Is the original Tomb of Horrors a well-designed adventure module?

[Mark Hope]

Again, while the ToH is clearly not suited for regular gameplay and has some really nasty and occasionally arbitrary challenges and traps, not all of the examples that are being cited here are accurate It is emphatically not just about dumb luck, as a reading of the adventure text shows. In addition to the ehren37's wholly erroneous claims about the crown and sceptre above, I'd also comment on these:

The pits?

Almost all pits in the ToH can be detected on a roll of 1-4 on a d6 by probing with a pole. Search and you have a good chance of finding them. Plus there is a Dex-based chance to avoid falling in. No roll is guaranteed in any edition of the game, but the odds are on your side. Others can be detected with spell use. Hardly dumb luck.

The undetectable secret-door accesses?

These are actually detectable, but you need magic to do so.

The unsavable sleep gas?

Yeah, that's pretty harsh .

The so-called "puzzles" that involve mere trial-and-error approaches?

Such as? I'm not sure that all of these really are mere trial and error - my experience runs contrary to this description.

The

Spoiler

slot door that can take a ring, coin, or gem and thus requires pure guesswork to bypass?

What about using stone shape on the wall around it? Nothing in the adventure states that this won't work.

Just to be clear - I'm not putting up a blanket defense of the ToH here. It has its flaws, to be sure. But I also feel that it has a reputation for arbitrariness that is not reflected by the actual material itself.

 

[painandgreed]

For instance, the poem in ToH provides some room for PC creativity and problem-solving. So does

Spoiler

the false lich encounter

. Some of the other encounters

Spoiler

(the devil mouth)

are just obvious "don't be stupid" plays. No problem with any of those. The pits? The undetectable secret-door accesses? The unsavable sleep gas? The so-called "puzzles" that involve mere trial-and-error approaches? The

Spoiler

slot door that can take a ring, coin, or gem and thus requires pure guesswork to bypass?

All bad adventure design in my book.

See, I have trouble with the poem as well as puzzles in dungeons that have clues. Why would a demi-lich or anybody else put such things in their dungeons? If the point was to keep people out, then the last thing you'd do is put clues to help them get through it. That is bad design if your design criteria is versimilitude.

 

[Mark Hope]

And yet, touching the silver end is what opens the door. Theres no internal logic. Thats my point. If you follow the ideas you set forth (like to like) the person dies. I remembered it just fine... its stupid and random.

Nonsense. Utter nonsense.

Here is the exact text from the 1e adventure:

The crown of gold negates the pillars’ levitation effectsand enables the wearer to see within the hall as if he or she were in normal daylight, but outside this place the wearer is blind! Furthermore, the wearer knows that the crown can be removed only by touching the scepter to its lop. The scepter is of electrum, with a gold ball at one end and a silver knob at the other. If the silver end is touched to the crown, the wearer is instantly snuffed out, turning to a fetid powder which cannot be brought back to life no matter what (wishes notwithstanding). If the golden knob is used upon the crown, the wearer can lift it from his or her head. Examination of the throne will reveal a small replica of the crown inlaid in silver upon the lower front panel of the seat. If the silver end of the scepter is applied to this inlay, the throne sinks and reveals a 5' wide passageway.

Show me how your idea that "If you follow the ideas you set forth (like to like) the person dies" is supported by this. In actuality, "like to like" is the way to solve this, either to remove the crown (gold to gold) or open the secret door (silver to silver). Sorry, but your memory is not up to scratch on this one...

 

[Mark Hope]

See, I have trouble with the poem as well as puzzles in dungeons that have clues. Why would a demi-lich or anybody else put such things in their dungeons? If the point was to keep people out, then the last thing you'd do is put clues to help them get through it. That is bad design if your design criteria is versimilitude.

Acererak wants tough, hardy and tasty PCs to get through so that he can eat them. He has no interest in the weak. This ultimately became once of the central concepts of Return to the Tomb of Horrors.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Again, while the ToH is clearly not suited for regular gameplay and has some really nasty and occasionally arbitrary challenges and traps, not all of the examples that are being cited here are accurate It is emphatically not just about dumb luck, as a reading of the adventure text shows. In addition to the ehren37's wholly erroneous claims about the crown and sceptre above, I'd also comment on these:

Almost all pits in the ToH can be detected on a roll of 1-4 on a d6 by probing with a pole. Search and you have a good chance of finding them. Plus there is a Dex-based chance to avoid falling in. No roll is guaranteed in any edition of the game, but the odds are on your side. Others can be detected with spell use. Hardly dumb luck.

Yet they're still boring.

These are actually detectable, but you need magic to do so.

How, exactly, do you do this in 1e? Do you walk through the entire dungeon at a crawl using the

Spoiler

gem of seeing found in the gargoyle arm?

If so, how is this vaguely cleverness-inducing as opposed to just dull? I don't mind one or two secret doors; I mind a forest of them for no purpose other than to induce tedium.

Such as? I'm not sure that all of these really are mere trial and error - my experience runs contrary to this description.

What about using stone shape on the wall around it? Nothing in the adventure states that this won't work.

