* * * Wizards Community Thread * * * -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Thread : Looking for a non-linear adventure Started at 05-02-04 07:32 AM by Wimsey Visit at http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=231695 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 1] Author : Wimsey Date : 05-02-04 07:32 AM Thread Title : Looking for a non-linear adventure Hi! Now that svgames has made available to us all classic D&D and AD&D modules, I want to start playing with my group one of them. We really dislike linear adventures, and pure dungeon crawls. We prefer modules with lots of NPC interaction, intrigue, strange murders and so on. And modules where players have a real decision power. Our best RPG experience has always been playing Carl Sargent's WHFRP Power Behind the Throne. We know that this book is perhaps unsurpassed, but we are looking for something similar. Do you know any adventure that has these characteristics? Many thanks. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 2] Author : beavis123 Date : 05-02-04 08:11 AM Thread Title : there's no one answer The "older" modules were designed to be mostly linear to keep it simple. You may have to modify them to suit your purposes. Maybe you can just take some ideas from them and develop your own. I really liked the Slavers for 2nd ed. It was somewhat open ended. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 3] Author : hamletru Date : 05-02-04 10:22 AM Faction War, which I'm currently reading, is a non-linear adventure but it's kind of complex (read, very complex). The original, 2ed. DragonLance War of the Lance series (I forget module names or numbers, sorry but they are available at SVGames) are very good. Played one of those and the group got so lost that the DM had to invent a way to get us back on track. The DarkSun adventure "The Road to Urik" is pretty non-linear. That's all that comes to mind really. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 4] Author : Crunchy Frog Date : 05-02-04 02:12 PM Check out L2 The Assassin's Knot (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/dx20001229b), a free download from Wizards.com. The heroes have to investigate a town to ferret out a group of assassins. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 5] Author : blackprinceofmuncie Date : 05-02-04 06:28 PM Thread Title : Re: there's no one answer Originally posted by beavis123 The "older" modules were designed to be mostly linear to keep it simple. This is one of the most ridiculous and uninformed statements I've ever seen anyone make about OOP D&D. To name JUST a few of the great non-linear modules put out for D&D/AD&D.... B2 - Keep on the Borderlands. X1 - Isle of Dread. N1 - Against the Cult of the Reptile God. L1 - Secret of Bone Hill. L2 - The Assassin's Knot. I1 - Dwellers of the Forbidden City I2 - Tomb of the Lizard King I7 - Baltron's Beacon T1 - The Village of Hommlet Every one of those adventures provides you with descriptions of an area with interesting NPCs and possible sites for adventure without a linear "lead them by the nose" plot. I would recommend staying away from the Dragonlance series if you don't want something linear. The adventure series basically follows the plot of the books and it's very tough to break out of that storyline without some major reworking of the modules. Good luck! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 6] Author : beavis123 Date : 05-02-04 07:08 PM Thread Title : i disagree The older adventures were linear for the most part. I will give you the Assassin's knot had some twists. I own Tomb of the Lizard King. That is as linear as it gets. That is an unimformed opinion!!! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 7] Author : blackprinceofmuncie Date : 05-02-04 07:32 PM Beavis, are you sure you understand what "linear" means? The Tomb of the Lizard King presents the DM with a background, some actions that certain NPCs will take, a village description, a dungeon description and a few sets of random encounter tables. The PCs are free to act as they see fit within this environment. There is no requirement that they proceed from A to B to C in order to the adventure to be useful. I'll admit that Mark Acres tends to give more suggestions about how the DM should handle things than some of the other authors of old adventures, but the adventure itself isn't at all linear. The fact that the Assassin's Knot has "twists" doesn't have anything to do with it being linear or non-linear. T1 Village of Hommlet doesn't have any "twists" but it's probably the most non-linear adventure of the entire list. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 8] Author : beavis123 Date : 05-02-04 08:50 PM Thread Title : I know I do...you do not. Linear follows a line. In Tomb of the Lizard King you proceed toward the village of Waycombe. From there you proceed into the great southern swamp. Everything proceeds in one direction. You need to read the adventure before you make so many obvious mistakes. How embarrassing for you!!! