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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sanglorian" data-source="post: 6099464" data-attributes="member: 83822">I've cut up and reorganised The Hills of Gore to give a rough outline of how I imagine the compilation being reworked. As you can see, some content gets pushed to the front of the region description, other content gets put in appendices at the back of the book, and the rest stays in hex descriptions. I personally wouldn't get use out of a document with more traditional and concise hex entries, but others might of course.I don't think player side documents would hurt either. One thing I was thinking is that GMs (or us) could compile player's guides around particular campaigns. So if you're running a game about the Hoard plotting to drive the orcs out of the North, you'd cut-and-paste content relating to that into a new document, remove the secrets, etc.I'm a bit wary that writing up a region in 'gazetteer' format might 'fix' that region in place, instead of encouraging people to build on it. One thing I like about the player's guides is that there's clearly so much more out there that you don't know, and that you can contribute to.I think a monster book would make a terrific stopgap, by the way. We've got so many awesome ones we could flesh out.EDIT:Now I think about it, you wouldn't necessarily have to sort the hexes by number. 'Homes of the Lords Sanguine' would make a great heading under which you could put some hexes.Also, to explain what I left in a hex and what I pulled out, basically if I thought you'd only need the information if you were reading the hex, I left it in the hex. If I thought it was general information you'd need if you were running something in Gore, I put it in the regional description. If I thought it was info you'd need if you were running something anywhere in the Shrouded Lands, I put it in the appendices.</blockquote>

Verification