The spell description does. You can't use 1e stone shape to open holes in things.

Just to be clear - I'm not putting up a blanket defense of the ToH here. It has its flaws, to be sure. But I also feel that it has a reputation for arbitrariness that is not reflected by the actual material itself.

And I'd have to disagree a bit. I think you've mounted a convincing defense, but I still think that it's the sheer randomness and tedium of the complex that's its biggest problem. ToH has some very imaginative and challenging traps and tricks, but overall, its real challenges to player creativity pale before something like Lost Tomb of Martek or Descent into the Depths of the Earth.

 

[ruleslawyer]

See, I have trouble with the poem as well as puzzles in dungeons that have clues. Why would a demi-lich or anybody else put such things in their dungeons? If the point was to keep people out, then the last thing you'd do is put clues to help them get through it. That is bad design if your design criteria is versimilitude.

There's lots of stuff that breaks "verisimilitude" but is better for game-play. Verisimilitude would be just avoiding the dungeon entirely, or, perhaps, a demilich not bothering with the entire gauntlet of traps at all and just putting everything in the Mithral Vault. It's not like the thing is easy to open, after all.

 

[Mark Hope]

Do you walk through the entire dungeon at a crawl using the

Spoiler

gem of seeing found in the gargoyle arm?

If so, how is this vaguely cleverness-inducing as opposed to just dull? I don't mind one or two secret doors; I mind a forest of them for no purpose other than to induce tedium.

That's not the issue I am debating here. I am arguing that you can use reason, skill, magic - anything besides dumb luck, as you put it - to work your way through the tomb. The item you mention was clearly placed there for just this purpose. Tedious and dull? Maybe. Not my point, however .

You can't use 1e stone shape to open holes in things.

Yes you can. The 1e spell description specifically mentions creating trapdoors and secret doors in order to escape imprisonment.

And I'd have to disagree a bit. I think you've mounted a convincing defense, but I still think that it's the sheer randomness and tedium of the complex that's its biggest problem. ToH has some very imaginative and challenging traps and tricks, but overall, its real challenges to player creativity pale before something like Lost Tomb of Martek or Descent into the Depths of the Earth.

You'll get no argument from me there. Those two are amongst the best of the best. Lost Tomb of Martek is one of my all-time favourites - a real star gem of an adventure. I'm sure that, without a DM keeping the right kind of tension and atmosphere, the ToH would be little more than a tedious grind for all but the most dedicated dungeoneer. Thankfully it need not come across that way. Either way, I'm just trying to illustrate that there are valid, non-random, methods to work your way through this adventure .

 

[Abraxas]

Just referring to this point, I really can't agree with you. You touch the silver end of the sceptre to the silver crown or the gold end to the gold crown. That's it. What is so crushingly difficult about that? Maybe not everyone will figure it out, but I saw someone do just that the other day. There's a lot to be said about the ToH and its lack of suitability for regular D&D play, but the myth that players cannot reason their way through it is just that - a myth.

With respect to the crown and the sceptre - the groups I played in got past this also - but it is arbitrary. Gold to gold and silver to silver seem to make perfect sense - but given what players had gone through to get to this point why should it be that easy? It could just as easily have been silver to gold. And thats not the real problem - its later outside of the throne room where you have to use the sceptre and there is no clue as to which end you use - so you can either guess, rely on a less the perfect augury, or hope you still have a henchman left to sacrifice. As for the idea that its a myth that you can't reason your way through it, it is also a myth that there is no element of luck involved. As I posted earlier there is one point where we survivng 4 all failed our saves and basically could proceed no farther.

And the sceptre comments reminded me of another point. A previous poster mentioned the use of the crown and the sceptre to

Spoiler

disintegrate acerak

, I've always wondered after reading about that who the

Spoiler

unlucky character who found out about the crown and sceptre's ability to disintegrate the wearer

was. I'va also wondered if Gygax hadn't been there to rule it worked would the DM have allowed it to work - nothing in the ToH says it should.

I actually like the ToH - I just don't think its as great a design as some other adventures from the same time frame.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

It is well designed for what it was desinged for. Like Diaglo said it is a tourney module, not something that was expected to take beloved characters to in the midst of a 5 year campaign. I think the problem comes from people wanting to fit a square module into a round campaign.

A fair point.

I voted No, because it would not fit into a normal campaign in a useful way. Why would PCs bother?

Unfortunately I know firsthand a bad answer to that question: If the DM pulls all stops to railroad your beloved PCs into death-filled hell because he feels like running this super-cool module he spent his precious 6 quid on.

With respect to adventure design, there is a lot of game rule-breaking which is dangerous even if is not necessarily wrong. I do not doubt that the adventure worked fine while under Gary's DMing, but it can have serious breakdowns when shoehorned into another DM's gaming style.

"What do you mean my PC is dead? We have never played the rules that way before!"
"Uh. That is what the module says."

 

[Crothian]

A fair point.

I voted No, because it would not fit into a normal campaign in a useful way. Why would PCs bother?

I've never had any problems getting PCs to go there. I do bait the hook, there needs to be a reason but I never force the players to do anything it is always one of many choices.