Classic Dungeons: all of them to exist in the new edition

[The Little Raven]

I'm actually saddened by Slavicsek's casual dismissal of Barrier Peaks---which examined future-tech from a uniquely fantastic point of view.

I disagree. There was no real examination of future-tech. It was just thrown in as "Cool! LASERS! PEWPEWPEW!" There was no real discussion of the technology, no story about the originators of it, it's purpose, or even the effect it would have on the world. Simply put, it was just a dungeon with laser guns thrown in, because Star Wars had come out a few years before.

 

[The Little Raven]

Once again, WoTC knows better than us. Just sit back and let them tell us what we like.

Would you rather they put out a remake of a module they've made clear they have no desire to remake? Getting someone to make something they don't like is a good way to get a crappy product.

EDIT: I think it would be better if the community that wants a Barrier Peaks remake put some pressure on Clark and his crew over at Necromancer Games, since recreating a classic adventure is right up their alley.

 

[Wormwood]

I disagree. There was no real examination of future-tech. It was just thrown in as "Cool! LASERS! PEWPEWPEW!" There was no real discussion of the technology, no story about the originators of it, it's purpose, or even the effect it would have on the world.

You missed my point.

I *loved* the fact that future tech was introduced to a primitive culture without context or instructions.

Barrier Peaks was Clarke's Law in action, and we had a blast with it.

 

[The Little Raven]

I *loved* the fact that future tech was introduced to a primitive culture without context or instructions.

And that's where we differ on that.

I hate things without any kind of context (at least for the DM; keeping players in the dark is fine), especially with something like throwing a spaceship into an otherwise medieval-style fantasy game.

To me, it simply says that Gygax saw how popular Star Wars was, and decided to cash in on it with little effort.

 

[MerricB]

If you look at, say "G1: Steading of the Hill Giant Chief", what you'll find (after the surprising thin-ness of the booklet) is that it pretty much includes only the adventure site and the monster details. It's entirely up to the DM to decide why the hill giants are a problem, why the PCs are going there, and so on and so forth.

You must be looking at a different adventure than I am.

G1 explicitly gives the set-up: Giants have been raiding the lands of men. The rulers have gathered together a group of adventurers (the PCs) and told them to eliminate the giant threat or else face execution. The PCs were provided with guides to take them close to the Hill Giant Steading... and the adventure begins just as they approach the Steading.

What G1 doesn't give is an "order of adventure". There's a couple of hidden goals (discover the way to the next adventure), but the PCs aren't constrained to any one path.

Compare to A1, which is *very* linear - and indeed, the entire A1-4 experience is a pretty constrained plot.

Cheers!

 

[The Little Raven]

G1 explicitly gives the set-up: Giants have been raiding the lands of men. The rulers have gathered together a group of adventurers (the PCs) and told them to eliminate the giant threat or else face execution. The PCs were provided with guides to take them close to the Hill Giant Steading... and the adventure begins just as they approach the Steading.

This part always bugged me about G1. It's why, after completing it, my party and I went back to the rulers and overthrew them, since only a murderous tyrant would threaten innocent people with execution in order to achieve their own political objectives.

 

[JoeGKushner]

A bit extreme to ask for people who might one day design for D&D to watch their tongue years and years ahead of the fact, IMO.

I mean, it's not as if Mearls knew that he had to appease the fickle whims of D&D fandom as a representative of the 4th ed design team when he expressed his opinion about Keep on the Borderlands.

Because then, every game designer had best shut up about every opinion about D&D they have, out of fear of slighting some fan or the other. Just in case they one day might write something for the game, and have that opinion dragged through the streets as being a representation of the opinion of WotC as a collecive hive mind.

Assuming that (in)famous review is what you are referring to, of course.

/M

I agree he had no idea. If he did, he probably wouldn't have written it. I could be completely wrong mind you. Mike, from his online presence, doesn't seem like he's afraid to shake things up.

As it is, it's still out there and it still gives me an idea, especially couped with another designer's apparent dislike of a classic, that not all of the... D&Disms that I enjoy are still going to be even possible because the new designers don't consider it part of the 'Classic D&D' despite the fact that if it wasn't there in the first place, they couldn't pick it apart.

As far as them speaking, we're a specialty crowd and they're postings are going to be examined. Taste is, of course, personal. It's good to see them note what they stand for. Of course if that's not what the market you're selling to wants...

 

[JoeGKushner]

Would you rather they put out a remake of a module they've made clear they have no desire to remake? Getting someone to make something they don't like is a good way to get a crappy product.

I'd rather they get someone who can appreciate what a Classic Module is as opposed to someone who dismisses one of the top thirty adventures as noted by an official publication of the company because it doesn't meet his personal tastes.

EDIT: I think it would be better if the community that wants a Barrier Peaks remake put some pressure on Clark and his crew over at Necromancer Games, since recreating a classic adventure is right up their alley.

Heck, if WoTC licensed out anything these days that might be a great idea. But I'd expect to see Paizo do such a thing first. I suspect that Necromancer Games days of doing retro adventures is over unless they get some Role Aids license from WoTC or something. The Judges Guild stuff didn't do fantastic for them although I am glad it's found a home in Goodman Games and is supposed to be appearing in other venues soon.

 

[RPG_Tweaker]

The thing is, if it's in the setting, it defines the setting. They (and me, and many others) want D&D to be fantasy, without sci-fi.

That is why many of us grumble about tieflings and warlocks in the PHB. They don't fit our idea of a heroic D&D fantasy setting. Especially at the expense of classical elements like gnomes and druids.

As you say... it would be easier for people to add tieflings and warlocks from a supplement, than be forced to restrict them from the most primary of the core books.

It's easy enough to add it in, if that's your thing, but the opposite is not true.

So how would a Return to the Barrier Peaks module somehow defile your D&D campaign? At what point does the mere existence of a module make it inherent?

It's quite simple to merely NOT purchase or use it if a scifi element violates your personal concept of what D&D is "supposed" to be.

I detest the Great Wheel, so I never purchased Planescape. Its existance has no bearing on my D&D.

If you don't want scifi, eschew it... its existence will have no bearing on your D&D.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Link? I'd love to read that.

I ran a google search to find my posting on it. Luckily I did get a hit on it in the WotC forum archives. I originally posted my recollections on it. The whole thing happened in three parts. First, I sat with him after a GenCon seminar on his novels for an hour, I just wanted a single question answered, but it grew into a full hour! So I didn't take notes. I couldn't believe his generosity with his time . . . just chatting with a fan of his work that was long since out of print for a whole hour. Over that hour my questions ranged all over the place. After that hour I contacted him through a Wisconsin author's group website . . . called the Alliterates. Not sure if they are still going. In any case that hour conversation with Troy was only spoken, and I never took notes. It's all in my memory and the friend I was there with.

After contacting him through email I sent him a series of followup questions. Those questions and answers I was given permission to post to the Dark Sun mailling list. The post and the thread that followed was reposted on the Dark Sun forums. I also contacted Tim Brown (Dark Sun's co-creator) a few questions but it appears those questions have been lost in the intrawebs.

Unfortunately, I didn't take notes over the hour with Troy at GenCon. I only expected to get a question or two answers and I knew I'd remember that easily. All I can say is that I remember from that hour him saying that Dark Sun was designed from the start to be a setting where great change was a possibility but only from the hands of the heroes. A stagnant decadent world heroes rise up and overturn everything. Troy took the theme and ran with it right away by writing the Prism Pentad novels.

So that interview I linked to doesn't include any notes from that spontaneous hour conversation at GenCon, I'm really sorry about that. FWIW, it does have some interesting revelations.