Would you like to see RPGA modules in Dungeon magazine?

[SteveC]

Heavens no!
I have played in quite a few RPGA adventures and run a couple. Uniformly they have been awful: heavily railroaded, poorly written from a rules standpoint, and written for the lowest common denominator in players.

No way, no how.

--Steve

 

[Dirt]

What I WOULD like to see is some of the older D&D Open tournaments, but it probably wouldn't be in Dungeon (although they did print a more recent D&D Open tournament, "Shards of Eberron"...I think it was called). There are several that I'd like to get a hold of, if they'd just offer them in PDF somewhere.

 

[Baron Opal]

I wouldn't mind a select few being collected, re-edited, perhaps lengthened and then reprinted on their own. As a part of Dungeon? Aboslutely not!

 

[Whisper72]

Hmm... maybe the other way around. If the Living Greyhawk, Green Regent or Living Eberron adventures form a neato adventure path and are of high enuff quality (or get reworked to get up to par on the quality side), mebbe they can be released as (softcover?) campaign books sorta in the style of the AP books (Shackled City and Age of Worms). Combined with tons of advice, background notes on progressing the setting etc. Might be cool that way...

 

[diaglo]

HELLS No.

 

[Psychic Warrior]

It's better to have RPGA-published adventure be part of Polyhedron not Dungeon.

ALTHOUGH, I still prefer Polyhedron as a "Definitive d20" Magazine, not its original newsletter magazine. (IOW, Screw You, Dung subscribers!)

Wow, I wish I had 8000 posts so I could get away with insulting DUngeon subscribers.

 

[Whisper72]

Wow, I wish I had 8000 posts so I could get away with insulting DUngeon subscribers.

Almost 9,000, but who's counting. Dungeon and Polyhedron are simply completely differenttypes of magazines. Different ideas, different target audiences. They should never have been put together, even though there was a (large?) crowd who liked both and thought the combination was neat...

Anyhoo, you and I know that Dungeon is simply the cheapest and best source of adventures and DM advice in print, nuff said...

 

[diaglo]

Wow, I wish I had 8000 posts so I could get away with insulting DUngeon subscribers.

this ain't the paizo board. he can insult me all he wants. i reciprocate.

besides i'm still dancing a jig over Poly's end.

 

[delericho]

How many of you would cancel your subscription or not pick up an issue if there were one or two RPGA modules in Dungeon a year? Even if they were reprints of the worst RPGA modules ever made? What exactly is your tolerance level before you won't pick up a copy?

I wouldn't cancel my subscription over a couple of adventures a year, regardless of the quality. Nonetheless, I am opposed to anything that would reduce the overall quality of Dungeon.

Since I haven't read any RPGA modules, I can't comment on their quality. If they are good enough to be considered for Dungeon on their own merits, then I have no problem with them being published. However, it doesn't sound like this is the case. And if a module is not good enough to be considered for publication in Dungeon on its own merits, it should not be considered for publication. As far as I'm aware, Dungeon are not so short of good adventures that they need to reduce the quality to fill the magazine.

(And I'd rather see Dungeon print 3 good adventures every month that have no setting-specific content or, conversely, 3 good adventures every month that are set in a setting I don't use, than see Dungeon print 2 good adventures and 1 poor one every month simply to get the right setting/no-setting ratio.)

 

[kenobi65]

Hmm... maybe the other way around. If the Living Greyhawk, Green Regent or Living Eberron adventures form a neato adventure path and are of high enuff quality (or get reworked to get up to par on the quality side), mebbe they can be released as (softcover?) campaign books sorta in the style of the AP books (Shackled City and Age of Worms). Combined with tons of advice, background notes on progressing the setting etc. Might be cool that way...

I agree, it could be cool.

The issue with re-releasing RPGA modules after they've been retired from official RPGA play has always been that the RPGA doesn't retain any additional publication rights to them. In order for them to be re-released, someone (RPGA? WotC? Paizo?) would need to be convinced enough that there'd be sufficient demand for them, to renegotiate contracts with the authors.

Even just putting them up on a web site, as-is, as PDFs, would require new contracts (i.e., additional payments to the authors), something that the RPGA has never shown much, if any, interest in.