Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 7673218" data-attributes="member: 22779">In what way did Pemerton make a value judgement to say that this is &quot;bad&quot;?&nbsp; His point is that if you're completely off script, adding in virtually every NPC, changing every encounter, and rewriting the entire adventure, why would you even bother starting with that adventure in the first place?&nbsp; The ability to completely ignore a module is not a strength of that module.&nbsp; OTOH, it can easily lead to paralysis as the DM lacks any guidance when the players try something outside the box.&nbsp; Why is adding that material that much easier than ignoring existing material?&nbsp; Considering the success Paizo has had with the second type of adventure, and considering that Paizo is generally seen as top standard of module design, I'd say that your tastes are perhaps not as widespread as you might like.&nbsp; Everyone wants WOTC to emulate Paizo when it comes to adventure design.&nbsp; But, Paizo most certainly does not produce your type of adventures.&nbsp; Paizo adventures are very, very strongly the second type, whether stand alone or Adventure Path.&nbsp; IOW, you are looking for a book of adventure sites - something like a Book of Lairs.&nbsp; That's a very niche product and hoping that WOTC is going to shotgun a bunch of modules to find what works isn't going to happen.&nbsp; They KNOW what works - Paizo has shown that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 7673218, member: 22779"] In what way did Pemerton make a value judgement to say that this is "bad"? His point is that if you're completely off script, adding in virtually every NPC, changing every encounter, and rewriting the entire adventure, why would you even bother starting with that adventure in the first place? The ability to completely ignore a module is not a strength of that module. OTOH, it can easily lead to paralysis as the DM lacks any guidance when the players try something outside the box. Why is adding that material that much easier than ignoring existing material? Considering the success Paizo has had with the second type of adventure, and considering that Paizo is generally seen as top standard of module design, I'd say that your tastes are perhaps not as widespread as you might like. Everyone wants WOTC to emulate Paizo when it comes to adventure design. But, Paizo most certainly does not produce your type of adventures. Paizo adventures are very, very strongly the second type, whether stand alone or Adventure Path. IOW, you are looking for a book of adventure sites - something like a Book of Lairs. That's a very niche product and hoping that WOTC is going to shotgun a bunch of modules to find what works isn't going to happen. They KNOW what works - Paizo has shown that. [/QUOTE]

Verification