Dungeon scenarios are great -- the writing and artwork are excellent (usually), and they crank out three a month.
Why can't WotC do this?
I haven't gotten excited about a D&D adventure/campaign (outside of Dungeon) since Temple of Elemental Evil. People may like them, but they don't really stand out.
What is going on?!?
Regard all,
Jack
|
Dungeon scenarios are great -- the writing and artwork are excellent (usually), and they crank out three a month.
Why can't WotC do this?
I haven't gotten excited about a D&D adventure/campaign (outside of Dungeon) since Temple of Elemental Evil. People may like them, but they don't really stand out.
What is going on?!?
Regard all,
Jack
(...)
I should note that the official adventures for third edition have escaped this trend, since the new version of the game is very focused on the play experience. There just aren't enough of them out there (which is actually quite good for Dungeon, so I'm not complaining).--Erik Mona
(...)
I should note that the official adventures for third edition have escaped this trend, since the new version of the game is very focused on the play experience. There just aren't enough of them out there (which is actually quite good for Dungeon, so I'm not complaining).--Erik Mona
OK but what was Erik saying before the (...)? I never saw that bit but from just whats posted here one would presume that Erik's bribing everyone not to make modules or that he has some really big thugs on call with d20 cuff links (bonus points if you know were the reference comes from) who he sends out to intimidate the competition.
OK but what was Erik saying before the (...)? I never saw that bit but from just whats posted here one would presume that Erik's bribing everyone not to make modules or that he has some really big thugs on call with d20 cuff links (bonus points if you know were the reference comes from) who he sends out to intimidate the competition.
(...)
I should note that the official adventures for third edition have escaped this trend, since the new version of the game is very focused on the play experience. There just aren't enough of them out there (which is actually quite good for Dungeon, so I'm not complaining).--Erik Mona
The bit before it was Erik's answer to what he didn't like in module design (which as it turned out to be a fair share of AD&D modules created after the formation of the RPGA, who shovelled their "adventures" into module form). For my money "classic" D&D modules where the bomb during this period (one of the many reasons I never played D&D with an "A" prefix). What that has to do with the orginal post I have no idea.
I do though understand the issue. I want a module who's cover falls off on purpose. I want nutty non-continuity-ridden Desert Nomands, Enter the Maelstrom, Vault of the Drow, Lost City, Barrier Peaks, Ravenloft, Testof the Warlords, Isle of Dread-goodness. Are you with me here? I want adventure with no-strings and no boundries and if we get to kill Harpers, Elminster, Bane, and anything else that kills fun with too much backstory and explanation more's the better. I want to see new kingdoms (that have little or nothing to do with their neighbors continuity-wise), I want to see empires topple, I want to see the game worlds of today turned on their ear. I wanna see something I haven't.
G-Cube
First off, one of the things that was assumed a few years back was that the d20 publishers were going to put out a ton of generic adventures that you could buy if you wanted premade adventures, so WOTC shifted away from doing them, and subsequently, a ton of d20 publishers went out of business, and the ones that have been doing fairly well, i.e. Malhavoc Press, Green Ronin, Sovereign Press, have been making money on rulebooks and campaign settings moreso than on adventures, and the adventures that Green Ronin and Sovereign Press put out are more campaign specific than earlier d20 adventures.
One of the problems that WOTC had was that City of the Spider Queen, a massive Forgotten Realms adventure, didn't take off the way they wanted it too. It wasn't a bad adventure by any means (though it was definately a meat grinder, and a starting level of 10th for four characters was wishful thinking), but for some reason, fans that ran out and bought every other FR product didn't have the same drive to pick this one up, and not many people that didn't use FR were going to buy it even though you could concievably convert it to a "generic" setting.
Since that d20 market has become a bit more barren, and its been a few more years, we have started to see some shorter adventures come out for Eberron and one for Forgotten Realms (Sons of Gruumsh, a fun if fairly straightforward adventure). WOTC has also come out with the Fantastic Locations line, which are essentially more like set piece encounters with battlemats than epic adventures, but in this manner, they can try to serve multiple markets, i.e. people who want preplanned adventures and minaitures players that want the battlemats which might be used for tournament play.
And finally, we have the testing the waters Red Hand of Doom. Its a fairly major adventure, not set in either Greyhawk (Like RTTOEE) or Forgotten Realms (like COTSQ), so as to appeal to a broader demographic. My advice would be that if you see this, and you get a chance to look through it, and you like it, buy it and vote with your wallet to convince WOTC to do more larger adventures like it. And make sure to post reveiws to get out the good word if its good enough to merit that.
