Is Slave Pits of the Undercity a well-designed adventure module?

[3catcircus]

The map for A1, in particular, makes very little sense to me. I can't imagine why anyone would build a temple complex such that the two major areas are separated by a thick wall. If the chapel area is sacred and the stables are impure, then most religions would have built two separate buildings. It doesn't make sense.

Why wouldn't you want a fortified complex, protected by thick walls, if it were possible to do so? If you could afford to put the stable inside a wall, why not do it? Since the two areas *are* separated by a wall, there doesn't seem to be any conflict regarding pure/impure.

 

[riprock]

Why wouldn't you want a fortified complex, protected by thick walls, if it were possible to do so? If you could afford to put the stable inside a wall, why not do it? Since the two areas *are* separated by a wall, there doesn't seem to be any conflict regarding pure/impure.

The stable doesn't look well protected to me. The thick walls don't look as if they ever protected anything -- they look like bizarre, crooked, inefficient load-bearing walls. But I'm not a civil engineer.

The thickest wall is on the inside. That would make sense if it looked like there was a standard multi-ring keep with the thickest walls for the inner citadel. It doesn't look like that to me -- it looks like they used a 20-foot thick wall, running at a weird angle, to divide up the main body of the building. That's what it looks like to me, anyway. I am not an architect. Nor am I a historian of engineering. Possibly a real expert would take one look at it and say it was totally realistic.

The original complex, as described in the text, was three stories tall. Only the first story remains intact. Is it so odd to think that there might have been connecting passages on one or more of the upper floors?

I'm not an architect, so my notion of "odd" doesn't count for much, but yeah, it looks odd to me.

The buildings may very well have been separate or constructed as one and connected by doors that no longer exist.

The fact is, the slavers DO have several ways of getting between the two upper portions of the complex. They are both connected by the underground tunnels.

The interior rooms *do* look like they are ruins -- they are burned passages and so on. The exterior shape and the positions of walls -- I keep squinting at it, but I can't imagine what the original buildings looked like.

I think it only really harms suspension of disbelief when you can see the whole map -- when one goes through as a player, I think it seems much more plausible.

 

[Storm Raven]

Page 4:
"Ruin Encounter Table (roll d6)
Encounter occurs 1 in 6 (d6), check each turn.
. . .
3. 1-2 Basilisks
. . ."


"* Remove the appropriate number of basilisks from encounter area #10, temple level."

There is no explanation of whether they "break out of the sealed area" (#10) or not, but they somehow can be encountered outside their "den". And this fact (that they can be encountered randomly in the complex) is, to me, poor design.

The basilisks are in a sealed area. An area explicitly descirbed as having been sealed off by the other inhabitants of the temple. An area that is described as being made of recent construction and that shows signs of frequent patching. How much hand holding do you need to see that if the basilisks are to wander from their given area they must break through the brick walls placed around their lair? The fact that this apparently befuddles you is somewhat surprising to me.

"Is likely assumed" is a (legitimate) interpretation, but it is not mentioned by the text. The text tells what spells the cleric will cast if alerted "through loud noise, etc." that the PCs are coming (silence, prayer, resist fire, protection from good), but there's no mention as to how the troll got in the poor box (diminutized), or why it's there. It just bursts out two rounds after the party enters the room (while they ae probably engaged in battle with the half-orcs). (There's no mention of whether the orcs and cleric even know it is there.) It's a neat trick/gimmick to surprise the PCs, sure, but it just doesn't make any sense -- it's just thrown in without explanation or connection.

How did the troll get into the poor box? It used the stone of diminution to make itself small. Then one of the half-orcs put it in the poor box to hide it. Probably the same half-orc who is hiding in the shadows waiting to backstab someone. Why not ask why that half-orc is hiding in the shadows? The text doesn't spell that out for you either, so I guess that also doesn't make any sense.

And how did those 3 half-orc fighters, the cleric, the assassin, the troll, and the 10 chained prisoners get into that room, anyway? Down the hall past the glyph of warding (they'd all, including the slaves, have to speak the name of the glyph to get past without setting it off), or up through the trap door (which is literally trapped, and can't be disarmed from below) from the sewage-filled aspis grub hatchery or the net-trapped and strongly defended aspis main chamber?

Oh please. This isn't even difficult. The cleric walks down the hall, speaking the glyph name to get by, and then uses the hidden catch on the left foot of the statue to let the guards and slaves come up through the trap door. Given that the aspis are allied with the slavers (pretty explicitly so, since they run the controls for the slave pits), I'm trying to figure out how it is so difficult to understand how it would be possible to transit slaves and orcs through the aspis held chambers. Or any number of other ways that they could easily get that collection of inhabitants into the room. Now you are just looking for problems and making stuff up as you go.

And when the PCs overcame the half-orcs, cleric, assassin, and troll, they questioned the slaves about how to get around in the complex. I said the slaves were in too bad a shape and too scared to relate anything useful, because even *I*, the DM, with the map of the complex couldn't figure out how they got around in the complex.

Because, of course, disabling the trap to let people climb up and down the trap door shaft is so very outlandish a method to use.

This is just two of the problems I see with Slave Pits of the Undercity. There are more. And its the sum total of the problems that makes me call A1 a poorly designed module. I love the concept, and like I said, I made a whole campaign based on the concept.

Thus far, none of your problems are based in the actual substance of the module, but seem to derive from misunderstandings of the text.

