D&D 5e on top again

stevebombsquad

D&D is still on top of the ICV2 Hobby sales for Spring 2017. I wonder if the release of Starfinder by Paizo will unseat it. It was nice to see that the 5e Middle Earth by Cubicle 7 broke into the top 5. 

Forgrimm

D&D Beyond is wrapping up beta and will be releasing next month so that's going to be even more momentum. With Twitch behind them, they have a lot of resources.

stevebombsquad

Yeah, this edition seems to be doing quite well. I am really looking forward to the Tomb of Annihilation. 

Loke666

I am not surprised. 

D&D 3 and 3.5 got killed eventually by all the silly class books and similar, some by TSR while other 3rd part publishers. The game eventually got insanely unbalanced and players always bought weird books and demanding to use them for their characters.

D&D 4 was just terrible, they tried to get the Wow players into it by using MMO mechanics. Worst D&D edition ever.

Pathfinder have gotten into the same problem as D&D 3, too much additional books, crappy balance and the rules are getting more and more complicated.

D&D 5 is very simple right now and the balance is at least better even though some classes still suck at low level (sorceror) while others get unplayable after lvl 12 unless the whole group plays then (bard). Sometimes the rules feels a bit too much simplified  for my taste but it leaves more to roleplaying and the very strict limit on magical items work really well to balance things.

You basically can have 3 powerful items since you need to bind them (yeah, you can unbind them as well), rings for instance are all requiring that to work and magic weapons that have anything more then simple +1-+3. My rogues boots of elvenkind does not have to be bound.

That makes things far less complicated then Pathfinder where high level characters tend to have an insane amount of magical stuff on them. It also annoys the monty haul players a lot.

Sadly do the Forgotten realms campaign still suck, have not been good since 4th edition released.

Personally do I wish they make a new AD&D edition. I liked AD&D, and don't let the "advanced" thing trick you, besides the Thac0 that mystified many players it was rather basic and simple.

waynejr2

Loke666 said:

I am not surprised. 

D&D 3 and 3.5 got killed eventually by all the silly class books and similar, some by TSR while other 3rd part publishers. The game eventually got insanely unbalanced and players always bought weird books and demanding to use them for their characters.

D&D 4 was just terrible, they tried to get the Wow players into it by using MMO mechanics. Worst D&D edition ever.

Pathfinder have gotten into the same problem as D&D 3, too much additional books, crappy balance and the rules are getting more and more complicated.

D&D 5 is very simple right now and the balance is at least better even though some classes still suck at low level (sorceror) while others get unplayable after lvl 12 unless the whole group plays then (bard). Sometimes the rules feels a bit too much simplified  for my taste but it leaves more to roleplaying and the very strict limit on magical items work really well to balance things.

You basically can have 3 powerful items since you need to bind them (yeah, you can unbind them as well), rings for instance are all requiring that to work and magic weapons that have anything more then simple +1-+3. My rogues boots of elvenkind does not have to be bound.

That makes things far less complicated then Pathfinder where high level characters tend to have an insane amount of magical stuff on them. It also annoys the monty haul players a lot.

Sadly do the Forgotten realms campaign still suck, have not been good since 4th edition released.

Personally do I wish they make a new AD&D edition. I liked AD&D, and don't let the "advanced" thing trick you, besides the Thac0 that mystified many players it was rather basic and simple.

To this day, I still wonder at people who can't understand Thac0.

Alverant

Loke666 said:

I am not surprised. 

D&D 3 and 3.5 got killed eventually by all the silly class books and similar, some by TSR while other 3rd part publishers. The game eventually got insanely unbalanced and players always bought weird books and demanding to use them for their characters.

D&D 4 was just terrible, they tried to get the Wow players into it by using MMO mechanics. Worst D&D edition ever.

Pathfinder have gotten into the same problem as D&D 3, too much additional books, crappy balance and the rules are getting more and more complicated.

It's feature/power creep. The business needs people to keep buying books. So with a finite customer base it has to keep making more books to keep going. Adding special classes and elements gives people the motivation to buy those books. Sometimes you gotta wipe the slate clean and start over. I promise you, D&D 5 will have the same problems. Eventually you'll be able to get a 4th major magic item or a way to change an item so it can be used unbound. It will be handled in books that have to be bought because businesses need an ongoing income.

