Scourge of the Howling Horde and Dragondown Grotto

[Elder-Basilisk]

I'm looking to get a group together to play either Scourge of the Howling Horde, Dragondown Grotto, or both. What I need to know before I start scheduling them, however, is about how long it takes to play them.

Has anyone here run or played them?

If so, how long did they take you? And were there any characteristics of your groups that you can give that, without spoilers will let me know if your experience was somehow atypical (for instance, your group is very time-efficient or very inefficient, or somehow just happened to have the perfect party for a mod).

Thanks

 

[delericho]

I'm looking to get a group together to play either Scourge of the Howling Horde, Dragondown Grotto, or both. What I need to know before I start scheduling them, however, is about how long it takes to play them.

If you don't already own "Scourge of the Howling Horde" I strongly advise you to give it a miss. It is really badly done.

 

[GreatLemur]

If you don't already own "Scourge of the Howling Horde" I strongly advise you to give it a miss. It is really badly done.

Aw, really? Is that a product of its much-advertised newb-friendly format, or was it badly written or edited, or what? I was considering trying that as an introduction to D&D 3.x for some friends of mine.

 

[bento]

I have Dragondown Grotto and thought it was somewhat weak. The party is sent out by the evil wizard (in disguise) to fetch some dragon eggs held in a Materity Ward protected by a dragonkin kobold. There's also a fight with a dracolich. Very much a 9th-11th level adventure.

Wouldn't there be a gap between these two adventures? I thought the other was for a much lower level party.

 

[Jdvn1]

SotHH is for 1st level players. I'm running it now with some very inexperienced players, and they're having a blast.

With an intro, it's taken us four sessions so far. I expected us to finish by the fourth session, but the party decided to go in the wrong direction. So, maybe five or six sessions.

We also have a very inefficient (but really fun) party and very short sessions (~2-2.5 hours/session). Better players with longer sessions might get through it in two or three sessions.

 

[delericho]

Aw, really? Is that a product of its much-advertised newb-friendly format, or was it badly written or edited, or what? I was considering trying that as an introduction to D&D 3.x for some friends of mine.

It's not the newbie-format that's at fault, although the faults are mostly in the format, if you take my meaning.

The first and most obvious problem is that the page backgrounds were obviously designed for colour print, but the module is in greyscale, which makes large parts of it almost illegible. (The exact same background is used, in colour, in "Shattered Gates of Slaughtergarde", and works very well BTW.)

Of the stat-blocks in the module, only one is accurate. Only one, and that despite a great many of the creatures being taken directly from the Monster Manual.

The stat blocks also have nice neat rows of boxes for creature hit points, which is good... except that they've matched those by omitting the number of hit dice of the creatures entirely. Why does that matter, I hear you ask? Ask me again, the first time the Wizard casts his sleep spell.

IIRC, the plot of the adventure struck me as rather uninspired (not really a fault in a beginner's module, to be fair), and the structure as overly linear (which I think is more of an issue, even for newbies).

There may also have been more, but I try not to think overmuch about the products I don't like - I prefer to focus on the many excellent products Wizards do produce. (It's also possible that my opinion of this product was further soured by being at a revised higher price point. I don't mind paying the money... but when the first more expensive product is also very poor, that's a bitter pill to swallow.)

 

[GreatLemur]

Ah, thanks. Yeah, I'd heard about the backgrounds, and the plot sounded conspiculously bland to me, but that's the only problem I was aware of. Those stat block issues sound pretty damning.

 

[Jdvn1]

IThe first and most obvious problem is that the page backgrounds were obviously designed for colour print, but the module is in greyscale, which makes large parts of it almost illegible. (The exact same background is used, in colour, in "Shattered Gates of Slaughtergarde", and works very well BTW.)

I don't think the background was designed for color print. In all of WotC's more recent adventures, Encounter pages have a different (and more busy) background than other pages. Therefore, you can extrapolate that the page backgrounds are just designed to differentiate the Encounter pages.

Also, I have had no problems reading anything, but since I read through everything beforehand, I know what's going on in almost every room and don't need to read much in-game.

Of the stat-blocks in the module, only one is accurate. Only one, and that despite a great many of the creatures being taken directly from the Monster Manual.

I don't know the creatures well enough to be able to spot mistakes on sight. Could you give a few examples of errors?

The stat blocks also have nice neat rows of boxes for creature hit points, which is good... except that they've matched those by omitting the number of hit dice of the creatures entirely. Why does that matter, I hear you ask? Ask me again, the first time the Wizard casts his sleep spell.

