Grimrock

Very excited for a round two. In my head, here is a compilation of what I think would be cool;

• A generic entrance chamber with some plot explaining the scenario and some basic equipment perhaps.
• Three exits from said chamber, one to the evil floor(s), one to the good floor(s) and a central (barred) exit going down to the 'final area', which might be 1-4 rooms?
• You have to complete, say, 16/20 rooms in order to go into the 'final area'. Each room could result in getting a 'good' or 'evil' item / spirit / something to help in 'the final battle' (or puzzle).
• If you complete them all, you get extra bonuses to take on the final room / kudos for finishing all rooms.
• The layout would be predefined with all rooms being between 6x6 and 9x9 say, but you could then 'fill in' the spaces in your room to make a more complex layout.

With this sort of framework I think you could latch some cool story onto the scenario with a proper beginning and ending. I'm very much in favour of encouraging the player to complete all of the rooms, but also have the option to skip one or two if they get stuck (which is preferable to them simply giving up and not playing any more). I believe that giving the player the option to leave a room they're struggling in and come back later (or skip it if it's really too hard for them) will vastly increase the chance that the player makes it through the whole mod.

Of course, just my opinion - I'd love to take part no matter what options we go with!

Great ideas. I agree with everything you suggest.

In particular, I definitely think it would be good to allow room creators some flexibility in the size of room they can make... I already have a puzzle in mind (which I've actually already made and tested), but thematically it needs a larger room (I don't want to spoil it by saying why) and I'd rather not reduce the scale and lose the 'theme'. Maybe we could ask everyone to post a room size in advance (and whether they see it as light or dark) so we can pre-plan how much space each user requires.

Of course I would be happy to sit out this round if the majority of people would prefer to have smaller or more consistent sized rooms.

Considering Mysblade's "Creators" lore, this could be the perfect opportunity for us Creators to define ourselves as light or dark.

@John, I did not even consider equipment. Whoops!

You have to complete, say, 16/20 rooms in order to go into the 'final area'. Each room could result in getting a 'good' or 'evil' item / spirit / something to help in 'the final battle' (or puzzle).

What about:

• Having one main room with a central puzzle, solved which, you win
• That puzzle must have an awfully high problem space so that solving it by chance or brute force is not feasible
• Every room will reward of some piece of information useful to solve the final puzzle
• The final puzzle can have a complete solution either from a limited number of rooms or require all of them but still being solvable (as an effect of a reduction of the problem-space) if not all rooms are solved

This way, there is a purpose in doing as many rooms as possible, the dungeon can be completed without completing all rooms.

There is no reason for anyone to have to sit this round out; we can make this work, even if we have to do two floors for each alignment.

I like the idea of having to complete a set number of rooms before moving to the final floor. It makes it so much easier for the player when they can move in and out between puzzles instead of "solve the puzzle to open the door" and sovles some logistical problems for the designer.

I'm sorry if I wasn't clear when we first started talking about a pre-determined room size; as we agreed the designer could choose a room and make it his/her own, I always assumeed that they could altar the shape/size of the room as well (by reducing, not adding).

There are some great ideas in here! I'm trying to set back and let you guys make this your own, but it's difficult to not want to jump in.

@Xanathar: I read the first sentence about the central puzzle, and I was going to say, "Every room should have a part in solving the puzzle" and there it was, two lines later. Very well thought-out.

The only thing I would caution is that we make the reward for completing each room something not tangible, or else the player is going to wind up with 20 gems in their pockets. How about (combining Xanathar and John's ideas):

Each room has a dedicated switch/button/plate (pre-determined so that all designers are the esame) that reveals a bit of text on the wall of the central puzzle that, when complete, will open up a portal to the final room. Or, btter yet: The text will make up 16 wall pieces. If you get the remaining four, then you get a clue about defeating the final room/boss/whatever.

A dungeon with a central chamber from which all the individual rooms can be accessed sounds good to me. And I don't mind the player being able to skip a few rooms, especially if there's incentive to complete them all. Mostly I as objecting to a layout where the player would be unable to play all the rooms, as I think one of the early suggestions would gone. Likewise, if we create a backstory related to the light/dark dichotomy, it shouldn't discourage people from playing everyone's contributions, e.g. "complete all the light side rooms and none of the dark side rooms to get ending X".

Having all the individual rooms contribute to an ultimate puzzle sounds like an excellent idea. It would be best if the contributions were something more than having to press a button, though. Collecting and combining individual items would make the connection more tangible, even though it would clutter inventory.

I always assumed that the contributors could reduce the size of their rooms if they wanted to, the question there is mostly whether we want to create a layout in which all rooms start out with the same maximum size (possibly somewhat dull) or where the space allotted to rooms varies (difficult to plan for). I rather prefer the former, but can work with either.

Sounds like there are some good ideas going here. I like the idea of having a central room solved by solving the other rooms. I think we should make sure that people are encouraged to at least try every room, even if they don't have to solve everything to finish.

Having all the individual rooms contribute to an ultimate puzzle sounds like an excellent idea. It would be best if the contributions were something more than having to press a button, though.

When I formulated that thought I had in mind - as examples, I absolutely don't mean we should do those exact puzzles! - the mastermind game and clue. In that example, every room would provide a sequence of colours or a non-guilty-card which helps guessing the final solution. The more rooms the more sequences/cards, the easier to solve the main puzzle.

Besides, speaking of clue (the game), the butler in Clue (the movie) is called Wordsworth!
Ok ok I'm lying, in all honesty it's Wadsworth , still I can't help thinking to Clue everytime I read John's posts. Sorry John I hope you don't get offended

Boy this thread was hard to relocate.

As the One Room Round One gets back on a roll, I think it's a good idea to revive this thread for reference and feedback for how we should go about the next one.

How about "One level" round robin instead of one room? More design possibilities and more gameplay.

We could design it bottom-up to allow for pits and stairs to be laid down easily by the next designer in line.