Revised Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth Coming Soon...

[grodog]

So the anagram doesn't mean John Scott?

It could (you'll note that I had ?? after that on my anagrams page ), but I haven't found any evidence to suggest that there was a John Scott involved in the original tourney or of any John Scott's in the original GH campaign. Sounds like a good Q for EGG

For reference, there are several folks mentioned in the MDG tourney version, but not Scott's and only one John: http://home.flash.net/~brenfrow/rp/rp-lost.htm

 

[Thulcondar]

Please, please PLEASE let it go!

Tsojcanth was a great, and even classic, module. It is complete. It is in no need of expansion or revision or anything else.

If WOTC must revisit this material, why not do something new, like another dungeon complex of Iggwilv in the Yatils? Or perhaps thwart some attempt of Iggwilv to return to power in the Flanaess? But why, oh why, must they use the name Tsojcanth? It's just pandering...

 

[Mortellan]

Oh sweet jebus....

 

[Mouseferatu]

Tsojcanth was a great, and even classic, module. It is complete. It is in no need of expansion or revision or anything else.

Lots of people enjoy playing the classic modules in 3E. Why begrudge them a converted version thereof?

 

[ruleslawyer]

...even Undermountain, probably the best-regarded of the three, tends to draw a lot of reactions along the lines of "nice looking set of maps -- too bad they didn't bother to fill 'em in..."

Well, Undermountain was specifically *designed* to be an open-ended dungeon for the DM to customize. I've dropped everything from encounters with the latest neat homebrew monster to entire prepackaged modules into that thing when playing a Waterdeep/UM campaign. I don't think Expedition to Undermountain will really be able to "fix" that, mainly because a) some DMs, like me, view the open-endedness as a feature, not a bug; and b) detailing Undermountain's nine levels and fourteen sub-levels would require a product that made Ptolus look like a pamphlet by comparison.

But back to topic (sorta):

So will they call the revisited S3 Expedition to the Expedition to the Barrier Peaks?

 

[Angel Tarragon]

Any news of a release date for this adventure?

 

[Pbartender]

But why, oh why, must they use the name Tsojcanth?

Because of people like me.

At heart, I'm one of the old-school gamers. I've been playing D&D for a little over 20 years or so ago, starting out with the Basic Red Book that my big brother wasn't using any more in 3rd grade and later moved on to 1st edition AD&D. Most of my formative D&D experience consisted of playing in or DMing all of these classic adventure modules: Expedition to the Barrier Peaks, Isle of Dread, Tomb of Horrors, White Plume Mountain, Against the Giants and so on. There's a lot of nostalgic and fond memories there.

Right now, most of my players are people who have joined the game within the last 5-10 years. Some of them have never played anything other than 3.0 or 3.5. These revised -- actually, converted would probably be a better word -- versions of old adventure modules are a chance for me to share that "Golden Age" experience with my newer players. It's also a chance for me, as a DM, to find out the difference 20 years of D&D experience can make when running, effectively, the same adventure module now... Can I make these adventures into somethign a little more than the straightforward (but extremely entertaining) dungeon crawls I ran in Junior High School.

It's the same reason I own the first seasons of all those campy cartoons I watched as a kid on DVD, like GI Joe, Transformers, Thundercats, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Voltron. I remember how much I enjoyed them as a kid, and I enjoy watching them with my own kids now because they enjoy them as much as I did.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Lots of people enjoy playing the classic modules in 3E. Why begrudge them a converted version thereof?

Because some people want other people to have fun exactly like they have fun, or have no fun at all.

 

[grodog]

Tsojcanth was a great, and even classic, module. It is complete. It is in no need of expansion or revision or anything else.

No disagreement there

If WOTC must revisit this material, why not do something new, like another dungeon complex of Iggwilv in the Yatils? Or perhaps thwart some attempt of Iggwilv to return to power in the Flanaess?

I've always thought that Tsojcanth was one of the modules that would best adapt to expansion, when done properly. Living quarters for Iggwilv and her henchmen/apprentices, and conjuration chambers/labs are obvious opportunities for further expansion of hidden levels/sub-levels in S4; plenty of other exist, too.

In terms of Iggwilv, Gygax followed up on her involvement in WG6 Isle of the Ape, as did Roger E. Moore in the late 2e Return of the Eight adventure.

 

[Thulcondar]

Lots of people enjoy playing the classic modules in 3E. Why begrudge them a converted version thereof?

Right now, most of my players are people who have joined the game within the last 5-10 years. Some of them have never played anything other than 3.0 or 3.5. These revised -- actually, converted would probably be a better word -- versions of old adventure modules are a chance for me to share that "Golden Age" experience with my newer players. It's also a chance for me, as a DM, to find out the difference 20 years of D&D experience can make when running, effectively, the same adventure module now... Can I make these adventures into somethign a little more than the straightforward (but extremely entertaining) dungeon crawls I ran in Junior High School.

If they were truly nothing more than updating the modules to the new rules set, I don't think I would have a problem with it. Changing some monster stats and magic item descriptions. No problem. In fact, it could probably be done in something the size of a Dragon article.

But we all know that these re-visits will entail much more than simply updating to cover the new rules. As Dr. McCoy observed in ST:TMP, "Engineers... they love to change things." The same can be said of game designers. What was there will be altered, and taken away, and new stuff added, and the nature of the original changed probably beyond recognition. Thin modules don't have a good enough profit margin, and the originals will need to be bulked up in order to make for fatter profits.

That's what I'm dreading. Not changing details in order to conform to the new rules, but rather changing the big picture "because we had the opportunity to do so."