Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Riastlin" data-source="post: 5497218" data-attributes="member: 94022">Oh I agree.&nbsp; I usually write my own mods, but when I first started DM'ing I very much appreciated having published mods available for consumption.&nbsp; I do agree as well that WotC's mods are often anything but ideal.&nbsp; I think part of this is a sympton of trying to please as many people as possible while making it as easy to fit into an existing campaign as possible.&nbsp; However, I do think that they really just need a better variety of options, and perhaps, at least with their online offerings, could do a better job of categorizing them.&nbsp; Say &quot;Mystery&quot;, &quot;dungeoncrawl&quot;, &quot;wilderness adventure&quot;, etc.&nbsp; That way a DM could quickly scan for the &quot;type&quot; of adventure they are looking for and could easily avoid reading mods that just won't work.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Hmmmm, I hadn't considered it quite like that.&nbsp; You may be right in this regard.&nbsp; However, I think it would be better if it were a &quot;generic&quot; setting than an official setting.&nbsp; In other words, Nentir Vale would be great since it can be dropped into any campaign, but I would be hesitant to have them start doing a &quot;Sword Coast&quot; or &quot;Eldeen Reaches&quot; book.&nbsp; Not because those couldn't be useful, but because I don't need a &quot;Sword Coast&quot;, &quot;Dalelands&quot;, &quot;Waterdeep&quot;, and &quot;Icewind Dale&quot;.&nbsp; One or two of these products could very well serve an entire edition of the game in my opinion, particularly if they are coupled with advice on creating your own towns, regions, nations, etc.&nbsp; I still think the general campaign setting books are good for providing the feel of a world for the DM that does not wish to homebrew, but detailed sub-settings really do not need to be all that plentiful (in published terms) in my opinion.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Riastlin, post: 5497218, member: 94022"] Oh I agree. I usually write my own mods, but when I first started DM'ing I very much appreciated having published mods available for consumption. I do agree as well that WotC's mods are often anything but ideal. I think part of this is a sympton of trying to please as many people as possible while making it as easy to fit into an existing campaign as possible. However, I do think that they really just need a better variety of options, and perhaps, at least with their online offerings, could do a better job of categorizing them. Say "Mystery", "dungeoncrawl", "wilderness adventure", etc. That way a DM could quickly scan for the "type" of adventure they are looking for and could easily avoid reading mods that just won't work. Hmmmm, I hadn't considered it quite like that. You may be right in this regard. However, I think it would be better if it were a "generic" setting than an official setting. In other words, Nentir Vale would be great since it can be dropped into any campaign, but I would be hesitant to have them start doing a "Sword Coast" or "Eldeen Reaches" book. Not because those couldn't be useful, but because I don't need a "Sword Coast", "Dalelands", "Waterdeep", and "Icewind Dale". One or two of these products could very well serve an entire edition of the game in my opinion, particularly if they are coupled with advice on creating your own towns, regions, nations, etc. I still think the general campaign setting books are good for providing the feel of a world for the DM that does not wish to homebrew, but detailed sub-settings really do not need to be all that plentiful (in published terms) in my opinion. [/QUOTE]

Verification