log in or register to remove this ad

 

Is TOMB OF HORRORS the Worst Adventure Of All Time?

Prevailing opinion here in the EN World community has traditionally held that the worst adventure module of all time is 1984's The Forest Oracle. 7th Sea designer John Wick (whose upcoming edition of 7th Sea is the third most anticipated tabletop RPG of 2016) vehemently disagrees; he nominates the classic adventure Tomb of Horrors for that position, contending that it "represents all the wrong, backward thinking that people have about being a GM." In an article on his blog (warning: this uses a lot of strong language), he goes into great detail as to why he hold this opinion, stating that the adventure is the "worst, &#@&$&@est, most disgusting piece of pig vomit ever published".


1198278663fullres.jpg



[lQ]"My players picked the entrance with the long corridor rather than the two other entrances which are instant kills. That’s right, out of the three ways to enter the tomb, two of them are designed to give the GM the authority for a TPK."[/lQ]

Very strong words, and you can read them all here. As I mentioned before, there's lots of NSFW language there.

The article also includes an anecdote about a convention game in which he participated. In that game, being already familiar with the adventure and its traps (and having advised the DM of this), he played a thief and attempted to discover or deactivate the traps, up until a near TPK occurred and he left the game.

Wick is, of course, no stranger to controversy. A couple of years ago, he created widespread internet arguments when he stated that "The first four editions of D&D are not roleplaying games."
 
Russ Morrissey

Comments

werecorpse

Explorer
And thus we see why I remain highly skeptical of anecdote.
To be fair the anecdote was that people had attended a tournament (or several tournaments) and one or more groups had "beaten the tomb".

You then registered your scepticism by stating you found it hard to believe that such a feat could be done but added parameters that were not part of the anecdote "by 6-8 players in 4 hours with 0 prep". That's like not believing that the running feat referred to above in the Occam's razor discussion could be done "by a child under 14 carrying a 50 kilo rucksack".

Your skeptiscism may be accurate but it was about something that wasn't part of the original claim.

(And yes I note that you had always accepted that the module was beatable)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

increment

Explorer
You do realize that, with respect to the Mark Swanson bit, he's relating an anecdote? And you're using that to bolster the validity of your skepticism.
Well, in fairness, I was citing a write-up that Mark Swanson produced for Alarums & Excursions #4 within a week of playing in the tournament personally, which I corroborate with a direct comparison to the actual 1975 Tomb draft used by Gygax to run the game, as well as the Origins program and a few other pieces of contemporary evidence. So there are good reasons to think his representation is fresh and accurate, though obviously nobody's perfect. It is a very detailed read, you can really trace the party's progress through the Tomb and see how each trap and encounter looked to him as the caller.

But I'd like to add that Frank's anecdotes sometimes capture information that falls outside the scope of my archival method, and should not be dismissed lightly.

Do you know
1. how long each group had to deal with the adventure?
Not off the top of my head. It was a timed event, and you got a five-minute warning near the end (which in an environment like the Tomb naturally caused some last-minute desperate deaths).

2. Was the demilich destroyed ?(was this the crown & sceptre event?)
That's my understanding, though I'm not sure how he was destroyed.

3. How did the other groups go (the ones that didn't get the whole treasure or have Swanson and not get very far?)
Swanson reports that the other Friday night group only got roughly as far as he did, despite having 13 experienced players. Note though that the format really favored later groups in the weekend: you could sign up on the program for 1, 2 or 3 trips, so if this was your third try, you could surely help steer the party in a productive direction. It's no surprise that the first evening runs of the weekend didn't yield a winner.
 

Hussar

Legend
To be fair the anecdote was that people had attended a tournament (or several tournaments) and one or more groups had "beaten the tomb".

You then registered your scepticism by stating you found it hard to believe that such a feat could be done but added parameters that were not part of the anecdote "by 6-8 players in 4 hours with 0 prep". That's like not believing that the running feat referred to above in the Occam's razor discussion could be done "by a child under 14 carrying a 50 kilo rucksack".

Your skeptiscism may be accurate but it was about something that wasn't part of the original claim.

(And yes I note that you had always accepted that the module was beatable)
I believe you'll find if you go back, you've got the order of events backwards. I registered my skepticism that a group going into the module cold, with a 4 hour time limit, would be able to complete the module only to be told afterward that not only was it possible, but that more than one group did so in the original tournament. It wasn't until a bit after that that [MENTION=52672]increment[/MENTION] stepped in with a more detailed account based on first person reports.

