|
Post by vladtaltos on Apr 9, 2012 12:14:46 GMT -5
During a brief war game craze a few years ago, I became aware of this reviewer. I still check in on his reviews from time to time, and I discovered he's reviewed LAW and its introductory adventure, Orcs of the High Mountains; it's more an overview of LAW, and he only lightly touches on aspects of OHM. There's also a promise at the end of the episode to review the full-length adventure, Gates to the Underworld in the days ahead. www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfNTxqfnso0&feature=g-all-u&context=G2d0ba87FAAAAAAAAAAA
|
|
|
Post by mister frau blucher on Apr 11, 2012 8:58:04 GMT -5
Hey, vladtaltos,
I checked this out and I am really impressed. This guy obviously read through the rules thoroughly and grokked what we are doing with the system. I like that he actually played the OHM before he reviewed the system.
I've gotta say his amazon crew are in for a change of tone from OHM to Gates of the Underworld. I will be very interested in what he has to say!
Thanks for pointing this out!
Bret
|
|
|
Post by vladtaltos on Apr 14, 2012 8:11:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by vladtaltos on Apr 30, 2012 9:25:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mister frau blucher on May 1, 2012 14:28:41 GMT -5
That guy is great! He has very thoughtful commentary, that obviously arises from actual play.
My only complaint is that he did not show any of the battles or drama on the map! I'd be interested in seeing if he retrieved/destroyed the Blackstone in time!
Thanks again for pointing these out!
Bret
|
|
|
Post by kellvyn on May 16, 2012 9:49:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by darkscar on May 16, 2012 11:50:42 GMT -5
I love the way this reviewer pronounces the word “series,” but I’m from the Bayou so I guess I can’t say anything about strange word pronunciations.
Marco the reviewer does hit on something, though. I guess if there is one quibble I have about some of the modules is there is a tendency to favor hack-and-slash. Some are very combat heavy, and like Marco the reviewer, I prefer a more narrative, a more puzzly kind of adventure. I think the plotwords work great, especially the way they act as a kind of epilogue at the end of some adventures. But mood, atmosphere, suspense and tension-building leading up to some critical combats are what I like.
With that said, the writing quality is very good and I enjoy the adventures--hence me being a member of the board here--so, I think that aspect of play is something the writers can achieve.
|
|
|
Post by mister frau blucher on May 17, 2012 9:08:16 GMT -5
I agree with everything Marco says, but do see it a little differently. SOR was the first adventure I wrote for Dark City, a year before I met George and he invited me to become a partner (the compromising photos of him helped my case for such). It was an homage to Death Test, but at the same time, I remeber when I played DT and DT2 there were hints of the city of Ardonirane in the intro but nowhere else. The fights were disconnected from a larger narrative.
So with SOR I wanted to weave a lot more into the fights. The thieves' guild, the slavers' guild, the snacas preparing their return, the skeletons and lore of the mishapen dwarggs, of course the cultists of the worm god, the rebellion against Gomar, and the movement against the slavers - I put all this into the sewers so that you would see larger context while you try to save the child avatar. After that task is done, there are a series of further small encounters that explain each of these factors. That is, there is the main adventure and then flavor opportunities afterwards.
Marco sees this, but to him it is like two separate games. I thought it was a bit more integrated and interesting. Again, I think he is right, we just see it a bit differently. The other adventures I have written since do things a bit differently, like the Dark Vale and Emerald Twilight.
So, as usual, a very thoughtful review from Marco.
Darkscar - I thought he was actually talking about how the fights seemed more disassociated from the larger plot than the number of them, maybe I should watch it again.
But that is a larger topic, actually, that maybe deserves its own thread. We have always felt that there needs to be a certain number of combats for an adventure to have heft - if there is too much reading back and forth between paragraphs, and not enough action on the game map, that it is not satisfying. An example is Wolves on the Rhine. It is written very well, and there is a nice plot that you need to get to the bottom of, but because of the relatively few combats, it feels short. Now there is no magical healing (it is historical), so this is a bit out of necessity, and it does not diminish from how strongly written it is, but the majority of the feedback we have received indicates people wanted more action, that it went by too quick.
We talked a bit about this on our old boards, but maybe it should be discussed again. We generally feel and adventure should have 25-30 combats, and you will encounter 50-80% of these when playing through.
This is not to discount puzzles and plot; I think all of our adventures have a good number - but perhaps you want more?
Again, maybe the topic of combat and its frequency deserves its own thread.
