The Forge Archives

Dungeons/Dummies Threads:
[Dungeons/Dummies] Dungeon Design 101 (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=13310)
[Dungeons/Dummies]Rough Draft 1: The Imps (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=13280)

Cruising along with the design of D/D and actually preparing for some playtesting tonight, I'm running headlong into Adventurers and Monsters now!

Both differ from Imps in one major respect: they're both expendable. Whereas Imps are effectivly immortal, Adventurers MUST die and Monsters CAN die.

Big Question 1: D/D is, at its core, a comedy of bumbling idiots. Should I: A) Make it an over-the-top, cartoony game and system or should I B) Remain close to the genre of high-fantasy/dungeon crawls but with a little bit of warpage?
Normally yes, this is a designer preference question, but I want to see what others think when reading over this and what kind of feel you get. Its not as important for the Adventurers as it is the Monsters as I plan on subscribing to over-blown stereotypes for the Adventurers, but the Monsters can really affect the flavor.
Do you want to have the Imps brush the horrifying Fearsome Demon's teeth before sending it out to battle for the day or do you want to sic Leptocay Leftius Podia Apparellum (Socks, the left sock stealing demon) upon unsuspecting heroes?
Anywho, onto actual mechanics!

Mechanics, as they stand

Adventurers- Adventurers have a basic mechanic that is a reverse of the Imps: they roll 2d6 with a Target Number starting at 2, but the must roll higher than the TN. With each success, the bar is raised 1 point. Imps can also try to interfere and raise it 1 to 2 points, just like they do with their own Challenge Checks.
Reason behind the switch: Heroes are generally successful in all they do, but they do occasionally fail. The Imp's mechanic is a perfect illustration of certain Failure with possibility of Success, so the reverse is a good example of certain Success with the chance of Failure.
Adventurers also have HP, measured slightly differently. I'm not going to get into extreme specifics on Adventurer stats (Stats, armor classes, skills etc) because more often than not I see many enouncters being glossed over. Those that aren't, the DM can go ahead and tack on skills or what not (may include rules or a splat on Adventurers, using some traditional D&D concepts...why not? Tis the father of the Dungeon Crawl is it not?) Anyhow, An Adventurers life is based on failures- so many failures and they die, whether they botch a puzzle (which is likely to have some kind of consequence) or in combat with a Monster.

Monsters - Monsters, as far as stats, rolls and whatnot, function as Adventuers. They will have HP of their own as well.
Monsters also have a Reputation Rating of their own, which is conferred to the Dungeon under Maiming value (need better names...), as well as a point cost. Monsters will also have a Point Cost and a Reputation Requirement- meaning until a Dungeon has reached a certain Rep level, it will refuse to live and 'work' there. They can also have other requirements which the Imps must meet to keep the monster there (Specific diet or living conditions, certain pay off in treasure, favors, etc)
Each will also have a special ability, such as the Dire Rabbits ability to breed large numbers (Roll 1d6 at the end of each Scenario for each Pair. On a 1 or 6, nothing happens. On anything else, that many Dire Rabbits are born.)

Equipment - Adventurers and Monsters will also have equipment which will help out rolls.

I think thats the brain drain of the moment. Thus I leave with these questions and a quote from the Adventurer portion of the current draft:
- Does the game benefit from a comedic setting AND creatures or does it benefit more from serious creatures and what not with comedic happenings?
- How much detail should Adventurers have?

Quote from: D/D Manual
Archer
Primary Abilities: Shoots Good Arrows
The token Elf. It is almost impossible for a fantasy campaign to be run without the token Archer Elf, who is almost included in every party. Stereotypically snooty and smarter than the Fighter-hero of the party, Elves also, according to the Great Fantasy Cliché, warm up to their human or dwarf companions eventually, pledging their lives to their newfound friends cause.
The Archer is the only race-specific class for Adventurers. Because, face it, Human or Dwarf Archers simply aren’t as cool.

To answer big question 1:

I prefer B: close to the original, but with warpage. Over-the-top-humour starts to bore after a while, subtle humour has more lasting appeal (although one could wonder if a group would play 10 sessions of D/D?).

I could see the adventurers taking themselves really seriously, but given the goal of DEVO, that is doomed to failure anyway. I would probably like your game less if socks was around - but that's me.

So, on your rephrase: I prefer slightly-less serious than normal surroundings, with comic things happening. Also take a look at what was done with universalis - that started with some things tightly defined, since the thought was that drift towards looser structure would natural.

On adventurer mechanics and detail: I like the mechanics, especially your reasoning on failure. on detail: less detail than the imps. Or, phrased differently: enough detail to make it hilarious for the imp players when the adventurers hit the traps/dungeon.

Curious as to the results of your playtest!

Hmmkay, slight progress with Monsters (and in turn, Reps I think)

Monsters will follow this basic formula:

Name Cost: Cost in Points
HP - X
Rep - X per Y (for generic creatures)
Abilities - Any special abilities
Quote Any interesting quote from the creature(s)

IE (for some reason I like these guys)
Dire Rabbits Cost: 3 pts. per pair
HP - 1 per
Rep - 1 per 100
Abilities Roll 1d6 at the end of each Scenario. On a 1 or 6 nothing happens. On any other roll, that many Dire Rabbits are born.
Quote "Grrrr..."

One Eyed Troll Cost: (8 or 10) per
HP - 5
Rep - 1 per 5
Ability Regenerate 1 HP per round of combat. If in combat with other 1ET's, a 1 or 6 on any die results in the Troll hitting another Troll.
Quote "Can't see too good, but I works cheap!"

Combat, as mentioned above, is a series of rolls 2d6 vs. a TN, starting at 2 and escalating on each success by 1. Imps can, through 'cheerleading' (who put it that way? I like that!) use their own Imp Points to lower a Monster's TN.
On a successful Adventurer attack, a Monster can opt to roll to block, same roll (need a name for that!) , which however raises their own chances to blow it.

Rules will also be provided for players who would rather gloss over the whole thing and just look at the 'outcome' (how many monsters die, how much treasure is missing etc).

BUT, in terms of content, is this too much or too little by comparison to the Imps?