But, as my Internet is currently really hating En World, I cannot go back at this time and check, so, it's entirely possible that my mouth got going before my brain engaged. :D

/edit - my Internet is kinda loving En World, so, I could wander back through the thread.

My very first post on the whole point about anecdote was this one:

On the idea of reports and cheating:

Look, I'm not saying the people who reported succeeding at the module were automatically cheating, but, lets face facts. What are the odds that a group of 6-8 people with zero preparation and pre-gen characters could successfully navigate the ToH in 3-4 hours? It's pretty hard to believe.

What is perhaps easier to believe is those 6-8 players listened in on earlier tables running the module, talked to other players who played the module previously, and generally canvassed as much information as they could about the module beforehand and thus managed to complete the module due to a pretty healthy running head start.

Granted, it might be that they were just that good. They managed to defeat the entire module completely on their own. That is certainly a possibility. But, IMO, it's likely not what happened. They defeated the ToH the same way that most home games did it - they had a pretty large amount of forewarning from other players and perhaps even had access to the Monster Manual II.

Heh, my own group did ToH after playing the G series. Which meant we had an intelligent sword that detected secret doors and a +5 Hammer of Thunderbolts. Made the module fairly easy to defeat. But, a group doing this with the pre-gens? With zero forewarning? And only first-person accounts of the event? I remain healthily skeptical.
Note, at this point, I don't think anyway, no one had actually posted ANY actual anecdotes. Just some vague pointing at various Wikipedia and TV Tropes articles. And, note, right from the first, I NEVER accused anyone of lying or being deceptive. I was skeptical that anyone did it without a bit of extra help, that going in 100% cold was, and is, IMO, very unlikely to result in a successful run in 4 hours, but, even right from the start, I was entirely willing to admit that the module is playable.
[MENTION=6810442]ExTSR[/MENTION] stepped in later on and provided some insights and then [MENTION=52672]increment[/MENTION] provided more. I'd say that my skepticism was both healthy and dovetails pretty well with the additional information we've been given.

I'm frankly baffled by the pushback I'm getting here. I wonder if I'm not being lumped in with other people's arguments and if there isn't some misreading going on.

----

As to the "one sentence explanation requested, I guess I'll repeat for the 5th and final time:

I am skeptical that a group, without any prep, going into the module completely cold, could complete the module in 4 hours.

Is that clear enough?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

E

ExTSR

Guest
at this point, I don't think anyway, no one had actually posted ANY actual anecdotes. ExTSR stepped in later on and provided some insights and then increment provided more... I'm frankly baffled by the pushback I'm getting here.
Slight terminology suggestion... I provided some second-hand unverified anecdotes by friends. (I wasn't there.) Then Jon dropped by with some Truth. That's HIS stock in trade. ;>

As to pushback... I suggest that perhaps it was your firm position clearly and loudly announced well before you had all the facts, and "I didn't know!" is your reason.
So it may be your Method rather than the Results that are affecting readers the most.

Just my 2c, I'll go back to my game now. :p

F
 

Nytmare

Adventurer
As to pushback... I suggest that perhaps it was your firm position clearly and loudly announced well before you had all the facts, and "I didn't know!" is your reason.
So it may be your Method rather than the Results that are affecting readers the most.
That's kinda what skepticism is.
 

ha, he said it for marketing purposes for seventh sea.

judging it by how much it made, it worked :p


edit: well done. :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

GameDaddy

Explorer
And "I beat a module" isn't exactly an 'extraordinary claim'"...

As many many many many people have pointed out, all you need is tons of hirelings, chickens and other canaries to beat this dungeon. That was a much more common style of play back then.
Was not.

None of the players in our group brought hirelings, chickens, or canaries... or anything else even remotely like that. Just to try it, some folks used pregens, I rolled up brand new 10th level fighter. After that character died, on a direct challenge of the GM, I brought one of my best characters, a 17th Level Wizard, that had never died in any other adventure that I had playing for over two years years previously. We did bring 6 ' and 10' poles, rope, spikes, hammers, picks, shovels, and other common dungeon sundries.

