Path: ...!news.roellig-ltd.de!open-news-network.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.xs3.de!ereborbbs.duckdns.org!pyrite!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: kyonshi <gmkeros@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: edition wars
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 21:04:59 +0100
Organization: Fool's Gold
Message-ID: <vh5l5b$69t$1@pyrite.ereborbbs.duckdns.org>
References: <vf2kna$9cq3$1@dont-email.me>
 <6715e0ca$1$3068692$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
 <dmpchjt25i452ivj5vvtbttsjiu1trplkp@4ax.com> <vf7kmb$1cv4o$1@dont-email.me>
 <vgl3o0$37bmm$2@dont-email.me> <g9ftij56shv225a6pkqe9c50ncjq0ivia9@4ax.com>
 <vh08at$6r4$1@ereborbbs.duckdns.org>
 <rrh9jjdermro0jd36u5eh0thnaccsmjg0l@4ax.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: c3066ed76bae8bcc0e476efb157ff758
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 20:04:59 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: pyrite.ereborbbs.duckdns.org;
	logging-data="6461"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@pyrite.ereborbbs.duckdns.org"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <rrh9jjdermro0jd36u5eh0thnaccsmjg0l@4ax.com>
Bytes: 4351
Lines: 67

On 11/13/24 16:46, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

> 
> 2nd Ed definitely was better when it came to campaign expansions than
> with its modules. There were a handful of great adventures ("Dragon
> Mountain", "Planescape: Dead Gods", "Rod of Seven Parts") but on the
> whole I remember the edition more for its stuff like the
> aforementioned "DMGR3 Arms & Equipment Guide", "Ravenloft Boxed Set"
> and "Aurora's Whole Realms Catalog".

Yes, some of the campaign expansions were great. Some of the more 
generic things like the Odyssey line as well.
I still don't know what to think about other stuff though, e.g. the 
whole line of Dark Sun adventures. They were ultimately... fine. Not 
great. Just fine.

On the other hand Planescape had a higher amount of usable material from 
what I have seen.

(don't get me started on the Forgotten Realms which I started to despise 
at that time, which only solidified with 3rd edition)

> Which was fine with me, because that was the era when I pretty much
> stopped using retail adventures and started building up my own
> campaign worlds. I still _bought_ them, being the good little consumer
> (as "research" and "inspiration", I told myself) but most never really
> interested me enough to run them.

Oh yes, I call it collecting. Of course I don't really collect, I just 
like having particular stuff in the shelf.
> 
>       [Some were just horrible, though. Pretty much everything
>        Dragonlance did in 2nd Ed was just _awful_.]
I think it just outlived itself. The original Dragonlance adventures 
might not be my favorite, but they told a story. The whole franchise was 
basically desperately searching for what it's point was afterwards, and 
failing.

> 
> But I'm not really surprised. The game itself was changing. Early 1E
> adventures were either extremely simplistic, or often whole
> supplements unto themselves. They were good not so much for their
> adventures but because of the realms they described for us. But with
> TSR putting out more stand-alone campaign material, the modules
> focused more on _just_ the adventures... and those just weren't
> satisfactory on their own.
> 

I would claim that it made more money as well. It's a bit of a perverse 
intent: the more you focused on just the adventure the more you had to 
shell out for additional modules.
Funnily enough I didn't see that as so much of a problem in the 90s when 
I was socialized into RPGs with The Dark Eye, which had this model from 
the beginning. It was a revelation later when I realized how stuff like 
Keep on the Borderlands was intended to give longer-lasting material for 
adventures, not just a single plotline.

But yes, this became much more of a thing in the 90s. People started to 
want the event driven adventures that 5e seems to have perfected. I 
personally don't really like it, but it's an expression of roleplaying 
just like the older types.

> TL;DR: don't disagree with 2E modules, but I think it the decline has
> less to do with the system and more to do with how the industry was
> changing overall.
> 
>