|
|
Post by geneweigel on Feb 2, 2021 9:48:32 GMT -5
I have the next chapter of the unfinished parts of my T1-4 add-on all laid out. Half of the entries are finished. This is another complete adventure area which is an obvious double tribute (To a hardcover and a module). Low level intentionally. The mysteries continue but its doable as a standalone and as a starter.
|
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on Feb 2, 2021 10:07:17 GMT -5
In what way is it an add-on, Gene? Just in the same general locale, or linked to the power factions in the Temple dungeon levels?
|
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Feb 2, 2021 13:56:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Feb 2, 2021 14:00:59 GMT -5
As far as connectivity its all done in a tangential theme that will stand alone.
|
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on Feb 2, 2021 14:51:31 GMT -5
I like the idea of the "Other Moathouse" considering the module described the ToEE having a plan to expand outward:
"The subjugated folk were then to be used as slaves to construct another fortress further west, as the evil power of the Temple spread in ever-growing rings to encompass all of the land round its base" (T1, p. 12).
Something else to consider is where all of those "ochre robed men and humanoids fleeing south and west through their community" went (T1, p. 2).
|
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Feb 2, 2021 16:01:55 GMT -5
This isn't that... yet. But this is built on another bread crumb.
|
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on Feb 3, 2021 18:17:43 GMT -5
Well, I liked your interpretation of the "monstrous troll"!
|
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Feb 4, 2021 10:28:14 GMT -5
This entire series is based on a bunch of notes from the 90s contemplating running more for T1. I had a major theme running throughout the campaign play but that is not going to be included in this series. The beings are too unique for Greyhawk and will be covered in a published module. What is emphasized here is Greyhawk related material only. There is a theme of universal usability and that BS from my campaign will be delved into at a later point at which point I'll show how they were involved in all this alt-T1-4 seeming nonsense that I'm ginning up for the blog.
|
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Feb 4, 2021 10:37:49 GMT -5
There are new monsters of course and more variants.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Feb 4, 2021 12:05:46 GMT -5
According to a few comments Paul Stormberg has made after seeing Gary's ToEE notes, his outline apparently had a much more grander scale than the published version ended up being, and maybe more sandboxy. Gary had a wilderness map that went from Verbobonc to Dyvers. I remember reading that Ernie's group had discovered the location of the Temple, but were avoiding it out of fear.
|
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on Feb 4, 2021 12:38:09 GMT -5
I wonder how EGG's wilderness map compares to the one Paul drew up a while back? EGG gave suggestions in T1-4 about how to draw a wilderness map showing the Velverdyva River to the north and all of the relative distances, but that may have been at a scale when everything was imagined to be in closer proximity. Therefore they would not have been a good match for the distances as shown on the Darlene map and the little map insert included in T1-4. As I recall, Paul tried to reconcile the distances with a "south bend" of the Velverdyva River. Also, Paul mentioned having a conversation with EGG about some of the naming conventions and guessed the Verbobonc was derived from something that meant "both banks" of the river (Veluna-both-banks or something like that). So, I was wondering if on EGG's map the city is shown as sprawled across both sides of the Velverdyva.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Feb 4, 2021 12:55:44 GMT -5
Veluna River Both Banks. And Sobanwych, which was Sobonc on Gary's wilderness map was south bank.
I'm not sure the map instructions were EGG's, Frank's. I think Frank had a collection of notes that were based on both Gary's home map and the map that ended up being published, and cobbling the two together was part of the challenge.
I was going over T1 recently, and I think there's a possibility that Nulb being only 6 miles distant may have been a mistake all along, and the intended distance was the greater all along. I think it's possible that should have read 6 leagues. Leagues was used in multiple instances in the module, and in the monochrome T1, in the introduction to the Moathouse section it states: "The track continues past the ruins for many miles - seven leagues in fact - until the temple area is reached."
Apparently Frank only had a portion of Gary's notes and a lot of what Gary had outlines was dropped completely.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Feb 4, 2021 13:06:36 GMT -5
Gene, when I eventually do run this thing again I am going to try increase the scale. Your additions will fit nicely.
|
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on Feb 4, 2021 15:27:04 GMT -5
I'd love to see the scales and relative positions of everything on EGG's map. It would put to rest a lifetime's worth of headaches!
|
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Feb 4, 2021 18:25:16 GMT -5
The "bonc" for "bank" is the naming device that led me to "Yeenoghu" being "Dunsany" backwards.
|
|
|
|
Post by grodog on Feb 5, 2021 18:35:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Apr 8, 2021 9:11:39 GMT -5
This thing is lagging mentally. I have two more areas to finalize and its definitely module level event for this one. I've been back and forth in this so many times it feels real.
|
|
|
|
Post by GRWelsh on Apr 8, 2021 10:49:40 GMT -5
What experiences have you guys had in DMing/playing T1-4? I've DMed and played T1 many times, but I don't think I've ever gotten through T1-4 all the way either as a DM or player. How does it usually end, when you guys play it out?
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Apr 8, 2021 13:35:52 GMT -5
It's been a long time since I ran it. Don't recall a lot of specifics. I can remember running T1 in the early 80s and making my own Temple.
in the early 90s I had a party finish up the written material, but the campaign ended right after that. They had the orb, but didn't destroy it. I don't think they ran into Zuggtmoy, but not sure.
I started it a few other times, but never finished it.
It's always been fun. I enjoy running it and the players have always seemed to enjoy it.
|
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Apr 8, 2021 15:45:47 GMT -5
Played Hommlet with an aggressive DM in 1983 and then later played T1-4 with a by "the book/rules judge" in 1988 doing a repeat of Hommlet and the Moathouse briefly before skipping it and going straight to the temple. I later DMed it for strangers partially as the group was stale (Minimalists) in 1995. Then another group of strangers in 2001 with a D20 conversion (I had a massive preparation but I had aborted at the last minute when one of the players was trying to hide the module under the table who was literally a bald and fully grown man in his late 30's). Later played 3E video game and was stuck in front of Moathouse.
The forays are all varied and a sense of different approaches but reaching Zuggtmoy was a no go as a player.
|
|