This was 1980. We played the mono 78' red cover version, because it had just arrived at our Friendly Local Gaming Store (FLGS). 90% of everything we ever learned about RPGs came from the FLGS. We mail ordered our wargames, and the wargame companies like Avalon Hill and SPI published their catalog, and direct mailed us new catalogs with the latest releases at least once a year, AH and SPI were famous for mailing quarterly updates as well. That's once every three months, and they were the big boys in the game Industry. RPG were still very new, and the other gaming companies we would get catalogs from would maybe mail out a catalog maybe once a year. TSR would add an advertising page, so you could learn about new modules by reading the last page of a game or module. One of the inside cover, or maybe it was the back of the Tomb of Horrors listed the other modules that were released at the time, and often we would go down to the game shop after we had played a new module or game, and special order new games or modules we learned about in this manner.

I might have attended one or two Ghenghis Con game conventions in Denver by that time. There were no groups that would teach RPG or wargame walk-thru's at the convention at that time, because organized play groups did not even exist then. We would just go to shows to try new games, and half the new games at a show were run by local GMs and Refs from coffee stained crib notes, rules mashups, or some new cobbled experimental rules set laboriously typed up on some old typewriter. If you were really newfangled and had a nice chunk of change to burn, you could buy an electric IBM Selectric typewriter which included a whiteout typeover ribbon so you could quickly correct your writing mistakes on the fly.

State of the Art computers of the time included TRS-80's, The Amiga, and a few folks had Apple IIe's. Any gaming material that came from these computers were printed on cheap mechanical tractor dot matrix printers, which featured perforated continuous sheets of paper tens or hundreds of feet long that included holes so it could be fed through the printer. We bought this paper in boxes. One sheet of this printer paper was like a hundred or five hundred continuous pages long, and we would print just what we would need, maybe ten sheets, then tear off this whole lot, then separate the papers laboriously by hand. The Ink quality varied widely, and often, after just a year, anything tractor printed would be so faded it was illegible.

Full color printing was extremely rare, and most games or RPGs were black and white, or featured one tone monochrome color printing. To be considered truly professional, you had to at least spring for a full color cover, but the vast majority of games were released as Black & White, or featured a monocolor print job with black and one other color. TSR printed their modules in monotone blue color because photocopiers at the time could not see light blue, it shows up as white for black and white copiers, and red shows up as solid black. It was a copy protection scheme to up their sales of modules. You had to either buy the module, or copy the maps and game notes by hand to duplicate them, because most copiers didn't "see" blue and would not reproduce the blue maps or notes on copies.

Us real GM's had a name for that style of play, where players got chickens, or cattle, or hirelings and ran them though the dungeon ahead of the players. We called it Monty Haul GMing, after that television game show "Let's Make A Deal". Basically with Monty Haul GMing, the GMs would award the players with a bounty or plentitude of monies, or treasure, and/or magic. And then let the players run through a dungeon or challenge. Our gaming group looked down on this style of play with considerable disdain. We actually didn't see this style of play often, but we heard about it.

The other term used at this time was Iron Man, and with the Iron Man style of play, the player would carefully actually work up a character from first level. and almost everyone at this time had a few long-term characters that had survived multiple campaigns of often unexpected complexity. Naturally we took great pride in the few high level characters we had, that had survived fiendishly devised dungeons, and adventures. If the high level character dies, player would roll up a new character at the 1st level, and start again. Iron Man. You had what equipment was listed on the character sheet when you started, and nothing else could be added, unless the game started in like some big city or something similar.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

pemerton

Legend
I am lucky enough to generally have 'think outside of the box' role-players in my groups, so things can go anywhere sometimes.

In my experience, if someone complains of something being too difficult and therefore 'unfair' after going at it head on, expecting a straight rush in and hit it to work most of the time, then they are often enough the kind of player who is self-entitled, whether they realise it or not.

<snip>

This limited and 'only inside the box' approach to the game was almost a strict requirement with the way 4th Edition rules worked. So much so my players and I abandoned it early on.

Personally I think the idea that all encounters must be entirely 'defeatable' using 'point and shoot' abilities or dice rolling alone is an unfortunate expectation baked-into to a certain extent with newer editions. This passively discourages creative 'outside the box' thinking

<snip>

If you think this is an unfair appraisal, please consider that I have been DM'ing since the late 70's and have seen the trend develop slowly over time.
It's good to know that everyone who doesn't like ToH has some sort of character flaw!

Or maybe they just don't like the same things you do. It doesn't mean that you're better than them.

