|
Post by darkscar on Jul 30, 2012 9:21:49 GMT -5
This is a good point. The DCG adventures are mostly hack and slash with some writing thrown in :-) The above was from another thread. I'm posting it in this thread because, well, I'm guess I'm sticking my neck on the chopping block and making a suggestion to the fine folks at DCG Games...or at least some food for thought... Has there ever been a consideration to do the opposite? An adventure that focused more on creative writing aspects, setting, atmosphere, mood, character dialogue, NPC interaction? I think you could still have a good number of fights, 10 or so, but put more of an emphasis on those things that make a good short story. I have a few of the games and I don't think it would be a problem for the writers to utilize those elements (in other words, it seems to me the writers have the creative talent to do that). I think I touched on this in a previous post, but got the impression it's a sore spot amongst the DCG folks, or was at one time so I dropped it. But anyway, generally, I think if a few combats were sacrificed to the gods of creative writing, they might be more fulfilling for folks. That's my suggestion, now I'm running away before those 2d6+1 wolves are set on me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2012 13:37:56 GMT -5
This is a good point. The DCG adventures are mostly hack and slash with some writing thrown in :-) The above was from another thread. I'm posting it in this thread because, well, I'm guess I'm sticking my neck on the chopping block and making a suggestion to the fine folks at DCG Games...or at least some food for thought... Has there ever been a consideration to do the opposite? An adventure that focused more on creative writing aspects, setting, atmosphere, mood, character dialogue, NPC interaction? I think you could still have a good number of fights, 10 or so, but put more of an emphasis on those things that make a good short story. I have a few of the games and I don't think it would be a problem for the writers to utilize those elements (in other words, it seems to me the writers have the creative talent to do that). I think I touched on this in a previous post, but got the impression it's a sore spot amongst the DCG folks, or was at one time so I dropped it. But anyway, generally, I think if a few combats were sacrificed to the gods of creative writing, they might be more fulfilling for folks. That's my suggestion, now I'm running away before those 2d6+1 wolves are set on me. hooowwwwwlllll!!!! i'll stick my neck out too and say that most of the DCG adventures already have creative writing, setting, atmosphere, and mood. hack-n-slash does not preclude those qualities. i think most RPGs are hack-n-slash. i would be interested in hearing of one that isn't. if there's combat with die-rolling, there's hack-n-slash. if you take the combat and die-rolling out, you have a choose-your-own-adventure book. of course, it's all a matter of balance. i think the DCG adventures have a good balance, but perhaps a little less combats and more other stuff would be better. NPC interaction... do you have any examples of the types of NPC interaction you desire? i have some ideas but they may be different than yours. character dialogue... i have no idea what you mean, unless it falls under NPC interaction.
|
|
|
Post by mister frau blucher on Jul 30, 2012 14:24:38 GMT -5
Hey darkscar (and howling ewookie),
Not a sore spot at all, or if I gave that impression, my apologies. Always happy to consider everything.
I have played around with this idea a bit - a preponderance of social encounters as opposed to tactical encounters. There were a few problems for me. Not the actual writing of the encounters - I have been writing stories since the '80's - but the way it plays out. Even if you are making choices, and some non-combat die rolls, it still feels like you are being narrated to, rather than actually playing, doing a lot of page-flipping.
Now that being said, we are not ruling anything out, and we are not so set in our ways that we won't try new ways to do things. There would be some potential scenarios that this might work, like a murder mystery. Investigation of grounds, interviewing suspects, etc. My main concern is that this kind of advanture would play so fast, compared to our others. The most criticism we have received from customers have been concerning adventures that felt too thin, that are too short. These criticisms seem to be linked directly to number of combats. The majority of feedback we have received on writing and atmosphere and npc's have been very positive (thanks for your kind words above!).
But maybe there is a way that it could be done, and we have not figured out the proper blend/ratio/path to do it.
I'll give this some more thought, darkscar. If you have some suggesstions about implementation in a substantial manner, please pass them on, either here or by pm. I would appreciate your specific thoughts!
Thanks for bringing this up!