 

[Quasqueton]

Thus far, none of your problems are based in the actual substance of the module, but seem to derive from misunderstandings of the text.

No, all of my problems are based on the actual substance of the module (or lack of substance), and your explanations are DM inventions based on no hints or suggestions in the text.

How much hand holding do you need to see that if the basilisks are to wander from their given area they must break through the brick walls placed around their lair?

My complaint is not *how* the basilisks get to wander about the complex, my complaint is that they *are* wandering about the complex.

Why not ask why that half-orc is hiding in the shadows? The text doesn't spell that out for you either, so I guess that also doesn't make any sense.

I see a difference between a half-orc assassin hiding in shadows and a dimuntized troll waiting in a chapel poor box. The one is normal (for D&D), the other is WTF?!

The cleric walks down the hall, speaking the glyph name to get by, and then uses the hidden catch on the left foot of the statue to let the guards and slaves come up through the trap door. . .

What a strangely convoluted way of getting around in their own complex. Maybe it would be easier (and safer for the inhabitants/workers/guards) if they didn’t trap everything around them, and maybe built some tunnels/accesses that allowed them better movement through their own complex?

I think the problems occurred because the designer didn’t put more thought into the conversion from tournament design to campaign adventure design. Tournament Players are pushing through the encounters as quickly as possible, so no one gives the encounter connections much thought. But in a campaign setting, the errors/problems stand out and kill verisimilitude.

Quasqueton

 

[Ourph]

What a strangely convoluted way of getting around in their own complex. Maybe it would be easier (and safer for the inhabitants/workers/guards) if they didn’t trap everything around them, and maybe built some tunnels/accesses that allowed them better movement through their own complex?

I always just assumed that the Slavers were making the best of what the ruined temple offered and the lack of better logistics was a result of either 1) having to work around the pre-existing structure; or 2) not having the time or resources to make improvements to their hideout yet.

I can tell you, as someone who worked on a remodeling construction crew for a few summers, there are a LOT of weird quirks people incorporate into buildings to work around pre-existing structure when money is tight and you have to cut corners.

 

[el-remmen]

I think Quasqueton is saying (and I agree) that a well-designed adventure would be more explicit about all these details.

 

[Storm Raven]

No, all of my problems are based on the actual substance of the module (or lack of substance), and your explanations are DM inventions based on no hints or suggestions in the text.

No, as far as I can tell, you are making these difficulties for yourself.

My complaint is not *how* the basilisks get to wander about the complex, my complaint is that they *are* wandering about the complex.

Why is that such a big problem? Basilisks are dangerous. The orcs have tried to lock them in. The text makes it clear that the freshly repaired walls are often broken. What, exactly, do you think is breaking the walls around the basilisk lair? Strong winds?

I see a difference between a half-orc assassin hiding in shadows and a dimuntized troll waiting in a chapel poor box. The one is normal (for D&D), the other is WTF?!

You have a problem with trolls ambushing their enemies? I'm not seeing what the big difference here is.

What a strangely convoluted way of getting around in their own complex. Maybe it would be easier (and safer for the inhabitants/workers/guards) if they didn’t trap everything around them, and maybe built some tunnels/accesses that allowed them better movement through their own complex?

Not really. The slavers are not only trying to keep enemies out, they are trying to keep slaves in. Trapping the exit from the sewers makes perfect sense in that case, to keep an escaped slave from getting out. It is typical for villains in movies to have this sort of set up where one needs a pass word or knock to get through a locked or trapped area. Someone (not necessarily the cleric) who knows the glyph name sticks around in the chapel when needed, and they wait until those below give the correct password, and then disarm the trap. This is not that convoluted at all.

I think the problems occurred because the designer didn’t put more thought into the conversion from tournament design to campaign adventure design. Tournament Players are pushing through the encounters as quickly as possible, so no one gives the encounter connections much thought. But in a campaign setting, the errors/problems stand out and kill verisimilitude.

Only if you try to make them so. Nothing you are complaining about is actually a problem unless you try to make it so. All of the "problems" you bemoan have perfectly reasonable explanations contained in the structure of the layout and the text of the module.

 

[Storm Raven]

I think Quasqueton is saying (and I agree) that a well-designed adventure would be more explicit about all these details.

Except that would run counter to the design methodology of 1e. The entire module is only 24 pages long plus a detached cover. Subtract out the page of new monsters (the aspis and giant sundew), the two pages of tournament characters, the page for tournament scoring, the cover page, and the two pages of tournament maps, and the entire adventure takes up seventeen pages. The module packs a lot of information into those seventeen pages, but it cannot explicitly detail everything, some things you just have to be able to see (like why a troll would ambush his foes, or how an organized band of slavers could move about a temple without tripping their own traps) without someone holding your hand the whole way through.

 

[Quasqueton]

All of the "problems" you bemoan have perfectly reasonable explanations contained in the structure of the layout and the text of the module.

Emphasis mine to highlight. I see none of this information. Would you be so kind as to quote such?

I'm open to being shown the light, but so far I've just seen explanations and reasons created by a DM, not revealed in the module.

Quasqueton

 

[Quasqueton]

without someone holding your hand the whole way through.

This is the second time you've used this phrase. You are starting to rely on insults to argue. I have not insulted you. How about we discuss the module without the emotion?

Quasqueton