ToEE, Scourge of the Slavelords, and Queen of Spiders

[Havlo]

I have been toying with the idea of running these 3 super modules as a campaign (in 3.5e) and was wondering if anyone else has done this (or in any other edition) and how well they work as a series? I'm not worried about conversion and balance, I have some of the conversion files and can do the rest. I'm talking about story-wise and level-wise leading into each other. Do the stories mesh well? Are the ending levels of one about right for the start of the next? Any play tips are welcome.

 

[Darkness]

If memory serves, the giants modules feature a slavelord at the start if the group has played the slavers adventures.
Adding ToEE shouldn't be hard either.

 

[diaglo]

If memory serves, the giants modules feature a slavelord at the start if the group has played the slavers adventures.
Adding ToEE shouldn't be hard either.

the slavers have a drow.

the ToEE has a Lolth worshipping cleric

and the giants/spider mods also feature giants, slaves, and elemental gods (G3 on the lower levels)

yeah. i used them all. but not as the compilation. i used them as individual modules with parts added here and there in the campaign.

the current OD&D campaign i am refereeing is using them now too.

 

[Insight]

I would love to play in these classic modules some time. I missed them during the days of OD&D as my group was all-homebrew back then. Heck, even my current group is all homebrew, but I think they would be open to trying it. Post an update if you decide to do it. Let us know how it goes.

 

[Quasqueton]

Originally, each of those adventures [series] were unrelated. When they released the Slavelords supermodule (originally 4 related/connected modules), they concocted a lame connection with the TOEE, as well as a very lame (and terribly aggravating) reason/hook for the PCs. They did the same with the release of the Giant/Drow supermodule.

The three series were great on their own, but they should never have been tied together. I would highly suggest these adventures, but I would also highly suggest you leave them unconnected (especially the way the supermodule author connected them). Play them as seperate series, without the lame connections.

Quasqueton

 

[D'karr]

I have been toying with the idea of running these 3 super modules as a campaign (in 3.5e) and was wondering if anyone else has done this (or in any other edition) and how well they work as a series? I'm not worried about conversion and balance, I have some of the conversion files and can do the rest. I'm talking about story-wise and level-wise leading into each other. Do the stories mesh well? Are the ending levels of one about right for the start of the next? Any play tips are welcome.

The questions you ask are difficult to answer.

Any conversion of the creatures in these modules to 3.x will give you encounter levels that are much higher than the original adventures. If the adventurers survive the converted encounters they will rack up some XP quickly. The faster rate of advancement in 3.x will make the party rise faster than the original adventures advertise.

In other words, levelwise, the advancement from each supermodule to the next will not be very smooth in 3.x. You might have to skimp on giving XP to keep progression smoother.

You can also fix this by adjusting the encounter levels of the conversion. Don't make a straight conversion. Try to make an appropriate conversion. Since you know your party, your conversion should be easier. There are places in all these modules where the EL would jump all over the place. You might have had a lower level party encountering a very hard encounter or a high level party encountering a very easy encounter. To remediate this make the encounters progressive by level. Try to keep the encounter levels in ToEE between 1-8. For Slavelords keep the encounter levels from 7-10. The Queen of Spiders will go from 8-15+. Giants were pushovers in previous editions, in 3.x the Giants Series is a killer.

As someone mentioned, storywise the connections are flimsy. However, knowing this from the start means that you can add more specific hooks and make the storywise connections stronger.

 

[billd91]

Originally, each of those adventures [series] were unrelated. When they released the Slavelords supermodule (originally 4 related/connected modules), they concocted a lame connection with the TOEE, as well as a very lame (and terribly aggravating) reason/hook for the PCs. They did the same with the release of the Giant/Drow supermodule.

The three series were great on their own, but they should never have been tied together. I would highly suggest these adventures, but I would also highly suggest you leave them unconnected (especially the way the supermodule author connected them). Play them as seperate series, without the lame connections.

Quasqueton

I disagree. I think the Scourge and Queen modules work quite well in a super-campaign. While the sample hook to get PCs out to Sterich is kind of lame (a henchman turns out to have family out there and they call him in for help), the other links work quite well.
If run in 3rd edition, however, keep ToEE out of it if you still want players to do the Scourge series. They'll level WAY out of range with 3rd edition's much faster XP reward system.

