Vor-Rukoth

[JeffB]

Anyone ever use this supplement for a campaign/adventures? I bought it a few years ago, and when I found out it was tied into Tieflings and Dragonborn, I put it aside, as I am a unashamed non-fan of both 4E-isms (but a fan of 4E, in general)

But after some recent paging through of VR,I realize there is alot of good adventuring hooks/inspiration material in there. I think with tweaking of the backstory/current socio-politics, I could find some good use for it.

Wondering how others may have used it. I also enjoyed Mearls' Hammerfast book, but neither of the Adventure Site books are often mentioned by 4E fans.Both books are pretty low on stats/crunch though, I would be using Dungeon World, I do not see why 5E, 13thAge or any retro-clone would not be a good fit either.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

I like Vor-Rukoth so much better of the two. I have used the battlemap and have several plans for the ruined city at some point. To me it has a tonne of potential. On that note, I really need to get that Eberron campaign going....

Hammerfast struck me as a bit more of a niche product (yes, even more niche than tieflings and dragonborn). I cannot imagine too many worlds where that relationship between orcs and dwarves would exist. I wonder if the basic idea was left over from the author's days as an OGL spambot?

 

[D'karr]

I've used both Hammerfast and Vor-Rukoth as inspiration pieces for the setting. Each has enough in them to provide ideas for adventures. Which I believe is the real strength of each product. They are not adventures, they are not splatbooks, and they are not campaign settings per se. They have a bit of adventure inspiration, and setting information.

 

[MoutonRustique]

Vor Rukoth is, to me, a prime example of a "Mearls" product. This, for me (and me alone), is a bad thing.

My meaning:
- it gives me almost enough information
- it gives me almost enough structure
- it gives me almost enough fluff

Man, I "hate" that guy... As examples of what I mean : there are very, very few names in Hammerfast. We are told there are all these NPCs doing cool stuff, but not what or who they are specifically.

The Vor Rukoth idea is awesome, but then we get no explanation how this "city" functions, it's used as a base by creatures that would be obliterated by trying to get to their hiding place. We get the sense that players are supposed to interact with many of the "residents", but we get no information on why these residents would even consider agreeable interactions.

The Arcana Evolved "ruins of adventure" product was the same way - it was chock-full of almost enough for my preferences.

ALMOST!



... as you can see, I possibly have some issues...

 

[D'karr]

... as you can see, I possibly have some issues...

You ALMOST have some issues!!!! LOL

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

Vor Rukoth is, to me, a prime example of a "Mearls" product. This, for me (and me alone), is a bad thing. (snip)

No, you're definitely not alone.

One of the reasons he was so prolific as an OGL spambot was he has a knack for spawning idea after idea after idea... but never seems to follow through to the end. I think this is also why his commentary during the course of the 5E playtest so often had to be corrected by Rodney Thompson a few days later.

Anyway, he's clearly a very creative guy... but his name as the lead designer on a product will cause me to read a lot of reviews before I spent my money on that product.

 

[D'karr]

Anyway, he's clearly a very creative guy... but his name as the lead designer on a product will cause me to read a lot of reviews before I spent my money on that product.

Being the lead designer is actually a good place for him to be. As long as you have a very good developer in the back end making sure the ideas are solid.

My experience with Mearls is conflicted and quite bittersweet. His Iron Heroes rework of 3e had some inspired ideas that never got fully developed. With 4e, I loved the quick and brutal Return to the Moathouse that he did for Origins 2008. Then I loathed KotS for how it took a really awesome system and completely presented it in its worst light, and his hit parade continued with Thunderspire. And I've had some choice words to say about his characterization of some of the mechanics of 4e. At times I have really wished he would rather stay silent and look dumb than open his mouth and confirm it. He, IMO, was the worst spokesman for any game system. So I agree with your sentiment of him being a great idea guy, but leaving things unfinished. With 4e I'm not sure if it was willful ignorance or he really did not get the power and flexibility inherent in the system. I think he really made things more difficult than they had to be, rigid if you will.

As for Vor-Rukoth I agree that the product is ALMOST there. However, for me that works to my advantage, which is why I like the product. I grew up with products like this from TSR. Products that gave you a small idea, and then left you to go and develop it to your satisfaction. This product is more detailed than what TSR provided in modules in some respects, so I liked how I could use it. Then it left some areas very undetailed, unlike TSR modules. This product kind of straddled the fence quite a bit. It's not an adventure, and it's almost a campaign booster. Both Hammerfast and VR gave me that sense of "let's see what can I grow this into", and it worked well for me.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

Being the lead designer is actually a good place for him to be. As long as you have a very good developer in the back end making sure the ideas are solid.

My experience with Mearls is conflicted and quite bittersweet. His Iron Heroes rework of 3e had some inspired ideas that never got fully developed. With 4e, I loved the quick and brutal Return to the Moathouse that he did for Origins 2008. Then I loathed KotS for how it took a really awesome system and completely presented it in its worst light, and his hit parade continued with Thunderspire. And I've had some choice words to say about his characterization of some of the mechanics of 4e. At times I have really wished he would rather stay silent and look dumb than open his mouth and confirm it. He, IMO, was the worst spokesman for any game system. So I agree with your sentiment of him being a great idea guy, but leaving things unfinished. With 4e I'm not sure if it was willful ignorance or he really did not get the power and flexibility inherent in the system. I think he really made things more difficult than they had to be, rigid if you will. (snip)

That's what I thought about being a lead designer but then I look at both the incomplete Iron Heroes and Heroes of Shadow, the latter being a late era 4E book that came out at a time when all the other designers seemed to be getting better at 4E.

