Identifying "old school" adventure modules

[Gentlegamer]

Can you enumerate the "old school" elements/aspects of IotA?

I don't have my copy handy to refresh my recollection, so I can't really do an enumeration, but I'll explain what I can from memory.

list of magic "that doesn't work" - While "old school" play generally encourages and rewards creative use of magic, there is an undercurrent that "bans" certain magical effects from operation to stop certain "shortcuts" in some circumstances. This stems from the general emphasis on player ingenuity as the engine of success rather than mere character ability (i.e. using certain magical effects as "trumps").

exploration of wilderness "hex-by-hex" - "Old school" play is most associated with "dungeon crawl" game-play; however, wilderness exploration was an option from the beginning, based on the recommended materials in Dungeons & Dragons that included Avalon Hill's "Outdoor Survival" boardgame, which was the genesis of the "hex map" as the "playing field" for wilderness adventure.

"Module of Attrition" - both the previous points ties into this one; an element of "old school" play is how players deal with the adversity their characters face. In Isle of the Ape, Gary explicitly states that it is a "module of attrition" (effectively the antithesis of Tomb of Horrors). Characters in this adventure must avoid many, many combat encounters while exploring because of their high danger (20+ HD dinosaurs that are immune/effectively immune to many magics, poisons, and other "trumps"), even to high-level characters. This tests the players in their ability to creatively and effectively manage the wilderness exploration while maintaining their dwindeling resources in anticipation of the "final encounter" that is foreshadowed from the beginning.

In broad strokes, I think I've hit upon the main elements of "old school" in that module. There are also elements of "new school" in the published version.

In the designer notes, Gary remarks that the original players from the Greyhawk Campaign (Ernie Gygax, Rob Kuntz, and others) that found themselves in the Isle of the Ape fled as soon as they were able; no group of players ever "completed" the adventure. "Running away" in the face of seeming overwhelming adversity is very "old school," in my opinion. There is no presumed assumption of character survival or balanced encounters.

 

[grodog]

Is that spectrum based on time/date line or a set of aspects?

1978 - most old school
1980 - moderately old school
1985 - least old school

or

Plot-less, ecology-less, monster-filled dungeon crawl - most old school
Minor plot concept, some sense to monster placements, dungeon - moderately old school
Fully detailed plot, logical monster placement, not a dungeon - least old school
?

Well, as with so many labels (whether old or new school), there's more to it than a simple linear relationship between release year and plotness; I'm not at all sure that's exactly your intent in the structure you created above, but it seems at least implied. In any event, to address that: in my page counts post I removed the stats I'd done on some JG products, including Caverns of Thracia and Dark Tower (both by Paul Jaquays) since this thread has been just about TSR stuff. But, they're relevant here: DT and CoT were released in 1979 and were the longest modules published that year, as well as to date, at 72 and 80 pages respectively. Both were also very ecologically-minded dungeon designs, with various sub-plots you could explore, cultures to interact with, and NPCs to chat up. They clearly show that Paul Jaquays was ahead of his time by at least 5-7 years, and that even "core old school values" modules can still address the more rounded, story-friendly approach without becoming the DragonLance plot train.

These dungeons were all pretty much linear to the McGuffin(s):
White Plume Mountain (92%)
Tomb of Horrors (98%)
Hidden Shrine of Tomoachan (76%)
Ghost Tower of Inverness (78%)

But these had more meandering labrynths:
Pharoah (28%)
Ravenloft (30%)
Beyond the Crystal Cave (25%)

How much "old school weight" does less restrictive map design have?

Melan's mapping analysis thread @ http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...n-layout-map-flow-old-school-game-design.html (which Philotomy also linked to) and the semi-related Castle Greyhawk maps thread @ http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...ld-these-maps-make-fun-dungeon-adventure.html speak to the openness of the map designs. I haven't sat down to do the analysis in earnest, but my hunches on how these would play out follow (perhaps we can entice Melan to pull out his Visio templates again?! ):

