Village of Hommlet for 4E

moriarty777 · Post by **moriarty777** » Mon May 25, 2009 3:45 pm

DangerDwarf wrote:
Not interested.

After picking up Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil I'm kinda leery about crap like this.

Hey! What's wrong with Return to ToEE (says the guy who bought it off ya)?

At least it's not a straight remake. I think it's pretty cool (for a dungeon crawl type ginder). Besides, I like a bunch of Monte's works!
Seriously though... the best way to run Return to ToEE is to take the overall concept and use selections from it for the adventure/story. Helps minimize the grind. Then again, I've had to do that with the original too. T1 was run unchanged but my players would have rebelled if I ran T2-4 unmodified and in its full and unabridged glory.

As for Mr Grimm's comments on d20 and the early days of third edition, I heartily agree. The d20 system was a good thing and I also liked the early days of 3rd edition and the potential that existed. Probably why I embraced the material so readily since the late TSR managed to alienate me as a customer. Unfortunately (or rather fortunately), WOTC has pretty much managed to do the same things seem to be getting worse as time goes on.

M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Mon May 25, 2009 4:24 pm

moriarty777 wrote:
Hey! What's wrong with Return to ToEE (says the guy who bought it off ya)?

Elder Elemental Eye = Tharizdun? No thanks.

Lord Dynel · Post by **Lord Dynel** » Mon May 25, 2009 4:26 pm

I think you're on to something JG. DD, may be right, it may be not him acting alone, but I do think it was mostly Collins doing. Granted, I hadn't put much thought into it, but once a little light is shed on it, the situation wholly illuminates.

But yeah, it would have been interesting if people like Peter, Monte, and Skip would have been able to stay on.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

concobar · Post by **concobar** » Mon May 25, 2009 4:44 pm

This may just be me but i think 4e is making a move away from the turn it up to 11 and towards a more old school feel. seems that way. I think the biggest problem with 4e is that it tried to capture new younger players at the expense of the older loyal fans.

IMO
_________________

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Mon May 25, 2009 4:58 pm

Lord Dynel wrote:
I think you're on to something JG. DD, may be right, it may be not him acting alone, but I do think it was mostly Collins doing. Granted, I hadn't put much thought into it, but once a little light is shed on it, the situation wholly illuminates.

But yeah, it would have been interesting if people like Peter, Monte, and Skip would have been able to stay on.

I think DD is right as well. It does seem the ones that left WOTC were the ones that could have opposed the tide of what we saw later in the designs of 3.X. Collins was possibly not the ringleader but more a lacky that appealed to the ones that wanted to creep up the game and move away from the traditional D&D game.

One thing I found early on in 3e was that some fans saw it as a return to 1e in a way. Many die hard 1e players did embrace 3e in it's infancy and I also noticed that there was a 1e vibe coming off the early products.

Of course we'll possibly never know what went on at WOTC in those days but I feel what we are discussing is close to the truth of the matter.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Lord Dynel · Post by **Lord Dynel** » Mon May 25, 2009 5:34 pm

Julian Grimm wrote:
I think DD is right as well. It does seem the ones that left WOTC were the ones that could have opposed the tide of what we saw later in the designs of 3.X. Collins was possibly not the ringleader but more a lacky that appealed to the ones that wanted to creep up the game and move away from the traditional D&D game.

One thing I found early on in 3e was that some fans saw it as a return to 1e in a way. Many die hard 1e players did embrace 3e in it's infancy and I also noticed that there was a 1e vibe coming off the early products.

Of course we'll possibly never know what went on at WOTC in those days but I feel what we are discussing is close to the truth of the matter.

Indeed.

concobar wrote:
This may just be me but i think 4e is making a move away from the turn it up to 11 and towards a more old school feel. seems that way. I think the biggest problem with 4e is that it tried to capture new younger players at the expense of the older loyal fans.

I don't know. I think they may be realizing that they were making more money appealing to the core of their fanbase, but decided to go a different route. If you're using the subject matter of the module (Homlett) as a basis of your theory, I don't know if I'd rely on that either, but that's me. It's hard to tell how WotC is targeting these days.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Mon May 25, 2009 5:38 pm

Lord Dynel wrote:
It's hard to tell how WotC is targeting these days.

