|
Post by Scott on Feb 6, 2005 11:54:03 GMT -5
What do you think works better for the distance between the two communities, the original description indicating six miles, or the later version that places Nulb over 30 miles away? The latter option will expose the party to many more random wilderness opportunities, and most likely force them to find lodgings in Nulb, which isn't a bad thing, but if played correctly, I believe the Temple's agents or the local residents would be more than the party could handle while trying to rest/recover in Nulb. Scott
|
|
|
Post by godentag from DF on Feb 6, 2005 14:45:58 GMT -5
Scott, I tossed this around for awhile in the past couple months, and I decided that what is the better positioning for Nulb actually is relative to where you have the Velverdyva.
1. If you go with the Darlene map geography, the T1-4 map (with the Temple south of Nulb and a day or more's travel from Hommlet) works best...and the distances seem to work much better than the T1 description. There would be no reason that I could think of, why characters would recuperate in Nulb rather than Hommlett, assuming a landlocked Temple, if it was only six miles down the road. The longer distance on the T1-4 map sort of forces an adventuring party into using that town as a stopover, at least. You might also just assume the "but six miles distant" is another editing oversight, and the actual distace to Nulb's "out of the way location" is 7 leagues past the moathouse.
2. If you redraw the Greyhawk map to flow the Velverdyva closer to Hommlett, though, the nearer distances creates some really interesting possibilities. I did this, to tinker with the module to keep it "fresh" for folks who know the CRPG.
In T1, the trail that leads to the moathouse (3 miles from Hommlet) also leads to the Temple area 7 leasues away. I assumed that the overgrown track doesn't re-cross the Lowroad, so the Temple is located between the Lowroad and the River, a day's march or more from Hommlet past the moathouse, ENE through boggy lowlands.
Nulb, which lies on the Lowroad 6 miles E of Hommlet, is situated on a navigable inlet that flows to the Velverdyva. Triangulating it (and allowing for bends in the Moathouse track), I positioned the Temple 12 miles NE from Nulb...but the Temple is only 1-2 miles off the riverbank. To get to the temple, you can take the track 25 miles from Hommlet past the moathouse, find the 12-mile trail from Nulb, or take a 10-mile or so ferry from Nulb (or sail from Verbobonc, about 50 miles upriver from the Temple area).
I have the river pirates of Nulb working with Belsornig's water temple, knowing a hidden landing only a mile away from the Temple area, so taking a boat from Nulb is by far the quickest way in (and out!) of the temple without magic or flight...also the least trackable. What I'm most looking forward to is how folks from the Temple (such as a disguised Smigmal, or humanoid raiders) will be able to take the battle to Hommlet as easily as the party can adventure in in the ruins. If the party is able to get to the temple in a day, then retaliatory nighttime raids become possible as well.
But then again, I'm doing this mostly because I have a good amount of time to plan before my campaign's underway, and because I don't want to give the players an edge from playing the CRPG. YMMV
|
|
There is no High Road
Guest
|
Post by There is no High Road on Feb 10, 2005 11:47:18 GMT -5
This discussion led me to review T1, and HOLY MOLY! Two things suprised me:
1) The distance from Verbobonc to Hommlett in T1 is stated to be 10 leauges, as opposed to the 30 leauges in T1-4.
This closer distance to Verbobonc, one days ride-or-so away, makes the threat to the city more real to me. It also helps me swallow that Emridy Meadows (and thus the eponymous Battle) is located near Verbobonc, ("...several leauges below..." [World of Greyhawk Gazeteer” 1980 pg. 8])
2) There is NO reference in the text of T1 to the High Road! Only the T1 Hommlett map indicates that the East road out of Hommlett leads to the temple and the Nyr Dyv. This makes Nulb more or less the end of the line, with most of the travel to and from Nulb going up Imyredes Run, i.e., an out-of-the-way place. I was always confused why the text referred to the Nulb area as "the out-of-the way settlement "(pg.2 para 3), because the T1-4 places Nulb on the High Road, a "frequently" (?!?) traveled route to Dyvers and points East, thats strikes me as not terribly out of the way.
Can it be extrapolated from these clues that perhaps only a track leads from Nulb through the forrested Kron Hills/Gnarley Forest to Dyvers/Nyr Dyv? If this track was assumed to exist, it would support the claims that the evil that spawned the ToEE came from Dyvers? Is this rarely travelled trace the "High Road" of T1-4 maps?
