D&D 5E Mud Sorcerer's Tomb - Crappy adventure? Or CrappiEST adventure?

[Mort]

As to the Mud Sorcerer's Tomb:

For the right group - very old school and there to loot, disarm traps and not mind random death (well the old version, the 5e version is a bit less lethal) it can be quite fun.

I find the biggest problem, for me. is that much of the richness of the module (the backstory, the infighting etc.) is gated so only the DM is likely to see it. Too many DMs don't impart this kind of information to the players (and the module doesn't really make it easy to do so) and as such they're going to miss out on the best parts. I can certainly see how DMs and those that just read the module could find it very enjoyable while players are mostly just "yuck, endless corridors with endless traps and no reason for any of it!"

 

[Shiroiken]

1. WG7 Castle Greyhawk. Not only is this a terrible, terrible "module," it is the worst example of bait-and-switch ever. Imagine seeing an adventure that people had been waiting for .... for 20 years, and finding out that it was a mean-spirited "parody" that wasn't much of an adventure.

This wasn't really a "bad" adventure so much as a "^#%& you" to Gygax and Greyhawk fans (Gargoyles was also part of this). The concept of the adventure isn't terrible, as a comical pop culture parody, which might appeal to some casual players. Of course it loses a lot over time, as the references become more and more dated.

2. Terrible Trouble at Tragidore. This is the Detroit Lions of the terrible adventures- an adventure that is both so terrible, and so forgotten, that people forget how terrible it was when ranking terrible adventures. It starts by taking your characters and getting rid of all of your stuff ... and goes downhill from there.

This is probably the only adventure that I've owned and never run. I don't even remember anything about it.

 

[Blue]

I always here, or maybe read, that the Mud Sorcerer's Tomb is a good adventure. Or maybe "classic". Is it just this version? I did see it waiting to be downloaded with the latest stuff, but since I don't have a group playing it, didn't bother.

The classic AD&D 2nd edition Mud Sorcerer's Tomb from Dungeon magazine was a great deathtrap dungeon, designed in some ways to trip up players who were familiar with deathtrap dungeons like the original Tomb of Annihilation. Remember having a lot of fun with it back in the day, and a lot of magical loot as well.

But AD&D 2nd had a different take on mortality and on dungeon-crawls then modern play. Plus I have no idea how the D&D Next update was, though I do remember that some official but early 5e adventures suffered from the rules being incomplete/in flux when they were written and I would have to picture that would go at least double for anything during the actual playtest.

EDIT: Oops, replied to a necro-comment. But I was agreeing with them, not starting a debate, so it's not all bad.

 

[Blue]

As to the Mud Sorcerer's Tomb:

For the right group - very old school and there to loot, disarm traps and not mind random death (well the old version, the 5e version is a bit less lethal) it can be quite fun.

I find the biggest problem, for me. is that much of the richness of the module (the backstory, the infighting etc.) is gated so only the DM is likely to see it. Too many DMs don't impart this kind of information to the players (and the module doesn't really make it easy to do so) and as such they're going to miss out on the best parts. I can certainly see how DMs and those that just read the module could find it very enjoyable while players are mostly just "yuck, endless corridors with endless traps and no reason for any of it!"

I had not realized the information was gated. Then our DM originally ran it we got that, but it was decades ago and I don't know how. Enough that we later had an ongoing arc about other Mud Sorcerer tombs he wrote that continued the lore.

 

[SkidAce]

A review of the original Mud Sorcerer's Tomb, which I love, adore, and use the lore in a major section of my campaign. (Dungeon #37?)

If you are speaking of other adventures that don't exist (much like any mythical movie following Highlander) then I cannot comment on their quality.

[TENFOOTPOSR 2] Dungeon Magazine #37; Mud Sorceror’s Tomb

“You tell me: ‘Life is hard to bear.’ But if it were otherwise why should you have your pride in the morning and your resignation in the evening? Life is hard to bear: but do not preten…

princeofnothingblogs.wordpress.com

 

[SkidAce]

The 3.5 and 5e versions of MST both did a poorer job of presenting the lore and backstory IMO. I used them for the mechanics but Dragon #37 for the adventure text. Dunno if that helps anything. I and everyone Ive played it with think it's awesome.

Quoted for truth.

 

[Ancalagon]

what's forest Oracle?

strangely enough, this hilariously bad adventure gave rise to one of the best threads on the forum

TSR - Example from the worst TSR adventure module(s) ever published

I was looking through some of my old D&D modules last night, and I came across The Forest Oracle, what I think is the worst TSR module ever published. It is so bad you have to read it to beleive it. So, just for the fun of seeing your reaction to it, here is one "encounter area" of the module...

www.enworld.org

 

[Fizban Kainenminster]

If you were around for the original Tomb of Horrors back in the AD&D games and loved the classics, you loved Mud Sorcerer. Mike Shel in general is one of my favorite current module writers. His chapter in the Shattered Star adventure path (book 3) for Pathfinder is great, and his standalone module "The Dragon's Demand" is incredible.

Mud Sorcerer was simply a spiritual sequel to Tomb of Horrors. I don't see the younger generation understanding the allure of these tpk dungeons as some of us grognards do.