Kajidourden

Wish I knew enough people to even play with lol

Grunty

Kajidourden said:

Wish I knew enough people to even play with lol

This site has a lot of U.S. national online game group links. http://dfwroleplayers.com/find-a-game-group/

mgilbrtsn

waynejr2 said:

Loke666 said:

I am not surprised. 

D&D 3 and 3.5 got killed eventually by all the silly class books and similar, some by TSR while other 3rd part publishers. The game eventually got insanely unbalanced and players always bought weird books and demanding to use them for their characters.

D&D 4 was just terrible, they tried to get the Wow players into it by using MMO mechanics. Worst D&D edition ever.

Pathfinder have gotten into the same problem as D&D 3, too much additional books, crappy balance and the rules are getting more and more complicated.

D&D 5 is very simple right now and the balance is at least better even though some classes still suck at low level (sorceror) while others get unplayable after lvl 12 unless the whole group plays then (bard). Sometimes the rules feels a bit too much simplified  for my taste but it leaves more to roleplaying and the very strict limit on magical items work really well to balance things.

You basically can have 3 powerful items since you need to bind them (yeah, you can unbind them as well), rings for instance are all requiring that to work and magic weapons that have anything more then simple +1-+3. My rogues boots of elvenkind does not have to be bound.

That makes things far less complicated then Pathfinder where high level characters tend to have an insane amount of magical stuff on them. It also annoys the monty haul players a lot.

Sadly do the Forgotten realms campaign still suck, have not been good since 4th edition released.

Personally do I wish they make a new AD&D edition. I liked AD&D, and don't let the "advanced" thing trick you, besides the Thac0 that mystified many players it was rather basic and simple.

To this day, I still wonder at people who can't understand Thac0.

I do my budget, manage bills, work a tech job and yet, I have to write the little chart down.  Drives me crazy: I can do  double entry accounting, but not THAC0 in my head.  

Robsolf

stevebombsquad said:

D&D is still on top of the ICV2 Hobby sales for Spring 2017. I wonder if the release of Starfinder by Paizo will unseat it. It was nice to see that the 5e Middle Earth by Cubicle 7 broke into the top 5. 

DnD still remains philosophically flawed.  From the time I was 8 years old and played a magic user in "Keep on the Borderlands" and died after the first pit I fell into, to the modern modules which insist that plot advancement hinge on me picking the right building/npc/map point to approach, I understand that it's not so much about story or challenge, but more about arbitrary BS.

PbtA... even the Marvel system works better for appreciating player characters while creating a challenge, and encouraging story participation.  So many better systems now than DnD...

waynejr2

Robsolf said:

stevebombsquad said:

D&D is still on top of the ICV2 Hobby sales for Spring 2017. I wonder if the release of Starfinder by Paizo will unseat it. It was nice to see that the 5e Middle Earth by Cubicle 7 broke into the top 5. 

DnD still remains philosophically flawed.  From the time I was 8 years old and played a magic user in "Keep on the Borderlands" and died after the first pit I fell into, to the modern modules which insist that plot advancement hinge on me picking the right building/npc/map point to approach, I understand that it's not so much about story or challenge, but more about arbitrary BS.

PbtA... even the Marvel system works better for appreciating player characters while creating a challenge, and encouraging story participation.  So many better systems now than DnD...

I think that is the crux of why many people dislike a particular RPG.  My character died...

Robsolf

waynejr2 said:

Robsolf said:

stevebombsquad said:

D&D is still on top of the ICV2 Hobby sales for Spring 2017. I wonder if the release of Starfinder by Paizo will unseat it. It was nice to see that the 5e Middle Earth by Cubicle 7 broke into the top 5. 

DnD still remains philosophically flawed.  From the time I was 8 years old and played a magic user in "Keep on the Borderlands" and died after the first pit I fell into, to the modern modules which insist that plot advancement hinge on me picking the right building/npc/map point to approach, I understand that it's not so much about story or challenge, but more about arbitrary BS.

PbtA... even the Marvel system works better for appreciating player characters while creating a challenge, and encouraging story participation.  So many better systems now than DnD...

I think that is the crux of why many people dislike a particular RPG.  My character died...

Some, maybe.  On the other hand, if a game gives you a 20% chance to see a pit trap, then a 50% chance that you'll die when you fall into it, then I'd call that a pretty good reason to dislike a particular RPG.