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 9] Author : Falstaff the Fighter Date : 05-02-04 09:24 PM You need to read the adventure before you make so many obvious mistakes. How embarrassing for you!!! The only thing embrassing around here is the idiocy that flows from your mind, to your fingers, to these boards through your posts. Or the fact that the mods haven't saw you for the troll you are and banned your sorry butt. All you do is come to the OOP board to talk smack and try to hide it behind what you obviously think is some form of clever wit, just like all the other dime a dozen trolls and flamers on the internet. Most of the people here that are full on into OD&D know you for what you are, I just hope some of the newcomers catch on before they decide to take their questions elsewhere, or worse yet, think that all the OD&D fan community is populated by people like you. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 10] Author : blackprinceofmuncie Date : 05-02-04 10:09 PM Thread Title : Re: I know Originally posted by beavis123 Linear follows a line. In Tomb of the Lizard King you proceed toward the village of Waycombe. From there you proceed into the great southern swamp. Everything proceeds in one direction. The fact is, I've not only read but run Tomb of the Lizard King several times. It's one of my favorite adventures. Yes, the party CAN proceed exactly as outlined in the module from throne-room to village to dungeon. But the information contained within the adventure is useful even if the party doesn't follow that path. The module provides a fairly complete picture of a campaign area with numerous avenues to adventure for a creative DM. The PCs aren't REQUIRED to proceed immediately to confront Modrin or Sakatha. In fact, the adventure can be even more entertaining if the PCs don't disrupt the evil pairs plans right away and Sakatha gets a chance to establish a powerbase in the area. The fact that you don't see, or refuse to admit, these possibilities just illustrates your lack of creativity and ability to think outside the box as a DM. How embarassing for you! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 11] Author : Algolei Date : 05-02-04 11:25 PM I concur. Most 1e/2e modules were not what I would call linear. The ones created from convention tournaments, however, were made specifically to be linear (the individual Slavers series modules, for instance). -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 12] Author : beavis123 Date : 05-03-04 05:50 AM Thread Title : I agree In Tomb of the Lizard King, if you don't follow the module you can go on your own path. That's true for most everything, I pointed out that if you follow the module it goes in a straight line. And Falstaff the Fighter, I am not going to answer you. I have alerted the moderator about your trolling attack. I can complain about people who attack me. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 13] Author : rogueattorney Date : 05-03-04 09:49 AM Hamletru, are you talking about the DL series of Dragonlance adventures? That is simply the all time rail-roadenest linear force-the-PC's-down-the-one-true-path adventures of all time. They're the prototype for linear. Look linear up in the dictionary, and you'll see "DL1-14." If you talking about different Dragonlance modules, I apologize. Beavis, WTF are you sniffing? Have you even read any old modules? B1, B2, B4, B5, X1, X2, EX1, I1, L1, N1, S3, S4, T1, WG4, etc., etc., etc. All give you a simple area or dungeon, and then let the PC's do what they will. No forced plot. No railroading. That's non-linear. Modules like the aforementioned Dragonlance modules, where certain things are presumed to happen at a certain time, forcing the PC's to take certain actions. That's linear. R.A. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 14] Author : diaglo Date : 05-03-04 10:03 AM Originally posted by Algolei I concur. Most 1e/2e modules were not what I would call linear. The ones created from convention tournaments, however, were made specifically to be linear (the individual Slavers series modules, for instance). true dat. the modules from the tournaments were initially made to be complete within the tournament. examples include but are not limited to: D1, D2, D3, G1, G2, G3, A1, A2, A3, A4, etc... when they went to print. however, they were left vague in certain areas and/or with some written tie-in to make them useable by DMs. they did still, however, require the DM to adjust the module for the individual campaign. they are written as guidelines..not cast in stone...which in point of fact made them non-linear. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 15] Author : Thailfi Date : 05-03-04 10:34 AM First of all Rogueattorney, isn't your name a bit redundant? To the matter at hand, ever adventure that has been made or will be made has a story line that needs to be followed eventually. An adventure that doesn't have a story line is called and accessory. My definition of non-linear is an adventure that allows you freedom to move through the locations in more than one order and allows the freedom to interact with NPCs in different ways. Multiple solutions to the overall storyarc are possible and alliances can affect the the goals of the PCs as well as the outcome. My list of non-linear dungeons include: Vault of the Drow Queen of the Demonweb Pit Axe of the Dwarvish Lords Assassins Knot Tomb of the Lizard King Faction War For Duty and Diety The Legend of Spelljammer -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 16] Author : rogueattorney Date : 05-03-04 11:04 AM Originally posted by Thailfi To the matter at hand, ever adventure that has been made or will be made has a story line that needs to be followed