CFD 2012: Discussion thread (Submission Thread Link Within)

[Edsploration]

As I noted, I would prefer stairs because I think going down them feels more like progress than stepping into a teleporter. If the only issue with them is the limits on the starting and ending points, and you're willing to use teleporters anyway, you could just port the party from the first room to the actual start of the level and from exit to the last room (and vice versa). All you'd need to do is reserve room for the stairwell at the right location, and 3x5 tiles should suffice for that.

All that said, if stairs are deemed too troublesome, I think I can live with using teleporters.

I considered this, but there are still issues. Stairs would have to be on both the upper and lower designer's levels to fit. If a teleporter was above or below, the stairs would have to be replaced with teleporters. If you consider 4 cases of tele above, tele below; stairs above, tele below; tele above, stairs below, and stairs above stairs below:

• Only the T/T case has the pros of teleporters, cons of stairs.
• Only the S/S case has the pros of stairs, cons of teleporters.
• Both T/S and S/T cases have the cons of both.

So I think it's best we all stick to one system. Of course a designer is free to use stairs within their 2 dungeon levels, so the player will be sure to have the experience of finding a down staircase sometimes.

I'm very glad contributors won't need to manually name every single pillar and torch holder. The question is, how well does your system work with names used in connectors and scripts? At the very least I'm pretty sure it can't replace names parsed together from multiple components within the scripts. If/when it can't replace everything, there has to be a way to leave some names as they are: replace only names with conflicts, don't replace names beginning with designer's name, or something else along those lines. Or only use it for levels where it works fine and require complete manual naming for the rest.

Specifically the "corner cases" arise when:

1. Strings look like ID's, but are not. I think this case is rare, and easily avoided with a find-all and skim-through before a find-replace. Backups before and after would be a must, so it shouldn't be a problem.
2. As you said, names parsed from multiple components when the underscore and number are not adjacent in the script, which is likely for counting variables parsed into strings and concatenated. This is the toughest case and may need some private message exchanges with the original author to resolve. But I figured it's better to make it simple for the majority, than a bit more work for the passionate.
   It'd be best to add a note about this issue so people would know to avoid it.

I was actually planning on giving some experience as reward for solving the puzzles. The amount is of course easily adjustable to whatever suits the dungeon. Even without quest XP, puzzle levels really need to be assigned a place in the dungeon before their final versions are submitted so that itemization can be tuned to fit.

You caught me red-handed with something I overlooked here! So the puzzle tier would have to be based on itemization level. Perhaps the tier would be based on something like the median SL out of weapons provided on that level? I think that would be more accurate than basing it on armor provided, or items in general. And then XP limits would apply based on that tier.

I do want to make a point that XP limits are only upper-bound. You could easily have 7 submissions in the same tier as long as there is still room for XP.

So, do you think median weapon SL is the best way to rate a "typical dungeon level" by item content? I may have to add something like this to my Custom Dungeon Analyzer...

[SpiderFighter]

Of course a designer is free to use stairs within their 2 dungeon levels, so the player will be sure to have the experience of finding a down staircase sometimes.

They're in mine (between two floors), so they'll at least see one set.

You caught me red-handed with something I overlooked here! So the puzzle tier would have to be based on itemization level. Perhaps the tier would be based on something like the median SL out of weapons provided on that level? I think that would be more accurate than basing it on armor provided, or items in general. And then XP limits would apply based on that tier.

I do want to make a point that XP limits are only upper-bound. You could easily have 7 submissions in the same tier as long as there is still room for XP.

So, do you think median weapon SL is the best way to rate a "typical dungeon level" by item content? I may have to add something like this to my Custom Dungeon Analyzer...

I was wondering about this sort of thing myself. The Difficulty Index (or Suggested Level) may be a bit misleading in some rare instances. For example, I have one room with three fairly powerful creatures that, once defeated, will grant no xp, whereas I have a smaller critter that will grant normal xp, even though it becomes a much tougher than usual fight due to its having developed a new...um...skill, let's say. Are we tweaking individual values, or just confident that all will even out by then dungeon's end?

