Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DragonLancer" data-source="post: 9702612" data-attributes="member: 11868">I ran both during the days of 3.x and out of the two, myself and my players preferred Scarred Lands.I ran two campaigns with Wilderlands and no one was really impressed by the setting. I remember one player saying it was Greyhawk lite, meaning that it felt extremely generic and without any real setting hooks other than what I as the DM put into it. Another player felt that it was too much like 1950's and 60's fantasy. A little weird and not all that grounded. I see what they mean. After two campaigns we never went back to it.Scarred Lands on the other hand I was a fan of from day 1. It was different from the usual D&D campaign setting and but no much that it didn't feel like D&D. In the early days I got a D&D meets Clash of the Titans vibe, and I would try and include that in what I wrote. I ran several campaigns on Scarn and they were popular. I lost interest after a few years when they started to take the tone away from the D&D/Clash o the Titans vibe in their books.Of the two, I think Scarred Lands is better written and fits better with the D&D dynamic. It has life where I feel Wilderlands falls a little flat.</blockquote>