DMG to include a "starter town".

[gizmo33]

Although I realize you're being a bit sardonic here, I have to admit that I found your flavor text intriguing. Well done!

Thanks. I wasn't being entirely snippy. But as a thought experiment, imagine what you'll think of my village 2 years from now after you've had to flip past it over and over when trying to find the actual rules. It will probably seem a lot less interesting. That's one of the problems IMO with putting this in the DMG. I think it would be simple enough just to create a DM resource wiki and just have the DM Guide point people to the website where dozens of villages, temples, evil armies, dungeons, etc. just like this could be downloaded by the noob DM. I think anyone with a year or more of DMing under their belt could crank out something better than what I have here. New DMs should not have to lack for resources or pray for their inclusion in $30 hardback books.

 

[Thunderfoot]

<SNIP> Think about it - how useful would Hommlet be without a Moathouse or the ToEE? How much sense would it make to a new DM who had never seen those products? And how interesting could a town description really be that's completely seperated from any information on the surrounding campaign world? Does this town include that info too? (page...count...increasing...)

I've been politely ignoring your comments until this...
It is OBVIOUS that you are not old enough to remember when Hommlet WAS a stand alone product. Do your homework before you make unsubstantiated and frankly dumb statements such as these. The original Hommlet module was short, cheap and did everything that you described in your ill-mannered post. It probably SHOULD have been in the 1E DMG, it was a great learning tool and there was no reason for it to be separate.

Yes, later it was folded in and was used as a jump off point for the ToEE, but it was not always so. Check your history and then come back and apologize.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Hell, this could Mearls's chance to do Keep on the Borderlands "the way it should be" . . .

Let's see HIS 4D&D version where he "pwns" Gary's design.

If we're going to jump on Mike for things he said years ago, could we use OUR real names, too, so we can be held equally accountable for every damn thing we've ever said?

 

[gizmo33]

You keep saying that new DMs should have to buy another product. A Basic set, or a module, or a new DM book, or whatever.

"Another" is not the same as "additional". They buy the "Beginners Guide to DMing" and that's all they buy. It goes into laborious, but necessary detail on how to run the basic sorts of scenarios, with examples and sidebars and such. It stays relatively short, relatively cheap.

Then those of us that are experienced can buy the unabridged encyclopedic version with details on desert exploration, underwater explorations, and scads of magic items you've never heard of, etc. Two different books for two different audiences. Seriously - I guess you've never owned a version of the Basic DnD rules?

 

[Thunderfoot]

If we're going to jump on Mike for things he said years ago, could we use OUR real names, too, so we can be held equally accountable for every damn thing we've ever said?

You know, WD, I like you more all the time.

 

[Wormwood]

"Another" is not the same as "additional". They buy the "Beginners Guide to DMing" and that's all they buy. It goes into laborious, but necessary detail on how to run the basic sorts of scenarios, with examples and sidebars and such. It stays relatively short, relatively cheap.

Then those of us that are experienced can buy the unabridged encyclopedic version with details on desert exploration, underwater explorations, and scads of magic items you've never heard of, etc. Two different books for two different audiences. Seriously - I guess you've never owned a version of the Basic DnD rules?

Unless Wizards is splitting the brand into Basic 4e and Advanced 4e, the DMG must include rules for beginning DMs.

Of course, you seem to be forgetting that "beginning DMs" are not the sole audience for a sample town.

 

[gizmo33]

I've been politely ignoring your comments until this...

It's not particularly polite to refrain from saying something on a message board. Why not just talk about your ideas? I guess your brain is just so powerful that your merest thought is going to cause me some sort of pain? Have at it!

It is OBVIOUS that you are not old enough to remember when Hommlet WAS a stand alone product. Do your homework before you make unsubstantiated and frankly dumb statements such as these.

The Moathouse was part of the module. I actually own the monochrome version. It is obvious that reality here is taking place mostly in your imagination. My age will apparently always remain a mystery. Anyway, to reiterate the point about, it's not your participation that's rude as you seem to think. But if your participation in the thread habitually requires you to saying things are dumb then I can see why you would be used to thinking this way.

The original Hommlet module was short, cheap and did everything that you described in your ill-mannered post. It probably SHOULD have been in the 1E DMG, it was a great learning tool and there was no reason for it to be separate.

Was it really a great learning tool? What's a beginning DM do with a description of a tailor whose a 7th level fighter when using a crossbow? Compare it to keep on the borderlands where at least there's some effort made to explain some concepts, because KotB was intended to be a beginning module. The final words on the moathouse suggests that if the PCs defeat Lareth that they (1st to 3rd level characters, AFAICT) are pursued by a 10th level assassin! (Edit: Let me spell it out for you - Gygax is suggesting that the DM send an unstatted 10th level assassins after a 3rd level party, and you think this is advice for a beginning DM? Give me a break.) The righteous indignation that you are affecting this this post is completely unwarranted IMO.

Yes, later it was folded in and was used as a jump off point for the ToEE, but it was not always so. Check your history and then come back and apologize.

I'm sorry you're not a better reader. I'm sorry that this is your posting habit, though I see now why you equate posting your ideas with being rude. I'm sorry I gathered nothing from your post other that a display of psychological peculiarities. It's probably too much to hope that you'll get much from mine. Doesn't your copy of Hommlet have the moathouse in it? Maybe it fell out with the staples?

 

[Maggan]

T
Plus, it's a shared experience.

When I think a bit about it, I think this is the best reason for including a starting town. I'm not sure how the ratio between playing in a home-brew or a published setting is, but I think that for a lot of gamers who pick up the game and just play for fun for a couple of years before moving on, a sample town will become a tremendous shared experience.

/M

 

[dmccoy1693]

Then those of us that are experienced can buy the unabridged encyclopedic version with details on desert exploration, underwater explorations, and scads of magic items you've never heard of, etc. Two different books for two different audiences. Seriously - I guess you've never owned a version of the Basic DnD rules?

I find your ideas most intriguing. I highly recommend you gather all your ideas together, write a nice letter of proposal and send it off to Wizards. Offer yourself up as a freelance writer for the project.

 

[gizmo33]

Unless Wizards is splitting the brand into Basic 4e and Advanced 4e, the DMG must include rules for beginning DMs.

Based on what? I'm not following the logic of these statements anymore, forget about the differences in opinion. Since when does writing two different books for two different audiences require some sort of rebranding? You would simply choose which parts of the overall game you wanted to describe in any given book. This is fundementally what's done in the Monster Manual for instance. They didn't rebrand DnD so that they could publish the "Monster Manual 2". A DM who doesn't use the MM2 still plays DnD.