5th edition shows that it's gone a long way since then, but it still adheres to a guessing game narrative that often drags the plot into a swamp to die a horrible death... to the point where you wish that would happen to your character.

waynejr2

mgilbrtsn said:

waynejr2 said:

Loke666 said:

I am not surprised. 

D&D 3 and 3.5 got killed eventually by all the silly class books and similar, some by TSR while other 3rd part publishers. The game eventually got insanely unbalanced and players always bought weird books and demanding to use them for their characters.

D&D 4 was just terrible, they tried to get the Wow players into it by using MMO mechanics. Worst D&D edition ever.

Pathfinder have gotten into the same problem as D&D 3, too much additional books, crappy balance and the rules are getting more and more complicated.

D&D 5 is very simple right now and the balance is at least better even though some classes still suck at low level (sorceror) while others get unplayable after lvl 12 unless the whole group plays then (bard). Sometimes the rules feels a bit too much simplified  for my taste but it leaves more to roleplaying and the very strict limit on magical items work really well to balance things.

You basically can have 3 powerful items since you need to bind them (yeah, you can unbind them as well), rings for instance are all requiring that to work and magic weapons that have anything more then simple +1-+3. My rogues boots of elvenkind does not have to be bound.

That makes things far less complicated then Pathfinder where high level characters tend to have an insane amount of magical stuff on them. It also annoys the monty haul players a lot.

Sadly do the Forgotten realms campaign still suck, have not been good since 4th edition released.

Personally do I wish they make a new AD&D edition. I liked AD&D, and don't let the "advanced" thing trick you, besides the Thac0 that mystified many players it was rather basic and simple.

To this day, I still wonder at people who can't understand Thac0.

I do my budget, manage bills, work a tech job and yet, I have to write the little chart down.  Drives me crazy: I can do  double entry accounting, but not THAC0 in my head.  

Thac0 is a number you need to hit AC 0.  Suppose your Thac0 is 15.  Now, you might wonder how you hit AC 1?  You take Thac0 and subtract the AC to get the to hit number.  So 15 - 1 is 14.   If the AC was -1, you would do  15 - -1 for a 16.   And to be redundant, at AC0  15 - 0 = 15.  AC 10 would be 15 - 10 or 5 to hit.

OR SIMPLY:  Take Thac0 and subtract the AC to know the minimum number to hit.

mgilbrtsn

waynejr2 said:

mgilbrtsn said:

waynejr2 said:

Loke666 said:

I am not surprised. 

D&D 3 and 3.5 got killed eventually by all the silly class books and similar, some by TSR while other 3rd part publishers. The game eventually got insanely unbalanced and players always bought weird books and demanding to use them for their characters.

D&D 4 was just terrible, they tried to get the Wow players into it by using MMO mechanics. Worst D&D edition ever.

Pathfinder have gotten into the same problem as D&D 3, too much additional books, crappy balance and the rules are getting more and more complicated.

D&D 5 is very simple right now and the balance is at least better even though some classes still suck at low level (sorceror) while others get unplayable after lvl 12 unless the whole group plays then (bard). Sometimes the rules feels a bit too much simplified  for my taste but it leaves more to roleplaying and the very strict limit on magical items work really well to balance things.

You basically can have 3 powerful items since you need to bind them (yeah, you can unbind them as well), rings for instance are all requiring that to work and magic weapons that have anything more then simple +1-+3. My rogues boots of elvenkind does not have to be bound.

That makes things far less complicated then Pathfinder where high level characters tend to have an insane amount of magical stuff on them. It also annoys the monty haul players a lot.

Sadly do the Forgotten realms campaign still suck, have not been good since 4th edition released.

Personally do I wish they make a new AD&D edition. I liked AD&D, and don't let the "advanced" thing trick you, besides the Thac0 that mystified many players it was rather basic and simple.

To this day, I still wonder at people who can't understand Thac0.

I do my budget, manage bills, work a tech job and yet, I have to write the little chart down.  Drives me crazy: I can do  double entry accounting, but not THAC0 in my head.  

Thac0 is a number you need to hit AC 0.  Suppose your Thac0 is 15.  Now, you might wonder how you hit AC 1?  You take Thac0 and subtract the AC to get the to hit number.  So 15 - 1 is 14.   If the AC was -1, you would do  15 - -1 for a 16.   And to be redundant, at AC0  15 - 0 = 15.  AC 10 would be 15 - 10 or 5 to hit.