Bret
|
|
|
Post by darkscar on Aug 1, 2012 9:52:41 GMT -5
I'll give this some more thought, darkscar. If you have some suggesstions about implementation in a substantial manner, please pass them on, either here or by pm. I would appreciate your specific thoughts! Thanks for bringing this up! Bret Thanks for the feedback, Bret. It helps to see the things that have to be considered in these games. I made my suggestion based on the criticism that kind of keeps coming up in DCG adventures, and that is some of them seem to be too combat intensive for some people's liking. Based on George's recent post, he seemed to acknowledge and accept this, saying DCG games were "hack and slash with some writing thrown in," which certainly makes it sound like creative writing elements take a back seat to presenting combats. I'm not sure that's a good thing. As for specific ways of implementing a change, I definitely like the mystery aspects you mentioned. Blood in the Dust has mystery elements in it, and I think they worked well in the game. When I played through the game a couple of times, I think my crew had 9-11 fights, which I thought was a perfect balance between combats and investigating the story aspects of the game. Other games I played had 14-16 fights and I felt like I was slogging through one fight after another, having less fun. But to each their own, as they say. I like BitD for the lack of fights, comparatively speaking, and really being able to get immersed in the story through those mystery elements. I don't understand the criticism that there is too much page-flipping in what is essentially a solo gamebook. I understand what you're saying, but how can you have a solo gamebook and not page flip? I've played many, many solo gamebooks, and never had that thought (not that others wouldn't, but I guess that's why I don't understand that criticism). If the games feel too thin why not have a mystery styled game last longer, say 400 or so paragraphs. I have noticed DCG games (well, the ones I have anyway) have between 200-300 entries. I know other solo gamebooks, at times, have 400+ entries. The longest one I've ever seen came in a little over 1000 entries. If it feels too thin, can't they be made a little longer? Is there a certain length of real time DCG adventures shoot for? 3+ hours or more? Combats are an easy way to drive the playing time of a game up, but if you did decide to go another route, maybe make the gamebooks longer, incorporating those mystery or interpersonal elements you've mentioned. Thats all I've got, Bret. Thanks for listening and responding.
|
|
|
Post by mister frau blucher on Aug 1, 2012 11:30:45 GMT -5
Hey darkscar,
Thanks for your detailed thoughts. I hope you don't mind if I respond in a bit more detail...
"Based on George's recent post, he seemed to acknowledge and accept this, saying DCG games were "hack and slash with some writing thrown in," which certainly makes it sound like creative writing elements take a back seat to presenting combats. I'm not sure that's a good thing."
George was being a little tongue and cheek (the smiley-thing gives it away), but yes, there are some criticisms along those lines. But there are also people who tell us they love the balance between writing and combat. The thing here that is absolutely not true is that writing takes a backseat to presenting combats. I think our adventures speak for themselves as far as the quality of writing and the plots themselves. Yes combats are important, but if all we cared about was prestenting combats, we would have two adventures coming out every month. It would be easy to string a bunch of fights together. But it is not easy to come up with a compelling adventure and quality prose, one that engages a person. That is why writing these are difficult, and we are very proud of what we have done. I know this is the internet, and all it takes is one phrase taken out of context, and a few people who have played only one of our adventures to chime in with "yeah!" and all of a sudden we hate role playing, and combats are all we care about. But it is demonstarbly inaccurate.
Not that that is what you are explicitly stating, but I want to dispel that notion. Combats are important to us and our customers - the majority of whom communicate directly with george and I by email rather than the boards - but if that is all we cared about, we wouldn't have any customers.
And, most importantly, the depth of the plots we create and the quality of the writing itself should dispel this notion. Particularly those in the Redpoint canon, which all build on the situations, places, races, and people introduced before, culminating in Emerald Twilight. Combat is not the reason people care about those adventures.
We aim for about 20-25 combat encounters, and expect a player to encounter maybe about 15 of them. For most, this is a good balance between reading and playing on the tabletop. Not everybody, of course, some want less and some want more (yes, people have asked for more!), but this is where most people feel they are getting a solid return on their time/money investment, based on the total feedback we have received.
Page-flipping: I guess you could characterize this as a gamebook, but programmed adventures actually pre-dated them by a few years. Buffalo Castle for Tunnels and Trolls was the first, in 1975). I played programmed adventures before gamebooks, but I have run through a bunch of gamebooks, and that is why I feel there is a distinction, but maybe it is greater in my eyes than it really is. But the biggest problem I found in going through most of those was the constant back-and-forth without any tactical break. Don't get me wrong, I love the plots and mysteries, but I generally felt like I was being narrated to and directed than actually choosing and deciding my fate myself. My favorites were the four Sorcery! books from the mid '80's, but even then I felt more like a passenger. Our ganes are explicitly designed to be more immersive. I feel our writing and plotting is as strong or stronger than those, and the ability to determine the outcome tactically is an advantage.
