Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cerebral Paladin" data-source="post: 3395993" data-attributes="member: 3448">I noted that to some extent it had that problem in my response.&nbsp; Also, I think there is a difference between &quot;going back to what Classics were when they worked&quot; and &quot;reviving Classics as what they were in the last, sad days.&quot;&nbsp; IMO, there was an effort to change Classics in the hopes of making them bigger; they were never as popular as LG is now, but there was a hope that they could be more popular.&nbsp; Those changes were a disaster and made them not worth playing.&nbsp; I stopped going to GenCon because of those changes, along with many other people I know.Also, I think the key change I was suggesting was moving to a volunteer-based model (as you suggested as well).&nbsp; When Robert Wiese was the lynch-pin through which all Classic modules had to go, and he had limited time and other RPGA duties, the system didn't work.&nbsp; But then, if Ian Richards had to approve every LG regional game, that system wouldn't work either.&nbsp; I think we could make Classics work if we had a good system in place and a good set (not necessarily large) of volunteers who were actually doing the work.(Incidentally, Classics became at the very end &quot;show case WotC's new product.&quot;&nbsp; The trouble was, these were typically &quot;show case WotC's new product badly.&quot;&nbsp; I'd be perfectly happy to write modules displaying the coolness of the new splatbook, which is a value Classics can provide to the RPGA as a marketting tool.&nbsp; But the modules have to be good modules, or there's less than no point.&nbsp; The idiotic &quot;travel into the northern frost lands and get frostbite&quot; module I ran made me much *less* likely to want to buy the cold environment book they were trying to use it to hawk; likewise a bad &quot;oooo, lots of undead&quot; game and Liber Mortis.)The problem from my perspective is that your re-invention bears no resemblance to the old Classics, except to some extent for the old Team tournaments (like the Open).&nbsp; I like a good Team tournament, but it's not what Classics were.&nbsp; Maybe you're right that Classics is a lost cause at an organized level, and I should stick to writing and running them at local cons.&nbsp; But even if your idea is the best thing since sliced bread, I wouldn't view it as going towards bringing back Classics.&nbsp; I also think that competitive, team based adventures work BETTER in the Living campaigns, but that's a different post.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cerebral Paladin, post: 3395993, member: 3448"] I noted that to some extent it had that problem in my response. Also, I think there is a difference between "going back to what Classics were when they worked" and "reviving Classics as what they were in the last, sad days." IMO, there was an effort to change Classics in the hopes of making them bigger; they were never as popular as LG is now, but there was a hope that they could be more popular. Those changes were a disaster and made them not worth playing. I stopped going to GenCon because of those changes, along with many other people I know. Also, I think the key change I was suggesting was moving to a volunteer-based model (as you suggested as well). When Robert Wiese was the lynch-pin through which all Classic modules had to go, and he had limited time and other RPGA duties, the system didn't work. But then, if Ian Richards had to approve every LG regional game, that system wouldn't work either. I think we could make Classics work if we had a good system in place and a good set (not necessarily large) of volunteers who were actually doing the work. (Incidentally, Classics became at the very end "show case WotC's new product." The trouble was, these were typically "show case WotC's new product badly." I'd be perfectly happy to write modules displaying the coolness of the new splatbook, which is a value Classics can provide to the RPGA as a marketting tool. But the modules have to be good modules, or there's less than no point. The idiotic "travel into the northern frost lands and get frostbite" module I ran made me much *less* likely to want to buy the cold environment book they were trying to use it to hawk; likewise a bad "oooo, lots of undead" game and Liber Mortis.) The problem from my perspective is that your re-invention bears no resemblance to the old Classics, except to some extent for the old Team tournaments (like the Open). I like a good Team tournament, but it's not what Classics were. Maybe you're right that Classics is a lost cause at an organized level, and I should stick to writing and running them at local cons. But even if your idea is the best thing since sliced bread, I wouldn't view it as going towards bringing back Classics. I also think that competitive, team based adventures work BETTER in the Living campaigns, but that's a different post. [/QUOTE]

Verification