And just for clarification: I've been GMing since the first half of the 1980s; have never enjoyed trap-and-puzzle-style dungeons (either as GM or player); have GMed a lot of 4e (among other systems); and see a lot of "outside the box" thinking from my players.
 

Hussar

Legend
Been thinking about this thread for a while, and this is how I would critique the ToH:

The Good

1. ToH is fantastically inspirational. There are just some excellent ideas in there. And, I would say that few if any other modules have been burned into the collective zeitgeist of gamers as much has this one has. Show someone a picture of the Green Demon Face and everyone knows exactly what you're talking about. I'd say there are extremely few modules with that level of instant recognition. So, obviously this module touches on something in our collective experience. And, IMO, many of the traps and puzzles are pretty interesting without being reduced to pixel bitching. The tension in the module is very high. You have your player's undivided attention when you run this module and that's a very, very good thing. Of all the criticisms you hear about ToH, no one ever says it's boring.

2. I can't think of another module that has inspired DM's to the level of this module. For example, how many other forty year old modules get modelled in 3d?? One of my earliest gaming experiences was watching my older brother run this module for his friends (I was a bit too young at the time to play). I remember quite vividly when the players came to the series of secret doors that have to be opened in a specific way or a spear trap shoots out and tags you.

My brother had the players actually get out of their chairs and demonstrate how they were opening the doors. I was observing LARPing in 1979! :D To this day, I've rarely, if ever, seen this level of immersion from any other module. And that's a very good thing.

The Bad

1. Like anything, nothing is perfect. The module does suffer from some extremely arbitrary choice points where the players really have no way of knowing which is the right choice. It becomes less a "thinking man's dungeon" and more "Can you brute force calculate the answer before you run out of HP?" module. The above mentioned secret door/spear traps section is a perfect example of this. There's no clues whatsoever. So, you basically just have to run through every possible solution until such time as you open the door. And each time you're wrong, you take damage. There's rather a lot of this sort of thing and the module, again IMO, suffers for it.

2. Metagaming. As was mentioned, the module is more or less unsolvable if you use it as written. A group using pre-gens without any outside knowledge will almost certainly fail to complete the adventure. It's frustrating to say the least. Which, in practice, means that virtually no one actually goes through the module as written. [MENTION=80711]GameDaddy[/MENTION] above mentions bringing a 17th level wizard into the module to resolve it. This is far, far outside the scenario parameters (and likely would make the module pretty easy to solve to boot). In my own experience, we had a group that had played the G series and had an intelligent sword that detected secret doors. Makes the module pretty darn easy. Or, you get the bag of rats solutions that people talk about. IIRC, Gygax's own group saw Robilar do pretty much this exact tactic. And, likely, he was not going into the module without any foreknowledge.

--------

Conclusion:

Is the module the worst of all time? No. Not in the slightest. There are far, far worse modules out there. The worst that can really be said about ToH is that it's a pretty linear module with no role play interaction (there isn't anything to talk to) and fosters a very strong sense that players should game the game, rather than role play their own characters through the scenario. OTOH, it is very inspirational, filled with all sorts of very, very memorable events that players still talk about and remember forty years on. That, right there, makes it a very good module.
 

JonnyP71

Explorer
Is the module the worst of all time? No. Not in the slightest. There are far, far worse modules out there. The worst that can really be said about ToH is that it's a pretty linear module with no role play interaction (there isn't anything to talk to) and fosters a very strong sense that players should game the game, rather than role play their own characters through the scenario. OTOH, it is very inspirational, filled with all sorts of very, very memorable events that players still talk about and remember forty years on. That, right there, makes it a very good module.
That's a pretty fair conclusion on the whole. However on your roleplaying point, while it's true to say there is little to for the players to interact with in the module, it forces more player-player interaction than any other printed module D&D I have played or DMed. And as DM I loved the level of thought it provoked among my playing groups - even though they all used one-shot PCs to which they had no personal attachment, they were really invested in the challenge the Tomb presented.

Yes it is a 'players vs the game' adventure, that's precisely what it was meant to be, and on that score it succeeds admirably.

The worst modules are those which are utterly forgettable and which feel pointless. Tomb of Horrors is perhaps THE most memorable for a whole generation of gamers. And it is far from pointless.
 

GameDaddy

Explorer
I'm not saying it couldn't be done. I'm just saying it's very unlikely that a convention group with just four hours could complete this without some additional foreknowledge or help, and this estimate is based on the experiences of our actual group play.