[Ancylus]

I considered this, but there are still issues. Stairs would have to be on both the upper and lower designer's levels to fit. If a teleporter was above or below, the stairs would have to be replaced with teleporters. If you consider 4 cases of tele above, tele below; stairs above, tele below; tele above, stairs below, and stairs above stairs below:

• Only the T/T case has the pros of teleporters, cons of stairs.
• Only the S/S case has the pros of stairs, cons of teleporters.
• Both T/S and S/T cases have the cons of both.

So I think it's best we all stick to one system. Of course a designer is free to use stairs within their 2 dungeon levels, so the player will be sure to have the experience of finding a down staircase sometimes.

I don't quite understand what you mean. My idea was a room like the following:

SpoilerShow

Edit: Image hopefully fixed now. In case it isn't, here's the same in ASCII:

Code: Select all

td.
++.
S+s
.++
.DT

S ans s are stairs up and down, T and t are teleports to actual level start and end, D and d are destinations for teleports at level start and end, + means wall and . marks empty space.

Surround the whole thing with walls or secret doors, or remove the teleporters and connect it to the rest of the level with corridors if that fits your design. Of course if you have multiple levels it's not necessary to place stairs between them here. And getting up/down stairs to match between different designers' levels only requires mirroring the room.

So, do you think median weapon SL is the best way to rate a "typical dungeon level" by item content? I may have to add something like this to my Custom Dungeon Analyzer...

Median may not work well if there are lots of low-SL items on the level. A better idea would be to take the highest SL found in the level, and subtract one or two from that.

[Brodie301]

I posted a 2 level dungeon called Low Levels for a play test on Nexus.
Please give give it a try and give suggestions.

[SpiderFighter]

I don't quite understand what you mean. My idea was a room like the following:

SpoilerShow

Surround the whole thing with walls or secret doors, or remove the teleporters and connect it to the rest of the level with corridors if that fits your design. Of course if you have multiple levels it's not necessary to place stairs between them here. And getting up/down stairs to match between different designers' levels only requires mirroring the room.

(EDIT: Your pic link is broken.)
(EDIT to EDIT: Now it's working. )

As my section is nearing completion, I'm realizing that, for me, it's a question of aesthetics. My two-level area is connected by three sets of stairs, which makes it feel pretty solid: To the player, there will be no question that these levels are by the same person. When that color-coded exit tele appears, it becomes exciting, because it means we're now (as players) about to visit someone else's imagination. As designers, we want as much cohesiveness throughout the entire dungeon, yes, but isn't part of the fun of a "FrankenDungeon" in knowing that it comes from the minds of many different people?

Part of such a project is also about making people want to create, however; someone who is frustrated over something (comparatively) trivial as how to exit their section is either not going to design as well as if they had full creativety without restriction, or just bypass the project altogether, either of which is, in my opinion, a shame. I still suggest that the best way is to color code the exit, be it stairs or tele, and label it with a simple "EXIT" to let the player know it's time to move on. Teles would be easy to stitch together, and designers who want to use stairs can simply tele (or maneuver) their players to a corner of the map and use stairs there to take them out.

My dungeon makes extensive use of color in an extremely specific way, which means, by the time my red exit pops up, players are going to think it means something else entirely...which is less than ideal. I'd rather the exits be a color that isn't primary, but it's not worth grumbling about; the challenge is on me to make my area fit within the guidelines and, overall, I just want to focus on making it an exciting ride for my players. (Please note, none of this is directed at any one person; I'm simply stating my opinion on the subject).

Median may not work well if there are lots of low-SL items on the level. A better idea would be to take the highest SL found in the level, and subtract one or two from that.

