Honestly there are so many ways to handle (and slightly differentiate) iconic scenes from previously published material so that you are not actually copying anything, why would a publisher risk cleaving too closely to previously published material at all, and risk possible legal action against them for doing so? I would never, as a publisher, attempt to replicate a previously iconic adventure and try to rely on Fair Use to keep me out of trouble. Why not deviate slightly more, so your adventure can emulate the flavor of a previously published product, while at the same time being different enough to consider your product an original, and not some close copy. Why risk copyright infringement, when it's so very much easy to be different enough not to be confused with anything previously created? Why risk it? Why ever put yourself in a risky position as a publisher ever - it doesn't need to be done.
From Greek Myth (so no copyright): Teeth that turn into skeletons. Have some low level wizard throw them to cover his escape.
Classic!Or a battle on a scree slope that starts sliding down to a cliff edge, then all of a sudden creatures start popping out at attacking both parties.
Can I get an expert opinion? The sample adventure is all written up, with nothing that won't survive a de minimis argument. But the rules module...
I want the sample rules module to make the game very similar to Gauntlet. So I need to include things like valkyries, Death, generators, etc. to give the proper feel. Does an arcade game intellectual property, especially one with a generic name like Gauntlet, have a claim to make against an RPG? Especially one not produced by Hasbro?

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.