Director of Game Development
|
Has anyone bought any of the revamps of the old Classic 1st ed modules? I saw some in the local gaming store ( Dragon's Lair Austin,Tx ) But didn't really read through any. (wife needed paint choice advice for the minis she was painting for me)
So if any of you have seen them, read them or have any sort of opinion on them - share.
I do though understand the issue. I want a module who's cover falls off on purpose. I want nutty non-continuity-ridden Desert Nomands, Enter the Maelstrom, Vault of the Drow, Lost City, Barrier Peaks, Ravenloft, Testof the Warlords, Isle of Dread-goodness. Are you with me here? I want adventure with no-strings and no boundries and if we get to kill Harpers, Elminster, Bane, and anything else that kills fun with too much backstory and explanation more's the better. I want to see new kingdoms (that have little or nothing to do with their neighbors continuity-wise), I want to see empires topple, I want to see the game worlds of today turned on their ear. I wanna see something I haven't.G-Cube
Can't say I agree with you. There is something about the classics that make them great. Maybe its their age or some kind of nostalgia or, I don't exactly know what. But you can't just remake most of them. In general a lot about them is often pretty weak and I don't think the community would look at new versions done in the same manner in a favorable light. Sure we all agree that Keep on the Borderland is a Masterpiece rivaled only by other Masterpieces created during that era but We've come to expect a lot from our modules and even when they deliver half the time we are underwhelmed. Remake something along the same vein and I expect all you'll hear is complaints about how the Dungeon has little rhyme or reason - the adventure has zero plot except go fourth and slaughter goblins and orcs and kobolds and more orcs and gnolls oh and some humans at the end - and get as much phat lewt and experience as possible. In its original form its manna from heaven but some new author making a similar themed module has done little more then create a rather sub par and meaningless slaughter fest.
|
Director of Game Development
|
Can't say I agree with you. There is something about the classics that make them great. Maybe its their age or some kind of nostalgia or, I don't exactly know what. But you can't just remake most of them. In general a lot about them is often pretty weak and I don't think the community would look at new versions done in the same manner in a favorable light. Sure we all agree that Keep on the Borderland is a Masterpiece rivaled only by other Masterpieces created during that era but We've come to expect a lot from our modules and even when they deliver half the time we are underwhelmed. Remake something along the same vein and I expect all you'll hear is complaints about how the Dungeon has little rhyme or reason - the adventure has zero plot except go fourth and slaughter goblins and orcs and kobolds and more orcs and gnolls oh and some humans at the end - and get as much phat lewt and experience as possible. In its original form its manna from heaven but some new author making a similar themed module has done little more then create a rather sub par and meaningless slaughter fest.
I do though understand the issue. I want a module who's cover falls off on purpose. I want nutty non-continuity-ridden Desert Nomands, Enter the Maelstrom, Vault of the Drow, Lost City, Barrier Peaks, Ravenloft, Testof the Warlords, Isle of Dread-goodness. Are you with me here? I want adventure with no-strings and no boundries and if we get to kill Harpers, Elminster, Bane, and anything else that kills fun with too much backstory and explanation more's the better. I want to see new kingdoms (that have little or nothing to do with their neighbors continuity-wise), I want to see empires topple, I want to see the game worlds of today turned on their ear. I wanna see something I haven't.G-Cube
Very insightful. I totally agree. And just one post earlier I was asking about the revamps! Thanks for stopping that thought dead in its tracks. Although there were some that were not so linear. I'm not sure of my timeline, but one of my most memorable moments of D&D in my 18 years at it was from the Lost Temple of Tharizdun. It was when my pacifist character (yes I did it before you got a bonus to do it [stupid Book of Exalted Deeds]) killed his first creature ever....at 4th lvl. It was a norker on the big bridge/ramp/whatever going into the temple proper. The rest of the party had been knocked down past 0 and the mage and I patched them up and dragged them out. The attack kept coming and I had to kill one to defend the mage.
I digress. Yes, nostalgia is what it is. Er...was.
I think Jeremy is right if the modules are duplicated to be exact replicas with new rules.