OR SIMPLY:  Take Thac0 and subtract the AC to know the minimum number to hit.

I know!!!  That's the sick, twisted part.  I'll have it explained:  It's incredibly easy:  I screw it up.  It's a mental block.  It's bizarre!!!

Donpoohbear

id love more material for naval battles and such  pirate adventures woot 

Mendel

I gave up following D&D with the 4th edition.  I didn't understand the move to more MMORPG-like conventions and systems, then expecting a human GM to implement these.  That edition might have worked as part of an actual computerized game, but they tried to make it a p&p game.  Unfathomable!

penandpaper

Oh, the hate for fourth is palpable...

I've personally thought all the systems I've played (from Advanced to 5th) have had their merits.  Personally, the largest problem in all RPG's is power creep, not the actual system.  Power creep breaks systems and drags combat into epically long sections of the game.  But the climb up is damn fun! 

waynejr2

Nyctelios said:

waynejr2 said:

mgilbrtsn said:

waynejr2 said:

Loke666 said:

I am not surprised. 

D&D 3 and 3.5 got killed eventually by all the silly class books and similar, some by TSR while other 3rd part publishers. The game eventually got insanely unbalanced and players always bought weird books and demanding to use them for their characters.

D&D 4 was just terrible, they tried to get the Wow players into it by using MMO mechanics. Worst D&D edition ever.

Pathfinder have gotten into the same problem as D&D 3, too much additional books, crappy balance and the rules are getting more and more complicated.

D&D 5 is very simple right now and the balance is at least better even though some classes still suck at low level (sorceror) while others get unplayable after lvl 12 unless the whole group plays then (bard). Sometimes the rules feels a bit too much simplified  for my taste but it leaves more to roleplaying and the very strict limit on magical items work really well to balance things.

You basically can have 3 powerful items since you need to bind them (yeah, you can unbind them as well), rings for instance are all requiring that to work and magic weapons that have anything more then simple +1-+3. My rogues boots of elvenkind does not have to be bound.

That makes things far less complicated then Pathfinder where high level characters tend to have an insane amount of magical stuff on them. It also annoys the monty haul players a lot.

Sadly do the Forgotten realms campaign still suck, have not been good since 4th edition released.

Personally do I wish they make a new AD&D edition. I liked AD&D, and don't let the "advanced" thing trick you, besides the Thac0 that mystified many players it was rather basic and simple.

To this day, I still wonder at people who can't understand Thac0.

I do my budget, manage bills, work a tech job and yet, I have to write the little chart down.  Drives me crazy: I can do  double entry accounting, but not THAC0 in my head.  

Thac0 is a number you need to hit AC 0.  Suppose your Thac0 is 15.  Now, you might wonder how you hit AC 1?  You take Thac0 and subtract the AC to get the to hit number.  So 15 - 1 is 14.   If the AC was -1, you would do  15 - -1 for a 16.   And to be redundant, at AC0  15 - 0 = 15.  AC 10 would be 15 - 10 or 5 to hit.

OR SIMPLY:  Take Thac0 and subtract the AC to know the minimum number to hit.

That what "unnecessary complicated" means. 

Where is the complicated?

waynejr2

Nyctelios said:

waynejr2 said:

Nyctelios said:

waynejr2 said:

mgilbrtsn said:

waynejr2 said:

Loke666 said:

I am not surprised. 

D&D 3 and 3.5 got killed eventually by all the silly class books and similar, some by TSR while other 3rd part publishers. The game eventually got insanely unbalanced and players always bought weird books and demanding to use them for their characters.

D&D 4 was just terrible, they tried to get the Wow players into it by using MMO mechanics. Worst D&D edition ever.

Pathfinder have gotten into the same problem as D&D 3, too much additional books, crappy balance and the rules are getting more and more complicated.

D&D 5 is very simple right now and the balance is at least better even though some classes still suck at low level (sorceror) while others get unplayable after lvl 12 unless the whole group plays then (bard). Sometimes the rules feels a bit too much simplified  for my taste but it leaves more to roleplaying and the very strict limit on magical items work really well to balance things.

You basically can have 3 powerful items since you need to bind them (yeah, you can unbind them as well), rings for instance are all requiring that to work and magic weapons that have anything more then simple +1-+3. My rogues boots of elvenkind does not have to be bound.