eventually. An adventure that doesn't have a story line is called and accessory. The first adventure scenario published for D&D was Temple of the Frog in the Blackmoor Supplement. I invite you to tell me what the story line was that needed to be followed. I can ask the same question of many of the (A)D&D modules originally published in the 70's - B1, B2, S1, JG's Caverns of Thracia, T1, etc. The story line form of writing modules was not the conventional way of writing modules in the beginning, even if certain modlues, GDQ and A1-4 in particular, had a certain path to be taken. The story module was an "innovation" of the early 80's first seen in I6 Ravenloft and later "perfected" in the DL series. Both mainly written by Tracy Hickman, BTW. These products were both very successful, to the point that pretty much all modules produced by TSR after '86 or so used the story model. R.A. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 17] Author : Falstaff the Fighter Date : 05-03-04 12:50 PM I won't post any more here and derail this thread any further. Those who are posting here already are doing a fine job of proving you wrong. I just hope newcomers listen to these people and ignore your trolls. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 18] Author : hamletru Date : 05-03-04 01:45 PM Originally posted by rogueattorney [B]Hamletru, are you talking about the DL series of Dragonlance adventures? That is simply the all time rail-roadenest linear force-the-PC's-down-the-one-true-path adventures of all time. They're the prototype for linear. Look linear up in the dictionary, and you'll see "DL1-14." If you talking about different Dragonlance modules, I apologize. Linear? Granted, it's been at least five years since I've read them, but I seem to remember plenty of chances to get off track in them. Hmmmm. . . *goes rummaging in the attic for a while* -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 19] Author : Serena DarkMyst Date : 05-03-04 02:45 PM Yeah....the DL setting was the first setting I ever played in...My DM at the time ran us through the DL series.....years later I found that our adventures did not even closely resemble the books....then I took on the setting....ran the series three times....the first two times I ran it my players had made their own characters for the series (two groups, two vastly different character parties) and the adventures still didnt resemble the novels......then I played the third time through with my players using the pregenerated characters...then the game almost mirrored the novels....I think the key to making the DL series non railroaded is to make them your own....require that your players make their own characters. And as far as non linear adventures go....I tend to think most adventures are linear...to a point....So..Im kinda strapped for an idea of an adventure that isnt linear. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 20] Author : Halaster-Blackcloak Date : 05-03-04 02:50 PM People who come to the OOP board claiming that older modules are all linear and inflexible are one of three things: 1. Ignorant of facts 2. Trolls 3. WOTC "agents" spreading propaganda Just ignore them and enjoy the far superior OOP stuff. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 21] Author : blackprinceofmuncie Date : 05-03-04 03:32 PM I think there's a misunderstanding of what "linear" means in terms of a D&D module. A dungeon, in and of itself isn't linear unless the adventure structure makes it so. Castle Greyhawk is the most non-linear place I can think of. The PCs aren't REQUIRED to do anything in order to adventure there. They go in, kill stuff, come out, go back in, find new areas, kill stuff, come back out, etc. There is no A to B to C progression. There is no railroading. A "linear" dungeon is one that starts out like this: The PCs enter area A. They must defeat the ogre and proceed to area B where they find the key that opens the door to area C. In area C they meet an old hermit who tells them a riddle. The only way to find the answer to this riddle is to go to area D. The answer to the riddle allows them access to area E. etc. A module set up like this means the PCs cannot deviate from the set path. If you skip any step, the rest of the adventure becomes useless. There's simply no way to proceed without completing the next step in the sequence. The fact is, I find VERY few modules of ANY edition do this. The Dragonlance series is a notable exception. Some of the supermodules like ToEE and Desert of Desolation are also quite linear, though with some DM work they can be "fixed" to avoid railroading. The same for convention modules. ANY module can be reworked to avoid railroading. The main point I'm making is that most of the early TSR modules require NO reworking to avoid railroading. A plain old dungeon is a locale for adventure. It's non-linear in that, a good DM can make use of the whole set of material no matter what actions his PCs take. If the PCs manage to find a way to avoid the Ogre in area A and open the door to area C, the entire adventure isn't ruined because they've skipped area B. The PCs don't HAVE to visit area D in order to solve the riddle, they can figure it out on their own, or through some other method (a sage for example). As long as there is always more than one option for the direction the PCs can take that will allow the adventure material to remain