However, I think redoing some classic modules in 3.5 can work if they are not exact duplicates...in other words, make them a little more than what they were. For example, Keep on the Borderlands could sure add some plot, some adventure hooks, some revisions to make the Caves of Chaos seem a little less like a D&D theme park.
If someone could pull THAT off--remake a classic module, but change it enough so that it captures something special and something new--that would be a real accomplishment.
Not just a 3.5 remake, but a 3.5 makeover...
|
|
I think Jeremy is right if the modules are duplicated to be exact replicas with new rules.
However, I think redoing some classic modules in 3.5 can work if they are not exact duplicates...in other words, make them a little more than what they were. For example, Keep on the Borderlands could sure add some plot, some adventure hooks, some revisions to make the Caves of Chaos seem a little less like a D&D theme park.
If someone could pull THAT off--remake a classic module, but change it enough so that it captures something special and something new--that would be a real accomplishment.
Not just a 3.5 remake, but a 3.5 makeover...
I wholeheartedly agree with you: I joined the D&D ranks, when AD&D 2nd ed. just had been published. I loved the adventures of that era. I feel fascinated by 1ed. and D&D adventures, but whenever I have a look at updated adventures that try to be "too true" to their roots, I feel appalled by maps that look like being hand drawn on graph paper, mostly rectangular, crude black and white character drawings, encounters that just consist of statistics and battle tactics... that is a bit too minimalistic for my taste - but then everyone favours different blends of D&D. From my point of view I would not want to miss the quality of current Dungeon adventures.
My copy of Erik's comment in a different thread:
Yes, actually he talked about the quality of adventures for previous editions. That excerpt was a bit short. ;-) Anyway his point is clear: Dungeon did not have such a huge reputation if there were more high quality (and generic or WotC settings supporting!) adventures out there.
I looked for a different thread I could not find anymore, though. Someone wrote that WotC concentrated on (larger margin creating) source and rule books while they left the market for adventures to third parties. Unfortunately that strategy did not exactly work in the intended way (see above postings).
Greetings,
Guenther
Sure we all agree that Keep on the Borderland is a Masterpiece rivaled only by other Masterpieces created during that era but We've come to expect a lot from our modules and even when they deliver half the time we are underwhelmed.
This is only my opinion. How many times have you read an adventure (these days) and opted not to play it out because it just didn't fit in your campaign?
I have an extensive collection of old 1st and 2nd edition modules (in the hundreds). What (I think) made the classics great was the fact that they were centered on a locale. Like the 'Keep on the Borderlands' would describe the Caves of Chaos, 'The Isle of Dread' would describe the small group of Islands, and the 'Tomb of Horrors' would describe only the tomb. No complications, no exact setting, only a few major NPCs to deal with. You could take these MODULES and place them ANYWHERE, in ANY campaign.
Not that I don't appreciate the detail (and the work) that goes into plublished adventures these days, but I believe they leave too little for the DM to "insert". I have found that I RARELY use published adventures 'as is', and almost always just use parts of it to fill my campaign. Modifying these adventures, or just studying the dozens of special NPCs for that adventure is painstakenly long and tedious. I realized that that's where all my time is going.
You want to make new "instant classic" modules? I say just make a neat map of a place (some caves, an island or a simple tomb) and describe it in detail. Make it easy for the DMs to implement it into their campaign and, sure enough, everybody will use it.
Ultradan
This is only my opinion. How many times have you read an adventure (these days) and opted not to play it out because it just didn't fit in your campaign?I have an extensive collection of old 1st and 2nd edition modules (in the hundreds). What (I think) made the classics great was the fact that they were centered on a locale. Like the 'Keep on the Borderlands' would describe the Caves of Chaos, 'The Isle of Dread' would describe the small group of Islands, and the 'Tomb of Horrors' would describe only the tomb. No complications, no exact setting, only a few major NPCs to deal with. You could take these MODULES and place them ANYWHERE, in ANY campaign.
Not that I don't appreciate the detail (and the work) that goes into plublished adventures these days, but I believe they leave too little for the DM to "insert". I have found that I RARELY use published adventures 'as is', and almost always just use parts of it to fill my campaign. Modifying these adventures, or just studying the dozens of special NPCs for that adventure is painstakenly long and tedious. I realized that that's where all my time is going.
You want to make new "instant classic" modules? I say just make a neat map of a place (some caves, an island or a simple tomb) and describe it in detail. Make it easy for the DMs to implement it into their campaign and, sure enough, everybody will use it.