This is annoying, even though no one in my party has a sleep spell. I'm just used to seeing it there. I figured it was because of the newbie-format. All the creatures have page numbers listed, so looking up information hasn't been a problem, though.

IIRC, the plot of the adventure struck me as rather uninspired (not really a fault in a beginner's module, to be fair), and the structure as overly linear (which I think is more of an issue, even for newbies).

There may also have been more, but I try not to think overmuch about the products I don't like - I prefer to focus on the many excellent products Wizards do produce. (It's also possible that my opinion of this product was further soured by being at a revised higher price point. I don't mind paying the money... but when the first more expensive product is also very poor, that's a bitter pill to swallow.)

Like I said earlier, my players are having fun. This is probably because they get along well and joke around a lot, and try to come up with creative uses of their abilities, and not a function of the quality of the module, which reinforces my idea that the fun part of D&D is the social aspect. The game is merely a vehicle of that. So what if it's linear? I've been able to improvise a few differences, and the party is going about the module in a very odd way, so it hasn't felt very linear.

And, I got a discount on the module. Lots of major bookstores carry modules and offer coupons (though, since I work at one, I get a discount on everything).

 

[delericho]

I don't think the background was designed for color print. In all of WotC's more recent adventures, Encounter pages have a different (and more busy) background than other pages. Therefore, you can extrapolate that the page backgrounds are just designed to differentiate the Encounter pages.

As I mentioned in my previous post, "Shattered Gates of Slaughtergarde" uses exactly the same page backgrounds, but is in colour. What is a light brown in SGoS becomes a very dark grey in SotHH. It works really well in the former; I found it difficult to read in the latter.

I don't know the creatures well enough to be able to spot mistakes on sight. Could you give a few examples of errors?

John Cooper did a review, which can be found on this site. He did an analysis of the sixteen stat blocks, and found errors in fifteen of them. To be fair, most of these were the odd skill point here and there, and not something that's likely to affect play at all, but it's still pretty bad IMO, especially in a product designed for newbie DMs, who might be curious enough to take apart the stat blocks to see how they work, only to become confused when the numbers don't add up.

(Normally, with the stat block errors, I'm in the camp that says Wizards should be working to do better, but otherwise understand that these things are largely inevitable. It's only the intended use of this product that leads me to hold it to a higher standard.)

Like I said earlier, my players are having fun. This is probably because they get along well and joke around a lot, and try to come up with creative uses of their abilities, and not a function of the quality of the module, which reinforces my idea that the fun part of D&D is the social aspect.

You make a very good point. Ultimately, if everyone who buys the adventure runs through it and has a blast, it's a good module, regardless of its 'objective' quality.

 

[Jdvn1]

As I mentioned in my previous post, "Shattered Gates of Slaughtergarde" uses exactly the same page backgrounds, but is in colour. What is a light brown in SGoS becomes a very dark grey in SotHH. It works really well in the former; I found it difficult to read in the latter.

It does work better in color, but I'm just saying that the background isn't designed for color.

John Cooper did a review, which can be found on this site. He did an analysis of the sixteen stat blocks, and found errors in fifteen of them. To be fair, most of these were the odd skill point here and there, and not something that's likely to affect play at all, but it's still pretty bad IMO, especially in a product designed for newbie DMs, who might be curious enough to take apart the stat blocks to see how they work, only to become confused when the numbers don't add up.

(Normally, with the stat block errors, I'm in the camp that says Wizards should be working to do better, but otherwise understand that these things are largely inevitable. It's only the intended use of this product that leads me to hold it to a higher standard.)

I found said review after I made my last post on this thread (just forgot to check back here). I suppose if someone tried to take the stat blocks apart, they'd be confused, but I don't think one point here or there on never-used skills is a deal-breaker. I mean, ride? There isn't a mount anywhere in here, and 1st level characters usually can't afford mounts anyway, if the goblins wanted to steal some.

I'd prefer perfect stat blocks too, but most of these errors are insignificant.

You make a very good point. Ultimately, if everyone who buys the adventure runs through it and has a blast, it's a good module, regardless of its 'objective' quality.

It also probably helps my players are newbies anyway.

Though, both I and my players have found flexibility in the module, which doesn't make if feel so linear. I think instead of giving options, this module leaves holes. If you're not looking for variations on it, you're not distracted. If you need something different, there are opportunities.

I plan on connecting it to a Green Ronin product, actually. It'll probably spread out from there. I'm pretty excited.