useful, then you're not in a linear adventure. A really GOOD adventure will provide numerous options at every point. B2 Keep on the Borderlands and X2 Isle of Dread are probably the best examples of this. The only way a module like I2 Tomb of the Lizard King would be "linear" is if the DM running it decided that he couldn't do any independent thinking. If the PCs want to do something and the DM says "Well, that's not the next encounter area in the book. It says here you're supposed to go straight to the dungeon." then the DM is MAKING the adventure linear. I2 provides random encounter tables for areas around the town and dungeon. If the PCs don't proceed to the next encounter area, there is still information provided for the DM to present adventures for them (as long as the DM is creative enough to use and expand on the information given). In addition, the PCs aren't in an A + B + C = The World Doesn't Blow UP scenario. If the PCs never get to C, things WILL happen, the bad guys MIGHT win the day, but the adventure can still continue. The good guys can fight back. However, that's going to require some DM creativity and thinking. At one point in the history of D&D, requiring those things of a DM was not considered a bad thing. :smirk: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 22] Author : Thailfi Date : 05-03-04 03:57 PM Proof that the DragonLance series is not linear is how my party conquered the first dungeon. SPOILER My group was a mix of the pregenerated characters used as NPCs and the player's PCs. My thief character and Tasselhoff got seperated from the main party. We managed to get down to the lower city. We avoided conflict with the draconian forces down there by hiding amoung the buildings. We skirted around the city until we found the gully dwarves. We convinced them to assist us and we wound up going through a passage we found behind a waterfall. We rescued the plainswoman named Sunstar and we continued through the underground network. We came upon the dragon's lair through a drain in the floor. We waited until the dragon was asleep and creeped into her lair and stole the disks of Mishakel. We wove our way back out of the city and managed to escape to the upper level where we met up with he main party and we beat a hasty retreat with our ill gotten gains. The dungeon would have ended this way if the DM hadn't been miffed that we cheated our way around the dragon. He had it wake up and chase us down just outside the main area where he had the module end in the traditional manner. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 23] Author : blackprinceofmuncie Date : 05-03-04 04:17 PM I think when people say that the Dragonlance adventures are very railroad dependent, it's in the context of the whole series. Individual adventures aren't that linear, but if you're interested in playing the whole series, beginning to end, you've almost GOT to follow along in the published order DL1->DL2->DL3-> etc. It's very difficult to take them out of order. This is true of many of the module series. A1-4 and G1-3 for example. A1- Slave Pits of the Undercity is not a particularly linear adventure, but the Slavers series as a whole is very linear. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 24] Author : rogueattorney Date : 05-03-04 04:23 PM Originally posted by Thailfi Proof that the DragonLance series is not linear is how my party conquered the first dungeon. <> He had it wake up and chase us down just outside the main area where he had the module end in the traditional manner. Aaaaaargh!!!!! You are simply not understanding the point! The fact that the module ends in a "traditional manner" means that it's linear! Non-linear modules by their very definition have no set ending and no necessity to complete steps X, Y, or Z. You start at point A and then go wherever. In DL1, you MUST defeat the Dragon for the module to end and the story to continue. In DL2, you MUST free the captives for the moduel to end and the story to continue. How many people have adventured in B2 and never destroyed the Shrine of Evil Chaos? How many people have adventured in WG4 and never discovered the Black Cyst? How many people have turned back from S1 thinking they've destroyed the true demi-lich? How many people have left B1 without ever figuring out what the glowing white stone was? How many people never defeated Zargon in B4? How many people left the Island without ever finding the hidden pirate cave in X1? Non-linear! These things did not have to occur in order for the characters to have a successful romp through the dungeon! [edited to make sense] R.A. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 25] Author : Thailfi Date : 05-03-04 06:03 PM So the fact that ONE thing HAD to happen makes the whole adventure linear? An adventure has to be completely without point or structure to be non-linear? I don't think so. Every adventure has to have a starting point and an ending point. The trip in between decides whether it is linear or not, not whether there is extraneous stuff in between that a party might not have to do. I can't imagine a satisfying adventure that didn't have a goal. By the way No party has ever prematurely left S1 thinking they have destroyed the demi-lich without being laughed at by their DM for being painfully stupid and I certainly wouldn't call it a successful adventure. Lastly you left out the part where I specifically stated that we accomplished the mission in the first DragonLance WITHOUT confronting the dragon. The encounter was completely unnecessary. The disks were all that was important. Our DM just wanted us to fight the thing. There are plenty of things in that series that the players don't need to do. