Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Spatula" data-source="post: 4655193" data-attributes="member: 2198">*shrug* It's set in the implied setting, and details its region fairly well.&nbsp; The city of Overlook, for example, (from adventures #2-4) has a lot of space devoted to fleshing it out.&nbsp; In general it follows the DMG advice of starting small and building up the areas of interest from there, which has been good DM advice for a long time now (I think there's some similar advice way back in the 2e DMG).Well, I'm guessing the early ones suffered from the authors being overworked.&nbsp; Getting 4e out the door, starting up the new Dragon &amp; Dungeon, DDI stuff... when the first batch of adventures were being written, there was a lot of other stuff going on at Wizards.&nbsp; Plus the rules were still in flux.But part of that is also that they bit off more than they could chew, I think.&nbsp; With the DDI in general, but the AP idea specifically.&nbsp; &quot;Oh, it's just a bunch of linked adventures, how hard could it be?&quot;&nbsp; Without fully realing all the work Paizo had come to put into the AP concept.&nbsp; You can see this back when DMs starting asking about getting an overview of the whole AP.&nbsp; &quot;We don't want to ruin the surprise,&quot; was the answer, which showed that they weren't up to speed with how Paizo had evolved and refined the concept.&nbsp; Or that Wizards hadn't figured out the outline yet, but I believe Ari Marmell has said that that isn't the case (and in any case I'm more likely to believe ignorance over maliciousness).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Spatula, post: 4655193, member: 2198"] *shrug* It's set in the implied setting, and details its region fairly well. The city of Overlook, for example, (from adventures #2-4) has a lot of space devoted to fleshing it out. In general it follows the DMG advice of starting small and building up the areas of interest from there, which has been good DM advice for a long time now (I think there's some similar advice way back in the 2e DMG). Well, I'm guessing the early ones suffered from the authors being overworked. Getting 4e out the door, starting up the new Dragon & Dungeon, DDI stuff... when the first batch of adventures were being written, there was a lot of other stuff going on at Wizards. Plus the rules were still in flux. But part of that is also that they bit off more than they could chew, I think. With the DDI in general, but the AP idea specifically. "Oh, it's just a bunch of linked adventures, how hard could it be?" Without fully realing all the work Paizo had come to put into the AP concept. You can see this back when DMs starting asking about getting an overview of the whole AP. "We don't want to ruin the surprise," was the answer, which showed that they weren't up to speed with how Paizo had evolved and refined the concept. Or that Wizards hadn't figured out the outline yet, but I believe Ari Marmell has said that that isn't the case (and in any case I'm more likely to believe ignorance over maliciousness). [/QUOTE]

Verification