This is still an area that isn't really clear for me, so I'm waiting on item placement until we have more definitive guidelines. I'm worried we'll wind up with 10 areas in a row that all have the same weapon (for example) and leave out something a player may want/need instead. Is there a way to parse every item that appears in a dungeon, to make the stitiching easier, or should we keep a running list of what we're using to submit with our maps? I have no problem with a team leader (aka "The Stitcher" ) PMing me with "Hey, we could really use an "item X" by the time we've gotten to your area; would you mind throwing one in your map somewhere?".

I posted a 2 level dungeon called Low Levels for a play test on Nexus.
Please give give it a try and give suggestions.

I'm on it!

EDIT after playing: Overall, this is an *excellent* way to start the game!! I love how you assume the player knows nothing (giving recipes, for example). The map is polished, extremely well balanced, and very much in the spirit of the original game. If this is any indication of how the rest of the FrankenDungeon will be in terms of quality, then this is going to be an incredible release. I'll PM you with notes.

[HaunterV]

Got the rough idea of the opening floor which will basically facilitate skipping to later submissions should you choose to do so.

[HaunterV]

1st floor mapped out. now I just need to put in names and credit notes in each alcove next to the submission teleporters.

In my vision, people would submit a tiny "thanks for trying my submission, it contains such n such I hope you have fun" readmes that we would then cut and paste onto a note stuffed in an alcove right next to the teleporter of your submission.

[SpiderFighter]

1st floor mapped out. now I just need to put in names and credit notes in each alcove next to the submission teleporters.

In my vision, people would submit a tiny "thanks for trying my submission, it contains such n such I hope you have fun" readmes that we would then cut and paste onto a note stuffed in an alcove right next to the teleporter of your submission.

The scrolls are a nifty idea, but I'm not sure I like the idea of no real progression in the dungeon. How do we handle progression so people don't hit an area before they're ready? Are the teleporters sorted by level? Just curious. Would it be possible to make an alternate version (or teleporter) for those of us who want to run it top to bottom?

[HaunterV]

1st floor mapped out. now I just need to put in names and credit notes in each alcove next to the submission teleporters.

In my vision, people would submit a tiny "thanks for trying my submission, it contains such n such I hope you have fun" readmes that we would then cut and paste onto a note stuffed in an alcove right next to the teleporter of your submission.

The scrolls are a nifty idea, but I'm not sure I like the idea of no real progression in the dungeon. How do we handle progression so people don't hit an area before they're ready? Are the teleporters sorted by level? Just curious. Would it be possible to make an alternate version (or teleporter) for those of us who want to run it top to bottom?

Yes there will still be top->bottom mode. actually when you first spawn into the Frankendungeon you can either go left and skip the first dungeon and take whatever teleporter you wish, or you can go right and start on the first submission which will lead into the second submission and so on.

My thinking behind this first floor is that some people will have beaten the whole thing eventually and might want to try a different build for a different part of the FrankenDungeon, this way they can just skid ahead.

Additionally, there is a thought that this initial floor might act as a Hubworld of sorts with each teleporter being unlocked once you complete the submission to which it belongs.


There are now doors with Pull chains in front of the teleporters, this has a twofold purpose;
1- prevent the player from accidentally stepping into a teleporter they do not want to, and
2- helps with framerate.

I believe I'll be linking all of the teleporters with their respective doors so the teleporter activates and isn't being rendered and casting its little particle fields all over the place until they are actually needed.



oh, and the first alcove will have a mortar to solve the problem of who hands out the mortar.

[SpiderFighter]

[...]when you first spawn into the Frankendungeon you can either go left and skip the first dungeon and take whatever teleporter you wish, or you can go right and start on the first submission which will lead into the second submission and so on.

[snip]

Additionally, there is a thought that this initial floor might act as a Hubworld of sorts with each teleporter being unlocked once you complete the submission to which it belongs.

Excellent ideas, and very well thought out. I'm looking forward to this even more than before now!