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 26] Author : blackprinceofmuncie Date : 05-03-04 06:20 PM Originally posted by Thailfi Every adventure has to have a starting point and an ending point. The trip in between decides whether it is linear or not, not whether there is extraneous stuff in between that a party might not have to do. I can't imagine a satisfying adventure that didn't have a goal. Where is the starting and ending point for B2? For X1? There is nothing in those modules that DEPENDS on the players starting in a certain place or pursuing a certain goal. Some of the best campaigns I've ever been involved in have centered around doing stuff on the Isle of Dread that had absolutely nothing to do with the central plateau. The BEST adventures are the ones that don't have a goal, because the players get to set their own goals. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 27] Author : Thailfi Date : 05-03-04 09:36 PM Well to each his own I guess. The Isle of Dread remains the only adventure our group has purchased but never run because we felt it was incredibly weak. We always felt wandering around aimlessly was boring. If we wanted to do that we certainly wouldn't need to purchase a module to do it. I am glad you get enjoyment out of it. There are plenty of people who think the Planescape, Dragon Lance, Forgotten Realms, and other plot driven stuff that we love is garbage. I guess it goes to show what a versatile game D&D really is. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 28] Author : caeruleus Date : 05-03-04 11:15 PM Rather than thinking about adventures being either linear or nonlinear, perhaps we can think of them as having various degrees of linearity. blackprinceofmuncie makes a good point that the original Dragonlance adventures may not have been individually linear, but as a whole were. Of course, this is only if you want to follow the story as it's set out. There's nothing stopping a creative DM from allowing the PCs to, say, raise their own small army to fight the Dragon Highlords, or even to join the Dragonarmies. Granted, if this was done, then you wouldn't be really using the adventures presented in the modules (even though you might use some of the material). However, doesn't that go for any module that is used? If the PCs go to the Tomb of Horrors, then they're going to be at the Tomb of Horrors. Once you've decided to use a module, any module, you've already determined that the PCs will have an adventure relating to it. The thing with Dragonlance is that, with 14 modules, there's a lot to commit to, but only if you commit to the entire set of 14 modules from the beginning. Now, I do think that the DL modules are more linear than many others. I could pick another set of 14 modules to commit to, but the DL modules can't really be done out of order (such as starting with DL13, then DL5, and finally DL2). -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 29] Author : Serena DarkMyst Date : 05-04-04 12:19 AM Originally posted by Halaster-Blackcloak People who come to the OOP board claiming that older modules are all linear and inflexible are one of three things: 1. Ignorant of facts 2. Trolls 3. WOTC "agents" spreading propaganda Just ignore them and enjoy the far superior OOP stuff. I have noticed on this thread that some people arent quite understanding the meaning of the word linear......But I will say that the older and newer adventures alike are linear....that isnt necessarily bad......I dont find myself to be a troll...but I have played many linear OOP adventures.....when they were in print...lol.....I'm not a WoTC agent either....but my preference is the newer material...it' just my preference....That doesnt make my edition any better or worse than yours....there are people here who play all editions....I just dont understand why the different players dont seem to get along...why is there this need to have a glorified urinating contest and say who's game is better? It's really childish. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 30] Author : Sarta Date : 05-04-04 05:23 AM I think the closest you are going to come to a completely non-linear adventure will be some of the sourcebooks on specific locales that include a lot of plot-hooks and npc's that have ready-made plot-hooks in their write ups. With this in mind, you will find them for all editions of play. Rarely is a packaged adventure going to not steer the players into some semblance of a specific order in which events must be played out. Some are just less heavy-handed than others. A strong argument can be made that the various Volo's Guides or the Gazetteers for Greyhawk were some of the best non-linear adventure supplements. Sarta -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 31] Author : Falstaff the Fighter Date : 05-04-04 11:18 AM Well, the relations between 1e / 2e / B(x) players can be kind of heated some times. Unless you were talking about the relations between these guys and the players of D20 Fantasy. Then they get riled because their favorite game's good name has been slapped on a game that has as much in common with the real D&D as apples do with oranges. