By and large, there are three methods of module writing: the location-based module, which most of Gary's are; the pretedermined-plot module, which more or less began with the DL modules and became prevalent in the 1990s, then suffered a backlash against 'railroading'; and Ron Edwards's method of relation maps and 'bangs' (events which catalyze and provoke PC action). I don't think any of these outranks or replaces the others. (I wouldn't class setting description with adventure hooks as module material.)
I suppose my main point is - If Greyhawk is to go anywhere, it'll be through new ideas and new frontiers (and that doesn't have to be off the map or an advanced timeline - how many modules have been set in Ull for example or the Tiger Nomads?) and not a through nostalgia.
P.
Originally posted by Faraer
I like Gygax's modules, for instance, because they are brilliant, showing inventiveness and concise design that eclipse most of what's come since, because they embody a sensibility and influences that have since been largely ignored, and because their people and places have great resonance that came from how they were published and were (and are) played.
You have to be kidding.
Gygax's adventure modules were ill-thought out, ill-conceived, excuses to hack stuff in dungeons. With monsters scattered all over the place and traps aplenty with huge amounts of treasure as a reward.
Fine, you may like that style, I'm not knocking it, it can be fun. But saying that they're brilliant and that he put any great deal of thought into them is patently absurd and contrary to the evidence that is as plain as day to anyone with a remotely objective opinion on the matter.
Originally posted by Faraer
My view is one shared by many, and you can't claim objectivity here any more than I can. I think they will be played many decades from now, when the first generation of players (the one subject to nostalgia) is long gone. You can see on the ENWorld boards that players who weren't around when they were published, and have no background in that culture, are enjoying the Gygax adventures right now.
Err... so what?
That proves only one thing and that is that the adventures are older than any others.
They have no competition so it's not like you can compare it to X module and say, "Well nobody's playing that so this MUST be good!"
Look, I'm not dissing the old guy, I like the adventures, however you have to face facts and those facts are that the modules were very simplistic in scope, and not very well thought out. They were given a very basic premise and the rest was 'open door, kill monster, get treasure'.
The average adventure in Dungeon is ten times more sophisticated and has had ten times the amount of thought put into it to develop complexity in character, story and plot. They might not be brilliant, but compared to the Gygax modules, is like comparing a classic fifties car to a modern day sports car.
Maybe if Dungeon could do one "classic-style" adventure for every ten or so normal style ones it'd be cool?
Originally posted by Iksander
They might not be brilliant, but compared to the Gygax modules, is like comparing a classic fifties car to a modern day sports car.
I think I'd rather be driving an old four-door continental when we run into the dragon.
Originally posted by Iksander
The average adventure in Dungeon is ten times more sophisticated and has had ten times the amount of thought put into it to develop complexity in character, story and plot. They might not be brilliant, but compared to the Gygax modules, is like comparing a classic fifties car to a modern day sports car.
True, but when it comes down to actually playing a module with your typical group of players, how often does the party ever even scratch the surface of all that complexity? It makes for a good read for the DM, but in most cases, the players will never know anything more about all the colorful and complex NPCs that they hack or blast to smithereens than what kind of loot they got off the bloodied, smoking corpse.
Originally posted by KelanenPrinceofSwords
True, but when it comes down to actually playing a module with your typical group of players, how often does the party ever even scratch the surface of all that complexity?
For sure, absolutely, I agree.
I'm not arguing that the complexity is a good or bad thing, I'm just refuting that Gygaxian modules are complex or sophsticated or 'brilliant' in their form. They are simplistic and straightforward and it doesn't take a great thinker to come up with modules like those. There is no real skill needed, no artistry.
To thus imply or state that the modules are somehow works of creative genius is, IMO, ludicrous.
Originally posted by Iksander
Gygax's adventure modules were ill-thought out, ill-conceived, excuses to hack stuff in dungeons. With monsters scattered all over the place and traps aplenty with huge amounts of treasure as a reward.
Fine, you may like that style, I'm not knocking it, it can be fun. But saying that they're brilliant and that he put any great deal of thought into them is patently absurd and contrary to the evidence that is as plain as day to anyone with a remotely objective opinion on the matter.
I'm not arguing that the complexity is a good or bad thing, I'm just refuting that Gygaxian modules are complex or sophsticated or 'brilliant' in their form. They are simplistic and straightforward and it doesn't take a great thinker to come up with modules like those. There is no real skill needed, no artistry.
To thus imply or state that the modules are somehow works of creative genius is, IMO, ludicrous.
A few things need to be kept in mind. Gygax practically invented a gaming genre that has captivated and entertained people for going on four decades. That in and of itself is a work of creative genius. Part of his contribution to the tremendously fun and satifisfying game that he helped to invent were some of the earliest, ready-made adventures that could be used by players of the great game he gave to us.
Perhaps those early modules weren't the best they could have been, and perhaps to some they are no where near as creative and artistic as modules have become in our *modern* age of RPGs, or at least in some people's estimation.
However, that does not and should not take away from the creativity and hard work that were originally put into them in the first place. What I mean here is that the context needs to be taken into consideration. Gygax and his fledgling TSR was not backed by some huge megacorp like today's Hasbro driven WotC is. He didn't have large amounts of investments capital available to come up with the shiniest covers and the most well-fleshed out plots and story arcs for his modules. He needed to put product on the shelves so he could bring home the bacon.
