The Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth is up (EDIT-All Chapters Now Added)

[qstor]

There was aslo a Living Greyhawk module tied to Tsojcanth, that mentioned a Cult of Drezlena (sp) I guess that information wasn't included either. I guess Living Greyhawk didn't affect Greyhawk as far as WOTC is concerned.

Mike

 

[Lidgar]

I really like some of the background story and associated writing in this adventure. Kudos to the authors. The presentation/editing is where I feel it falls flat. Many of my "complaints" have already been stated by others: the prolific use of supplements as a way to push said supplements; the issues with the Delve format (why don't they shelf this idea already? Or at least make it an optional download, like an appendix); and the poor production quality (lack or art, quality of the Delve maps, etc.) It may be that part of the "problem" is that this adventure may have been originally slated for a free WotC download, separate from the Dungeon DI. It has the feeling of being repackaged into the DI, almost as a "Hey, let's start the DI early and use this as our first adventure! It has old-school name recognition, and nothing sells like old-school!" Not sure if this is the case, and, as I said at the beginning, it really is pretty good so far - it just looks rough around the edges when compared to the Paizo adventures to date (an comparisons to Paizo will be unavoidable).

Regarding some of the comments on the current (and future) generation of D&D and the style WOTC has adopted, I have viewed it simply as thus: D&D is now much more like a video game, with rules programmed in, not the free-flowing set of Pirate Guidelines that many of us grew up with. That is not to say both can't be fun, but they are certainly different.

 

[Lancelot]

I'd just like to say "thanks" to Ari for his work on this one. It's a great blast of nostalgia for an old-timer like myself who both played and DM'ed the Lost Caverns (more than once, on both accounts) back in the heady days of 1e.

Big props for the expanded back-story and the nifty encounters in Chapter 1. The Cauchimera is fantastic, and the depraved gnomes are a riot.

On the converse side, I'd like to echo a few comments already made about Chapter 2 (...and I'll follow your suggestion and try to post them on the Wizards' boards as well).

1) Editing: The dungeon delve format is a major annoyance to me personally. The most useful thing about it is the more detailed maps for the encounter, showing positioning of creatures and special features. The simple enlargement of the 10'-grid map doesn't provide that.

2) Concept: The old S4 module, like most modules in those days, threw a mish-mash of creatures together in an enclosed ecosystem with no real rhyme or reason. I guess one of the reasons I remember it so fondly was that everything was new and amazing back then. Nobody had heard of dao, pech, marids, fomorian giants, chasme demons, mobats, crysmals, behirs, or any of the literally dozens of new monsters introduced by the module. But these days, I can't help but feel that we've got a little past that. I was (personally) sort of hoping for a 3e update where there wasn't a combat encounter in nearly every room... where the creature list was a little less "grab-something-from-every-book". Maybe more options for diplomacy (maybe those wacky fomorians... sorry, ettins... need the party's help?), puzzle-solving (how about a golem-riddle-puzzle, rather than the golem just lunges out to attack?), and so forth.

Overall, though, I very much appreciate the effort. I get a lot of pleasure from reading re-makes of the "classics", and Lost Caverns is one of my favorites.

No chance, I suppose, of you (or anyone else) taking a stab at a 3e (or better yet, 4e!) version of "B4- The Lost City"...?

 

[Mouseferatu]

Big props for the expanded back-story and the nifty encounters in Chapter 1. The Cauchimera is fantastic, and the depraved gnomes are a riot.

Thanks. And yeah, I love how the cauchimera turned out. I'm hoping for an opportunity to convert it to 4E in the relatively near future.

I was (personally) sort of hoping for a 3e update where there wasn't a combat encounter in nearly every room... where the creature list was a little less "grab-something-from-every-book". Maybe more options for diplomacy (maybe those wacky fomorians... sorry, ettins... need the party's help?), puzzle-solving (how about a golem-riddle-puzzle, rather than the golem just lunges out to attack?), and so forth.

I agree, that would've been nice. But as I understand it, Ed Albert's objective was a pretty straight-forward translation to the new edition, with minimal dramatic changes, and I can certainly respect that intention.

No chance, I suppose, of you (or anyone else) taking a stab at a 3e (or better yet, 4e!) version of "B4- The Lost City"...?

Well, I think it's probably too late (or at least, nearly so) to see many more 3E conversions. But as far as conversions of classic modules to 4E? Yeah, I'm given to understand that WotC has already said such things are likely to happen, and I know that I'd dearly love to be part of that.

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

updates to old modules

My personal opinion on updates, is that when doing a 'Return to' type update it's appropriate to change the tone or modernize the dungeon, but when doing a straight conversion, the design of the original (with all its warts) should be respected.

Haven't read this one yet (I'm on vacation in Argentina), but am looking forward to it.

Ken

 

[Maggan]

We did not, ever have someone from TSR telling us the way to game, however. One of the big tag lines back in the day was run your game the way you want, dont be a slve to the rules, yadda yadda yadda.

Apart from the infamous Gygax missives in Dragon, I guess ...

/M

 

[francisca]

I thought that was kinda nifty, but apparently development decided that they really want PCs to progress through the three "chapters" in order.

All aboard!

 

[Raven Crowking]

Apart from the infamous Gygax missives in Dragon, I guess ...

Often mentioned, seldom quoted, and always given far too much weight......

IMHO.

 

[TerraDave]

This has become an interesting thread...

* Overall, I like what I am seeing so far, and look forward to the rest.
* I like the delve format.
* I like the amount of detail that has been retained from the original, but the new stuff, (mostly from the wilderness section) is also cool.

But, as has been noted many times, by many industry profesionals, it is amazing how demanding people become reagarding products they don't have to pay for. If this a normal for-sale product, I am sure people posting would be more positive on it. Seriously.

 

[Maggan]

seldom quoted.

Dragon issue 17, page 15 to 16, e.g.

Another interesting text can be found in issue 26, page 28 to 30.

They are rather lengthy texts, and I don't think it would be prudent of me to post them in their entirety to this board, out of respect for the author. But I'm sure you can find someone in your circle of gamers who own the magazines, or the Dragon CD archive.

I agree with some of the things Gygax is saying in the texts, and disagree with others, but if those texts are not telling people how the game should be played (see e.g. the evils of spell points, and what constitues a proper AD&D game), then neither are the WotC comments that some people are getting riled up about.

/M