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 32] Author : blackprinceofmuncie Date : 05-04-04 02:57 PM Originally posted by Thailfi There are plenty of people who think the Planescape, Dragon Lance, Forgotten Realms, and other plot driven stuff that we love is garbage. I just want to be clear that I don't equate linear with "garbage". Personally, I don't like the DL modules (just my taste). But there are plenty of linear modules I think are brilliant. The Desert of Desolation series, for example, is quite linear. Ther material assumes the PCs will go from A to B to C in order to "complete" the adventure. However, it's a great set of adventures and can be very fun. It does, however, require some significant reworking if the DM doesn't want to railroad his players. I actually believe exactly the oppostie of Serena. I think a great number of older and newer adventures are not linear. Linear, plot-driven adventures had their hey-day in the 90s and seem to have died out again in favor of the more useful non-linear generic adventure. The exception would, IMO, be Dungeon Magazine, where plot-driven story-heavy adventures still seem to be going strong. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 33] Author : diaglo Date : 05-04-04 03:03 PM also don't get event based encounters vs. site based encounters confused with the linear definition. you know something happens on day 1 ... event based something happens on spot 1 .... site based -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 34] Author : Halaster-Blackcloak Date : 05-04-04 10:05 PM Serena DarkMyst wrote: I just dont understand why the different players dont seem to get along...why is there this need to have a glorified urinating contest and say who's game is better? Because it's human nature. People don't get along. It amazes me that people still ask this question. Turn on the tv and watch the news to see how well people get along all over the world. Sorry I can't respond to the rest of your post. No offense, but your posts give me headaches, with all those ellipses instead of periods at the end of sentences. They read like some sort of random thought, stream of consciousness exercise or something. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 35] Author : caeruleus Date : 05-05-04 12:13 AM Originally posted by Halaster-Blackcloak Because it's human nature. People don't get along. It amazes me that people still ask this question. Turn on the tv and watch the news to see how well people get along all over the world. That just restates the question. It's clear that people don't get along, but the psychology/sociology/whatever behind it isn't always so clear. Besides, asking why is one way to express a wish that it were not so. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 36] Author : Serena DarkMyst Date : 05-05-04 01:50 AM Originally posted by Halaster-Blackcloak Serena DarkMyst wrote: Sorry I can't respond to the rest of your post. No offense, but your posts give me headaches, with all those ellipses instead of periods at the end of sentences. They read like some sort of random thought, stream of consciousness exercise or something. No offense taken. I am literally trying my rear end off to not do that while responding to ya. ;) It's difficult for me, as the way I type is exactly as you say, random thoughts tied together. Not much I can do but try to tone it down for you all...;) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 37] Author : Halaster-Blackcloak Date : 05-05-04 03:40 AM caeruleus wrote: That just restates the question. It's clear that people don't get along, but the psychology/sociology/whatever behind it isn't always so clear. It's pointless to ask it in the first place. If it's being asked as an actual interrogatory question, the answer is self evident...because people simply don't get along. There's no need for deep psychological investigation into the matter. Man has always, does, and will always find a reason to fight. Whether it's based on religion, race, ethnicity, politics, favorite color, or game edition, people tend to fight and not get along. Simple answer, human nature. That will never change. As far back as we have recorded history, this is true, and it's never gotten better. If it's a rhetorical question, or as you later said, a way to wish it were not so, it's still pointless. It's like asking why the sun rises in the east. That's just the way things are, so why cry about it? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 38] Author : Halaster-Blackcloak Date : 05-05-04 03:45 AM Serena Darkmyst wrote: No offense taken. I am literally trying my rear end off to not do that while responding to ya. It's difficult for me, as the way I type is exactly as you say, random thoughts tied together. Not much I can do but try to tone it down for you all... Awesome! Much better! :D :cool: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 39] Author : Asta Kask Date : 05-05-04 05:52 AM Originally posted by caeruleus That just restates the question. It's clear that people don't get along, but the psychology/sociology/whatever behind it isn't always so clear. Besides, asking why is one way to express a wish that it were not so. One reason is that people tend to define out-groups and in-groups. This seems to be something deeply rooted in our biology, and