Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Philotomy Jurament" data-source="post: 5236892" data-attributes="member: 20854">My main reasons for excluding RA are the size and density of the levels, and the fact that it doesn't support low-level play.&nbsp; I think the upper levels (especially) of a campaign-style dungeon are the ones that see the most exploration and play, and need to be expansive and offer empty space and breathing room, as well as many caches of low-level treasure to support multiple groups and PC attrition (i.e. &quot;wasted&quot; or &quot;lost&quot; XP points due to PC deaths).&nbsp; Rappan Athuk's upper levels are just too small and too dense to support that kind of play, in my opinion.&nbsp; I'm not saying you couldn't run a campaign around RA, or that it isn't a good dungeon.&nbsp; It just doesn't have some of the elements that I consider prominent for the persistent, campaign-style design.(FWIW, I ran RA, too, when I was running 3e.&nbsp; I had a good time with it.&nbsp; I think Necromancer Games released some of the better &quot;old schoolish&quot; 3e modules: RA, Tomb of Abysthor, and Demons &amp; Devils are probably my three favorites, from them.)I wouldn't say that a persistent, campaign-style dungeon must look like Castle Greyhawk, but I do think that there are certain elements that such dungeons have in common.&nbsp; Of course, my personal &quot;definition&quot; and its list of essential elements isn't definitive or authoritative: it's just my personal definition.It probably also has something to do with my view of the &quot;campaign.&quot;&nbsp; As I mentioned in the other thread, I view the campaign from a pretty broad scope that spans more than just one group or the careers of a handful of PCs.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Philotomy Jurament, post: 5236892, member: 20854"] My main reasons for excluding RA are the size and density of the levels, and the fact that it doesn't support low-level play. I think the upper levels (especially) of a campaign-style dungeon are the ones that see the most exploration and play, and need to be expansive and offer empty space and breathing room, as well as many caches of low-level treasure to support multiple groups and PC attrition (i.e. "wasted" or "lost" XP points due to PC deaths). Rappan Athuk's upper levels are just too small and too dense to support that kind of play, in my opinion. I'm not saying you couldn't run a campaign around RA, or that it isn't a good dungeon. It just doesn't have some of the elements that I consider prominent for the persistent, campaign-style design. (FWIW, I ran RA, too, when I was running 3e. I had a good time with it. I think Necromancer Games released some of the better "old schoolish" 3e modules: RA, Tomb of Abysthor, and Demons & Devils are probably my three favorites, from them.) I wouldn't say that a persistent, campaign-style dungeon must look like Castle Greyhawk, but I do think that there are certain elements that such dungeons have in common. Of course, my personal "definition" and its list of essential elements isn't definitive or authoritative: it's just my personal definition. It probably also has something to do with my view of the "campaign." As I mentioned in the other thread, I view the campaign from a pretty broad scope that spans more than just one group or the careers of a handful of PCs. [/QUOTE]

Verification