Wolfgang's "Demonweb Q&A"

[Shade]

Agreed. I love the notion of the "main" dungeon of a module also serving as the nexus point for exploring other, more "out-there" locales. In fact, I'd love to see that idea expanded on, with the "sub-planes" (or whatever conceit was used in its place in this hypothetical adventure) expanded into whole side trek adventures.

Ditto here. I was thrilled to see Maldev and the other worlds given treatment in FC1.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Well I don't know how you quantify an informed opinion in this case, but having been playing and DMing since 1983 in each of its incarnations/editions I feel this does give some small (perhaps tiny) measure of weight to my opinion on the matter.

It actually makes you pretty much a newcomer to D&D by the standards of this board.

My opinion in this case is that DnD never has and still doesn't need to publish official campaign settings filled with airships, trains, and PC robots/transformers especially in an era where they are supporting so few settings. They should have left the robots to the third party publishers and redone Greyhawk or Mystara DnD didn't need a steampunk remix.

That's swell, except that golems have been in D&D since the little gray booklet days.

There are no robots in Eberron and it's not steampunk (compare it to Iron Kingdoms or even Freeport or Ptolus). You are free to have opinions with no factual basis, but do expect people to point that lack of basis out to you.

 

[JustKim]

Maybe it's the cant and crappy art,

This is the third time someone's called the art crappy. What art are you referring to, exactly? The early, DiTerlizzi illustrated books or the later books with artistic experimentation?

 

[Shroomy]

Hmmm, I thought that Mystara did have airships. I must have misread all those Princess Ark articles in Dragon.

 

[Mercule]

This is the third time someone's called the art crappy. What art are you referring to, exactly? The early, DiTerlizzi illustrated books or the later books with artistic experimentation?

Not sure what time period, honestly. I vaguely remember that it had a feel similar to the "dungeon punk" of early 3E.

My comment came from seeing someone else making a comment that people may have been turned off by the art. I was more making an allowance for that as a possible factor than actually indicting the PS art.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Hmmm, I thought that Mystara did have airships. I must have misread all those Princess Ark articles in Dragon.

And the Dawn of the Emperors boxed set before that.

 

[Monkey King]

But I thought the important question was "why did Wolfgang say what he did", namely, why does he like ToH but not Q1. Seems likely to me that game mechanics is not a significant factor in his opinion here.

Er, I didn't say that I didn't like Q1. I said that I liked Giants, the D series, and ToH better. In the case of G and D, that's because of my play experience with them: they are extemely short and reward DM improvisation.

In the case of ToH, I like it because I'm a sadistic SoB who loves player handouts. I will decline to participate in the edition wars, though: I've enjoyed every edition to date, for different reasons.

 

[Jedi_Solo]

In the case of ToH, I like it because I'm a sadistic SoB who loves player handouts. I will decline to participate in the edition wars, though: I've enjoyed every edition to date, for different reasons.

Okay... Player handouts are cool. I hate Tomb of Horrors but that is one thing I will give it. It had a lot of handouts and a lot of chances for the DM to go "it looks like this." I think that gives the chance for the players to imagine the situation a lot better and have a larger chance of having a unified experience that a dozen paragraphs of read text can.


When you said you liked ToH I had a sudden sense of dread of how this adventure would turn out. But this explanation makes that dread go away. Thank you.

 

[Shadeydm]

It actually makes you pretty much a newcomer to D&D by the standards of this board.


That's swell, except that golems have been in D&D since the little gray booklet days.

There are no robots in Eberron and it's not steampunk (compare it to Iron Kingdoms or even Freeport or Ptolus). You are free to have opinions with no factual basis, but do expect people to point that lack of basis out to you.

Newcomer = exaggeration but whatever ive seen plenty of poster who never played anything earlier than 3.0 and plenty of posters whos ideas of playing AD&D involved having a bag full of Vorpal Weapons but whatever. I never claimed to be the first person to play the game just a person who has been playing by the rules for well over 20 years.

Golems were never PCs unless by claiming how much of a newcomer I am you are counting folks as more experienced who didn't follow the even the most basic rules.

Iron Kingdoms, Freeport and Ptolus have nothing to do with WotC supported campaigns but thanks for playing.

 

[gizmo33]

Er, I didn't say that I didn't like Q1. I said that I liked Giants, the D series, and ToH better. In the case of G and D, that's because of my play experience with them: they are extemely short and reward DM improvisation.

In the case of ToH, I like it because I'm a sadistic SoB who loves player handouts. I will decline to participate in the edition wars, though: I've enjoyed every edition to date, for different reasons.

First of all, sorry for mischaracterizing your opinion. What I was trying to say could have better said that you prefer ToH to Q1, and my point could have still been made. In simplifying it I wound up giving folks the wrong impression.

One of the points of confusion for me, and perhaps others, is that you used the word "design" in that section. I don't think anyone would expect to hear someone say "that's a great design because I'm a sadistic SoB". People that I've seen criticize ToH do so for "design" reasons and I think the other poster was a bit taken back at the apparent inconsistency between what has been the "3E design standards" that they saw espoused by you and others, and what ToH is.

This isn't an edition war issue for me, although I think some folks have a tendency to dust off these sort of rehearsed arguments anytime they see certain topics come up. I prefer 3E to 1E as a system and I like the way it's tackled many of the game's issues. However, I think the 1E adventure modules are underrated by folks that, IMO, are a little too enamored of mechanical elegance. What I was trying to suggest about the blog entry referenced in the OP is that mechanical elegance, and the things that people criticise ToH for, didn't really seem to factor into your likes and dislikes.