Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="(un)reason" data-source="post: 8160259" data-attributes="member: 27780">Dungeon Issue 12: Jul/Aug 1988part 1/568 pages. It seems they're in a whimsical mood again, as the cover shows a leprechaun painting cows green for some reason. Well, that's definitely an adventure hook worth following, to see where it leads us. Of course, given that it's fae-related, it might well lead into a string of well-prepared pranks, and the pot of gold at the end turning into leaves the next morning. Let's see if there's any way to get the better of them in this particular scenario, or the railroad inevitably leads to them getting the last laugh.Editorial: Straight away, they cement that they are indeed in a whimsical mood this issue with a quote from the big name parody book Bored of the Rings. Well, you've got to balance out the boring stuff, like making indexes, that also comes with the job. Yup, only two years in, and they're already doing an index to make it easier to track down adventures of a particular level. They grow up so fast these days. Very interestingly, what they're most pleased about in this accomplishment is that they did it all with freelance submissions, not adventures written by the staff. Yet despite that, or actually perhaps because of it, they've maintained a considerably higher average standard of adventures than the ones in Polyhedron. It makes sense when you remember that the staff writers are working on tighter schedules than the freelancers, and they don't have the same luxury to just reject their creations outright or  tell them to start again from scratch if something isn't working. Plus there's the whole on spec element. Just how many submissions do they get for each one they actually publish? I guess what it illustrates is that gatekeeping can be a good thing as long as it uses the right criteria, and the gatekeepers aren't getting so many submissions themselves that they can't properly evaluate each of them & wind up making decisions based on superficial looks/listens to the start before dropping most, or letting bad submissions through just because they're by familiar names. Well, it seems to be working for them at the moment, so let's hope it continues. Letters: The big topic this issue is module length. David Howery is part of the mild majority that would prefer to see the average length go up a bit. But not so much that you have to split them between multiple issues, as it's tricky to spin even the longest adventure in here out a full 8 weeks while you wait for the next instalment, so you wind up having to wait until the whole thing is out before you start it at all anyway. There's a good reason why 32 pages became the standard module length in the early days of the hobby. The second letter covers a related topic, wanting more high level modules. They do seem to be positively correlated, don't they. Where are the short but tough high level encounters to pad out a session? Could really do with even a few of those.The third one also wants more high level modules, and more Oriental Adventures ones in general. Turtlemania is really boosting the profile of ninjas and anthromorphic animals, so it's not surprising D&D players would also want more adventures that involve those things.The fourth one wants them to try an epic multi-parter. The one two-parter they tried didn't get much response, (What?!) so unfortunately they won't be trying that again for quite a while. They have to include a contrary opinion though. A young Wolfgang Baur (who ironically will be involved in creating some of the more epic adventures in Dungeon's future) pipes up in favour of short but flexible encounters that you can drop more easily into any campaign. Those are the ones more likely to actually get used rather than just read. Our next six letters all concern the merits of solo adventures, with four for and two against. Enough to keep on doing them, but be careful of overdoing it and wearing out their welcome. The next one asks about the feasibility of Forgotten Realms adventures. Technically all the OA adventures are already FR ones anyway, but yes, as long as you don't contradict canon or their metaplot plans. This may get increasingly difficult as the sheer quantity of details racks up. A slightly more leftfield letter asks if they plan to reprint the adventure from Dragon 131 in here. Nope. What would be the point when nearly all Dungeon buyers also get Dragon anyway?Finally, we have someone complaining about the use of Unearthed Arcana material in adventures. Did you not the memo that everything in it is Official AD&D™ material that you're expected to incorporate into your game to keep it tournament-correct? Gary was very clear about this, and even though he's gone, it will remain TSR policy until the new edition is released.</blockquote>

Verification