More on Killer Dungeons

[Sir Whiskers]

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

By revision, do you mean a conversion to 3E? I've noticed that several modules cannot keep the same levels when converted, the most glaring examples being the Against the Giants modules. Giants have been significantly upgraded in 3E, and a normal party of the original levels would have to be played perfectly to survive, much less succeed.

Concerning modules in general, two quick points:
1) I've found that 3E modules and adventures tend to be "off" more often than the older ones. I suspect this is because the newer modules do not go through anywhere near the same playtesting as the older ones.
2) I agree with others concerning player competence. My own experience mirrors Grodog's comment, where my first couple gaming groups (all wargamers) used excellent battle tactics vs. my 3E groups, who rarely act as a cohesive unit. Partly this is due to unfamiliarity with the new rules, but it's also telling that my 3E groups have included a total of one wargamer: me.

 

[Treebore]

2 modules that no one should survive is the old Lich Lords (I don't remember the full title) and the last module of the Bloodstone series. Egg of the Phoenix shouldn't be surviveable either, unless you upped the PC levels a good bit, like by 4 to 6.

Haven't ran RA but I own and have read them. I don't think anyone will live through it without a lot of "kindness" from the DM. But Bill and Clark have hinted that DM kindness is often necessary in 1e feel games. I do remember having to do that a lot. My objective was to have them convinced they were all going to die, not necessarily have it happen. I would let it happen too, just not as often as it "should" have.

Tomb of Abysthor would be tough, but probably surviveable, as long as they don't make tactical errors at the worst time. This includes making alliances at the right times to the right NPC.

Labyrinth of Madness was so ugly I didn't even bother to run it. Meaning, why bother running a module when you know the outcome is going to be death, death, and more death? Plus, to make it surviveable meant gutting the module so badly you couldn't call it by the same name. The best way to beat that module was to not even go there. For the player AND the DM.

Tomb of Horrors. Biggest lesson in taught me is how kick butt my character was even after appearing out of a teleportation with no magic items. Magic? I don't need no stinking magic!

Expedition to Barrier Peaks and Ravenloft had high body counts, but no TPK's. Of course in Ravenloft that was because they ran and hid. Strahd would have killed them, eventually. The only group to beat Strahd is the one I allowed to do it at 12th level. Only two survived. But they were eventually able to bring everyone else back to life.

 

[Endur]

Some adventures were designed to be adventures in which all of the characters would probably survive.

Some adventures were designed to be challenging and would have almost certainly some enounters that would spell death for someone.

Some adventures were designed to be so lethal that probably every character would die, some multiple times.

Tomb of Horrors is a good example of a module designed to kill everyone. Lots of save or die, or even, you do this and you automatically die magical effects.

Many 1e dungeons had this aspect, of you are the wrong person in the wrong place and you die, no saving throw.