Ultradan
petty much I agree with you up to a point. One of the reasons these classics keep turning up is because they really are easy to drop into a campaign. That said I still don't think that this form of plotless adventure should become the norm. Generally a good plot is a benefit - sure work is then required to fit any specific module into the campaign but once thats done you have a well done somewhat personalized adventure, with a plot. Admittedly this means that lots of adventures will just have to be skipped entirely but its not like were short of them - most of us have more then we can possibly use.
Not that I'm saying all local based adventures should be avoided but I'd not think that this has been done in any case - there are lots of essentially location based adventures around that are not that far removed from the classic style.
I tend to simply feel that the classic modules themselves often don't survive reprinting with new statistics all that well. Pretty much if one wants to test drive that concept go on over to the Wizards site and read the new 3.5 version of White Plum Mountain. I did and ended up with mixed feelings. I thought the whole thing was pretty good but its weak points went from being a kind of murmur in the background when I'm reading the original to the elephant in the living room when reading its in its new guise.
That said I'd love to see a restatted version of Ravonloft - that module dripped atmosphere and plot. Of course its just possible one could split the difference in this sort of a remake. Have the modules include most of the classic features but with new stats and then layer on top of that a plot. I'd think of this as being something done in almost two parts so that the restatted version is usable essentially on its own while the plotted elements are placed either before or after the basic restatted version.
Still - I'm pretty sure it would just not be the same and I'll probably just be happiest restatting classics myself and then putting them in my campaign. That way I get the exact adventure I'm looking for and it fits seamlessly.
So far, I've only used one 1e adventure in my current 3.5 campaign. The only thing I did was go through the adventure and added some post it notes about 3.5 features, such as CR rating for traps, etc....then I created a bunch of stat blocks on 4x6 cards for the monsters and NPCs....voila, ready to go.
Converting classics to be appealing to those who played the original adventures would be just as artistically difficult as remixing an old classic rock tune--very rarely will it work, but when it does, it's an instant classic all over again.
I'm not up that challenge, but someone out there is....
Sure we all agree that Keep on the Borderland is a Masterpiece rivaled only by other Masterpieces created during that era but We've come to expect a lot from our modules and even when they deliver half the time we are underwhelmed.This is only my opinion. How many times have you read an adventure (these days) and opted not to play it out because it just didn't fit in your campaign?
I have an extensive collection of old 1st and 2nd edition modules (in the hundreds). What (I think) made the classics great was the fact that they were centered on a locale. Like the 'Keep on the Borderlands' would describe the Caves of Chaos, 'The Isle of Dread' would describe the small group of Islands, and the 'Tomb of Horrors' would describe only the tomb. No complications, no exact setting, only a few major NPCs to deal with. You could take these MODULES and place them ANYWHERE, in ANY campaign.
Not that I don't appreciate the detail (and the work) that goes into plublished adventures these days, but I believe they leave too little for the DM to "insert". I have found that I RARELY use published adventures 'as is', and almost always just use parts of it to fill my campaign. Modifying these adventures, or just studying the dozens of special NPCs for that adventure is painstakenly long and tedious. I realized that that's where all my time is going.
You want to make new "instant classic" modules? I say just make a neat map of a place (some caves, an island or a simple tomb) and describe it in detail. Make it easy for the DMs to implement it into their campaign and, sure enough, everybody will use it.
Ultradan
Thank you for remaking my point. No seriously, because people didn't get it the last time around. Perhaps it was because I named names (as in module names). Really, the modules I picked all did something unique had generally had good (even by modern standards) pace, plotting, characters and story and could be dropped in almost anywhere. In no way did I say we should remake these treasures of old (I'll let Hollywood do that - and fail miserably). No, what I want to see a module (self-contained (which is what the word means), relatively fresh concept, Pregenerated Characters in the back, fall-away map cover the whole nine yards. I don't care what's happening in the Dale Lands, The Duchy of Urnst, Sharn or any place else because, to be frank, that's just baggage that never seems to change. And if it doesn't change significantly why talk about it?
GGG
|
You guys are on to something! There have been very few modules for 3.0/3.5 that I consider "magic", but the ones I have truly loved (Sunless Citadel, The Shackled City, some of the Necromancer Games Modules and Malhavoc Press Modules) have been "plug and play" modules. They've been adaptable to my personal campaign.
