D&D General An Appreciation of David "Zeb" Cook

[Ruin Explorer]

I suspect differently given the quality work of Monte Cook, but I suppose it's easy to have a scapegoat.

Scapegoat seems a bit much given he actually did what he's accused of, and has basically just said "But I was going to put it back together better than before, honest!". I'd be more inclined to believe him if he outlined his specific intentions as to where it'd have ended up (perhaps he has, but I'm unaware of it). Plus the end result was that the only significant detail on Planescape since then (in the 4E DMG2) relied on the state of play as Monte left it - all the Factions gone, replaced by a few three-letter acronym organisations. If they continue that vision into 5E, well, good grief, what a betrayal of what Zeb Cook did, and what an endorsement of what Monte did. Let's hope they go back to basics on PS, and forget the whole Faction War deal entirely.

Re: quality of work, I'm generally a fan of Monte Cook, but one place he's repeatedly fallen down is in making the detailed bits of settings interesting. Numenera and Diamond Throne both have this a bit. Big picture, they're amazing. Moderate picture, they're cool. But the detailed setting bits? Dull, uninspired, somewhat generic. It's the opposite of Zeb Cook's work, where the close-in work is often fascinatingly complex or unexpected.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Except no middle bit, and Monte left it with the right-most one, and he says if he'd been allowed to finish he'd be as good as the original, but I rather suspect it would still be the right-most one, just maybe with a beard drawn on it.

That was funny!

I tend to think D&D editions (and the designers associated with them) tend to be a lot like Bonds; people will always have a strong attachment to the Bond they grew up with, and while they can learn to appreciate (or even love) the current Bond, or a past Bond, there will always be that unshakable love for Roger Mo.... um, the edition you started with.

 

[Bitbrain]

That was funny!

I tend to think D&D editions (and the designers associated with them) tend to be a lot like Bonds; people will always have a strong attachment to the Bond they grew up with, and while they can learn to appreciate (or even love) the current Bond, or a past Bond, there will always be that unshakable love for Roger Mo.... um, the edition you started with.

I started with 3.5/Pathfinder 1e. I hated it then, and I still hate it now.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I started with 3.5/Pathfinder 1e. I hated it then, and I still hate it now.

Maybe you were just blessed with preternaturally good taste?

 

[QuentinGeorge]

Yeah, he mentioned this in some article of his I read, that's where I found out it wasn't mere vandalism, but rather intended to be part of a process, where "some" of the Factions would come back, but equally he didn't seem to see what he did as a problem at all, just that he didn't get to finish. To me the whole thing is a bit like this:

View attachment 123480

Except no middle bit, and Monte left it with the right-most one, and he says if he'd been allowed to finish he'd be as good as the original, but I rather suspect it would still be the right-most one, just maybe with a beard drawn on it.



I feel pretty certain it did have sales problems, and I suspect wasn't sufficiently marketed, either. I think there may have been an assumption that, as the first new setting for 2E, and as a Dragonlance relative, it would automatically have huge sales, but this was a different era, and loads of people saw the box and thought it was just an adventure, or an add-on for existing Dragonlance (rather than a stand-alone setting), and I don't think it helped that the box cover was an androgynous youth playing a harp to a dragon, which whilst lovely didn't exactly scream DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS WOOO YEAH. If they'd had a dumb-but-conventional picture with say, a Minotaur legionary, an Elf steppe barbarian, a Bakali Lizardman, an Goblin, and a human (of one of the more generic nations, maybe the trading one) all adventuring together, maybe say menacing a dragon (all them were playable, note), then I think this might be a much better-remembered setting.

Whilst it had some slightly outdated elements, and arguably a whole lot of cultural appropriation (probably enough from enough different cultures, most of them dead, that no-one is likely to care, though), I feel like a lot of Taladas was actually ridiculously ahead of its time, not least the trope inversions and broad range of playable races and so on (to be fair, Krynn was always a bit easier on the playing odd races deal).

I feel the cover for "Taladas: The Minotaurs" was probably better suited.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

That was funny!

I tend to think D&D editions (and the designers associated with them) tend to be a lot like Bonds; people will always have a strong attachment to the Bond they grew up with, and while they can learn to appreciate (or even love) the current Bond, or a past Bond, there will always be that unshakable love for Roger Mo.... um, the edition you started with.

Tell me about it - for me the "real" Bond is Timothy Dalton.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Tell me about it - for me the "real" Bond is Timothy Dalton.

I will say this one thing- if he had better scripts, and been in movies with better budgets, and had better co-stars, he could've been a good Bond.

Which is kind of the "Other than that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?" for Bond compliments.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Zeb Cook is an amazing designer, and Planescape was his peak design, just astonishing.

I'd be interested in learning more. 2e has always struck me as the least well designed version of D&D (Zeb Cook's hands were tied there admittedly) because it's a mismatch between a game that was designed for gritty dungeon crawling, a DMG that tries to point you to heroic fantasy, and an XP system where killing monsters is the only type of XP the party shares leading to a much more murder-happy game than even 1e. And Planescape, while a great setting appears to me to be an even bigger mismatch between rules and setting than the rest of 2e.

I'd be delighted to find out that I was wrong and that there's more to learn - but could you tease out some of how he was a great designer rather than just listing some of his products please.

 

[Jack Hooligan]

I feel the cover for "Taladas: The Minotaurs" was probably better suited.

Yeah, I the cover for Time of the Dragon is a reused piece that was the cover to a 1985 issue of Dragon Magazine. Reused artwork doesn't exactly scream 'major new setting launch'.

I remember also being confused on the description of that^ being a Silver Dragon...

 

[Marc Radle]

I just wish he was doing more D&D work right now. 5e would certainly benefit from the input of a guy with his vision.

He has done some D&D 5E work for Kobold Press!