Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="WSmith" data-source="post: 41892" data-attributes="member: 106">Clark's quote hits it on the head. This is my 2 cents: to me, 1e ment location based adventuring. How the players got to the location was up to the DM. This was and is my style of DMing, so I can releate to it. How and why did the group travel from Reme to Faihill and then to Bard's Gate? Leave that part to me, and give me the locations along the way that I can use for them to encounter.IMO, 2e adventures leaned in the direction of "Why are we out in widlerness, travelling to Waterdeep and who is the shadowy form following us, and what will happen if we don't return the totem to the barbarian tribe in time?" There is nothing wrong with this. I will say it again cause someone wants to get bent out of shape, I can tell. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS! BUT, it just doesn't mesh with the style of DMing I use when utilzing published adventures. Two notable exceptions from the 2e line, which I will never sell or give away, Vale of the Mage and Greyhawk Ruins. To me,  they are location based.  That doesn't mean location based adventures don't have a story element, they don't emphisize it as much.</blockquote>