring and uninteresting.

Even with my sandbox campaign there are times when the initial context and the specific situation that the players start out with prove to be uninteresting and the campaign ends early.

Quote from: Brad;859329So an autistic video gamer is telling people how to generate an algorithm in which to best facilitate the proper amount of utility within the rpg paradigm.

I'm sure there's some synergy in there too.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;859377Yeah he calls those, games where you have to "find the fun" after poking around for hours, instead of actually having it be fun from the start. Same with hexcrawls. The fun is hidden from the player and they must wrestle it out of the game like it was a grudge.

Watching my kids play Minecraft, slowly figuring out how to build portals into the Nether, tame wolves, and build golems, I'd have to say that "find the fun" games tend to be a lot more engaging in the long run.

I mean, there's nothing inherently WRONG with what he's doing, but it's very prescriptive.

He works on the assumption that dungeon exploration is inevitably going to be "go to Room A, run encounter; go to room B, run encounter; choose between Room C or D, run encounter...".

In my experience, dungeon exploration is more like "go to Room A, dick around for a while; go to Room B, argue about something, decide to return to town.  Spend some time shopping and debate about whether to return to the dungeon or pursue a totally different adventure.  Six weeks later return to Room A, run encounter..."

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;859377Yeah he calls those, games where you have to "find the fun" after poking around for hours, instead of actually having it be fun from the start. Same with hexcrawls. The fun is hidden from the player and they must wrestle it out of the game like it was a grudge.

Horseshit, cowshit, pigshit, dogshit, and aardvarkshit.

For some of us with an attention span of more than six seconds, exploration IS the fun.

Of course this goes way back.  As early as 1976 some of the whiny dicks were complaining that the Origins tournament dungeon actually had empty rooms in it.

Waah waah waah waah fucking waah.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;859584Horseshit, cowshit, pigshit, dogshit, and aardvarkshit.

For some of us with an attention span of more than six seconds, exploration IS the fun.

Of course this goes way back.  As early as 1976 some of the whiny dicks were complaining that the Origins tournament dungeon actually had empty rooms in it.

Waah waah waah waah fucking waah.

Some people cannot see empty rooms for what they are- player resources.

Kind of reminds of that ambush scene from the movie Heartbreak Ridge.

Corporal 'Stitch' Jones: We're here for that, man. We've ambushed Major Powers three times, and always right here. We know what we're doing.

Highway: Well, shit-for-brains, who says we're gonna ambush Major Powers right here?


Empty rooms aren't interesting because of whats in them. They are interesting because of what players can make happen in them.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;858016And people wonder why the OSR can give the impression of "One True Way" thinking.

Funny double standard, the NSE (new school establishment) seeing things the other way getting a free pass. Apparently it's not OTW when you really slam just one way, eh?

Sort of like how crimes cease to get treated as crimes once you're stealing big enough?