Often I pass by adventures in Dungeon magazine, not because they aren't well written, but they dictate a background, environment, or locale I can't adapt to where my PCs are and what my campaign world is like ...
|
Creative Director
|
Often I pass by adventures in Dungeon magazine, not because they aren't well written, but they dictate a background, environment, or locale I can't adapt to where my PCs are and what my campaign world is like ...
Would you care to elaborate? Because the primary goal of the adventures in Dungeon is precisely that—to provide adventrues that anyone can plug and play directly into their campaigns. Which is one of the primary reason that since Erik and I took over the magazine's reins that we've been avoiding adventures with overly complex backstories or adventures that presuppose certain things about the DM's campaign world. I think we've been doing pretty good providing adventures that are fairly easy to port over to a standard D&D campaign, but maybe we haven't?
Often I pass by adventures in Dungeon magazine, not because they aren't well written, but they dictate a background, environment, or locale I can't adapt to where my PCs are and what my campaign world is like ...
I have found this to be the total opposite for me. I've adopted virtually every single Dungeon adventure I've ever run to fit my campaign world. Some changes were minor, some were major...I find this to be fun, a great deal of fun actually--in two weeks my players are going to play "Hateful Legacy" from #131, which I've moved all the way across the continent, from its original location to the swamps. Backstory is totally different and a couple of encounters were changed, but it took me about 20 minutes and a half page of notes to make the adaptation. I love doing this--adapting published adventures to fit my campaign is one of my greatest joys as a DM (is that weird?)
I think Dungeon adventures are wonderfully adaptable, but some people aren't as comfortable with making such wholesale changes. As far as I'm concerned, James--no changes are needed.
Thank you for remaking my point. No seriously, because people didn't get it the last time around. Perhaps it was because I named names (as in module names). Really, the modules I picked all did something unique had generally had good (even by modern standards) pace, plotting, characters and story and could be dropped in almost anywhere....
OK if I'm following you what your essentially asking for is less Greyhawk/Eberron/Forgotten Realms and more places unconnected to any background but which are themselves full of atmosphere etc.
I guess I don't particularly have a problem with that - I run a hombrew so in some ways it makes my job easier if I don't have to worry about Igglwiv and who she might be in my campaign. That said I'm not exactly sure that much has been done recently were I really had to now all that much about Igglwiv to play the adventure - I guess I can think of a specific instance were I would have had to do some slight adapting if I did not have Igglwiv herself in my campaign but it was rather minor. In the end I guess I can't say I would care if you got your way - but I don't really care about the rather limited amounts of setting specific material appearing currently either. I do wonder though if making the various fans of these specific worlds less happy is worth the price of entry. A good adventure about a cloak made as a gift by a Demon to his lover works for me whether or not its part of Greyhawk - but fans of Greyhawk probably start salvating when they read Iggwilv's name in the intro.
|
...Because the primary goal of the adventures in Dungeon is precisely that—to provide adventrues that anyone can plug and play directly into their campaigns. ...
And you're doing it very well!
Seriously - no changes needed. I find almost every adventure easily adabtable to my campaign (even if adapting something to Eberron is a bit harder) or, not so easy sometimes. But it has worked every time!|
Director of Game Development
|
Often I pass by adventures in Dungeon magazine, not because they aren't well written, but they dictate a background, environment, or locale I can't adapt to where my PCs are and what my campaign world is like ...Would you care to elaborate? Because the primary goal of the adventures in Dungeon is precisely that—to provide adventrues that anyone can plug and play directly into their campaigns. Which is one of the primary reason that since Erik and I took over the magazine's reins that we've been avoiding adventures with overly complex backstories or adventures that presuppose certain things about the DM's campaign world. I think we've been doing pretty good providing adventures that are fairly easy to port over to a standard D&D campaign, but maybe we haven't?
Most of the reasons I don't use a Dungeon adventure is either flavor ( just doesn't fit ) or level ( too much adaptation ). Although I have adapted both.
To be honest, the majority of changes I have had with Dungeon modules is changing the critters and region to fit the location in the module. Which is easy if I don't want to just come up with something myself. Most of the time the only thing that makes me want to re-write something already written is if there is a good theme that is not trite and hackneyed as so many RPG 'hooks' are. And alot of times Dungeon shines for this. I've even taken the general theme of a high-level adventure and worked the basic concept down to a low-level one.
That being said, most general entertainment genres other than fantasy or sci-fi provide the best storylines for a game or campaign.
