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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Orcus" data-source="post: 1795473" data-attributes="member: 1254">I really agree with Mike.Some of my factors are more measurable or knowable. Like design influence or historical impact. Some are more subjective. Playability is a huge factor for me. Some are totally not objective at all, such as memorability. What is memorable to me may not be memorable to you, or it may be memorable to you but not favorably.So I think we all just have to agree that these choices are very subjective. We have good reasons for them, but they are subjective to a large degree. What I tried to do is take my DM style out of it somewhat and focus on the adventure itself. Sure, I cant take out of my evaluation that I will viscerally like the modules that I like. It is real hard for me to vote for a module as top 10 if I've had a bad experience with it as a DM. I'm not sure you can flunk a module just because you didnt like it as a player. So I tried to broaden my view. 1. The play of the module. This is a huge criteria for me. Which is why I rate Frost Giant so highly. That thing plays great. Same with White Plume Mountain. Over and over time in and time out the module plays great. It can accept the party doing lots of different things and somehow always ends up in an epic experience. Though that could just mean the module fits more with my DM style. This is a key factor. If it doesnt play great, it can have the best maps ever and not be a top 10 module. Some criticize Tomb of Horrors on this point and it is true that TODAY Tomb of Horrors doesnt always play so great, particularly now that eveyone knows about it. But back in the day, there was nothing like it. Running players for their first time through that dungeon is amazing. But that is very hard to replicate today since so many people know what it is about. Plus, it is for real experienced players. You cant get newbies and say "here are some 9th level pregens, lets go in this module I have." Well, you can but the result will be death and death pretty quickly. It wont be fun. But when run for a good group of experienced people, that module is pretty much the definitave high level challenge. AND you have a lot of players who hate Tomb because their characters died there. To that I say too bad. It is still an awesome module. People dont properly appreciate an epic death. And dying in the Tomb is a story you can tell forever. Which leads me to point 2...2. Game History. This is important to me. How much of a defining part of what D&D is comes from this module? That is why, to me, Giants, Drow and Tomb of Horrors MUST be included. Same with Keep on the Borderlands (and some could argue In Search of the Unknown, but I thought that wasnt even a design, it was a map with some fill in the blank stuff, but I digress.) This is why I include "Palace of the Vampire Queen". You could easily (as Pramas did, and I agree with) also cite Temple of the Frog. They were the first. That alone is worth mention. This is objective if you know the history of D&D. Similarly, the "common experience" of D&D is a part of game history. Everyone has been in GDQ. Everyone has been in the Tomb of Horrors. And if you havent, you need to go do it now. That is like not having even one Stones or Beatles album. Like classic literature and classic rock, those adventures are a necessary part of the D&D cannon.3. Design Influence. Did the module do something new and unique and did it influence other modules. Again, Tomb is unmatched here. It set the standard for what a "killer dungeon" is. Period. Ravenloft does the same. So do all three giants and drow modules--they created the "series" concept which is perhaps perfected in the Desert of Desolation series. This too is objective if you know the history of D&D. One could argue for Queen of the Demonweb Pits here, because planar adventuring was new and cool. But I thought that module was otherwise lame. It never played well (I played it many times). It isnt that significant, since you got to fight Lolth already in D3 (kind of). But from a design standpoint it is certainly fresh. So I dont mind it slipping in with the rest of the D series. And I think it is legitimate to take design issues into account. Not just because I am a designer. But because seminal modules shape the way future modules are done. Its the same with music.4. Test of Time. I've been playing D&D for well over 20 years. I have run most of these modules bunches of times. So I am not basing my decision on "I ran it once and liked it." Similarly, there are some modules (some from Dungeon issues I dont have) that I have not run as much and maybe that hurt them. If the module didnt stand up to the test of time, I couldnt put it in the top 10. I will admit, I did not even consider a single module I never atleast played in. I wouldnt go on reputation alone. Which admittedly leaves out Raisia (since I have never owned it or played it). But I am hardcore and basically have everything ever (other than some rare stuff and some early Dungeon Mags where i let my subscription lapse and was out of D&D and playing other stuff).5. Memorability. Call it excitement. Call it geek factor. I dont know. Some modules are just flat out more memorable and epic. Tomb. WPM. Maybe I am wrong, but if I dont get all geeky and smily about a module, I can't put it in the top 10. Sometimes it is the play of the module (like Frost Giant, a ratehr ordinary seeming module that always plays just great with epic battles), sometimes it is the "coolness" of the module--the artifacts in WPM, the drow in G3, the underdark in D1, the drow city in D3, the demilich in Tomb. etc. Some put Expediditon to the Barrier Peaks here. I just never liked that module. Maybe it was the cheesy vegepygmies. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> So those are the things I looked at. I can't say that I picked things because I am a designer. These would be my choices if I never ever ran a d20 company. But being a designer gave me a deeper insight on a few of them. Like the difficulty of writing high level meatgrinders like Tomb. Man, that is hard to do. But that module is my #1 even without that insight. Or Masks of Nyrlathotep. That thing blew me away before I was a designer. And now that I am one, it is just all the more impressive.I think Erik picked me because he knows I am passionate about adventures. I hope all of you are too. And by not including your favorite, I'm not saying you dont have the right to love it to death. Hey, you could like that stupid Castle Greyhawk with the Alice In Wonderland and all that other tongue in cheek junk. I hate it. It could be your number 1 and you could have bought 1000 copies of Tomb of Horrors and burned them. In the end, this list is no better than a list of top 100 albums. There are some there that I think deserve to be there, but I have never yet agreed with a top 100 list. Heck, I dont even like the results of Erik's survey--why, because it doesnt match my list <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I love this discussion by the way <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Clark</blockquote>

Verification