Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="knightofround" data-source="post: 4405535" data-attributes="member: 27884">Yeah I wouldn't say that I categorically hate *all* the classics; hell I even included one in my top five =PIts just that when I go through the old adventure books, they seem to be very vague compared to adventures found today. I mean, I look at the Caves of Chaos in B2 and although I can see "hey-there's some nifty encounters here", its largely just a bunch of rooms. Or I can look at the Giants series and say "hey this is a neat concept, but where's the plot to tie this together?"I dunno I guess I just tend to prefer adventures that have strong plot and fascinating villians. Stuff like B2 just doesn't interest me because I see a stat block for a Dark Knight...but there's little/no detail into why he's in the caves, whats his motivations/alliances. He's just another guy in a room. And I know this is a fantasy game, but dungeon ecology is pretty much lacking in 1st/2nd ed. Its more of a room-room-room-boss-town experience, and I'm sure thats fun for some people...its just not my cup of tea.Thats why the adventures I've picked are more focused on having great plot (drow war) awesome dungeon ecology (banewarrens and RttToEE), and settings with a lot of depth to them (ravenloft).Again I'm not bashing all the classics, I'm just shocked that so many people here prefers 1st/2nd ed adventures when it seems like everybody on this forum discusses 3rd/4th ed.I'm curious as to what you think the "design philosophy" of earlier adventures are compared to modern ones? To me, it seems to be a dichotomy between vague sandboxes which give the DM alot of room to maneuver (early) against more-defined storylines that the PCs flesh out.</blockquote>

Verification