This makes a re-evaluation of the location of Nulb and the Temple, relying mostly on T1, such as excellent done job by godentag, interesting and fun.
I played around and have the Temple generally located only three leauges or so from the Velverdyva River and the Low Road! YOW!
FL
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on May 9, 2010 21:01:45 GMT -5
Making sense of the map situation in T1-4 is something I've always wanted to do. This has always been a mess. I can only assume it was because EGG didn't complete this module, and it was handed over to Frank Mentzer and the TSR staff to complete -- and the map details were part of that detail which got messed up. That may not be Frank's fault. I suppose it is also possible that EGG himself had notes that were conflicting, like an early version (with the Temple and Nulb six miles from Hommlet) and a later version (with the Temple and Nulb more like 30 miles from Hommlet). But that is all just speculation on my part -- I have no idea what caused these differences.
Anyway, here are a few of my notes:
In the Background in T1, Hommlet is located "some ten or so leagues southeast of the town of Verbobonc, on the fringe of the territory controlled by its noble lord, the Viscount of Verbobonc." In the Background in T1-4, Hommlet is "some 30 leagues southeast of the town of Verbobonc, or thereabouts..."
In both T1 and T1-4: "The folk of Hommlet tended to ignore this place, Nulb, though it was but six miles distant."
T1-4, p. 27: "Just a half-day's journey afoot (only about two hours' ride) east along the High Road, lies the disreputable community of Nulb, and the Temple hidden in the hills nearby."
T1-4, p. 28: "This adventure began in the Village of Hommlet, only about 30 miles west and south of the edge of the Nulb area map."
T1-4, p. 28: There is a suggestion to make a graph paper campaign map, "roughly the same parameters as the Nulb map" and corresponding to its dimensions of 100 yards per square and that "players might want to base themselves in Hommlet and ride to the Temple for adventures." This doesn't make much sense, though, because the only Nulb map provided has a key of 30 feet per square. Even if this were not the case, the suggestion of adding two sheets of graph paper to the west, and two more to the south, being enough to "cover all the important territory" doesn't seem to cover nearly enough ground. There are 1760 yards in a mile, so that rounds up to 18 squares equalling one mile. The typical sheet of 8 1/2 " x 11" graph paper with 4 squares to the inch has 31 x 41 squares, so it is not really clear what was being suggested here.
On the T1-4 map, the locations of the Low Road and the High Road seem to be confused. The Background says "To the north is the mighty Velverdyva, along whose south bank runs the Lowroad." But the T1-4 map has both a Low Road and High Road going east from Hommlet to Nulb. The road going east from Hommlet to Nulb should be the High Road.
|
|
|
Post by grodog on May 10, 2010 0:08:19 GMT -5
T1-4, p. 28: There is a suggestion to make a graph paper campaign map, "roughly the same parameters as the Nulb map" and corresponding to its dimensions of 100 yards per square and that "players might want to base themselves in Hommlet and ride to the Temple for adventures." This doesn't make much sense, though, because the only Nulb map provided has a key of 30 feet per square. Even if this were not the case, the suggestion of adding two sheets of graph paper to the west, and two more to the south, being enough to "cover all the important territory" doesn't seem to cover nearly enough ground. There are 1760 yards in a mile, so that rounds up to 18 squares equalling one mile. The typical sheet of 8 1/2 " x 11" graph paper with 4 squares to the inch has 31 x 41 squares, so it is not really clear what was being suggested here. It's probably worth recalibrating this with a 6 squares per inch sheet to see how much of a difference that makes, since many of the Castle Greyhawk and El Raja Key dungeon maps were on such sheets, and also because that's the size grid that OD&D recommends for drawing dungeons, too.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 10, 2010 8:23:48 GMT -5
Oh, the maps are definitely a mess. I'm sure it's due to Hommlet being started before WoG was completed, Gary updating the info to match the completed WoG, and then Frank getting pages of notes with some of the old layout and some with the new layout.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 10, 2010 8:35:09 GMT -5
I used to prefer the shorter distances because it made things much easier on me as a DM, but I think it makes things too easy on the party, and Nulb gets ignored. If I run it again I'm going to use the longer scale, and try to flesh out the wilderness and Nulb.
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on May 10, 2010 19:05:18 GMT -5
Allan, I will take your advice about the six squares per inch graph paper, when I get back from travelling later this week.
But for now -- After doodling out my own hand-drawn map on blown-up hexes corresponding to the Darlene map, I can see both sides as far as which scale to prefer.