Again, this is my opinion, shared by a substantial part of our fanbase (but not all), but I realize it is difficult to be objective about your own work, so maybe I am totally full of doo-doo. (If so, it will sadly not be the first time!)
As far as number of entries, we are physically limited page-wise by our printing process. We have talked to dozens of printers over the years, even worked with a few, but quality control is something we need to maintain, and other printers we have worked with - that might have allowed for larger books - could not meet our standards, nor be accountable for their work once paid. We could certainly increase entries by cutting back on their depth, but here is the thing: just about every entry we write has something to distinguish it. We don't have mere connecting passages, or at least very few, we put something interesting in them. George told me back in '06 after I submitted Sewers of Redpoint that every entry should serve a purpose, and we try to do that. I don't think number of entries - or even length of the book - is indicative of quality. And I know you are not stating that it is, darkscar, just saying why number of entries is less important from my perspective than the depth of the adventure itself. The amount of writing can add to the depth, but it can also lead to just being a passenger that is being narrated to.
As far as time, hard to say as people read and play at different speeds. Combats certainly drive up the time, but that is not their function. I think a minimum of eight hours on any adventure I write, but over ten is better. Raid on Cygnosa should take closer to 15 or more, and that is definitely our longest, most intensive adventure.
Anyway, darkscar, thanks for your feedback. People arrive here from different backgrounds, and with different expectations, and you have given me a chance to expound a bit. I appreciate the candor, and we take your words seriously, even if we might view things a little differently. We want to be a strong publisher, so if our customer base shifts their expectations and desires, we want to stay abreast of it. There are a few voices here that feel 15 is too many combats, and we do take it seriously - I am not trying to justiy what we do, just explain it.
Please don't take this as a refutation of your viewpoint, which I respect! We know we can't please everyone, but we still want to try! I'll be thinking about what you said.
Bret
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2012 13:43:22 GMT -5
i would like to state for the record, that i do hate role-playing...but i think i have different definition than everyone else. i will define that in a moment. first, i want to make clear that 'combat' is not all i care about. it should be obvious from many of my many posts that combat in these games gives me trouble. a little less combats or a little easier combats or less costly healing spells would make me happy. combat is not all i care about. i don't care about it at all. i like finding things, discovering things, and figuring things out. my definition of role-playing is something like: "my character, Imtusexy Formyshirt, bows before the queen and says, 'Forgive me Your Grace, High Queen of the Land, for I have a humble request to make of thee. Dost thou have any Grey Poupon?'" so, yeah, i hate role-playing because that's what REAL role-playing is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2012 4:40:01 GMT -5
This is a good point. The DCG adventures are mostly hack and slash with some writing thrown in :-) i'm not sure why george re-phrased it that way. here was my original statement he was referring to: what i should have said (and what i meant) is that DCG games have a lot of flavor and creative writing with some hack-n-slash thrown in. however, after spending the last few days looking into Tunnels & Trolls, i am very sorry that i used the term 'hack-n-slash' anywhere near DCG games. T&T taught me what REAL 'hack-n-slash' is. it reminded of some old DOS/BASIC program i found in a TRS80 book and typed in and played back in the 80s. i'm not knocking it. there are times when i would prefer something like that...but comparing T&T with LAW is like comparing Pac-man with Diablo3. LAW is much more immersive and rich than the sampling i tasted of T&T when it comes to solo play.
|
|
|
Post by mister frau blucher on Aug 6, 2012 9:33:52 GMT -5
Thanks for the thoughtful comments, ewookie! There are definitely some examples of hack and slash in our games, so I can see why people would comment on it. But despite LAW being a tactical game, the plot of the adventures is the main focus. Otherwise, we would put out two a month with nothing but battles. That would not be fun!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2012 20:19:23 GMT -5
Thanks for the thoughtful comments, ewookie! There are definitely some examples of hack and slash in our games, so I can see why people would comment on it. But despite LAW being a tactical game, the plot of the adventures is the main focus. Otherwise, we would put out two a month with nothing but battles. That would not be fun! actually, i think this could be fun on a once a month scale. small, $5 adventures of equal length and proportion as OHM or TSM. i don't know how many 'introductory adventure' submissions you guys get. they could be drawn from that....'nanoquests' might be a good way to find your pdf footing as well. perhaps it could grow into a monthly or semi-monthly magazine or newsletter with a yearly subscription.
|
|
|
Post by jimmyd on Nov 19, 2012 13:31:06 GMT -5
I would LOVE to see, and would definitely buy, a GM module type of adventure or campaign. I have been using "The Crown of Kings" as a GM'd module and find it difficult to use for two reasons.
