More on Killer Dungeons

[MerricB]

I like tough modules. I like hearing my players think.

However, some dungeons take it too far.

Would you say that some of those dungeons we think of as "Killers" were actually labelled at the wrong level?

For instance, the revision of the Slavers modules bumped up the levels of PCs going through it by several levels...

Thoughts?

 

[grodog]

I think part of the "high level" nature of the original 1e modules was due to the fact that 10th-14th level PCs _were_ the highest level characters around at that point during D&D's early history.

Tomb of Horrors was first run at Origins I in 1975; the Lost Caverns of Tsojconth [sic] was run at WinterCon V in 1976; the G series was published in 1978. D&D was only 6 years old in 1978; at that time, Robliar, Mordenkainen, Drawmij, and others were among the highest level PCs going.

Such challenging adventures were also created for the original crowd who played OD&D: tactical- and strategic-savvy wargamers. They survived encounters that would kill higher level PCs now because of their skill as players: playing while everything in the game was still a new and unexpected challenge.

So, to more directly respond to your question, Merric, I'm not sure that the original "high level" range (10-14 for OD&D/1e) scales over time as the rules and challenges become more systematized/regular/predictable. I would think that as players grow more familiar with the rule (with demi-liches, for example), that the challenge of the high-level games would in fact fall vs. grow, unless the DM was to continue to introduce new elements that the players could not already be familiar with.

 

[megamania]

uh...yeah what he said

 

[Queen_of_Hearts]

New elements (monsters) are always a good way to keep PCs on thier toes.

 

[Altalazar]

And what would be the current killer modules? And what level are they? Or are there "killer" modules for every level?

 

[maddman75]

Heh - I have an old copy of Ghost Tower of Inverness. The original level was (IIRC) 4-7. The original owner had scratched it out and wrote "My ass! 9-14!"

 

[d20Dwarf]

Heh - I have an old copy of Ghost Tower of Inverness. The original level was (IIRC) 4-7. The original owner had scratched it out and wrote "My ass! 9-14!"

I think it was 5-10 or something weird like that, but who knows.

As for current killer mods, I'd have to say that Rappan Athuk comes to mind (how many giant albino cave scorpions?!?!). I've got a killer one coming out on Dire Kobold soon, but I'm not sure it's in the same league.

 

[Arnwyn]

2e's Labyrinth of Madness might be considered too low level (and it was labelled for 15th+).

 

[Bregh]

I think it was 5-10 or something weird like that, but who knows.

C2 is for levels 5-7.

And I think grodog's post is spot on, though I dare say certain modules will be challenging and deadly no matter what the level. S1 ("Tomb of Horrors"), in particular, and

...Rappan Athuk comes to mind (how many giant albino cave scorpions?!?!).

is another, for certain.

The Players' style has an awful lot to do with it, of course. D3 ("Vault of the Drow") could be attempted by even a very low-level party if they are extremely patient and are willing to take things slow; conversely, even a very high level party is doomed to extinction should they attempt to tackle all the Drow Houses or Erelhei-Cinlu head on. I don't think killer dungeons are made so often as they happen--usually as a result of bull-headed Player tactics.

 

[Altalazar]

I think what is "killer" can depend on both Players and DMs - some DMs only throw things at PCs that they could theoretically deal with or defeat. Others let the players wander out into the world, and if it makes sense that an ancient blue dragon lives in a certain area and the party would find it, it matters little that the party is all 1st level and armed with pitchforks. In other words, they should know better than to wander off into the dangerous wilderness.