psychological experiments show that you can create such groups by dividing a group into two (randomly) and then make on of the groups "jailers" and the other group "prisoners". The prisoners had to wear masks, could only speak when spoken to and had to ba addressed as numbers. Before long the jailers began abusing the prisoners, and the experiment had to be abandoned for reasons of student safety. This grouping behavior coincides with another human trait: that of defining rigid categories of right and wrong. Now, I'm not a relativist, but I wholly agree that arguing whether 1e, 2e, 3.0 or 3.5 is "better" is kind of pointless. The editions have merits and flaws, and what one person considers a merit, another thinks is a flaw. Much depends on what kind of game you want to play. Now, as for the discussion on linear vs. non-linear adventure modules. 1) As has been pointed out before, the absolute concepts of linearity and non-linearity are not very interesting. There is a sliding scale, and the absolutes are probably uninteresting (one example of an extremely linear roleplaying session would be a play, were aside from improvisations evern the dialogue is fixed). Something like this: Linear_________________________Non-Linear Where one places certain adventures on this line depends on one's own taste. What can be discussed is whether 1e and 2e adventure modules had a greater tendency to be (non-)linear than 3.x stuff. However, if you do not conduct such discussions in a civilized manner, I will do my best to see that this thread comes to a rapid and predictable end. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 40] Author : rogueattorney Date : 05-05-04 10:45 AM What can be discussed is whether 1e and 2e adventure modules had a greater tendency to be (non-)linear than 3.x stuff. But that's not what the original poster was asking about. In fact, the original poster didn't mention 3e at all and was specifically asking about "Classic D&D and AD&D modules." The first person to answer the thread said that older modules weren't non-linear, which is a complete factual error, and the discussion devolved from there. Further, lumping the 25+ years of pre-3e D&D and AD&D products into one category and comparing them to 3e is a complete waste of time. Adventures made prior to 1982 are different from adventures made from '82 to '89, are different from adventures made from '90 to '95 and so on. Blanket statements of all 1e adventures are a certain way and all 2e adventures are a certain way are innaccurate even when stated in the most general fashion. R.A. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 41] Author : RobertFisher Date : 05-05-04 02:27 PM Dragonlance is an interesting case to me. For context: I only have the first three, & I've only ever run the first one. Also, it's been several years, so my memory may not be entirely accurate. When I ran DL1 I remember being surprised at how non-linear the module overall seemed to be. (Having read the novels, I was expecting something more linear.) It may have been higher on the railroad-scale than B2 or T1, but not hugely so. (I'm going to try to make this as spoiler proof as possible... :)) Is not visiting the BD's L in DL1 really any different from not visiting the MH in T1 or the CoC in B2? I could put the Keep, Hommlett, & Solace on the same map, drop rumors about each, & let the PCs choose which one to pursue. DL1 is a bit more difficult in this respect, as it makes more assumptions about the setting & that its trying to be an introduction to world shaping events. That's the bigger problem I have with the DL modules: They're set so firmly in Krynn. It takes more work to adopt them. Plus, as written, you couldn't just move into them once a party reached 3rd to 5th level. You'd have to specifically start a 1st level party in the pre-DL1 Krynn if you want to start at 1st level. Now, connecting the DL modules looked like a problem. Fortunately or unfortunately...that campaign never got past the first session for some reason. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 42] Author : caeruleus Date : 05-05-04 04:41 PM Originally posted by Halaster-Blackcloak It's pointless to ask it in the first place. If it's being asked as an actual interrogatory question, the answer is self evident...because people simply don't get along. There's no need for deep psychological investigation into the matter. Man has always, does, and will always find a reason to fight. Whether it's based on religion, race, ethnicity, politics, favorite color, or game edition, people tend to fight and not get along. Simple answer, human nature. That will never change. As far back as we have recorded history, this is true, and it's never gotten better. It's that very attitude that perpetuates conflict. "Human nature" does not explain anything. Any reference to "human nature" betrays a complete misunderstanding of biology (species are populations, membership in a species is not a matter of having some sort of "nature", but of being part of a lineage, and the constitution of populations change all the time). An investigation into the systemic causes of conflict will allow for a removal of those causes. Just as investigating the causes of a disease allows us to remove those causes. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Downloaded from Wizards Community (http://forums.gleemax.com) at 05-10-08 08:20 AM.