To note, our group did successfully beat the dungeon, but not on the first attempt, ...nor even the second. We started about seven or eight pm. I quit by ten, after losing the wizard in our second run through, and the bulk of the rest of the group played through until they completed the Tomb of Horrors and quit around three or four a.m. Many of our weekends in high school went that way. It took like five or six attempts before they finally succeeded and it was a real bloodbath.

I remember where the Canary came from now. In ToH the Canary in a Cage came with one of the Pre-gen characters or as an additional equipment option the players could add in the pre-dungeon outfitting phase of the adventure. I do remember one player taking this option now and carrying a canary in a cage into the Tomb of Horrors. He died. The Canary died. We did have a discussion about the canary though during the game, after the first couple run throughs that went something like this;

Me: "Why are you bringing a canary in a cage into this dungeon?"

Tom: "Well, you know, it's like in a mine, if there's no air, or poisonous gas, the canary will die first, and we'll get some warning that we need to act."

Me: "Really??? just what exactly do you plan on doing if the canary dies? You have just a few rounds before you too will suffocate, or die a horrible death because of the poison."

Tom: "We can leave, and go back out the way we came in."

Me: (Thinking about one way doors and slide traps) "uuuhh-huh..."

Tom: "And the cleric can heal us..."

Me: "OK, what spells can help? Ahh remove poision! But how is the cleric going to know if you need to have poison removed, or if you are instead out of air and suffocating? ...And how many spells or scrolls like this is the cleric going to need to keep the whole party alive? You think the cleric is going to have time to save everybody, or is he going to use his spells to save himself?"

Tom: " I dunno..."


I'm sure Gary and Frank and company laughed their a$$es off when they walked into the convention center gaming hall and saw all these players with big tough fighters, Fear inducing thieves, and awesome wizards, who were daintily traipsing through the dungeon hauling canaries in cages. This goes right back to the Monty Haul "Let's make a Deal" theme, where people would show up in the most ridiculous of costumes in order to wow Monty and persuade him to favor them. The same with the players and GM ...in game with ToH. Yay!

If it helps any, our gaming group didn't like to think of ourselves in those terms. Instead of Canaries in a Coal Mine, we envisioned ourselves to be a lot more like Conan, Subotai, and Valeria, when they stole into the underground stronghold of Thulsa Doom to kidnap the Princess in Conan the Barbarian. We go in fast using stealth and camouflage, dodge or disarm the traps, kill anything that needs to be killed, and get out fast with the treasure/loot, and with the least amount of alarm, or fuss.



Now Hussar is right, It's a very good dungeon, but not in the way one would immediately expect, or guess. Here's what actual effect this play through had on me;

1) Other than B1 (Which was an exceptionally well designed dungeon) I had not played in any TSR Dungeon. We had taken the Holmes blue book to heart, and had happily crafted our own dungeons and story lines for years before and were already well versed in fiendish Dungeon design by the time ToH even came out. Other than B1, I never bought a TSR dungeon module, and didn't buy another dungeon module until after 2000 when WOTC released Forge of Fury. And that was only after I had a chance to examine an already opened copy of Forge of Fury.

TSR used to shrink wrap all of their dungeon and dragon modules so I couldn't inspect them for quality, This also put me off from buying any more modules, specifically becuase of our experiences with ToH. I did play in one other campaign where my friend Tom ran the B4 The Lost City adventure, right after it was released in 1982. It was also very good, and I enjoyed it even though I lost two of the five characters that I played during that adventure.

2) When we went back to making our own dungeons, I always made sure to include at least two available methods or techniques any player could use to disarm any trap, because I wanted to avoid having my dungeon labeled a "Railroad" which was a term we first heard not too long after the release of Tomb of Horrors.

3) Whenever somebody did use the term "Railroad" to describe an adventure or game. I always though first of Tomb of Horrors and that inexperienced GM, and that evening where I lost my best wizard in a sadistic deathtrap where I felt, ...despite my best efforts, there would have been no chance to win. Most games, and adventures that earned the label railroad were ones that I personally avoided, and to this day avoid, because it reveals a fatal flaw in the inherent design that is not properly being addressed by the game designer.

It's not a matter of game balance, as an adventure can be unbalanced and tilted in the favor of players, or tilted against them. A really good game should be neither, and it should be up to the players to eke out a victory against a series of challenges, some more difficult, and some less difficult, but no challenge should be so difficult that it cannot be overcome. Any challenge like that and it is no longer a game.
 