- S2 should be rather like a trident/three-pronged fork, in structure, with some loops and spokes here and there (like a three-caves Caves of Chaos).
- Similarly, the loop structures in the first tier of C1 make me think that it would look most like level 1 of B1; the rest of the tiers are pretty linear, though, because they're so small in area
- C2 is fairly linear in tourney play (choose a tower entrance, find the center, ascend through the tower), but in campaign play I think folks would be more inclined to explore the other paths from the other towers, too, which starts to introduce loops into the flow; or, perhaps it's just one loop, with multiple entry points (like the arms of a whirlpool); hmmm; Melan?
- The fact that the "big" encounter at S1 occurs that the end of the module doesn't in fact mean that the map design itself is linear. In particular, S1's use of the false entrances, teleporters throughout, the various "segments" of the dungeon, the use of one-way doors suggest to me a design that's more like an amalgamation of B2 and G2 from a flow-chart standpoint.
- I don't have copies of UK1 or I3 handy to check, but my recollection of I6's map design (of the castle) is that it's a pretty open design, and that it would be very complex to map out into a flowchart, especially given the verticality throughout the levels. So, in that sense I think it's a very open map design. That doesn't preclude the module from being more story driven/new school in approach either, though. I think I6 occupies an in-between place between the old school designs, with the Dragonlance-like plot determinism, without quite falling into either side cleanly. The plot elements of I6 allow for a lot of determinism (the gypsy fortune decks determining the location of items, what things have to occur to kill the Count, etc.), but they're also random in nature; the map for the Castle is very open, but the lands around Ravenloft itself are bounded by the mists that prevent reaching outward (which is rather demi-plane-ish!).

But, as the comments to Blondie earlier speak, map design is not the only litmus test by which an old-school dungeon is created---and nor should it be! In addition to a more-open map design (in general), I think the following criteria also fit somewhere in the mix:

- stuff that's out of bounds/beyond mortal ken and PC understanding, but is just too cool not to want to explore/steal/fight/etc. (Kuntz's Unopenable Doors and Terrible Iron Golem in WG5 are great examples of this)
- lots of options/paths for player choice/exploration, both within the existing level and up/down to other levels (the latter is most applicable to a classic mega-dungeon environment vs. to a published module, though)
- challenges for the players as well as the characters (riddles, puzzles, logic tests, mapping, resource management, perhaps a looming deadline, etc.)
- introduction of new monsters, spells, treasures, etc.: you and your PCs haven't seen everything under the sun yet (this could be a subset of the above point, too)
- lightweight background to make the scenario more easily adaptable into a homebrew campaign (the A-series is probably as dense as the background should be, in my book)
- the dungeon environment is part of the challenge, and takes the players out of their "comfort zones" (S1 is the classic example, but S3 and Kuntz's Maze of Zayene #1-2 are great example of this, as is A4's dungeon---if the PCs fail to escape they die in the collapsing dungeon!; teleporters and passages to other dimensions also fit in quite nicely here)
- lots of room to expand further, with hints to spur on the DM's creativity: Gary's dungeons were rife with places where the enterprising DM could insert rooms into an existing level (G1 dungeon level) all the way through entire new levels demanding to be detailed (D1 and S4 are probably the best examples of this)
- many hidden treasures in out of the way nooks, hidden encounters, hidden sub-levels, etc. that the players will have to be smart to be able to find in the first place, and then be smarter to overcome (WG4's Black Cyst is a great example of this; none of the players I've ever run through this have found it without me providing too many DM hints to them to steer them toward it)

I'm sure others will come up with further examples, but those are some core traits that define old-school adventures for me.

list of magic "that doesn't work" - While "old school" play generally encourages and rewards creative use of magic, there is an undercurrent that "bans" certain magical effects from operation to stop certain "shortcuts" in some circumstances. This stems from the general emphasis on player ingenuity as the engine of success rather than mere character ability (i.e. using certain magical effects as "trumps").

I think that this also fits nicely with taking the players out of their comfort zones idea, too: they have to rely on other tools vs. their standard toolkit (whether that toolkit is divination magic or teleport/dimension door for a quick escape or whatever).

exploration of wilderness "hex-by-hex" - "Old school" play is most associated with "dungeon crawl" game-play;

Ironically, there are few good examples of wilderness crawls in TSR's AD&D works: S4/WG4, WG6, and L1 are really the only ones in the pre-1986 modules (perhaps N5 Under Illefarn too?---it's been awhile since I read that one). Many modules strongly hint at the DM adding wilderness explorations before the PCs arrive at the dungeon (A2, G1-3, I1, S1, T1's environs, etc.), but few provide good models for wilderness exploration. The X modules have a few more, I suppose (X4/X5 being an excellent example), but I haven't reread them in years and years, and never owned most of the later X modules.