The shorter distances do make the threat to Verbobonc more immediate, and the Battle of Emridy Meadows being located so close to Verbobonc and the Velverdyva River more plausible/sensible. Also, It would make Nulb much closer to the Velverdyva River -- a better fit for Imeryd's Run being a small river that pirates hide along, to emerge and raid upon the greater river.
But the longer distances, like Scott says, make it harder for the players to remain at Hommlet for their base of daily operations, and more strongly encourages them to engage in Nulb as a setting. Also the larger distances seems to be a better fit for the backstory of the Temple rising in power over a period of a few years, and then expanding its circle of influence and building outposts like the moathouse. That could give the sense of the Temple being the center of rapidly growing little evil nation, just far enough away from civilization that it was ignored -- until it was a threat beyond the ability of local lords to stop.
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on May 10, 2010 19:15:24 GMT -5
I just read Greyhawk Grognard's reminiscences about how much he loved T1 and how disappointed he was with T1-4 -- and I feel exactly the same way. Every time I read the wonderful and evocative introduction in T1, and leaf through the descriptions of the villagers in Hommlet and the ruins of the moathouse, it makes me want to flesh out this campaign again and give it another go.
But every time I do, and start to dig into T1-4, I get that same disappointed feeling again. It's not just that T1-4 doesn't mesh well, or that it has editorial problems -- T1-4 just doesn't live up to T1 aesthetically.
Have any of you guys ever had a party that played through T1-4 to the end? How did it turn out?
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 10, 2010 20:49:29 GMT -5
I can't say I was disappointed when I first read it. I loved it. I was 15 years old, and not as critical as I am now. I was many years before I really started pondering the flaws. Even with all the flaws, I still think it's great stuff, but I agree that it falls far short of T1 aesthetically. I've DM into Nulb and the Temple several times, and every time the players loved it. The players will often ask me to DM it again, because they know they've never figured it all out. I've never had a party play all the way through, one came pretty close.
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on May 11, 2010 6:56:43 GMT -5
I thought it was too much hodge-podge. I was hoping for more eldritch, dark temple spookiness, with more demons, Cthulhu-like horrors and black magic. The "elemental factions" kind of fell flat for me, although there are some good bits of old-fashioned Gygaxian description in there with the water and fire temples, and Prince Thrommel. I guess I had been thinking of Elemental Evil as something unrelated to the four classical elements of air, earth, fire and water... something more like the liquid in JohnCarpenter's PRINCE OF DARKNESS, or the black rock they forgot to pick up at the end of TIME BANDITS.
"Mom! Dad! Don't touch it! It's EVIL!"
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 11, 2010 7:13:52 GMT -5
After learning more about the module’s history, I really regret that we didn’t see Gary’s full version of the Temple, and the weird, creepy EEG stuff (just what you were pining for) that Gary had intended, was left out completely. It says something that Gary himself stated one of his biggest gaming disappointments was not getting to publish his complete version of the Temple. It wasn’t as good a read as I’d like it to be, but in the modules favor, I had a good time DMing it, and the players had a great time playing it.
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on May 12, 2010 15:43:25 GMT -5
I guess what I was expecting was something more along the lines of the Temple of the Eye in G3, the Wall of Tentacles, clerics with tentacle rods, etc. -- that sort of thing, but expanded upon. It's not even so much about stuff being really deadly, but just giving you that WTF feeling as a player. And there is some feeling that the altars in S1, B2, G1 and G3 all have, that T1-4 just doesn't have.
Have you ever thought of sketching out a T2 based on the notes you got from EGG?
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 12, 2010 20:25:19 GMT -5
If I were going to make that kind of effort, I'd rather redo the end of the GD series. As much as I wish I would have seen Gary's Temple, I've come to accept the Temple as is as part of the history of my Greyhawk campaign.
|
|
Falconer
Enchanter
Knight Bachelor
AD&D, Middle-earth, Star Trek TOS
Posts: 330
|
Post by Falconer on May 13, 2010 0:09:42 GMT -5
I see people putting down T1-4 so much that I generally find myself on the defensive. I can see the flaws, but overall, I have gotten far more use out of T1-4 than any other module, and my fond memories of it dwarf every other module. It rules.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 13, 2010 10:05:09 GMT -5
That's pretty much the way I feel. There is a sense of regret because I know the story behind the adventure, but I've had a ton of fun running the adventure that was released, flaws and all.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 23, 2010 7:04:00 GMT -5
Some more map musings: Going forward I will definately use the greater distance from Hommlet to Nulb. On the "FROM HOMMLET TO NULB" wilderness map, both the Low Road and High Road connect Hommlet to Nulb. My initial impression, based on the original background, was that the Lowroad ran from Verbobonc to Dyvers, and I think I'll stick with that. In T1, wasn't it mentioned that the track that lead to the Moathouse continued on to the Temple? I think I will have this track be the main connection to Nulb. The Main road east out of Hommlet will be the High Road, and it will connect Hommlet to Sobanwych, bypassing Nulb completely, using the next nearest ford of Imeryds Run six leagues upstream (south) from Nulb. The track leading southwest out of Nulb will connect to the High Road somewhere between the ford and Sobanwych.