Bankruptcy?
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Mon May 25, 2009 5:40 pm

Seriously, I know 4e isn't a game I want to really invest in. I did borrow a couple things like the healing surges (toned down for C&C) and some of their ideas on monsters like 1 hp creatures to wear down a party but that was it. Though I am intrigued by the Eladrin and would like a C&C conversion without that munchy teleportation.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Mon May 25, 2009 5:50 pm

Julian Grimm wrote:
Of course we'll possibly never know what went on at WOTC in those days but I feel what we are discussing is close to the truth of the matter.

I may not be accurate at all in this, but I have vague recollections of fluff vs. crunch camps within WotC in the early d20 era.

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Mon May 25, 2009 8:29 pm

There were according to Sean Renyolds and others. And I think the OGL vs Non-OGL camps came about at the same time. IIRC this was all before the big layoffs and resignations. If you look closely it was after that when 3e began changing for the worse.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

moriarty777 · Post by **moriarty777** » Mon May 25, 2009 9:31 pm

DangerDwarf wrote:
Elder Elemental Eye = Tharizdun? No thanks.

Come on man... where's the love for Tharizdun eh?

M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Mon May 25, 2009 10:13 pm

I don't mind Tharizdun at all.

He still isn't the Elemental Eye though.

That was cheesey of them.

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Mon May 25, 2009 10:28 pm

DangerDwarf wrote:
I don't mind Tharizdun at all.

He still isn't the Elemental Eye though.

That was cheesey of them.

Is the Elder Elemental Eye supposed to be Tharizdun in Queen of the Spiderweb Pits?
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Mon May 25, 2009 10:51 pm

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Mon May 25, 2009 11:12 pm

DangerDwarf wrote:
huh?

I am running the Drow modules right now, House Eilserv worships an Elder Elemental Eye instead of Lolth. So I am wondering if it is actually supposed to be Tharizdun.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Mon May 25, 2009 11:15 pm

Gary has said that the EEE was not the big T before. I agree with this as I think they are two different beings. I think this was all covered in Oerth Journal 12, IIRC.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Mon May 25, 2009 11:17 pm

Julian Grimm wrote:
Gary has said that the EEE was not the big T before. I agree with this as I think they are two different beings. I think this was all covered in Oerth Journal 12, IIRC.

OK. Depending on how things play out, maybe I will have him be Tharizdun, otherwise I'll just leave it alone.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Lord Dynel · Post by **Lord Dynel** » Mon May 25, 2009 11:19 pm

Julian Grimm wrote:
Gary has said that the EEE was not the big T before. I agree with this as I think they are two different beings. I think this was all covered in Oerth Journal 12, IIRC.

I think you are right...I remember that interview (I think it was an interview ).
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Mon May 25, 2009 11:20 pm

Yep one of the best issues of OJ ever and the only one I printed out.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Tue May 26, 2009 10:56 am

Treebore wrote:
I am running the Drow modules right now, House Eilserv worships an Elder Elemental Eye instead of Lolth.

Ah, ok.

Treebore wrote:
So I am wondering if it is actually supposed to be Tharizdun.

Like JG said, no not supposed to be.

concobar · Post by **concobar** » Tue May 26, 2009 3:02 pm

Looking over VoH it looks like WotC is not trying to rewrite the history of the realms to account for the changes in spell casting mechanics and what not like they did in the realms setting. this is a good thing if it turns out a GH book is in the pipeline.

I think the best thing that WotC could do is pretend that spells have always been cast the way they are 4e when/if the release a new greyhawk sourcebook and spend their time explaining eladrin dragonborn and goliaths.

Its what they should have done for FR as i believe they would have not alienated so many FR fans. If I were calling the shots I would basically do a rewrite of the '83 box set with modifications to explain some of the core gods (wee jas becomes the raven queen) and explaining the new races. I would not allow dragon born as a core greyhawk race but would add notes for ways a lone dragonborn could find itself in the realms.

I would probably add a timeline allowing the DM to run a campaign through the greyhawk wars and from the ashes as well.
_________________

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Tue May 26, 2009 3:25 pm

I never understood their need to "explain" some changes. The game loses nothing if the changes are left out, so they should just leave them out.