That makes things far less complicated then Pathfinder where high level characters tend to have an insane amount of magical stuff on them. It also annoys the monty haul players a lot.

Sadly do the Forgotten realms campaign still suck, have not been good since 4th edition released.

Personally do I wish they make a new AD&D edition. I liked AD&D, and don't let the "advanced" thing trick you, besides the Thac0 that mystified many players it was rather basic and simple.

To this day, I still wonder at people who can't understand Thac0.

I do my budget, manage bills, work a tech job and yet, I have to write the little chart down.  Drives me crazy: I can do  double entry accounting, but not THAC0 in my head.  

Thac0 is a number you need to hit AC 0.  Suppose your Thac0 is 15.  Now, you might wonder how you hit AC 1?  You take Thac0 and subtract the AC to get the to hit number.  So 15 - 1 is 14.   If the AC was -1, you would do  15 - -1 for a 16.   And to be redundant, at AC0  15 - 0 = 15.  AC 10 would be 15 - 10 or 5 to hit.

OR SIMPLY:  Take Thac0 and subtract the AC to know the minimum number to hit.

That what "unnecessary complicated" means. 

Where is the complicated?

When you can streamline to something more accessible. 

This sorta "elitism" in rpg systems made them look bad for too long. I lost count how many people gave up trying to play because they felt stupid they could not understand "a game" on the first time. We are talking about entertainment and gaming here, the point is to be a good interface to the player, not one that requires the player to think beyond the necessary.

How is it complicated? When any other does better and easily? Why the standard metric would be a mid point instead of being a increasing number like is the actual method? You get your PROF, add your d20 roll plus bonus and if reaches AC you hit. It follows the same principle as the rest of the game and its mechanics (skill, att rolls, etc). It is streamlined, it's logical, it's intuitive.

Thac0 is jut a system someone tried to make something that could easily be simple and efficient and just became unnecessary complicated for the sake of being unnecessary complicated.

Thank Ao for 5thEd.

Saying another system does something different/better isn't helpful. 

Tell me explicitly what you find "complicated" about THAC0?  Don't talk about other systems.

PottedPlant22

waynejr2 said:

Tell me explicitly what you find "complicated" about THAC0?  Don't talk about other systems.

Well... a lot of people found THAC0 confusing.  Mainly because of the -# AC means harder for monster to get hit.  The system (while I had no problem with it) seemed to many to not really 'fit' right.  Also the original presentation of it from 2nd edition was a little vague, if I remember correctly.  Companies have gotten better through the years with page layouts for systems.  I know there were plenty of friends I've had to show that THAC0 chart to myself and then explained the system.  In fact I had it explained to me the first time as well.

All the being said I LOVED 2nd edition.  Loved it.  I thought 3.5 was good and didn't really like 4.0.  Funny thing is I would have prob liked 4.0 if it was a different game and a little more board game focused, perhaps like Descent.

I will say this that those that have not played D&D 5th edition and consider yourself an old school D&D player, you should really check it out.  5th edition is by far my favorite iteration of the D&D universe.  It's flexible, streamlined and allows for DMs to run the game by using map and miniatures or theater of the mind.  This is my opinion is a HUGE benefit for many gamers, since a lot of playgroups vary on what they like.  

The gang at WotC have done a phenomenal job responding to feedback from the player base and the system really shines because of it.

Tamanous

I was really happy to see 5th edition come out and Wotc fully admitting they fucked up with 4th. We play tested 5e and liked it but it definitely needed time to mature. My old fav version was 2e but with a butt load of advanced options from Unearthed Arcana. I liked the simplicity and flow of the game RP-wise from that edition. 

5e sort of goes back to that but currently we are playing Star Wars Saga. It's an edition that likely inspired 4e without going full whore mode trying to attract a different audience. Works well for Star Wars and extreme character customization focus if that's what you are into.

Scott23

Robsolf said:

waynejr2 said:

Robsolf said:

stevebombsquad said:

D&D is still on top of the ICV2 Hobby sales for Spring 2017. I wonder if the release of Starfinder by Paizo will unseat it. It was nice to see that the 5e Middle Earth by Cubicle 7 broke into the top 5. 