Bret
|
|
|
Post by darkscar on May 17, 2012 14:27:04 GMT -5
You may be right, Bret. Marco might have been focusing on the association of fights to story. It just struck me for whatever the reason that, at times, he was talking about a heavy crunch of combats in SoR.
As a guestimate, in DCG adventures, I’d say I hit about 11-16 fights a game. At times it seems heavy, at times it seems okay. Maybe it’s those games where I hit 13-16 fights it begins to feel heavy for me. The lightest module I’ve played so far is in Blood in the Dust. I may have had only 9 or 10 fights, something like that, and I thought, "Ah, that was about the right number of fights." But each person will probably have their own preferences for this kind of thing.
The movement-to-combat ratio is where it really hits me in regards to a given module being hack-and-slash or not. When my team moves a step or two and there’s a fight, another step or two and there’s a fight, two steps-fight, this constant, steady stream of fights, one after the other, feels hack-and-slash to me, and as a consequence, the game becomes less enjoyable.
So, that’s my thoughts about it. The gray area for me would appear to be modules where the game’s hitting that 13th, 14th, 15th, 16th fight where it becomes too much. Or that Move-Fight-Move-Fight-Move-Fight formula.
As for my likes: colorful NPCs to talk to, tension-building, a clue here, an item there, the hint of something terrible around the corner, the mysterious, and in general not always showing your hand by hitting the players with a steady diet of combats can go a long way to a great adventure. "Fear of the Unknown" as Lovecraft once put it, is Man’s biggest Fear. My two pennies.
Anyway, I don’t want to hijack Vlad’s thread here, so if you wish to make another thread about module design, that would be fine (but maybe we’ve talked it to completeness already).
|
|
|
Post by vladtaltos on May 17, 2012 17:43:31 GMT -5
Anyway, I don’t want to hijack Vlad’s thread here, so if you wish to make another thread about module design, that would be fine (but maybe we’ve talked it to completeness already). Hijack away if you wish! Interesting discussion.
|
|
|
Post by vladtaltos on May 28, 2012 8:30:15 GMT -5
|
|
zot
New Member
Posts: 19
|
Post by zot on May 31, 2012 13:56:36 GMT -5
I just found these vid reviews and then checked here before posting about them. What about putting links to the reviews on the home page?
Bill
|
|
|
Post by mister frau blucher on May 31, 2012 15:28:08 GMT -5
Thanks, vlad! Glad he liked the adventure. That time limit before your oxygen is gone lights a fire under everyone!
|
|
|
Post by mister frau blucher on May 31, 2012 15:32:31 GMT -5
I just found these vid reviews and then checked here before posting about them. What about putting links to the reviews on the home page? Bill Hello, Bill, and welcome to the boards! Post whatever you want to about the video reviews or the adventures, or game system, that you fee like! Putting links to those reviews might be a good idea. My only concern - is it rude to do that? I certainly respect his insight and honesty, and I would hate to make him feel as if we are treating him like a spokesman by posting links to his reviews on our main site. But maybe I am overthinking this? I'll talk it over with George, and then we might email Marco to make sure he is comfortable with it. Thanks for the idea, and welcome again! Bret
|
|
|
Post by darkscar on Jun 2, 2012 10:00:08 GMT -5
Another interesting thing about solo adventures Marco hits on here (in VS57) is replay value. I've had similar thoughts myself. My first experience with solo adventures was with the Tunnels and Trolls rpg. T&T's solos really wanted to have a high replay value, but this comes at a bit of a price. For example, it wasn't uncommon for a T&T solo to have approx. 180-300 references, but the player could finish the solo in about 30 minutes (this way my experience in a lot of their solos). Their idea, I suppose, was to give the player multiple new, fresh plays before they exhausted the solo. In the end, this was a bit unsatisfying for me and I gradually turned away from T&T solos because no one run-through an adventure was particularly memorable, or gave a great or even good gaming experience. Of course, YMMV to any T&T fans out there.
On the other end of the spectrum, you had the Fighting Fantasy series of solo gamebooks, which were all 400 paragraphs (with a couple of exceptions) and it took 2-3 hours to play through. It was a great experience, perfect blend of fiction and dice-rolling. But the drawback here was that after one play, you'd essentially played 75+% of the book and you weren't likely to encounter many new things if you played through it again.
This is a tough thing I think for any solo adventure to address, that balance of being able to be replayed to providing a lasting, memorable good-to-great gaming experience.
How does DCG view this question and how do they address it?
|
|