Is The Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh a well-designed adventure module?

[Raven Crowking]

This is one of the greats.

 

[Mark Hope]

I never had a problem with the inclusion of Ned (although I really like the idea of replacing him with a lost child or something). Mind you, that might just be down to circumstance. Both times I ran this adventure, the PCs released Ned and let him join the party. With the first group, he backstabbed them but the Paladin forgave him (!) and let him flee with his life. He also backstabbed the second group, but they captured him, finished off the other slavers and then tortured Ned to death in a highly grisly fashion. In both cases, I suppose I was more surprised by the players than by the NPC, lol...

 

[gizmo33]

I'm with you, giz.

Thanks

In fact, on a related topic I think the Monster Manual could bring back some black and white drawings for their monsters. Flipping through some of the books at the store, I'm looking at the artwork for some of the monsters and saying "what the heck is that thing - I think it's a brain, stuck to a weasel body with a tentacle? Or is that the adventurers arm? Is that purple stuff part of the body?" I guess I'm just old - probably need new glasses.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Shady characters are good in an adventure, but only if the vast majority of people are not shady. If every "prisoner" stabs you in the back, you'll soon start preemptively stabbing the prisoners!

OTOH, as an occasional touch this sort of thing is good. It seems that lots of early modules had at least one guy you couldn't trust -- Hommlet, Keep on the Borderlands, Cult of the Reptile God and Saltmarsh are only a few. I don't think that these sorts of characters are bad design per se. You shouldn't simply trust anyone you meet tied up in a dungeon.

In conclusion, Ned is fine so long as the DM doesn't assume that Ned's appearance in the module means that every good adventure has an NPC stab you in the back.

 

[Mycanid]

All right - HOLD THE PHONE!

What is everyone bashing poor Ned about? Is it because he is just too tough for the 1st level party?

Or is it because it seemed out of place that he was in the haunted house in the first place?

Or is it some other reason?

If it is the first ... well ... neither I (when playing) nor the parties I DM'd through it had any problems with him.

If it is the second that is the entire point. He IS out of place. That's one of the big things that is supposed to tip the pc's off to the fact that something more is going on inside the house. More than that, the module says that the merchant put him therein a panick and did not think things through....

If it's something else ... please elaborate!

 

[Joshua Randall]

Oh, and as for the module - I would ranks it up there as one of the best - perhaps second only to Against the Cult of the Reptile God

!

Interesting, because I consider Against the Cult... one of the worst designed low-level 1e modules. But, I will save those comments for when Quasqueton starts that thread.

 

[Quasqueton]

Oh, and as for the module - I would ranks it up there as one of the best - perhaps second only to Against the Cult of the Reptile God

Interesting, because I consider Against the Cult... one of the worst designed low-level 1e modules. But, I will save those comments for when Quasqueton starts that thread.

Noted. That will be my next poll in the series. But since there are currently already two of these in discussion right now, I'll wait till next week to post that poll.

Quasqueton

 

[Raven Crowking]

!

Interesting, because I consider Against the Cult... one of the worst designed low-level 1e modules. But, I will save those comments for when Quasqueton starts that thread.

Not me! I thoroughly enjoyed Against the Cult. Of course, my players absolutely trashed the dungeon....they chewed it up and spit it out. It was really fun.

RC

 

[painandgreed]

What is everyone bashing poor Ned about?

Or is it some other reason?

In my case, it's because he's a cliched trap that nobody ever fell for. It's like the early Shadowrun modules where the players would despondently say "Now, here's where the Mr. Johnson screws us over.' while the DM looks nervous because he was just about to begin that part of the story and thought it would be a surprise.

 

[Raven Crowking]

In my case, it's because he's a cliched trap that nobody ever fell for. It's like the early Shadowrun modules where the players would despondently say "Now, here's where the Mr. Johnson screws us over.' while the DM looks nervous because he was just about to begin that part of the story and thought it would be a surprise.

Sometimes, though, it's good that the players see the signs, understand them, and turn the tables. It gives them an enormous sense of satisfaction.

RC