DnD Map 2
What went right?
Things went smoothly but not in the way it should have gone. For the good part of it, I stayed within the time limit. The players went through the map smoothly. They experienced the map almost to a hundred percent of its entirety. The checkpoint and items aspect were used.
What went wrong?
What went wrong would be that the map felt a bit easy. The enemies aside from the boss weren't too difficult, they were defeated within three to four turns. I didn't really choose items that would help the players. They didn't do much overall and were almost useless. My script wasn't solid, I would improv most of the scenes My map was too linear and didn't stretch long enough for range to play much of a factor in combat or encounters.
How might you improve your map next time?
I should have made my own items that would fit the map as well as revising the map to be able to use the items provided in the rules. I also need a solid script to fall on. Most importantly, I need to think less about the tutorial because I made this map a bit too easy. The playtesters stated that this map felt like a somewhat difficult tutorial map. I could have probably made the enemies stronger and give them more abilities instead of just straight-forward attacking. Lastly, I need to make my map less linear, like my last map, the critical path is obvious and continues in a straight line.
Were enemies appropriate to the player "level"?
The boss was difficult as it should be but the other enemies were fairly easy. I should have made the attack and defense of the other enemies higher. Or they could have had abilities that made them stronger. The boss might need to be weaker as it's abilities are already a bit overpowered.
Were there appropriate teaching mechanisms for new items?
The players weren't taught to "use" the items. The items were just given and the items themselves did not have any impact on the level. They were pretty useless aside from two events. One was continuing to the main hall where the goggles allowed players to see the enemies and potential allies in the room. If they did not see them, the players would have needed to battle more enemies but the items are given were obvious and any player could have gotten it if they actually explored instead of going straight to the hallway. The other item was the boots of retreat. Since the enemies were easy to defeat, the players did not use the item up until they reached the boss and retreat from the boss because of consistent bad-rolls (but the boss was already low enough to die if they rolled a 4 or higher).
Was it obvious where players we supposed to go?
Yes, the map was too linear for a medium-level map. There were only three main rooms connected to each other in a straight line. I have no clue how I missed that when I was making the map. Perhaps it's because my own train of thought is too linear.
How was the overall flow?
It was good, though there were long pauses where I did mental math in my head (that usually takes a while) to figure out how much damage enemies did or how much health they had left. However, I could have really improved the map by creating a solid script or giving enemies more abilities as well as giving the player more abilities/choices. I hope I can do better next time, especially for the tiered map as it's a group project. I wouldn't want to fail my team.
Simple DnD Map Version 2
What went right?
Things went smoother this time since I have a "script" or something to fall back on and I was more keen on what I was supposed to do. I also added a "grid" to my map, though it doesn't really change the gameplay. Again, my map's overall layout was simple, there were not many turns or twist. The core path was linear, only diverting for side rooms that weren't part of the main path. Players start off in the Tomb of the Dead. Just a starting area for the players to get their bearings and try out different actions like perception and interacting with the door which opens to the Hall of Reeds. There were three weak skeleton enemies for the players to fight as a tutorial enemy. They have fairly weak stats. All with 1 point in attack and 2 in defense. Each skeleton has 5 health. The players had no trouble defeating them. The boss was a bit harder. This boss could hit both players. It's stats were 3 attack and 2 defense with 10 health. One of the players died but the other managed to kill the boss. It's still a bit strong but at the same time, both players lasted a fairly good length of time. It could have been because of luck and rolls. The length of the map was good, the players finished around 18 minutes.
What went wrong?
Nothing went wrong in my opinion. Maybe I should have weakened the boss but that defeats the point of a boss. I could have added more interactivity to the map but there wasn't much to do for the first set of rules.
How might you improve your map next time?
I could add more interactivity to the map, let the players explore more. Maybe even add lore and backstory?
Were the challenges presented appropriate to the introductory/tutorial nature of the level?
More or less, the same as the last playtest. I tweaked the monsters to be a bit weaker but the results and gameplay felt the same. Mainly because the dice rolls and luck plays a large factor in these things.
Was it obvious where players we supposed to go?
Yep, the map is linear and the only thing that diverted the players from the main path would be the side rooms but those are optional. Players do not need to go to those rooms to complete the map. The map is one long path comprised of three sections. One is the spawn room where the players start in, it's empty and used for the purpose of letting the players figure out basic motor controls such as movement and observation. The second room is for tutorial combat, it's a long hallway so the players with range ability and players with melee only could test out their attacks depending on their location. Though I doubt it really helps because both the enemies and players can move and then attack. If anything a ranger could snipe the first enemy to engage in combat.
How was the overall flow?
Since our group was the same group from the last/first playtest, we already knew what to expect. Perhaps that why there wasn't much feedback that was effective. However, it's nice to see the improvements everyone has made and because it's the same group we can tell what kind of changes were made to the maps and what improvements there are. Everything went smoothier this time so we finished fairly early.
Simple DnD Map Version 1
What went right?
My map's overall layout was fairly simple, there were not many turns or twist. I wanted the first map to be more linear and catered to being a tutorial level for the players. The first area (aside from the spawn area) is the Hall of Reeds. There were three weak skeleton enemies for the players to fight as a tutorial enemy. The playtesters had no problems defeating them. The boss was both right and wrong. It might have been a bit strong but at the same time, the players lasted a fairly good length of time. This could have been both the impact on the dice rolls and luck, however. The length of my map was also fairly good. The players got through it around 20 minutes.
What went wrong?
The part that went wrong was that my map lacked squares, making it a bit more difficult to navigate and the combat didn't apply the range rule with the classes. The map was also more basic, it didn't give obstacles aside from enemies for the player to interact with. Also, I have never played DnD before so getting into DM-ing was rough at first. I didn't write a script to fall back on so the storytelling wasn't as smooth as I intended it to be. I didn't know we had to give similar stats to the enemies so the combat was wonky. I wasn't exactly sure how combat worked so I had to quickly learn and calculate the rolls and stats.
How might you improve your map next time?
The feedback I received from this playtest was extremely helpful. For future playtest and to improve my map I'll be adding grids so the players can use the range advantages of the ranger class as well as having the immersion of the map in terms of length. I'll do better with storytelling and definitely make sure to add stats to my enemies beforehand. Having a script on hand to fall to would be nice too.
Were the challenges presented appropriate to the introductory/tutorial nature of the level?
I gave out challenges that I thought were appropriate for an introductory level. The first enemies that the players encounter were three skeletons each with a defense of 1 and attack of 2. They weren't extremely weak but not strong either. Though my weak dice rolls also made them a very easy challenge, most of the time I rolled numbers lower than 4 which made the enemies very pitiful. Regardless they served their purpose as fodder. However, the next enemy was a small boss with a defense of 3 and an attack of 3. It wasn't too difficult, the playtesters spent a fair amount of time in combat with this boss. However, at the end with the last standing player and the boss near death, I luckily rolled a 6 on the boss's attack turn and defeated the last remaining player. It was a very close fight and I felt it was fair.
Was it obvious where players we supposed to go?
Yes, the layout was more on the linear side. There were only three main rooms and it's lined in a linear path. There are two other rooms that were meant for items (one for an armor piece and one for a weapon) but I later learned they were not necessary for this current version of a DnD map.
How was the overall flow?
For a first map, things went pretty smoothly. Mainly it was thanks to a playtester who had DnD experience to explain things to me and the other playtester, both who have never played DnD. He was extremely help in explaining the enemies and how combat worked because those were the two parts me and the other playtester had trouble grasping. Things could have gone smoother if I had a solid script and enemy stats starting this campaign. But regardless, things went better than expected for a first run.