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on May 23, 2010 8:27:57 GMT -5
You are right about that reference about the track:
T1, p. 12: "The track continues past the ruins [of the moathouse] for many miles -- seven leagues in fact -- until the Temple area is reached."
I agree that having the track as the main link to Nulb and the Temple is a better fit, and keeps Nulb more "out-of-the-way" as it was described in the background.
I also had the impression the Lowroad went from Verbobonc to Dyvers, and that it was incorrectly located on the map in T1-4, probably from a confused reading of the original background:
T1, p. 2: "To the north is the mighty Velverdyva River, along whose south bank runs the Lowroad. Many days travel to the east, on the shores of the Lake of Unknown Depths (Nyr Dyv) is the great walled city of Dyvers, the village of Sobanwych about halfway along that route."
If you read the second sentence as "Many days travel to the east [out of Hommlet]..." (which seems to be the context), then your placement of Sobanwych would be east of Hommlet in the hills of the Gnarley Forest, about halfway between Hommlet and Dyvers. Since those hills are said to be rather high ("peaking in the heart of the Gnarley Forest, where many sylvan elves happily roam over their crests"), in the Guide, then the High Road isn't a bad name for this route.
If you keep the original distance of Verbobonc to Hommlet as 30 miles, and then place the Temple 23 miles NE of Hommlet, as above, then you end up with a somewhat triangular set up. Nulb is positioned on the Imeryd's Run, a small river flowing into the Velverdyva River, which is now only a few miles away, rather than about 90 miles away. The idea of a small river which pirates hide and skulk along, between their raids out onto the larger river, seems to fit better with these distances.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 23, 2010 9:22:10 GMT -5
I never really gave the placement of Sobanwych too much thought, and just placed it on the Velverdyva, but putting it on a High Road crossing through the center of the hilly Gnarley is a good idea, making it a woodsmen village.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Apr 5, 2015 20:36:17 GMT -5
You are right about that reference about the track: T1, p. 12: "The track continues past the ruins [of the moathouse] for many miles -- seven leagues in fact -- until the Temple area is reached." I agree that having the track as the main link to Nulb and the Temple is a better fit, and keeps Nulb more "out-of-the-way" as it was described in the background. I also had the impression the Lowroad went from Verbobonc to Dyvers, and that it was incorrectly located on the map in T1-4, probably from a confused reading of the original background: T1, p. 2: "To the north is the mighty Velverdyva River, along whose south bank runs the Lowroad. Many days travel to the east, on the shores of the Lake of Unknown Depths (Nyr Dyv) is the great walled city of Dyvers, the village of Sobanwych about halfway along that route." If you read the second sentence as "Many days travel to the east [out of Hommlet]..." (which seems to be the context), then your placement of Sobanwych would be east of Hommlet in the hills of the Gnarley Forest, about halfway between Hommlet and Dyvers. Since those hills are said to be rather high ("peaking in the heart of the Gnarley Forest, where many sylvan elves happily roam over their crests"), in the Guide, then the High Road isn't a bad name for this route. If you keep the original distance of Verbobonc to Hommlet as 30 miles, and then place the Temple 23 miles NE of Hommlet, as above, then you end up with a somewhat triangular set up. Nulb is positioned on the Imeryd's Run, a small river flowing into the Velverdyva River, which is now only a few miles away, rather than about 90 miles away. The idea of a small river which pirates hide and skulk along, between their raids out onto the larger river, seems to fit better with these distances. I was reading T1 the other day, and it got me thinking about some of the discussions we've had. Now that I know Sobanwych came from south bank it would seem that the village should be on the Lowroad, along the river, and not in the Gnarley's hills. Also, I always wondered about the pronunciation of Verbobonc. Now I'm leaning towards ver-BO-bonc, with a long O in the BO.
|
|