PDA

View Full Version : palace of the silver princess



mr.fizzypop
2009-05-17, 10:07 PM
I have recently downloaded the orange cover pdf of the "palace of the silver princess". I was wondering, how much different is it from the green cover one? I want to know which one is better, or if the adventure is even worth playing.

shadzar
2009-05-18, 12:22 AM
Maybe this will help you? (http://www.acaeum.com/ddindexes/modpages/b3.html)

or this (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/dx20020121x7)

Matthew
2009-05-18, 06:26 AM
The orange cover version is generally held to be "better" than the green cover version on the grounds that the latter is a sanitised version of the former. Of course, that rather depends on your own preferences and usage.

FoE
2009-05-18, 06:33 AM
You say 'sanitized', I say 'eliminated a lot of crap.' I far prefer the green version.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-05-18, 06:39 AM
The orange cover version is generally held to be "better" than the green cover version on the grounds that the latter is a sanitised version of the former. Of course, that rather depends on your own preferences and usage.

"Sanitised"? Reading shadzar's link, what the heck was there to sanitize? Aside from the fact that the artwork is grotesquely bad, you have to be pretty determined to see penises and the like in those pictures...

Reading the link in general, I can't see how it's better, though - it's unedited and shoddy. Do "racy" descriptions of goblins pulling off women's garments make for better D&D modules, or was there real a difference in the content and plot?

The version I had was the Finnish translation (from '86 or '89, I think?) with a mostly-black cover, for red-box D&D.

Matthew
2009-05-18, 10:03 AM
You say 'sanitized', I say 'eliminated a lot of crap.' I far prefer the green version.

As I say, depends on your preferences.



"Sanitised"? Reading shadzar's link, what the heck was there to sanitize? Aside from the fact that the artwork is grotesquely bad, you have to be pretty determined to see penises and the like in those pictures...

Reading the link in general, I can't see how it's better, though - it's unedited and shoddy. Do "racy" descriptions of goblins pulling off women's garments make for better D&D modules, or was there real a difference in the content and plot?

The version I had was the Finnish translation (from '86 or '89, I think?) with a mostly-black cover, for red-box D&D.

Very little, but I think that is rather the point. There is no doubt about the "official" cause of the reissue , it was to remove anything that could be construed as risqué. The idea being that the author's original vision was censored for no good reason; whether you feel the changes are for the better or worse is up to you, I am only reporting my perception of what has been said on the subject.

That said, here are some noted changes and opinions from RogueAttorney over on [I]Dragonsfoot (http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=2515):



There are some very significant changes.

The whole surrounding wilderness area is taken out, which in my opinion, was the best thing about the original edition.

There are some minor physical changes to the dungeon, but it has been completely re-keyed with "normal" monsters like orcs and skeletons, etc.

The Green module has also been geared to beginner players and DM's, with a Mentzer-red-box choose your own adventure style intro, which is easy enough to ignore.

The plot has also been entirely changed. In the new version, the princess and the good knight have been trapped by an evil demon named Arik and the PC's are enlisted by a goodly group called the "protectors" to save the princess and all of Haven. Hokey as all heck!!!

In my opinion, even not taking into account the silly monsters, the Orange version is an editing mess, and is nearly unplayable. The Green version is tighter and easier to run, but doesn't have the flavor of the Orange version or any detail on the area surrounding the dungeon.

Neither version ranks very high in terms of my all time favorite modules.

His comments seem fairly typical of responses generated by this question to me. Of course, the Acaeum reports that the changes were more likely implemented to to improve overall quality, but the respondents are in disagreement.