Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5021227" data-attributes="member: 4937">I fully sympathize.&nbsp; The original is such a classic and covers so many of the basics, that there hardly seems to be a trope left over that is isn't well-worn.&nbsp; Bruce Cordell's work reads like a very great module and is plenty deadly, but for the most part Moil never felt to me evocative of the style of the original Tomb.&nbsp; Some of that was necessary.&nbsp; The dangers of the tomb wouldn't really hold up to characters of a significantly higher level (or significantly better equipment) than the sample characters.&nbsp; But one of the things that was so cool about the original was that for the most part, a party of cautious 2nd and 3rd level characters could overcome the challenges.&nbsp; Granted, its not likely to happen unless you've read the text, but nonetheless the oppurtunity for player skill to really shine is there.&nbsp; All the extra hit points and stuff really are is a buffer in which you can write your mistakes.&nbsp; They aren't essential to the solution.&nbsp; 'Die, no save' turns out to have a certain fairness in its application that is hard to capture with anything else.&nbsp; Acererak plays fair.Moil wasn't really like that.&nbsp; Those hit points and strong attacks were necessary in Moil.&nbsp; Avoiding death in Moil required being both high level and lucky, as some amount of damage was unavoidable and many of the challenges morphed from 'Do something, die, no save.' to 'Get hit by a monster, die no save'.&nbsp; It's a bit easier to avoid 'doing something', than it is to avoid 'get hit by a monster'.&nbsp; The third edition version of the tomb was even further away from the feel of the original than that though.&nbsp; In the 3rd edition vs. I read, it was the monsters that were the chief hazard - the real 'Horror' in the tomb - and the traps were almost secondary.I'm curious to see how you approached this problem in 4e.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 5021227, member: 4937"] I fully sympathize. The original is such a classic and covers so many of the basics, that there hardly seems to be a trope left over that is isn't well-worn. Bruce Cordell's work reads like a very great module and is plenty deadly, but for the most part Moil never felt to me evocative of the style of the original Tomb. Some of that was necessary. The dangers of the tomb wouldn't really hold up to characters of a significantly higher level (or significantly better equipment) than the sample characters. But one of the things that was so cool about the original was that for the most part, a party of cautious 2nd and 3rd level characters could overcome the challenges. Granted, its not likely to happen unless you've read the text, but nonetheless the oppurtunity for player skill to really shine is there. All the extra hit points and stuff really are is a buffer in which you can write your mistakes. They aren't essential to the solution. 'Die, no save' turns out to have a certain fairness in its application that is hard to capture with anything else. Acererak plays fair. Moil wasn't really like that. Those hit points and strong attacks were necessary in Moil. Avoiding death in Moil required being both high level and lucky, as some amount of damage was unavoidable and many of the challenges morphed from 'Do something, die, no save.' to 'Get hit by a monster, die no save'. It's a bit easier to avoid 'doing something', than it is to avoid 'get hit by a monster'. The third edition version of the tomb was even further away from the feel of the original than that though. In the 3rd edition vs. I read, it was the monsters that were the chief hazard - the real 'Horror' in the tomb - and the traps were almost secondary. I'm curious to see how you approached this problem in 4e. [/QUOTE]

Verification