TSR Example from the worst TSR adventure module(s) ever published

[nyvinter]

Some people actually tried to play this module.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Let me look through my collection and list off the ones that I thought were at least good.
A1-A4. Solid but not spectacular
B2. Great introduction to sandbox play.
C1-C2. Good. I haven't played the rest.
D1-D3. Great. Best of the G through Q series.
G1-G3. Good.
I1,I6. Good, Great
N1 Good.
Q1 - Okay. Not as big a fan but solid.
S1-S4. S1 Great. S2 Okay. S3 only if you are willing to allow technology. S4 Great
T1-4 Good.
U1-U3 Good.
UK Series. Varied. UK1-3 Okay at least.

I concur with all of these, generally. And you're missing some I really like, like EX 1 and 2, Dungeonland and The Land Beyond the Magic Mirror (with amazing Tim Truman art).

But these were all published in 1984 or earlier, assuming you stopped with UK3. There's still five more years of 1E adventures that I don't think you'd rate nearly as highly.

To Find a King? The Bane of Llywelyn? Swords of the Iron Legion? The Destiny of Kings? Treasure Hunt? Under Ilefarn?

(I was wrong about Gargoyle -- it's a 2E adventure.)

There's a reason most of the 1E nostalgia is focused on the years leading up to Ravenloft and Dragonlance. With rare exceptions, the adventures after that were just OK.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Just when you thought it was safe to go back on the forum some blighter resurrects The Forest Oracle.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Some people actually tried to play this module.

I did play it. Shortly after it came out. My older brother Dm'd it. I don't remember it being bad. Then again, I think I was like, 11 years old?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

This thread is older than many people who play D&D now.

In a few years, the age of this thread (currently 18.5 years old) will be greater than the amount of time between when The Forest Oracle was published (1984) and when this thread was started (2005, so 21 years).

Hello, it’s 2026.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

The Forest Oracle is so not fetch.

 

[aco175]

The Forest Oracle is so not fetch.

Forest Oracle confirmed is not going to happen.

 

[Emerikol]

I concur with all of these, generally. And you're missing some I really like, like EX 1 and 2, Dungeonland and The Land Beyond the Magic Mirror (with amazing Tim Truman art).

But these were all published in 1984 or earlier, assuming you stopped with UK3. There's still five more years of 1E adventures that I don't think you'd rate nearly as highly.

To Find a King? The Bane of Llywelyn? Swords of the Iron Legion? The Destiny of Kings? Treasure Hunt? Under Ilefarn?

(I was wrong about Gargoyle -- it's a 2E adventure.)

There's a reason most of the 1E nostalgia is focused on the years leading up to Ravenloft and Dragonlance. With rare exceptions, the adventures after that were just OK.

Okay, I can't argue as I haven't played all those others. I have collected them so maybe I will necro this thread if I ever play them.

I generally found modules post 1e to not be the best though I think Tharizdun was decent. I want a module that you could drop in any campaign world or even in multiple places in a published setting. I liked that Tomb of Horrors have many places it could be located.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Some people actually tried to play this module.

The more I look back on this thread, and blogs out there, and watching this video, the more I am convinced of a common shared behavior. A bunch of people piling on to nitpick every single flaw like it's the worst thing ever to happen in a module, often relying on hyperbole or exaggeration in their attempt to be part of the mob....er...crowd.

I'm not saying the module doesn't have issues. It does. Clearly. But so did a whole bunch of modules of the time. Almost every module was a railroad, and yet N2 is the one being criticized for it. Nearly every module had wonky encounters that didn't make sense. That's how things were largely written in the early 80s. I mean, have you seen any fantasy movie or TV show in the 80s?

But take this video. They are taking a module they heard was awful, and then the DM decided to fudge, exaggerate, and twist what actually was in the module to try to pile on because I guess piling on something is fun? For example, the odds of every party member missing the road are low (12% if you care about the math for a party of 3). And yet, in the video they all did! And the DM failed to mention that the map was an old map and the road has since been completely overgrown since it was made. It didn't have the new road because the map was too old. Context matters. But they spent 5 minutes yelling "how could we miss the ONE road!" And then they encountered 20 baboons which is the maximum (not only rolled a nat 1 on a d20 for encounters, but rolled max number of baboons?). It's like the DM intentionally made everything the worst-case scenario and then patted themselves on the back, saying, "Look how garbage this is!"

That's disingenuous to me. The only real flaws this module has that others didn't were the bad editing and stat blocks. Everything else seems to be selective memory of other modules just to pile onto this one.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Forest Oracle confirmed is not going to happen.

Forest Oracle 2: The Scent of Pie is still on?