Pausing to look up monster stats
Pausing to look up the map.
So why not take a cue from one-page dungeons without being literally one-page, putting everything you need to know to play in a given section of the adventure on one two-page spread?
Below - intentionally at low resolution for now - is how that has turned out. Beside the map is a section with minimal monster stats, and space below each monster listing to mark hit points or make notes. I'm a believer in letting DMs roll their own hit points, especially because systems disagree on what a monster hit die should be.
There's going to be a larger map that shows how all the sections hook up, and probably it's a good idea to put notes about which pages the passages off map lead to, once I have that arranged.
That's a really great idea. I like it.
ReplyDeleteHave you seen Stonehell? The format used there is very similar.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I have Stonehell and like its "multiple one-page dungeons" concept. This is my attempt to do something similar with a more freely drawn big map, longer descriptions and two-page spreads. Having the monster stats available is also important in play, as I've found.
DeleteI also prefer to have the monster stats as part of the spread. To make such a thing work, I think it's important to only include non-redundant information, however. For example:
Deletehttp://untimately.blogspot.com/2012/07/monster-defaults.html
Also, just to clarify for other readers, Stonehell does not use one page dungeons, it uses two page spreads with the left page containing the map and things like random encounter tables and the right page containing the room key.
I like it a lot. I find the one-page format a little too minimalistic for my needs. As already noted, Stonehell spread it out to a 2-page spread which I liked. This looks very promising Roger.
ReplyDeleteI've long liked using facing-page spread for areas of my dungeons, when I take the time for that degree of preparation.
ReplyDeleteFor instance, in the megadungeon I outlined recently, each of areas (nodes in the final result) could be expected to be 'several rooms' and presented on a two-page spread. There are exceptions (the Wolf Den and the Goblin Warren could probably each be put on a single spread), but in most cases each node would be a couple of facing pages.
Combine this with the sidebar reference system and you stand a decent chance of being able to handle most of the session directly from your notes, without referring to other books too much.
One thing I'd like to see is for each exit from the dungeon section to be labeled (such as IV-A) and for there to be a table showing what exits connect to what exits on the other sections (forex IV-A connects to V-A). That way a DM can rearrange the dungeon or add/delete sections just by modifying this connection table.
ReplyDeleteI prefer the one page spread (with a correspondingly smaller area mapped out) simply because the table we usually play on doesn't really have the space for a two-page spread (considering all the other junk I have to keep handy).
Something like the pointers to other pages is part of the plan, once I get the pagination settled. I see your point about the one page, for me I have a screen and plenty of table space, but if you're DMing behind a folded book then one page might work better. I also find it kind of difficult to chop some of the adventure areas that fine.
Delete