DnD still remains philosophically flawed.  From the time I was 8 years old and played a magic user in "Keep on the Borderlands" and died after the first pit I fell into, to the modern modules which insist that plot advancement hinge on me picking the right building/npc/map point to approach, I understand that it's not so much about story or challenge, but more about arbitrary BS.

PbtA... even the Marvel system works better for appreciating player characters while creating a challenge, and encouraging story participation.  So many better systems now than DnD...

I think that is the crux of why many people dislike a particular RPG.  My character died...

Some, maybe.  On the other hand, if a game gives you a 20% chance to see a pit trap, then a 50% chance that you'll die when you fall into it, then I'd call that a pretty good reason to dislike a particular RPG.

5th edition shows that it's gone a long way since then, but it still adheres to a guessing game narrative that often drags the plot into a swamp to die a horrible death... to the point where you wish that would happen to your character.

This is where it is important to have a good DM.  A good DM takes the 'rules' which in AD&D and 3.x were actually guidelines and makes an entertaining adventure for you and your friends.

Heck, the only time we were strict with the rules is when we were getting ready to judge the AD&D (later the D&D) open tournament at Gencon each year

Myrradah

THACO - Its the math I tell you. I love Math but some people do not understand that -1-1=-2 or for THACO purposes THACO 15 vs AC of -1 = 15--1 = 16.

Drives me absolutely nuts today when i see kids adding basic numbers (like 8+5) by counting fingers....Kids that have, hopefully, graduated High School or i should say are in their 20's.

God forbid you cast a fireball and have to add up d6's....

Mendel

Nyctelios said:

Mendel said:

I gave up following D&D with the 4th edition.  I didn't understand the move to more MMORPG-like conventions and systems, then expecting a human GM to implement these.  That edition might have worked as part of an actual computerized game, but they tried to make it a p&p game.  Unfathomable!

You REALLY  should give 5thED a try. Like, for real, trust me on this.

I've heard nothing but good about 5.  I pretty much gave up p&p gaming when MMORPGs started.  One of these days, I'll glance at the core rules, and if it's not another overly-reliant on "whatever the GM decides" edition, then I'll pick up a copy.  I've always been a fan of rules systems.

Robsolf

waynejr2 said:

Nyctelios said:

waynejr2 said:

Thac0 is a number you need to hit AC 0.  Suppose your Thac0 is 15.  Now, you might wonder how you hit AC 1?  You take Thac0 and subtract the AC to get the to hit number.  So 15 - 1 is 14.   If the AC was -1, you would do  15 - -1 for a 16.   And to be redundant, at AC0  15 - 0 = 15.  AC 10 would be 15 - 10 or 5 to hit.

OR SIMPLY:  Take Thac0 and subtract the AC to know the minimum number to hit.

That what "unnecessary complicated" means. 

Where is the complicated?

I think many people overthink THAC0.  I'm almost certain it's the positive/negative thing.  There's a similar mechanic in software I support that screws people up, royally.

"My Thaco is 12.  I'm swinging at an AC of 5 so I have to roll a... 17?  Now I'm going after a badass with -2 AC... 10 shouldn't be too tough..."  If you're a "legacy" DnD player that way of thinking may seem absurd.  But it's very much totally NOT.

All that is moot, these days, with touch attacks and ranged touch attacks and being caught flat-footed and sneak attacks and snack attacks, etc...

Robsolf

Scott23 said:

Robsolf said:

Some, maybe.  On the other hand, if a game gives you a 20% chance to see a pit trap, then a 50% chance that you'll die when you fall into it, then I'd call that a pretty good reason to dislike a particular RPG.

5th edition shows that it's gone a long way since then, but it still adheres to a guessing game narrative that often drags the plot into a swamp to die a horrible death... to the point where you wish that would happen to your character.

This is where it is important to have a good DM.  A good DM takes the 'rules' which in AD&D and 3.x were actually guidelines and makes an entertaining adventure for you and your friends.

Heck, the only time we were strict with the rules is when we were getting ready to judge the AD&D (later the D&D) open tournament at Gencon each year

Agree 100%...-ish.  A good DM will either make the plot come to you in an interesting, challenging way, or make the lumbering slog to the plot actually interesting, and/or improvise with the players to do so. 

Reading the room and pacing are crucial.  And when module makers create maps that are massively intricate and detailed, they think they are doing a service to the game and adding value.  To some, that's true.  But oh man, can that go wrong...