Pod-Cavern of the Sinister Shroom

[Raven Crowking]

Really? Because I had problems with the two main monsters being under-described. You have two humanoid species (shrooms and pod-men) with no mouths (according to the illustrations) and no description of their communication abilities. I don't even know if the main villain of the module is supposed to be able to talk to the PCs.

In fact, assuming the mouthless semi-intelligent pod-men don't talk means there's an entire level of the dungeon with no monsters capable of speech. That makes it one of the hack-and-slashiest adventures ever, because there's no opporturnity for PC/NPC interaction.

The dungeon map shows some sort of hidden tunnel that isn't explained in the text. Or rather, I think those dashed lines are a hidden tunnel -- it's difficult to be sure, since there is no map key. WTF?

And some general advice to module authors: If your adventure has a secret villian, don't put his name in the title of the adventure. Sheesh!

Oddly enough, I have no difficulties with transferring a module from one system to another while playing and making decisions on the fly. I would agree that the map could use some work, as it doesn't always correspond well to the descriptions, but I found it very serviceable nonetheless (i.e., I could certainly follow it after reading the text).

Finally, since not one of my players knows what a "shroom" is or can do, they could see the title without problems.


RC

 

[Treebore]

There was a time, a couple of years ago, when I was posting "SHROOMS RULE!" on several message boards. Glad to see others feeling similar.

 

[Contrarian]

I never tell the players before hand the module they are going through. Titles always give away too much.

What, are you the only Dungeon Master in Ohio? When I'm thinking of using a published module, I ask all my players if they've played or read it before. Having somebody announce after the first encounter "Hey! I've played this!" would kinda suck.

The title practically announces "We're hunting a mushroom monster." Which is something PCs would probably never learn any other way, since the module is (as I said) almost completely devoid of speaking monsters they might get information from.

The module is done in the style of 1e and under monster descriptions and odd art that doesn't always make sense plus levels of hack and slash are all part of the 1e game.

That's bull.

Gygax seldom, if ever, forgot to tell you if an intelligent monster can speak. Hell, Gygax would tell you the monster's primary language, a couple of alternate languages, and sometimes even the percent chance of a speaking more languages.

I just flipped to random page of Monster Manual II, and discovered that Firefriends (those would be intelligent giant fireflies, in case you've forgotten) "speak their own language as well as the common tongue in most cases."

Brief room descriptions is a valid 1Eism; leaving out the map key and forgetting to finish the description of the adventure's showcase monsters are not. Let's not insult the founders of our hobby by accusing them of amateur mistakes, OK?

 

[Crothian]

The title practically announces "We're hunting a mushroom monster." Which is something PCs would probably never learn any other way, since the module is (as I said) almost completely devoid of speaking monsters they might get information from.

The title is there to get someone to buy the module. It should tell something about the module. If a DM chooses to inform the players what he is running that is his choice. Also, presumably the DM knows that the title offers some type of spoiler for the players and chooses to tell them anyway. I won't fault the module for that.

Gygax was not the only writer of 1e and even he made mistakes. Some people like empty rooms in modules to fill with their own monsters. Not everyone does, but allowing the DMs and players to do things for themselves was part of 1e.

 

[Treebore]

I have spent the last year or so running a whole bunch of Gygax modules, and he left empty areas throughout, especially in the underdark areas.

I never bought an OSRIC Monster Manual, are the languages given in there for the monsters, so it will be equal to Gygax?

 

[Scribble]

Brief room descriptions is a valid 1Eism; leaving out the map key and forgetting to finish the description of the adventure's showcase monsters are not. Let's not insult the founders of our hobby by accusing them of amateur mistakes, OK?

Does it use the standard map symbols?

 

[Raven Crowking]

I think what is being referred to is a sluice drain that appears on the map.

 

[TerraDave]

[sblock=spoilers]One of the ways it can be used is: People and cattle go missing, with hunched shapes dragging them off to a cave in the night. Dare you explore?

The other way: PCs travelling along an underground river discover some interesting looking ruins.

Either way, there's a shroom (a humanoid mushroom) creating pod people and using humans as fertilizer. And it has control over some plant creatures, like hanging snagworts, insane animated trees, a captured treant, etc.

Good fun. Lots of encounters that have encouraged role-playing and problem-solving in addition to simply rolling the dice. A lvl 1 module by Matthew Finch.

I have been converting it to RCFG on the fly, and it is a lot of fun.[/sblock]

That...is awesome.

 

[jgbrowning]

I think what is being referred to is a sluice drain that appears on the map.

What's being referred to is the hash marks showing one tunnel going under another.

joe b.

 

[Raven Crowking]

That...is awesome.

I think so. If I wasn't finding it enormously fun, and a good value in terms of price and pagecount, I wouldn't have recommended it.

Expeditious Retreat is actually one of my favourite companies right now. They are extremely generous in terms of OGC, and have some fantastic products. I've never read anything by them that I've been disappointed with. Even though some of their other OSRIC modules require more work on the part of the GM to "complete" (as it were), the material that is presented (IMHO) makes completion more fun than chore-like.

YMMV.


RC