Would you care to elaborate? Because the primary goal of the adventures in Dungeon is precisely that—to provide adventrues that anyone can plug and play directly into their campaigns. Which is one of the primary reason that since Erik and I took over the magazine's reins that we've been avoiding adventures with overly complex backstories or adventures that presuppose certain things about the DM's campaign world. I think we've been doing pretty good providing adventures that are fairly easy to port over to a standard D&D campaign, but maybe we haven't?
First, I too would like to express my total satisfaction with the work done in Dungeon Magazine. I don’t think I’ll EVER find a more fun-adventure-filled resource anywhere else. I’ll be a subscriber for life!
This thread isn’t about if Dungeon should change it’s format, it’s why there are no more modules like the old ‘classics’. And, in my opinion, it is because the modules are no longer MODULES (i.e.: you can’t drop them anywhere in your campaign without a major overhaul). Read the many posters above: They almost never use the back story, mostly because they run their home-made campaigns and have their own stories.
Imagine this now:
Real MODULES of specific locales (like ‘The Forest with No Trees’, ‘The Swamp Ruins of the Lizard King’, ‘The Dwarven Mines’ or ‘The Lost Tomb’) having only a short background story, some possible locations in the known worlds, a few adventure hooks and, of course, the detailed descriptions of the rooms or areas.
THEN, you publish an adventure path: A major story, with as many NPCs as you want, describing how the players start by helping the dwarves of Rockhome to exterminate their mines (use The Dwarven Mines module). While in the mines, the PCs uncover a map to an ancient treasure buried in a wizard’s tomb. On the way to the wizard’s tomb, the party must cross the great swamp where they come across some ruins (use The Swamp Ruins of the Lizard King module). Once they finally make it to the wizards tomb (Use The Lost Tomb module), they uncover an entrance to the underworld which leads them to a series of caves filled with giant mushrooms (use The Forest with No Trees module). And on and on and on.
This would work like the ‘Against the Giants’ campaign or the ‘Slavers’ campaign, which have worked tremendously well. You could event put several ‘story-arcs’ together to make a mega adventure path like the ‘Giants’-‘Drow’-‘Demonweb’ series.
Most important is, again only in my opinion, is that DMs who need a tomb area for their own campaign would just crack open ‘The Lost Tomb’ module and maybe just change the main bad guy or treasure at the end, and voila!
That’s what I need in an ADVENTURE MODULE. Thanks for listening.
Ultradan
Has anyone tried the Dungoen Crawl Classics by Goodman Games?
http://www.goodman-games.com/DCCpreview.php
{Remember the good old days, when adventures were underground, NPCs were there to be killed, and the finale of every dungeon was the dragon on the 20th level? Those days are back. Dungeon Crawl Classics don't waste your time with long-winded speeches, weird campaign settings, or NPCs who aren't meant to be killed. Each adventure is 100% good, solid dungeon crawl, with the monsters you know, the traps you fear, and the secret doors you know are there somewhere}.
These sound fun.
|
Has anyone tried the Dungoen Crawl Classics by Goodman Games?
...
These sound fun.
I've been using some of them, and on the whole, I really like them. They are generic enough that I have been easily able to shoe-horn them in to fit with my campaign. I don't think that they are a perfect fit 'as is', necessarily, but I don't think may modules are (that's the DM's job). I've picked up 7 of them and run 2 so far (with a 3rd rapidly approaching), and my players (a couple old school/ a couple newbies) liked them. The art in most of them is relatively god-awful, but the adventures themselves have been a hoot.
(Replacing the goblins with Xvarts in 'Idylls of the Rat King' made it really entertaining. So thanks to Sean K. Reynolds for their timely addition to the Creature Catalog!)
I do though understand the issue. I want a module who's cover falls off on purpose. I want nutty non-continuity-ridden Desert Nomands, Enter the Maelstrom, Vault of the Drow, Lost City, Barrier Peaks, Ravenloft, Testof the Warlords, Isle of Dread-goodness. Are you with me here? I want adventure with no-strings and no boundries and if we get to kill Harpers, Elminster, Bane, and anything else that kills fun with too much backstory and explanation more's the better. I want to see new kingdoms (that have little or nothing to do with their neighbors continuity-wise), I want to see empires topple, I want to see the game worlds of today turned on their ear. I wanna see something I haven't.
G-Cube
Testify! :)