Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8389872" data-attributes="member: 82106">Well, there's constructive discussion of the character of different games, and then there's war!Anyway, most warish debate is more on which is the superior conceptual basis for RPG design. Naturally my own opinions are unassailable and hold supreme! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />I think you could salvage some stuff from any module, but I personally saw some really fundamental faults with the H series. I think they might best be employed, IMHO as a sort of set of situations that exist within a greater milieu. Like, H1 starts out with the spark of some potential. You hit this town, and there's a spy, and various other characters there, and a few possible ways you could go in terms of acting on what is at hand. The author just sort of drops it all in favor of a linear dungeon crawl after that. I haven't read the rewrite, maybe it is great. I don't think classic AP design suites 4e too well though. It probably will work better in 5e though. Heck, the original modules probably work better in 5e too!</blockquote>