Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Erik Mona" data-source="post: 1816356" data-attributes="member: 2174">>>>This is where you are alienating new players. New players have no clue about Greyhawk continuity. You're putting a lot of effort into ensuring your modules follow Greyhawk canon when only a minority of gamers can appreciate it, thanks to a lack of published canon available.>>>I respectfully disagree. I'm not intending to create a boatload of new continuity with the "Greyhawk" adventures. In fact, nearly all of the "Greyhawk" adventures we've published are listed as "any setting." Whom does it hurt if those adventures are set in, say, Furyondy rather than some author-invented nation from his home campaign?The answer is that it harms no one.>>>A pantheon does not make a campaign setting, at least not in Greyhawk. There are no professional continental maps, timelines or political background materials for Greyhawk for a new player to find even if they did have an interest in where the core elements of the rulebooks come from. The last thing WotC provided was Chainmail, and it included more "fantastic" elements than Eberron has.>>>Dungeon #118 will include the first of four quadrants for a massive continental map of the World of Greyhawk, incidentally. And the ties between Chainmail and Greyhawk are tenuous at best (about on order with the ties between Faerun and the events of the "Double Diamond Triangle" serial Forgotten Realms novel, which took place on an entirely different continent. A "core" Chainmail hardcover that would have provided more concrete ties never came out, so I don't think your point is wholly accurate.But regardless, the point is not to detail the setting in the magazine. The point is to provide easily adaptable "core" D&D fantasy adventures. The Greyhawk stuff is a nod and wink to long-time D&D players, who make up a sizable portion of our readers.>>>That's a very sarcastic reply. I have posted in this thread several times about the exact number of Eberron references in Dungeon. There have only been two adventures so far and IMO the first one was presented below par. The adventure was a pretty good dungeon crawl but the presentation was not done as well as it could have been.>>>Well, Dungeon 117 is circulating now (ours just arrived on Tuesday), and that contains an Eberron adventure. So that's three adventures and a fairly lengthly "Lord of Blades" Critical Threat. Oh, and a poster map of the world (albeit one on which Wizards of the Coast provided virtually no useful map tags).In the same time period (Dungeon 113-117), we've published a total of15 adventures. Here's the breakdown, by campaign setting:"Any Setting": 8Eberron: 3Explicitly Greyhawk: 2Forgotten Realms: 1Psionics: 1The only adventures I'm counting as "explicitly Greyhawk" are "Mad God's Key" (114) and "Raiders of the Black Ice" (115), both of which are relatively easy to adapt to any campaign setting. In fact, while trawling the Eberron folder on wizards.com today, I noticed someone talking about his plans to convert "Mad God's Key" to Eberron.We've got a few more Forgotten Realms adventures coming in the next few months. But all this stuff should be easy to convert to an Eberron campaign, or really to any campaign (which indeed is the whole point of Dungeon)."Queen with Burning Eyes," like it or not (and I've seen strong reactions on both sides of that issue) is simple to adapt to any campaign. Ditto "Fallen Angel," although with a little more work. Although we give several suggestions in "Steel Shadows" on how to adapt the adventure to settings other than Eberron, it works best "as is" as a murder mystery involving warforged. Every so often, we'll do an "explicitly Eberron" adventure just as we will for Greyhawk and the Forgotten Realms. But for the most part, the emphasis is on providing adventures usable to the majority of our readers, whether they're playing Eberron, the Forgotten Realms, or Red Steel, for that matter.I agree that the presentation on "Queen with Burning Eyes" isn't up to the usual standard, which is why you haven't seen maps using miniatures tiles since #113. >>>I don't follow you. Could you explain how using Greyhawk as a backdrop helps an Eberron or FR DM rather than using a generic backdrop?>>>Using Greyhawk as a backdrop helps an Eberron player exactly as much as using a generic backdrop, which is to say "not much." But the job of the magazine is not to serve Eberron and Forgotten Realms players exclusively, but rather to serve the general Dungeons & Dragons fandom. My informed opinion is that the majority of our adventures are useful to the majority of D&D gamers no matter what setting those players use. Our research tells us that most of our readers don't use _any_ of the official settings.--Erik MonaEditor-in-ChiefDragon & Dungeon</blockquote>

Verification