And that segues into your points about Keep on the Shadowfell and Pyramid of Shadow (not Thunderspire): I don't think he ever really grokked 4E in a way Chris Perkins or Rich Baker did.

I also remember watching him being on a panel with Chris Perkins about adventure design and while Chris was running two or more campaigns, it seems Mike was running none. And I think one of the lessons of the later years of TSR's decline is that your designers MUST be running and playing the game. That's probably even more of an issue in 4E which is such a radical departure in many ways from other editions of D&D (one of the reasons it's my favourite edition).

Anyway, for me he's the guy who killed 4E. (And I say that without bad blood or emotion. I have all the material I will ever need! )

He ensured it had a bad beginning with Paizo's favourite adventure Keep on the Shadowfell - the adventure that launched a thousand Pathfinder campaigns - and then presided over Essentials, the fake revised edition that didn't even bother to have a PHB. I don't think he will screw the pooch with 5E, though: clearly more AD&D-like editions are near and dear to him... and the strategy of outsourcing adventures means he won't be writing any!

 

[D'karr]

That's what I thought about being a lead designer but then I look at both the incomplete Iron Heroes and Heroes of Shadow, the latter being a late era 4E book that came out at a time when all the other designers seemed to be getting better at 4E.

And that segues into your points about Keep on the Shadowfell and Pyramid of Shadow (not Thunderspire): I don't think he ever really grokked 4E in a way Chris Perkins or Rich Baker did.

I must make a correction in two places Vor-Rukoth was not Mike Mearls but Greg Bilsland though it does suffer from the "almost there" problem usually seen in Mearls' 4e work, which I think was the point [MENTION=22362]MoutonRustique[/MENTION] was trying to make.

And you are correct it was Pyramid of Shadows, not Thunderspire. I just could not remember which was which.

To me Rich Baker, more than anyone in the design team, really clicked on how to expand and bend the system - maybe since Book of 9 Swords is one of his. Dark Sun brought the inspiration of Themes. Which I think are a brilliant broadening of the base leveling mechanics without impacting power level. Gamma World brought the idea of a completely compatible setting that could sit side by side within the same design space. He also wrote Red Hand of Doom, which to this day is my second favorite adventure.

Anyway, for me he's the guy who killed 4E. (And I say that without bad blood or emotion. I have all the material I will ever need! )

I would not view it so harshly but I understand the sentiment. I feel the same about material. I'm having a great time with the campaigns I'm playing and running and I have more than enough material to last me several lifetimes. I've always converted adventures and I'm having a great time doing that with 4e.

He ensured it had a bad beginning with Paizo's favourite adventure Keep on the Shadowfell - the adventure that launched a thousand Pathfinder campaigns

I had to laugh at that one.

... and then presided over Essentials, the fake revised edition that didn't even bother to have a PHB.

I don't see Essentials in such a dark light. I liked the fact that Essentials really showcased the robustness of the 4e underpinnings. You could build character classes that did not have to use the AEDU framework, and they could stay well balanced, and even interesting. They could play side by side with AEDU classes and still be lots of fun.

My son plays in our games and he prefers the slayer to the fighter, but he's added things like artificer (multiclass) to the things he likes. I think Essentials was great at broadening the spectrum of the classes and providing very simple classes for those that wanted them.

I also liked that they added the capacity of existing classes to broaden even further. For example the ranger could get some cool primal powers. I've never liked spell casting rangers as a base, but with this I was able to kind of have flexibility without multiclassing.

So I don't think Essentials was a total stinker, there were parts I really liked.

I don't think he will screw the pooch with 5E, though: clearly more AD&D-like editions are near and dear to him... and the strategy of outsourcing adventures means he won't be writing any!

I've liked some of the stuff he wrote for 4e, like I said Return to the Moathouse was fun, but I think it might have been fun because of the nostalgia factor more than because it was 4e. I also liked the basics of Essentials and I liked Hammerfast because it did have that "almost there" vibe that I could use. So not everything he did was crap in my mind.

It was an interesting turn because I think the stuff for 3e like Iron Heroes had a lot of good ideas. I just did not see anything similar from him with 4e.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

Actually, I also liked Essentials. My comment was on the foolishness of releasing what was effectively a new edition (or revised edition) without a book called PLAYER'S HANDBOOK. So it was more a comment on the business side than an actual dislike of Essentials. (I'm also a fan of half-orc slayers! )

Anyway, spilt milk.

Back to Vor Rukoth. I would actually like to see more products like these but with fewer "novel" elements. Dwarf/orc alliance? Too specific and doesn't fit a lot of campaigns. But I love loosely sketched out campaign arcs with supporting maps. That suits my DMing style perfectly.