d20 modules? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

d20 modules?

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
zombiegleemax
Nov 21, 2003 14:16:02 Since S&S isn't going to release any modules for Ravenloft d20, can anybody suggest any other d20 modules that would be appropriate for the setting?

Jeffrey A. Davis
www.jeffreyadavis.tk
#2
zombiegleemax
Nov 21, 2003 18:58:28 Most D20 game modules I have seen are made for more magic-heavy-and-higher-fantasy settings than Ravenloft. With (perhaps heavy) modifications, I could recommend Sword & Sorcery's G2 'What Evil Lurks' (it even has a 'Carnival'!), D2 'The Tomb of Abysthor (yeah, a dungeoncrawl, but you could play up the undead, make the demons more Lovecraftian, & replace the drow), Monte Cook's 'Demon God's Fane (same comments on that), and my all-time favorite, Reaper minis - Dark Heaven Legends 'The Eldest Son' (in my opinion, the perfect low-level adventure).
#3
scipio
Nov 21, 2003 19:28:55 There were a bunch of us that were working on a netbook of adventures, but it fell through due to lack of submissions.

As to published modules, I haven't really looked through too many, although if you want to heavily modify them you could probably turn Temple of Elemental Evil, and Return to the Temple o EE into something fairly Lovecraftian.
#4
platinumwarlock
Nov 22, 2003 5:28:46 Yeah, I spent a while about 2 years ago converting RTEE for Ravenloft. Wasn't too hard, but it was a challenge.
#5
b4real
Nov 22, 2003 11:35:35
Originally posted by Platinumwarlock
Yeah, I spent a while about 2 years ago converting RTEE for Ravenloft. Wasn't too hard, but it was a challenge.

I buy RL 2E modules and convert them for use with the 3E mechanics. In my personal opinion 2E had more flavor anyway.

~B4Real
#6
platinumwarlock
Nov 22, 2003 14:03:28
Originally posted by B4Real
In my personal opinion 2E had more flavor anyway.

I'm curious as to why you think this. Can you elaborate some more?
#7
b4real
Nov 22, 2003 15:27:18
Originally posted by Platinumwarlock
I'm curious as to why you think this. Can you elaborate some more?

Sure. You had guides that gave you excellent detail like VR' s Guide to the Vistani(I STILL use this for the backgrounds of Half-Vistani characters) and the boxed set I feel had alot more detail than what can be found in the 3e books.

Also the modules gave you the mechanics of the game in action. What I mean is that in 3e you can read about Mordentshire but reading an adventure based in Mordentshire with actual dialogues from the inhabitants(Such as in the 2e modules) is much more helpful in my opinion. I have nothing against 3e(now v3.5 RL is another case all together.) as a matter of fact I think the 3e RL CS is well written. I just feel that 2e had more flavor overall and you received more for your money.

~B4Real
#8
platinumwarlock
Nov 23, 2003 0:56:53 I'm going to have to beg to differ, but I can see where you're coming from.

It seems that in all settings, the overall lack of adventures tends to take away from the "intimacy" of certain locales, leaving DMs to fill in the blanks as they want. While that allows a lot of flexibility, it also can be frustrating in the sense that when you just want to run an adventure, all the tools aren't there--you have to make some up.
That said, I think the Gazetteer series really makes up for a lot of that 'intimacy' that was found in the boxed sets. By focusing an entire book on only a few domains, you can really get a lot of milage out of domains that might not get a second look otherwise.

In terms of the VRGs, I really thought that the new ones (Arsenal, and Walking Dead), continued a lot of the style that was had in the 2e guides. True, the voice was very different--Gennifer and Laurie are very different people than good ol' Van Richten--but when I read the final chapter of VRA, I really got the sense that it was written by a stuck-up, Sithican elf who really didn't care about the girls one way or the other. That, to me, is a true testament to capturing style in a setting.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 zombiegleemax Nov 21, 2003 14:16:02	Since S&S isn't going to release any modules for Ravenloft d20, can anybody suggest any other d20 modules that would be appropriate for the setting? Jeffrey A. Davis www.jeffreyadavis.tk
#2 zombiegleemax Nov 21, 2003 18:58:28	Most D20 game modules I have seen are made for more magic-heavy-and-higher-fantasy settings than Ravenloft. With (perhaps heavy) modifications, I could recommend Sword & Sorcery's G2 'What Evil Lurks' (it even has a 'Carnival'!), D2 'The Tomb of Abysthor (yeah, a dungeoncrawl, but you could play up the undead, make the demons more Lovecraftian, & replace the drow), Monte Cook's 'Demon God's Fane (same comments on that), and my all-time favorite, Reaper minis - Dark Heaven Legends 'The Eldest Son' (in my opinion, the perfect low-level adventure).
#3 scipio Nov 21, 2003 19:28:55	There were a bunch of us that were working on a netbook of adventures, but it fell through due to lack of submissions. As to published modules, I haven't really looked through too many, although if you want to heavily modify them you could probably turn Temple of Elemental Evil, and Return to the Temple o EE into something fairly Lovecraftian.
#4 platinumwarlock Nov 22, 2003 5:28:46	Yeah, I spent a while about 2 years ago converting RTEE for Ravenloft. Wasn't too hard, but it was a challenge.
#5 b4real Nov 22, 2003 11:35:35	Originally posted by Platinumwarlock Yeah, I spent a while about 2 years ago converting RTEE for Ravenloft. Wasn't too hard, but it was a challenge. I buy RL 2E modules and convert them for use with the 3E mechanics. In my personal opinion 2E had more flavor anyway. ~B4Real
#6 platinumwarlock Nov 22, 2003 14:03:28	Originally posted by B4Real In my personal opinion 2E had more flavor anyway. I'm curious as to why you think this. Can you elaborate some more?
#7 b4real Nov 22, 2003 15:27:18	Originally posted by Platinumwarlock I'm curious as to why you think this. Can you elaborate some more? Sure. You had guides that gave you excellent detail like VR' s Guide to the Vistani(I STILL use this for the backgrounds of Half-Vistani characters) and the boxed set I feel had alot more detail than what can be found in the 3e books. Also the modules gave you the mechanics of the game in action. What I mean is that in 3e you can read about Mordentshire but reading an adventure based in Mordentshire with actual dialogues from the inhabitants(Such as in the 2e modules) is much more helpful in my opinion. I have nothing against 3e(now v3.5 RL is another case all together.) as a matter of fact I think the 3e RL CS is well written. I just feel that 2e had more flavor overall and you received more for your money. ~B4Real
#8 platinumwarlock Nov 23, 2003 0:56:53	I'm going to have to beg to differ, but I can see where you're coming from. It seems that in all settings, the overall lack of adventures tends to take away from the "intimacy" of certain locales, leaving DMs to fill in the blanks as they want. While that allows a lot of flexibility, it also can be frustrating in the sense that when you just want to run an adventure, all the tools aren't there--you have to make some up. That said, I think the Gazetteer series really makes up for a lot of that 'intimacy' that was found in the boxed sets. By focusing an entire book on only a few domains, you can really get a lot of milage out of domains that might not get a second look otherwise. In terms of the VRGs, I really thought that the new ones (Arsenal, and Walking Dead), continued a lot of the style that was had in the 2e guides. True, the voice was very different--Gennifer and Laurie are very different people than good ol' Van Richten--but when I read the final chapter of VRA, I really got the sense that it was written by a stuck-up, Sithican elf who really didn't care about the girls one way or the other. That, to me, is a true testament to capturing style in a setting.