In the designer notes, Gary remarks that the original players from the Greyhawk Campaign (Ernie Gygax, Rob Kuntz, and others) that found themselves in the Isle of the Ape fled as soon as they were able; no group of players ever "completed" the adventure. "Running away" in the face of seeming overwhelming adversity is very "old school," in my opinion. There is no presumed assumption of character survival or balanced encounters.

Another excellent point!

 

[Bullgrit]

Well, as with so many labels (whether old or new school), there's more to it than a simple linear relationship between release year and plotness; I'm not at all sure that's exactly your intent in the structure you created above, but it seems at least implied.

No, I didn't intend to make a relationship between year and any aspect of adventure style. I made two completely separate, and hypothetical, spectrums -- that's why I didn't list something like, "1978, plot-less, ecology-less, monster-filled dungeon crawl." The year and the dungeon style don't necessarily go together.

I was asking if the spectrum of "old schoolness" was based on date of publication OR on a set of adventure-style aspects.

That is, is a give adventure considered "old school" because it was published in X year, OR because it contained X aspect. If the deciding factor is year that says that "old school" is not a style. If the deciding factor is an aspect, then an adventure published in 2009, with that aspect, could be considered "old school."

Bullgrit

 

[Hussar]

On the notion of "limiting magic to take players out of their comfort zones".

I'm not sure if that was really the reason for this. 1e AD&D had real problems in the double digit levels. The challenges just weren't really all that challenging for PC's of these levels. The wahoo level of high level magic users combined with insane AC's and damage output of double digit level PC's were just so far beyond what you could do with stock monsters that it wasn't even funny.

Instead of trying to create a Companion set of rules for AD&D, it looks more like they tried to make high level modules work by reducing PC's to lower, more manageable levels.

That was how I looked at it anyway.

 

[billd91]

If the deciding factor is year that says that "old school" is not a style. If the deciding factor is an aspect, then an adventure published in 2009, with that aspect, could be considered "old school."

Bullgrit

I don't see why it couldn't be called old school if it incorporated more old schoolness than new schoolness, even if published in 2009.

There are elements of old school that corellate with time, but the specific publication time isn't the determining factor. Things simply change over time and it's not the passage of time that is important, but the specifics in style of presentation, structure, content, and so on.

 

[Celebrim]

My first inclination is to just state that everything published before 1990 or so is 'old school' by definition, but really that's not a very fine grain.

Before we can answer the question, we need a working definition of 'old school' that isn't just 'old'.

I think that you can identify two large distinctive groups in that list.

'Gygaxian' and 'Hickmanian', plus a few important outliers.

The Gygaxian modules are tightly focused dungeon crawls. They have very terse descriptive texts generally centering on what there is to kill, and what stuff it has to take. They are typically somewhat sandbox dungeons and generally they have large numbers of humanoids which will band together and present the PC's with something approaching a classic war gaming tactical scenario. The mode of operation of the PC's is something like elite commandos.

Very typical Gygaxian modules include B2, WG4, S2, S3, S4, A1-4, GDQ, and ToEE.

There are however a couple of Gygaxian modules that very much leave those bounds in important ways. The most important of those are 'Tomb of Horrors' which introduced a linear evocative puzzle driven dungeon style that would in many ways overshadow the maze-like sandbox style of Gygax's other works.

At the same time Gygax is doing this though, there is significant exploration going on with what a module is like.

The most important of these experimental works is 'Beyond the Crystal Cave', which is, next to something like GDQ, is IMO the most important module in D&D's history. UK1 is a radically different story driven module that is completely outside of the Gygaxian style. There is nothing 'old school' about it. You don't really kill things and take their stuff. If you try, you'll almost certainly die. Instead, you are expected to talk to most everything you meet and try to come up with a people resolution based on the clues you gather. The climax of the module is so radically different to a Gygaxian module I won't even describe it here for fear of giving too many spoilers. Other early but not 'old school' modules include 'The Assassin's Knot' (sadly left off the list) and to some extent the other module on the list from the UK, 'U1: Sinister Secret of Salt Marsh'.

After Gygax, the most influential adventure writer in D&D is in my opinion Tracy Hickman. The Hickman style is a blending of the open sandbox dungeons of the Gygax style, with the story driven dungeons of the experimental style. You still kill things and take their stuff, but now the map is also the outline of a story. The levels are chapters, and they involve rising action leading up to a clear climax. Hickman is borrowing alot from Gygax's masterpeice 'Tomb of Horrors' and alot less from something like G1-3. The text descriptions are still very terse, but Hickman attempts to do with text something like Gygax did primarily with illustrations in S1 - provide a consistant narrative experience so that everyone is playing the same story (more or less).

