Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5813050" data-attributes="member: 42582">Completely agreed.I've GMed quite a bit of H2 - Chamber of Eyes, Well of Demons, and Tower of Mysteries. In each case I changed stuff - both story background and the way the encounters are &quot;scripted&quot; - to make things more interesting and more dynamic (and also to level things up for my party, but that's easy in 4e).These modules have some great maps, but crappy use of them by the designers. And the storylines as written are boring!AbdulAlhazred already said some sensible stuff in reply to this, but I'll add my own comments.Look at a book like The Plane Above, and its discussion of journeying into deep myth, in order to change the fundamentals of the universe. And then compare the E-modules (I've only got E1, admittedly) - so many encounters that add essentially nothing to the story. And look at the &quot;dialogue&quot; with the Raven Queen, and the way the stakes are set out - &quot;YAWN!&quot;.We finally have a version of D&amp;D that supports real mythological adventuring, with a robust core mythology to do it with, and a sourcebook - The Plane Above - that talks about it, but then the actual adventures deliver nothing like it.I haven't got Gardmore Abbey, but the best version I've seen of a 4e adventure/setting is Neverwinter, which uses the idea of themes to try and link the PCs into the adventure, and give the players a say in setting the stakes. But that's just one small step - imagine what could be done with scenarios that tried to take seriously what it means for a PC to take on a paragon path or an epic destiny, and that put player ownership of the stakes of play - which 4e is so good at, because of its robust resolution mechanics - front and centre.I'm probably in a minority, but I'm not a subscriber - I do most of my prep on the train going to/from work, so rely on books, pen and paper. Even with such a primitive suite of technology, 4e is still interesting!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5813050, member: 42582"] Completely agreed. I've GMed quite a bit of H2 - Chamber of Eyes, Well of Demons, and Tower of Mysteries. In each case I changed stuff - both story background and the way the encounters are "scripted" - to make things more interesting and more dynamic (and also to level things up for my party, but that's easy in 4e). These modules have some great maps, but crappy use of them by the designers. And the storylines as written are boring! AbdulAlhazred already said some sensible stuff in reply to this, but I'll add my own comments. Look at a book like The Plane Above, and its discussion of journeying into deep myth, in order to change the fundamentals of the universe. And then compare the E-modules (I've only got E1, admittedly) - so many encounters that add essentially nothing to the story. And look at the "dialogue" with the Raven Queen, and the way the stakes are set out - "YAWN!". We finally have a version of D&D that supports real mythological adventuring, with a robust core mythology to do it with, and a sourcebook - The Plane Above - that talks about it, but then the actual adventures deliver nothing like it. I haven't got Gardmore Abbey, but the best version I've seen of a 4e adventure/setting is Neverwinter, which uses the idea of themes to try and link the PCs into the adventure, and give the players a say in setting the stakes. But that's just one small step - imagine what could be done with scenarios that tried to take seriously what it means for a PC to take on a paragon path or an epic destiny, and that put [I]player[/I] ownership of the stakes of play - which 4e is so good at, because of its robust resolution mechanics - front and centre. I'm probably in a minority, but I'm not a subscriber - I do most of my prep on the train going to/from work, so rely on books, pen and paper. Even with such a primitive suite of technology, 4e is still interesting! [/QUOTE]

Verification