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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="drscott46" data-source="post: 3258836" data-attributes="member: 46144">Agreed on the CRPGs... although otherwise our arguments about FRC1 and FRC2 are perfect encapsulations on the differences between 1e and 2e adventure styles and the players and DMs with a clear preference.  (Pool of Radiance was released just before the 2e revision and Curse just after, so it all lines up.)I'm certainly not going to criticize your viewpoint, but it was part of the point in suggesting a discussion of "younger" classics to spend time on the 2e-era stuff, which tends to get a lot less keystrokes from ENWorld (in part due to demographics/nostalgia, in part due to the recent trend of 1e-style materials such as the Dungeon Crawl Classics and the WotC rewrites series).---Unrelated note, before I forget: I like the way the FRC2 module was specifically set after the events of the novel, then placed the novel's characters in the game as NPCs to guide with a "hey, I once had this same problem" effect.Contrast that with the Avatar Trilogy, which treats the PCs as accessories to the drama of Elminster, Midnight, Kelemvor, et al.  All the players have to do is follow the NPCs and they'll generally succeed.  The Avatar Trilogy was an underrated read as a set of novels, but the adventures really squander a unique setting (archetypal world in chaos, gods walk the earth) on something that's about as interactive as some of those old '90s "interactive movies" like A Fork in the Tale.</blockquote>

Verification