Without the sale of product back in the day, TSR may well have gone no where and the game might have died in still birth. Gygax and company did not have secure jobs at some hobby or toy company like today's WotC employees, they were breaking new ground with a game, and that meant alot of risk taking. It also meant that they didn't have the resources to produce the kinds of products that the RPG community has come to expect.
Coupled with that was the fact that they were doing something new that hadn't been done before. When people embark on new projects, without reference to other similar products to learn from, then its to be expected that perhaps they might make some mistakes along the way. When the Wright brothers invented the airplane, they didn't fly a fully-loaded F15 off the runway, they created what amounts to a fancy kite. Do we look back on their achievement and belittle them for their work?
Gygaxian modules and the others from the early Basic and 1st AD&D editions served as templates and starting points for other people to come along and write modules. Where perhaps Gygax and other early module writers may have made mistakes, omissions, or simply did not see the larger potential for modules, others were able to come along and address the areas they felt were lacking in newer adventurers.
Furthermore, unlike so many modules that have come down the pipe since then, most of Gygax's modules (and indeed of the other module authors of the day) were purposely left in a condition where large portions were not fleshed out precisely so that DM's could slip them into their existing Greyhawk or homebrew campaigns. Since the modules focused mainly on specific, main stories and plots, they could be worked into widely divergent campaigns. They left lots of room for DM's to customize the modules for their own worlds and campaigns rather than forcing too much into the modules that would require wholesale editing of the module to fit them into existing campaigns. They allowed for DM's to do their own work on their campaigns while at the same time offering some ready-made material to ease the DM's work load.
To call Gygaxian and other early modules uncreative and lacking any artistry at all is really an argument from ignorace that ignores the history of the game altogether. Even if the early modules and adventures weren't *all they should have been* (something that is highly debatable IMHO), that should in no way take away from the ingenuity and imagination that went into producing gaming materials that have inspired an entire gaming industry and have served as the templates for what we now call "adventure modules" for RPG's.
To deny the very ingenuity that created this game, and riducule the important early works in an important sub-genre of this game (i.e., adventure modules), is what's really ludicrous.
Originally posted by Gandalf_Istari
To deny the very ingenuity that created this game, and riducule the important early works in an important sub-genre of this game (i.e., adventure modules), is what's really ludicrous.
Amen to that. Not to mention that a lot of those "old" modules started as short scenarii played at gaming convention. They couldn't be too long, for the sake of the game.
Originally posted by Iksander
They are simplistic and straightforward and it doesn't take a great thinker to come up with modules like those. There is no real skill needed, no artistry.
To thus imply or state that the modules are somehow works of creative genius is, IMO, ludicrous.
Still on your EGG-bashing trip, eh? Give it a rest man.
You know, I am waiting to see anyone come up with "modules like those" that people still crave to play 20 odd years after they've been published AND continually adapt to the latest incarnation of the D&D rules. Simple nostalgia? I don't think so...
Stuart
But you're right Skerrigan and here is the proof. One has only to scroll down to the "Adventure" section to find a lot of modules 15 to 20 years old, some of which were high quality.
We don't even need to go that far actually given most of the modules written for bD&D were also produced some 20 years ago. Yet, when one looks at the ENWorld conversion files, it's quickly obvious which setting still rates #1 on all DM's priority list ;)
See... I didn't mean 20 years ago. I wasn't thinking. I just responded to the idiocy of Mort.
See, he was referring to the Gygax modules, as was I. Unfortunately, he thinks they were all created after '84! Hahahahahaha... he's a FUNNY guy.
IIRC, Gygax was booted out of TSR in or around '84. All those 'brilliant' modules were created BEFORE then.
So you're right, I'm wrong. It was THIRTY years ago, not twenty.
Shame on me.
Try again, fellas.
I said 20 odd years, not exactly 20 years today.
Some of those EGG modules are 20 to 30 years old? Big deal. I doubt being 1 to 10 years older than other modules of the same "era" would make such a difference in a player's mind (except perhaps to those who swear WoG hasn't been the same since EGG left TSR).
Besides, B1 was published in 1979 (just an example). That's 25 years ago if I am not mistaken. Old enough for you yet?
Originally posted by Gandalf_Istari
A few things need to be kept in mind. Gygax practically invented a gaming genre that has captivated and entertained people for going on four decades. . . .
To deny the very ingenuity that created this game, and riducule the important early works in an important sub-genre of this game (i.e., adventure modules), is what's really ludicrous.
Beautiful and appropriate. I could not have said it better myself.
What shocks me is that it had to be said at all. . . . . .
How pitiful..
If you can't participate in a mature fashion, then why do you participate at all? It's quite tiring to deal with your explosive escapades every few months as it pertains to this forum.
Something doesn't exactly have to be brilliant to still be thought well of 20 years or more later. Nor does it have to be nostalgia (though I think it gets kind of hard to sort real unemotional, detatched looks at the modules from the haze of hero worship/grudge holding that tends to run through the gaming community like Thunderbird runs through a wino). After all, I can really enjoy sitting down with a dog-eared copy of a few books of mine time and time again even though they aren't brilliant either. They're good enough to generate fans and repeated readings/playings and that's enough.
Ravenloft (the original I6) is one of the few modules that I would actually consider brilliant.