Leave Wee Jas as Wee Jas. Don't include the new races as core for that setting. I think WotC needs to realize its okay for the different settings to be...different.

moriarty777 · Post by **moriarty777** » Tue May 26, 2009 4:00 pm

Well... what if Tharizdun decided to capitalize on the groundwork that EEE had set up and is just duping former "devotee's" into servitude to him?

Seriously though, I had some good time playing Return though I was never able to finish the campaign I was involved in. Probably for the best though, the campaign got de-railed something fierce when various members of the party became evil themselves. There's a good bunch of material overall in it, and it isn't hard to remove or change certain things to be a bit more in line with one's sense of tradition.

Thinking back of those fun times, I can't help smiling when I think of the kill board. One of my characters was the first of many to wind up on that board.

M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Tue May 26, 2009 4:04 pm

It's also kinda hard for me to believe that a group of insane, self-destructive nutty, entropic, chaos worshiping, nihilists could manage to put any sort of plan together that didn't simply entail shouting

BOOOOGABOOOOOGABOOOOGABOOOOGA!

As the charged their enemy with a spork.

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Tue May 26, 2009 4:05 pm

DangerDwarf wrote:
I never understood their need to "explain" some changes. The game loses nothing if the changes are left out, so they should just leave them out.

Leave Wee Jas as Wee Jas. Don't include the new races as core for that setting. I think WotC needs to realize its okay for the different settings to be...different.

Exactly. Look at the backlash on the changes to FR and you will see what is coming for when they do Greyhawk. From what I read many die hard FR fans dropped FR or have not bought the new books. If a world that popular can suffer that much of a backlash just think of what the backlash on GH will be.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Tue May 26, 2009 5:52 pm

What backlash? The majority of people who care about Greyhawk don't play WotC D&D. Or, so some would like to believe.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

SoulCatcher78 · Post by **SoulCatcher78** » Tue May 26, 2009 9:28 pm

DangerDwarf wrote:
It's also kinda hard for me to believe that a group of insane, self-destructive nutty, entropic, chaos worshiping, nihilists could manage to put any sort of plan together that didn't simply entail shouting

BOOOOGABOOOOOGABOOOOGABOOOOGA!

As the charged their enemy with a spork.

I think I've been reading to much of the Paranoia rules because that actually makes sense when I picture it.

Lord Dynel · Post by **Lord Dynel** » Tue May 26, 2009 11:34 pm

serleran wrote:
What backlash? The majority of people who care about Greyhawk don't play WotC D&D. Or, so some would like to believe.

Indeed, sir...indeed.

DD - I agree with you, about leaving the setting be. If there are any GH fans (and I mean more than a mere fancy) playing 4e then I think WotC will go about leaving them in the dust, too, if they change GH too much. I'm sure someone's thinking, "Well, I like 4e and I would love a 4e-ized GH!" You are probably in the minority.
Seriously, people have grown to love GH in these years and I'd advise WotC (if I were in such a position) to leave GH as-is. There doesn't have to be dragonborn and warlocks in GH - there hasn't been for 30 years and it's done good so far.

Ultimately, it doesn;t matter to me too much anyhow. WotC can;t improve on the '83 box at this point, so I doubt I'd even purchase the thing.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Wed May 27, 2009 4:17 am

serleran wrote:
What backlash? The majority of people who care about Greyhawk don't play WotC D&D. Or, so some would like to believe.

True but there are a minor few who do use 4e with GH.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Sir Ironside · Post by **Sir Ironside** » Wed May 27, 2009 5:56 am

DangerDwarf wrote:
I never understood their need to "explain" some changes. The game loses nothing if the changes are left out, so they should just leave them out.

Leave Wee Jas as Wee Jas. Don't include the new races as core for that setting. I think WotC needs to realize its okay for the different settings to be...different.

But, we are talking corporate suits with the, if it ain't broke don't mess with our bottom line, way of thinking. They don't want to be innovative (Gosh did I just say innovative for something as simple as what DD said?) they just wanna make money. And, taking risks can actually LOSE you money. Though it can improve profits by why take the risk? I don't think it is all that surprising that the people who really cared about D&D no longer work for WotC/Hasbro.

I love Greyhawk, it was my first real "world" I gamed in and will forever have that favourite place in my heart. I just know that the Greyhawk they are gonna do for 4e will be bastardized so much it'll have little resemblance to what Greyhawk truly should be.

I have no faith. None really. Please surprise me.