|
Post by geoffrey on Jan 25, 2012 12:19:48 GMT -6
Read the review here: thealexandrian.net/wordpress/12031/roleplaying-games/review-carcosaTo me the single most significant part of the review is this: "I recognize that many of these elements are historic qualities of classic hex-based supplements like the Wilderlands. But Carcosa is a particularly bland and repetitive instantiation of the form, and I also think 1976 was a long time ago. Similarly, while I may find Palace of the Vampire Queen a fascinating historical oddity and revolutionary for its time, anybody trying to sell me a dungeon designed like that today is not going to win my applause." I myself prefer 1970s D&D design. What's more, I prefer OD&D style over AD&D style. I think that even G1 is too wordy. I prefer Tegel Manor's style, or Palace of the Vampire Queen's style. I am excited about One-Page Dungeon Levels and Two-Page Dungeon Levels. For me, what Aaron Steele calls "word walls" are one of the greatest banes of RPG products: apaladinincitadel.blogspot.com/2011/06/why-word-walls-wont-work.htmlI love Judges Guild's old Wilderness books. I think they are close to perfect. Of course, they are out-of-print and the monsters therein have become familiar. I try to write products that feel during game play like the Wilderlands products felt when we didn't know what a troll or a white dragon or etc. could do. In short, Carcosa and Isle of the Unknown try to replicate the structure of the old Wilderlands products, while replacing the now-familiar pieces (monsters, treasures, spells, etc.) with new and unfamiliar pieces.
|
|
|
Post by kesher on Jan 25, 2012 12:47:01 GMT -6
I'm pretty sure that's the first time I've ever heard anyone refer to Carcosa as "bland"... ...and how can you describe someone's houserules as being of "extremely questionable quality"? That doesn't even make sense. Anyway, while I've greatly enjoyed some of the Alexandrian's articles and essays, I think he's missing the point.
|
|
|
Post by Mushgnome on Jan 25, 2012 13:09:26 GMT -6
Geoffrey, one thing I've always admired about Carcosa is that you wear your influences on your sleeve and are unapologetic about your goals for the project (I guess that's two things).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2012 14:52:39 GMT -6
I was thinking "exactly!" when I read this in his review. The difference between Alexandrian and myself? He sees this as a flaw and I see it as a plus.
|
|
|
Post by kesher on Jan 25, 2012 15:33:03 GMT -6
I was point thinking "exactly!" when I read this in his review. The difference between Alexandrian and myself? He sees this as a flaw and I see it as a plus. Exactly ^2.
|
|
monk
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 237
|
Post by monk on Jan 25, 2012 15:35:06 GMT -6
I myself prefer 1970s D&D design. What's more, I prefer OD&D style over AD&D style. I think that even G1 is too wordy. I prefer Tegel Manor's style, or Palace of the Vampire Queen's style. I am excited about One-Page Dungeon Levels and Two-Page Dungeon Levels. For me, what Aaron Steele calls "word walls" are one of the greatest banes of RPG products Amen, brother.
|
|
|
Post by keith418 on Jan 25, 2012 15:54:12 GMT -6
I love Judges Guild's old Wilderness books. I think they are close to perfect. Of course, they are out-of-print and the monsters therein have become familiar. I try to write products that feel during game play like the Wilderlands products felt when we didn't know what a troll or a white dragon or etc. could do. In short, Carcosa and Isle of the Unknown try to replicate the structure of the old Wilderlands products, while replacing the now-familiar pieces (monsters, treasures, spells, etc.) with new and unfamiliar pieces. Thank god someone can stand up and say this. I agree 100%.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2012 16:44:39 GMT -6
Some people like to be spoon-fed and have others do most of the work for them - and that's fine - while other people are just looking for a spark to set their imaginations on fire. Carcosa caters to the latter.
|
|