Adam Shultz wrote:One thing they did right was bring in a whole new slew of exciting artists and put them along Easley. Ruppel, Brom, Fields, etc., all ushered lofty standards onto fantasy gaming.
zhowar1 wrote:Adam Shultz wrote:One thing they did right was bring in a whole new slew of exciting artists and put them along Easley. Ruppel, Brom, Fields, etc., all ushered lofty standards onto fantasy gaming.And force Otus, Roslof, Dee to take commissions from collectors on the Internet... I'm not familiar with any of the artists you mentioned other than Easley, who I don't really care for. I've generally been selling off all my stuff I bought in the 80s with Easley covers.
So, what am I missing. Which module in 2nd ed. is good?
bbarsh wrote:Ok. I am starting a new thread on the subject of modules. In another thread, it was mentioned how crappy 3.0 modules are from WoTC. I haven not read too many, and can agree - they suck.But I have to say, I can't really find anything worth much in 2nd edition either. I quit actively playing just after the release of 2nd edition. I just read WGM1 Border Watch. A somewhat original concept, but the presentation is garbage. And I must say, it takes a bit of work to screw up module for 1st level characters, but they did it. Redundant encounters, and flat out boring. The one thing that I see that is missing from most modules after 1st edition (and even some of those toward the end) is the basic concept of adventure. There is no sense of adventure or danger. So, what am I missing. Which module in 2nd ed. is good?
bbarsh wrote:Badmike,I am with you on EX1/2, UK1 and several others. They suck outright. Totally unplayable. I also hated X2. But for every crappy 1e mod, there many more that are solid. I give the C series wide latitude as those are tournament modules and don't have to make sense, to a large degree.I forgot about the "Challenge" modules. They do have that 1e feel and I liked the couple I read.
bbarsh wrote:So, what am I missing. Which module in 2nd ed. is good?