There have been a lot of D&D.Sci scenarios, but there's a lot of variance between them in complexity and quality. Some are more difficult, and might not be a good place to start, while others are much simpler - some were very good, while others on reflection didn't flow quite right.
Unfortunately, LW karma doesn't track the quality of these scenarios very well: often mediocre scenarios are higher-karma than better scenarios (whether because they had good writing around a poor scenario, or because people upvoted before playing them, or just because more people happened to be online and see them).
If you're interested in playing D&D.Sci scenarios, but don't know where to start, this index (compiled by frequent authors abstractapplic and aphyer, we'll try to keep this updated going forwards) is a good reference point to make sure you can pick good scenarios at a difficulty level you're comfortable with.
If you're new to D&D.Sci, you should probably start with the lower-Complexity scenarios and move up to the higher-Complexity ones. Scenarios with Quality Rating 1-2 are probably less worth playing, while the higher-rated ones are ones we'd recommend.
If you disagree with any of these ratings let us know, we're happy to review - there were some scenarios where we disagreed on the correct rating while compiling this list, and we'd appreciate your comments as an outside view, especially if you're a frequent player!
abstractapplic: These scenarios were attempts to convey / demonstrate specific ideas with real-world relevance; I judge that they failed at this; I therefore grade them a little less generously than you might.
abstractapplic: These scenarios were attempts to convey / demonstrate specific ideas with real-world relevance; I judge that they succeeded at this; I therefore grade them a little more generously than you might.
aphyer: I thought this scenario was great, and still do, but given that absolutely nobody but me liked it I am forced to admit that the odds suggest you will not like it either.
aphyer: Sadly the difficulty rating for this scenario arises less from complexity and more from tedium: the scenario doesn't have an intricate model with sneaky multivariate effects, it just has way too many simple effects to juggle and dull bits of work to do.
There have been a lot of D&D.Sci scenarios, but there's a lot of variance between them in complexity and quality. Some are more difficult, and might not be a good place to start, while others are much simpler - some were very good, while others on reflection didn't flow quite right.
Unfortunately, LW karma doesn't track the quality of these scenarios very well: often mediocre scenarios are higher-karma than better scenarios (whether because they had good writing around a poor scenario, or because people upvoted before playing them, or just because more people happened to be online and see them).
If you're interested in playing D&D.Sci scenarios, but don't know where to start, this index (compiled by frequent authors abstractapplic and aphyer, we'll try to keep this updated going forwards) is a good reference point to make sure you can pick good scenarios at a difficulty level you're comfortable with.
If you're new to D&D.Sci, you should probably start with the lower-Complexity scenarios and move up to the higher-Complexity ones. Scenarios with Quality Rating 1-2 are probably less worth playing, while the higher-rated ones are ones we'd recommend.
If you disagree with any of these ratings let us know, we're happy to review - there were some scenarios where we disagreed on the correct rating while compiling this list, and we'd appreciate your comments as an outside view, especially if you're a frequent player!
Keen-eyed readers will notice a correlation between this column and the 'Complexity' column.
abstractapplic: These scenarios were attempts to convey / demonstrate specific ideas with real-world relevance; I judge that they failed at this; I therefore grade them a little less generously than you might.
abstractapplic: These scenarios were attempts to convey / demonstrate specific ideas with real-world relevance; I judge that they succeeded at this; I therefore grade them a little more generously than you might.
aphyer: I thought this scenario was great, and still do, but given that absolutely nobody but me liked it I am forced to admit that the odds suggest you will not like it either.
aphyer: I'm quite proud of the writing in this scenario, but the actual scenario itself was mediocre.
aphyer: Sadly the difficulty rating for this scenario arises less from complexity and more from tedium: the scenario doesn't have an intricate model with sneaky multivariate effects, it just has way too many simple effects to juggle and dull bits of work to do.