Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Killer Shrike" data-source="post: 2012272" data-attributes="member: 1829">I too am a Greyhawker with a long running (12+ years) persisted campaign. I can agree with a lot of what Aelfric is saying; there are elements of Return ttToEE that dont jive well or at all with either the original Temple or the setting.Fortunately, Ive always used Tharizdun as a major baddy, with the Scarlet Brotherhood being a cult of Tharizdun in a more Gygaxian interpretation than the rather lame (IMO) interpretation of the much more recent Scarlet Brotherhood 2e supplement. Thus, Tharizdun cult(s) causing heinous trouble behind multiple veils of deceit and misdirection is old hat; otherwise taken as a standalone module on its own merits Return _would_ require major retooling as Aelfric has stated.However, taken as a 'Return' module, there are many significant details that just do not jive with the old-school ToEE. Perhaps most importantly there is little allowances made to DMs that have run ToEE in the past and persist the outcome of such. Frex, as Aelfric points out, the status of Thrommel does have a big political impact on Furyondy, its enemies, and allies. When we ran the temple Thrommel was freed and returned to Furyondy, but due to political repercussions and the suspect manner of his incarceration/return the government suppressed information about his return and sequestered him. The DM at the time played it up that Thrommel's mental stability wasnt what it could be after his ordeal and Belvor decided he was unfit to rule. Im sure Thrommel was released or killed in many other people's go at it as well. And yet, here he is as a Vampiric Blackgaurd.Lareth and Hadrek are two more needless inclusions. In our campaign, they were both killed with extreme prejuidice and malice aforethought. We burned the bodies, scattered the ashes and considered it a good days work. Thier presense in the Return causes continuity issues right out of the box. The Lortmils volcano was a little irritating, but could be worked around with some rectification.  Those are just the big ones. There are other minor continuity gripes here and there but they are to be expected and are easily ignored/rectifyed for the most part. It is a Return adventure and some suppositions must be made by the writer; I can accept that and adapt as necessary so long as the suppositions are not threaded thru the plot too heavily.All GH continuity adventures aside, I am of 2 minds regarding the Return itself. On one hand it is a very polished product mechanically and organizationally. Its the sort of format that I would like to see more of. It is a product that serves as a campaign-unto-itself or as an adventure requiring as much or little recourse to additional material as the DM wishes. I think this is in general a positive thing as it serves as a sort of primer for non-GHers, and allows for those that just want the adventure and not the setting. Realistically speaking, the product is actually least useful to long time DMs with long running GH campaigns which might seem back-asswards but makes sense from a sales point of view.On the other hand, reading thru the adventure, I personally find it to be rather simplistic and kind of random. A lot of the encounters are obviously contrived just to provide a gimmicky or scripted encounter. There seems to be very little versimilitude or logical arrangement of characters, threats, and the existance/layout of the environment. This really bothers me, and is the reason why I dont usually use published material, making heavy modifications even when I do. This scores big minuses for me personally, but I cant really knock it much when rating it objectively because thats just the way most supplements are; its the nature of beast. No writer can please all of the people all of the time or take into account individual playing groups accountrements and disposition or kowtow to individual DMs preferences/predilictions.I do have some specific discontents about the Return, but the big sop for me is simple: the original ToEE was basically pretty STOOPID. Heresy, I know, but it made no sense whatsover. Several levels of the dungeon itself were obviously almost certainly designed with a random generator. The Hows and Whys for its layout, population, and even its existance not really developed or plausible. Why the infamous moathouse was a day away and more distant from any real military threat than the temple it was supposed to protect or distract attention from. The color-coordinated cults that worship the elements for no apparant reason, in the temple run by servants of Iuz, with Lolth-worshippers hanging out too. The very existance of Zuggtmoy. The Temple was supposedly razed by the forces of good years before, but youd never know it other than the condition of the watch tower outside the temple. The main door is warded, but there's 2 doors around the corner from it and an underground passage to circumvent it. Stirges in the rafters. Items hidden under floorstones and in any asinine place you can imagine, again for no logical reason. It just goes on and on. But thats the ToEE. And its still fun. Thus, Im willing to cut the RtoEE some slack. Objectively and on its own terms, Id say it was a 4.5 or so. Personally, I would have to very heavily ammend it to run in my campaign and really think the continuity errors could have been avoided easily by a couple pages of exposition and alternate NPCs to fill the Lareth, Thrommel, and Heydrak slots; for those and some other gripes I would rate it around a 2.5 or so. Neverthe less I can totally see Aelfric's position and support him in his 1 rating. That is a fair rating for someone in Aelfric's position and as he said, others mileage may vary.As far as the GH fan-boy crack above, why was that necessary? Our opinion's dont matter because we like GH? I didnt realize that liking GH was such a mark of shame. Should we pin scarlet G's to our shirts so our sin is visible to all gamers?</blockquote>

Verification