Goodman Games

i vote for sellswords as the next 'old' module to get daniel bishop re-paint job! let's make it next .5 adventure.

Maybe all three 4th Edition Punjar modules could be updated as part of the Punjar Boxed Set...

GnomeBoy wrote:Maybe all three 4th Edition Punjar modules could be updated as part of the Punjar Boxed Set...

This....This I like....

Though it seems like an easy answer because the word "Punjar" is in there, I unfortunately do not see the 4E stuff being the best Punjar can be ...at all.

Lots of compromises were made for an inferior game system. Sorry, I wouldn't champion this cause. It can be done so much better.

I do not wish to disagree with the eminent Mr. Kovacs, but while I agree completely that 4e is a substandard system, my experience converting Mr. Stroh's 4e work suggests to me that there is much to be salvaged from the materials produced for it.

IF there was going to be a Punjar boxed set, AND I was offered the chance to convert older modules for it, I would be happy to do so. However, I would prefer to do so in the context of the Jeweller Who Dealt in Stardust version of Punjar - a more Appendix N, DCC version of the city. Ideally, the basic revision would be done, and then the earlier modules would be restructured to follow the DCC version of Punjar.

Because compromises were made to fit 4e, that doesn't mean that the modules cannot be converted into a better system.

Doug Kovacs wrote:Though it seems like an easy answer because the word "Punjar" is in there, I unfortunately do not see the 4E stuff being the best Punjar can be ...at all.

Lots of compromises were made for an inferior game system. Sorry, I wouldn't champion this cause. It can be done so much better.

i believed so too, till i bought dragora's dungeon. while sellswords certainly would not be the best punjar adventure it could still be great little adventure given mr. bishop's intuitive understanding of dcc.

just to add that i haven't read other two 4e punjar adventures

I'd suppose it's only the eternal questions of time and money that would ultimately determine if the 4e Punjar could be un-compromise-ified.

I've only run Sellswords (and re-built as basically 3.5e, not 4e), and given that that it is what sold me on Punjar, I can only imagine what an uncompromised version would be like... *imagines*

If those in the know feel strongly that the future of Punjar is brighter than anything so far, I'll take them at their word (and make my own conversion as needed). But if the basic premise of those adventures was not found lacking, and the time and money questions were minimal, I'd love to see them DCC omnibus-ized, or re-presented somehow...

*rests italicizing fingers*

catseye yellow wrote:

Doug Kovacs wrote:Though it seems like an easy answer because the word "Punjar" is in there, I unfortunately do not see the 4E stuff being the best Punjar can be ...at all.

Lots of compromises were made for an inferior game system. Sorry, I wouldn't champion this cause. It can be done so much better.

i believed so too, till i bought dragora's dungeon. while sellswords certainly would not be the best punjar adventure it could still be great little adventure given mr. bishop's intuitive understanding of dcc.

just to add that i haven't read other two 4e punjar adventures

Just wanted to say, Thanks! catseye, for the vote of confidence & the kind words.

Raven_Crowking wrote:...there is much to be salvaged from the materials produced for it.

Agreed. I bought the Punjar material in spite of the system, not because of it, and I think there are a lot of good ideas which could be restructured into something more useful to me. (I could go for either DCC or 5E, depending upon which system converts best.)

Raven_Crowking wrote:IF there was going to be a Punjar boxed set, AND I was offered the chance to convert older modules for it, I would be happy to do so. However, I would prefer to do so in the context of the Jeweller Who Dealt in Stardust version of Punjar - a more Appendix N, DCC version of the city. Ideally, the basic revision would be done, and then the earlier modules would be restructured to follow the DCC version of Punjar.

I'm not familiar with the "Jeweller Who Dealt in Stardust" but I'm all in favor of a "more Appendix N" version if such is out there. I think of Punjar a lot in the same way that I think of Lankhmar, which is about as Appendix N as it gets.

Raven_Crowking wrote:Because compromises were made to fit 4e, that doesn't mean that the modules cannot be converted into a better system.

+1 to this. The Goodman product line has always had a lot of quality regardless of system, so take the best parts and convert into a better rules set and it can only make them better!

finarvyn wrote:I'm not familiar with the "Jeweller Who Dealt in Stardust"

Harley's contribution to the 2012 Free RPG Day giveaway. I got to playtest it previously w/ Harley at GaryCon & ran it myself on Free RPG Day. Easily one of my favorites.
http://www.goodman-games.com/FRPGD12preview.html
http://www.rpgnow.com/product/103722/DC ... G-Day-2012

Sellswords is a good adventure.

I took my pals through it and converted it to Castles & Crusades. I even posted our exploits here on the boards. I was very pleased to have DMed this module. I think it would lend itself to DCC-RPG as well.

GnomeBoy wrote:I'd suppose it's only the eternal questions of time and money that would ultimately determine if the 4e Punjar could be un-compromise-ified.

I'd be highly favorably inclined to lend my money to a conversion/re-write of the Punjar material. I may not have much in the way of bank account, but whenever I hear that Harley and his writing is involved, I somehow manage to nip & tuck at my expenses to afford his products. This would be no different.

Daniel Crowking has thus far done a better-than-reasonable series of conversions from previous editions to DCCRPG. If the Goodman Gods deem him worthy of the task, please allow me to thrust my digital money in their faces and request they take it already!



Punjar Omnibus ahoy!