The line blurs most clearly I think at 'Temple of Elemental Evil' and Hickman's 'Pyramid'. ToEE is the climax of the Gygaxian style, and it has almost evolved into something Hickman might have written. Conversely, Pyramid is the very beginning of the Hickman style, and other than being lighter hearted than what Gygax is typically remembered for (his humorous works being less well remembered) it could almost have been written by Gygax. But out of Pyramid we get works like Ravenloft and Dragonlance which are clear departures from what has gone before.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Very interesting analysis, Celebrim. I didn't know about Beyond the Crystal Cave, apparently it was published in 83. How about Castle Amber, written by Tom Moldvay and published in 81 as an example of a departure in style? As I recall it has several non-combat encounters with the demented members of the Amber family.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Very interesting analysis, Celebrim. I didn't know about Beyond the Crystal Cave, apparently it was published in 83. How about Castle Amber, written by Tom Moldvay and published in 81 as an example of a departure in style? As I recall it has several non-combat encounters with the demented members of the Amber family.

UK1 had such a non-D&D feel that it worked great in a GURPS Swashbucklers game set in Darokin in the Known World.

 

[grodog]

That is, is a give adventure considered "old school" because it was published in X year, OR because it contained X aspect. If the deciding factor is year that says that "old school" is not a style. If the deciding factor is an aspect, then an adventure published in 2009, with that aspect, could be considered "old school."

I thought that might be where you were going, but the parallel construction of your examples sucked me in.

I think that there have been plenty of noteworthy, new "old school" modules released in the past few years, such as Rob Kuntz's "Maure Castle" modules in Dungeon 112/124/139, "Spire of Iron and Crystal" by Matt Finch, XPR's "Curse of the Witch Head" by James Boney, several of Gabor "Melan" Lux's adventures published in Fight On! and Knockspell, and Joe Bloch's "Castle of the Mad Archmage" @ Greyhawk Grognard. All good stuff, all worth digging into, and there's plenty certainly more, too!

I'm not sure if that was really the reason for this. 1e AD&D had real problems in the double digit levels. The challenges just weren't really all that challenging for PC's of these levels. The wahoo level of high level magic users combined with insane AC's and damage output of double digit level PC's were just so far beyond what you could do with stock monsters that it wasn't even funny.

Instead of trying to create a Companion set of rules for AD&D, it looks more like they tried to make high level modules work by reducing PC's to lower, more manageable levels.

My hunch is that that's a style of play thing: many of the pregen PCs in modules like S1 and S3, for example, were pretty "under" equipped in comparison to most PCs of those levels I've seen (or even in comparison to the pregen PCs in G1-3 and D1-2). If high-level PCs are walking Christmas trees then it's definitely harder to challenge them ("Damn rust monster ate my vorpal weapon---I'll have to fall back to the +4 defender then" ).

I think you still raise a good point though, Hussar: I think the hardest adventures to write are ones for 1st and 2nd level PCs, and those for characters of 12th+ level. The lower-level PCs are so fragile, and because of that, your creative options are much-more limited in terms of monsters you can throw at them, types of traps, etc.; on the other end of the spectrum, high-level PCs have many options available, and failsafes when their first choice options fail. And I suppose that's why I see the use of demi-planar- or outer-planar magic rules being different as a tool rather than a crutch---such rules force PCs to try to orient to the environment more when their spellcasting choices are more-restricted, and to come up with non-standard solutions to problems. Example: in an ice world, fire-based spells cause -2 per die rolled damage, save for 1/4 fail for 1/2 damage. PCs may swap out fireball for slow, or opt for burning hands instead (which is generally shunned IME, but since it's not rolled damage, there's no loss in the spell's damage potential).

 

[catsclaw227]

Tomb of Horrors. Nothing says old school like this death trap. It's also the only one on this list I'm actually familiar with, so the others I have to go by reputation.

White Plume Mountain, Slave Pits of the Undercity (and the rest of A series), Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan, Steading of the Hill Giant Chief (and the rest of G series), Expedition to the Barrier Peaks, Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth, Village of Hommlet (and the whole ToEE), and Queen of the Demonweb Pits also got my vote. I also add that you forgot to mention Keep on the Borderlands and the U series.

This. These are the classics I remember the most. And Bone Hill too. And Chateau d' Amberville.