Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ruleslawyer" data-source="post: 2911373" data-attributes="member: 1757">There's a big difference between changing flavor text, demographics, or... well, anything campaign-related and arbitrarily changing the way the rules work a number of times in combination. That's why almost every DM I know tells the players what his house rules are. ToH actually confounds player cleverness by mucking with the rules. Normally sensible tactics are simply rendered useless without explanation, requiring, to quote Pants, "borderline ridiculous" (and, in the case of Robilar, boring and unimaginative) tactics to get through the module.I think this one is a real stinker. I've had Garnfellow's experience with this; I've run it several times and it ends up just being boring and frustrating for the players and myself. Any possibility of using deductive reasoning to overcome the obstacles begins and ends with the poem. For instance, there is no other way to figure out what end of the scepter to touch to the crown. Is there a reason why gold should work and silver not, or vice versa? Perhaps my greatest problem with the dungeon lies in the huge number of secret doors. In 1e rules, this amounts to an arbitrary raised middle finger to the players, since there's no way to find these without stopping and trusting to your 1 in 6 chance. In fact, it seems to me like the only way to adequately walk the dungeon is to do what Abraxas's group did and just burrow straight to the vault. IMHO, running ToH requires far more in the way of luck than skill. Thus, I simply can't agree that it makes for a good player test.</blockquote>

Verification