Blackmoor dungeon history

[Havard]

Yeah, basically I agree with you, and really am happy to accept a good bit of the zgg stuff, particularly from Wizards Cabal and Blackmoor Dungeons as they seem to have the most input from Dave himself. I'm not keen on some of the 3.5/4e fluff (like Docrea IMHO, hobbits are good enough for me). I dunno what to think of the DA stuff as I only have ToTF and its very TSR in character, but it only makes sense to look at all the later materials as sources of information, and where it doesn't contradict the FFC, seems to fit in with the character of early Blackmoor or comes directly from Dave, then its good. So for the DA material I cheat and rely on you guys excellent summaries and write ups.

I recommend DA1 in particular. The bad thing about thisone is that the information is scattered all over the place (since it is an adventure rather than a setting book). This means that alot of vital information about the setting is found in the NPC section for instance.

Note that with the exception of DA4, Dave Arneson was listed as an author on the cover the DA series which meant that Ritchie probably relied heavily on Arneson's notes. Apparently there were a few things in DA4 that Arneson was unhappy with, but it has never become clear what those things were. It is possible that this rumour has been emphasized by ZGG as part of a stratetegy for selling the "real DA4" at some point in the future. This never happened though.

Although I love the FFC, I like the fact that the DA series have taken that information and more and presented in a better organized and less humorous style. The FFC is a very enjoyable read, but the in-jokes means that you will have to change alot of things when running an actual campaign.

I agree with your comment on the Docrae. As they stand they are pretty much superflous. I have some ideas for modifying these so that they get more of a niche of their own.

Havard