The first is the jumping around required in a pre-programmed adventure. I had to redraw out the map with all of the options for each room (and only those options that were pertinent) in order to get a clear picture of the adventure.
The second is that lots of background information is missing or scattered about the book making it hard for the GM (that's me) to keep a comprehensive understanding of what is going on. I had to bounce through the book several times in order to get a thorough understanding of the adventure.
Have you considered making module versions of the pre-programmed adventures that you already have completed? I would be interested in that... but I don't know how others would react.
Please note that the above wishes are not criticisms.. your adventures are a God-send and have allowed me to share my age old passion of TFT with my son and his friends. I will be ever in your debt because of that.
I would love to see an adventure with lots of background information... because that's what makes an adventure interesting.
BTW, I will post my map and play-aids on the COK forum so that others can benefit. The work is already done.
-JimmyD
|
|
|
Post by mister frau blucher on Nov 20, 2012 9:16:12 GMT -5
Hey JimmyD,
Welcome to the boards!
Thank you for your feedback. Believe me, we don't take it as criticism. All of your thoughts and comments are welcome.
As to the concept of issuing gamemaster versions of our adventures - interesting thought. I hadn't really thought about it before, but we do know how difficult it can be for a gm to extract the info from the adventure, given its presentation.
I am a bit intrigued by this, as it would revitalize our backstock a bit. I am not sure, as you point out, how others would react. If we re-wrote an adventure in this fashion, and sold about four or five copies, it might not be worth it. But then again, that is four or five customers we may not have had otherwise...
Food for thought. maybe we can get some feedback on this.
I hope you will like the upcoming adventure - the background is one of the key features. (More later!)
I would love to see your play aids for COK - let me know if you have any problem with them.
Thanks again for the kind and thoughtful words, and welcome!
Bret
|
|
|
Post by gigglestick on Nov 20, 2012 9:56:01 GMT -5
Well, I assume that most of the deisngers have some sort of outline that might be a primer for GMs. I recently picked up a TnT programmed adventure that had the programmed part in the beginning and then an appendix with quick notes on the layout and monsters in the adventures. That would be easy enough to do, especially if you link the appendix notes with the proper entries in the programmed part for GM use. Some of the new maps that George and Bret have been including in some of their adventures kind of do that already.
|
|
|
Post by mister frau blucher on Nov 20, 2012 10:23:19 GMT -5
The outlines are not always in publishable form - mine are rough as heck, and get messier as it develops and changes.
The problem with putting extensive notes in the back showing the structure of the adventure, is that it takes away from pages that could be devoted to the adventure itself - unless i am misunderstanding the size of the notes. Which Tunnels and Trolls adventure did you get? Always happy to improve things...
The maps the last few years have been included for several purposes, among them aids when lost and assisting gamemasters, but COK's maps were rough and I can see how they are not the easiest to follow.
|
|
|
Post by jimmyd on Nov 21, 2012 19:00:04 GMT -5
Thanks for the warm welcome Bret. I have uploaded two files in the COK section of the posts. I hope they are helpful to people. I can upload a non-Excel version of the monster listing if anyone prefers that format.
-JimmyD
|
|
|
Post by necrogamer on Feb 9, 2013 23:39:59 GMT -5
I would LOVE to see, and would definitely buy, a GM module type of adventure or campaign. Have you considered making module versions of the pre-programmed adventures that you already have completed? I would be interested in that... but I don't know how others would react. -JimmyD Why not publish some conversion notes for running your popular adventures with a GM? These should include a map and notes to help a GM. What I mean is that your GM materials should supplement and enhance an already published solitaire adventure. You can either provide this supplementary material in an electronic or print format. I like to run my friends through the adventures, so I would pay for the supplementary materials.
|
|