 

[jodyjohnson]

Our current Gestalt campaign is using the supermodules as a base -- pretty much the definitive nostalgia campaign.

We started with Keep on the Borderlands. Second was Baltron's Beacon.

Next they opted for Scourge of the Slavelords over ToEE. But we'll do ToEE next. The campaign will then head to Queen of Spiders.

At the epic end we may do Tomb of Horrors (likely heavily modified) or maybe the Iuz module where you have to rescue Belvor from the Dungeons of Dorakaa.

The original levels for most of these have been totally disregarded. They started KotB late in 2nd level and left it around 6th. Mostly because of the 4 character/few henchman model of 3.5 vs. 1e.

Baltron's Beacon took them from 7th to 9th. (with a few side adventures in the middle).

They are starting the Slavelords at 9th and will probably hit 12/13th before we're done.

In ToEE we'll skip the Moathouse (one of the few sections we've done multiple times). The organization level of the Temple and general goal (destroy an artifact, banish a demon lord) with be closer to the 12th-15th level range.

For Queen of Spiders we'll skip the Steading and Frost Giants (we've done these a few times) and start with the Fire Giants, heading into the Underdark from there. Levels 15+.

Should hit the abyss/demonweb pits around Epic.

The EL of the straight 1e encounters has a wide variation that tends to require players with higher levels than the original modules required (and generally creatures are more powerful than their 1e versions).

 

[SWBaxter]

I have been toying with the idea of running these 3 super modules as a campaign (in 3.5e) and was wondering if anyone else has done this (or in any other edition) and how well they work as a series? I'm not worried about conversion and balance, I have some of the conversion files and can do the rest. I'm talking about story-wise and level-wise leading into each other. Do the stories mesh well?

Well, for TOEE and the GDQ adventures, the story is "bad guys are acting up, good guys go to where they live, kill them, and take their stuff". Not much trouble meshing them. The A series is a bit more involved (particularly with all the story additions in the Slavelords compilation), but not immensely moreso. The original intention for all of them was for the DM to flesh out the story to match his/her own campaign, so it's easy enough to make them mesh as well as you need 'em to.

One story point you might want to keep an eye on is that Lolth is relatively important in TOEE and there's a Drow among the slavelords. G3 when originally published showcased the Drow and Lolth as brand new villains that were supposed to be a big surprise (Evil elves!
Who ever heard of such a thing?!), so if you want to keep that feeling you'll have to figure out some way to preserve the Drow's secrecy. Of course, not many modern D&D groups are going to be particularly surprised since you can't swing a dead cat without hitting half a dozen Drizzt clones in many campaigns, so it might be that plot point isn't worth preserving.

Are the ending levels of one about right for the start of the next?

In 1E, I didn't think they meshed particularly well; TOEE got groups up to a level where they could reasonably go straight into the G series. In 3E, it'll really depend entirely on your conversion. Suffice to say that it'll be possible to make the levels mesh, but it'll take a lot of work.

 

[Quasqueton]

Originally, in their AD&D forms, the ToEE took the PCs from 1st to 8th level. The Slavelords series was for levels 4-7. The Giants series was for levels 8-12. The Drow series was 10-14.

The supermodule form of the Slavelords series has the PCs called by a lord/lady of the area to undertake a special mission by ship to a far location. On this trip, they get captured by slavers (with no chance to avoid this capture), stripped of all their gear (especially sentimental items which would be thrown overboard, forever lost), and eventually dumped into the first original adventure with scrounged gear and equipment rather than their own personal stuff. And to top it off, paladins and other "duty bound" characters are penalized for failing to finish the original mission they were called on to do (before getting captured), even though the module forces the series of events to transpire regardless of the PCs' actions. This is absolute crap.

The original Slavelord series had the PCs hired by a confederation of local lords to go after the slavers commando style. The lords gave the PCs the location of the first adventure, and were willing to support the PCs between forays against the enemy.

Which one do you think most Players would enjoy? Auto capture and robbing, or hired heroes?

I don't remember any Lolth/drow connection in the ToEE. Where was this connection?

The supermodule connections were weak, contrived, lame, and stupid.

Quasqueton