Last edited by a moderator:


sphere830

First Post
I enjoyed this piece and the discussion it has generated. I love this module for everything that the piece brought out. For the reason of evolving the GM alone--ToH is very important "module." Regardless of your experience, I hope you have a memory of the Tomb of Horrors. I never beat it myself and lost a 7th level Ranger to the dungeon. That doesn't stop me from owning a first edition and rereading the dungeon for sheer ruthless design. Tomb of Horror forms a kind of base-line for the limits of a death-trap. But pillaged, this module is like a great early Atari game...it still works. This 32-page gem has enough game design and traps for many campaigns employed as a toolbox. And, as importantly, we are still having conversations about the shared and culture experience that ToH generated. This essay expressed something that everyone that experienced this module has felt! Fun Sunday read.
 


sphere830

First Post
I'm sorry, what was the thing that I (and apparently everyone who's played this module has felt) that it expressed?
Fair question. It seems for me that ToH places absolute kind of traps (e.g. sphere of annihilation) where bumbling around them instigates creativity or avoidance. As a party and relationship to the game itself, Tomb of horrors offers a dungeon (or series of traps) that will likely take a number of attempts/characters to beat. Or it offers a place in the game world that is almost unapproachable, but an example of the world being more important than individual characters.

My apologies for the initial ambiguity.

I should also put out here what I thought about the article. First, I disagree that Tomb of Horror is a bad module. In fact, I think of ToH as one of the best adventure modules, essentially for the reasons listed both above and in my initial comment.

Secondly, even though I said that I had never "beat" the adventure, ToH is not like most adventures (As most here have already commented on). I do think of this as a true dungeon of horrors. The game design itself evolved the game passed an adventure/puzzle to be beaten/solved in one pass. But, again, in my mind represents a truly place of horror. A place to be either taken seriously or avoided all together. Also a place or site that will alter the game world if the players choose to engage or venture into. Which brings up another point for clarity.

If a person is running a game of one-shots and/or linearly (aka tournament talk above and beyond the scope of my comments), then this module is the Donkey Kong of early adventure design. This dungeon will take your quarters. At the end, I prefer to add the Tomb of horrors to all of my game worlds, but in a sandbox-kind of way. That said, rumors leading a party are esoteric and must be pursued but forewarned.

I also like the critical essay of Wick's, but not because I dislike the Tomb of Horrors. Many people don't share initial experiences with the module, without the current meta-thinking about the what the Tomb of Horrors has become. And this is where my initial comment was rooted (albeit incompletely). Tomb of horrors is still generating conversation in general. From a game design perspective and a collection of traps and killer situations, I still love the Tomb of Horrors. The module does what it was intended for, to humble the hubris and the lack of concerns of high-level characters. So I disagree with Wick, but the article (like the module itself) does generate good conversation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

wwanno

First Post
Fair question. It seems for me that ToH places absolute kind of traps (e.g. sphere of annihilation) where bumbling around them instigates creativity or avoidance. As a party and relationship to the game itself, Tomb of horrors offers a dungeon (or series of traps) that will likely take a number of attempts/characters to beat. Or it offers a place in the game world that is almost unapproachable, but an example of the world being more important than individual characters.

My apologies for the initial ambiguity.
That is exactly what I am doing in all my campaigns, whatever the edition (2nd or 5th, I am the DM of 2 campaigns).

There is the tomb and it is known all around the game world.

Anytime the players desire, I let them generate PCs (lv 10+1d4, random magic equipment) to play the module.

If they die, I write down where they died and what they were carrying with them. If they pick up some loot, I remove it from the list.

If any group of players will win the dungeons, the new will spread all over the game worlds, and the players from the other campaigns will know that somebody else took the treasures of the tomb.

If the players adventure in the tomb with newly created PCs, they will put down those PCs at the end of the module (for good or for bad), but if they decide to play it with their main characters they could end up really really RICH in bot magic and mundane, and they will keep playing those characters.

The fact is that the players (partially) know what is inside the tomb because they left those items when they tried with their previous PCs.

I hope that in the end they will dare to enter the tomb with their main PCs, lured by the treasures inside

Inviato dal mio ASUS_Z00AD utilizzando Tapatalk
 

Mythological Figures & Maleficent Monsters

Advertisement1

Latest threads

Mythological Figures & Maleficent Monsters

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top