So, what is "4th Edition's Tomb of Horrors"?

[the Jester]

Wait.

From what I understand, Tomb of Horrors was basically 'Pick right or Left. You picked left? You die. You picked right? Okay. Pick right or left. You picked right? You die. You picked Left? Okay, on to the next coin flip..."

Simply put the deathtraps were rather instantaneous. Doesn't seem to be in line with 4e's philosophy, given they nixed the save or dies.

I disagree with this. A smart, canny party could make it through. I ran RttToH, no holds barred, and my pcs came through with, amazingly, flying colors.

For the record, one of the big keys to their success was the diviner cohort of one of the pcs (this was in 3.5). My conversion of it took them from the high teens to the low 20s- it was the start of the epic part of my 3.5 campaign. (RttToH starts here in my story hour, if you're interested.

 

[kaomera]

Since we're engaging in the thought-experiment of deciding what the Tomb of Horrors should be in 4E, the most obvious question is how we should "open it up" to players, if we should at all. In the time since the original, Acererak has becoming something of an icon in D&D, and given that WotC plans on stretching this adventure out for twelve levels, they obviously think there's a lot of room to develop this guy, his machinations, and his dungeon.

I think that first of all, the threat of Acererak will most likely be expanded into a kind of adventure-path, with the actual dungeon only reached at the very conclusion. S1 started at the dungeon entrance because it was a tournament module (and most likely due to space constraints as well), but it was made clear (as with several other modules, White Plume Mountain in particular sticks in my head) that locating and reaching the tomb's location was no easy task. I'm hoping that when the PCs arrive there will be more incentive to actually deal with the place, in the AD&D module there was no real expectation by any but the most foolhardy and overconfident players that this was going to be an overall profitable trip, and aside from "He's powerful and EVIL" there wasn't much immediate incentive to destroy the demi-lich. (In fact I know of at least three separate parties where one or more PCs worked to convince the characters bent on destroying Acererak, mostly Paladins and/or LG clerics, to skip it - twice by uncovering "evidence" that he was gone for good, and once by encouraging a lesser BBEG to attack...)

ETA: I agree with Jester. The deadliness of the Tomb of Horrors is part self-perpetuating myth. The stories that have grown up around the Tomb encourage DMs to run it as deadly as possible, but played straight even the AD&D version was survivable if you didn't just charge in or get bored and pick fights or start messing with stuff you didn't need to. At least in my opinion / experience.

 

[Doodles]

4e basically nullifies any interest one could have in running Tomb of Horrors.

The module is antithetic to the rules' set core design tenets. Anyone saying otherwise either hasn't played the real thing or is just completely deluded into somehow thinking that ToH was designed for special snowflakes, which it wasn't.

 

[jdrakeh]

4e basically nullifies any interest one could have in running Tomb of Horrors.

The module is antithetic to the rules' set core design tenets. Anyone saying otherwise either hasn't played the real thing or is just completely deluded into somehow thinking that ToH was designed for special snowflakes, which it wasn't.

I've played the original Tomb of Horrors and think it could be done in 4e. Having said that, the end result would be different in terms of actual play, instead embodying the design philosophy of D&D 4e. Just as Return to the Tomb of Horrors was vastly different than the original, embodying the design philosophy of AD&D 2e.

I envision a D&D 4e Tomb of Horrors as lacking binary "save or die" death traps, those features being replaced by the skill challenges and tactical combats of the current D&D edition. I further expect a D&D 4e version of the Tomb of Horrors would have a detailed back story and heavy story elements, both of which were lacking in the original (but that were introduced in Return to the Tomb of Horrors).

Such a module wouldn't be the same kind of module that the original was by any means. That's not exactly a bad thing, though — throwing together a bunch of one-dimensional death traps is pretty low brow dungeon design by today's standards. Anybody can do this, as hundreds of fan-created modules prove. Even if somebody published a carbon copy re-creation of the Tomb of Horrors, I'm not convinced that it would sell very well today, for this reason.

 

[Mortellan]

I've played the original Tomb of Horrors and think it could be done in 4e. Having said that, the end result would be different in terms of actual play, instead embodying the design philosophy of D&D 4e. Just as Return to the Tomb of Horrors was vastly different than the original, embodying the design philosophy of AD&D 2e.

I envision a D&D 4e Tomb of Horrors as lacking binary "save or die" death traps, those features being replaced by the skill challenges and tactical combats of the current D&D edition. I further expect a D&D 4e version of the Tomb of Horrors would have a detailed back story and heavy story elements, both of which were lacking in the original (but that were introduced in Return to the Tomb of Horrors).

Such a module wouldn't be the same kind of module that the original was by any means. That's not exactly a bad thing, though — throwing together a bunch of one-dimensional death traps is pretty low brow dungeon design by today's standards. Anybody can do this, as hundreds of fan-created modules prove. Even if somebody published a carbon copy re-creation of the Tomb of Horrors, I'm not convinced that it would sell very well today, for this reason.

You're probably right about that except for the fact the title Tomb of Horrors is now and forever gold. This mod to me is a catch 22. Wizards wants to capture the feel of the original ToH but can't due to their 'design philosophy' and WotC has to slap the name Tomb of Horrors on it since the same 12 level mega dungeon in writing wouldn't generate a buzz or sell as well if its named the 'Crypt of Terror' for instance.

 

[jdrakeh]

Wizards wants to capture the feel of the original ToH but can't due to their 'design philosophy' and WotC has to slap the name Tomb of Horrors on it since the same 12 level mega dungeon in writing wouldn't generate a buzz or sell as well if its named the 'Crypt of Terror' for instance.

Maybe. This would make the new module no different than Return to the Tomb of Horrors in that respect, though.

 

[LostSoul]

The module is antithetic to the rules' set core design tenets. Anyone saying otherwise either hasn't played the real thing or is just completely deluded into somehow thinking that ToH was designed for special snowflakes, which it wasn't.

There's no reason why you can't have a trap that says, "+19 vs. Will; dead" or "This is a sphere of annihilation. Anyone who touches (no attack roll needed) it is utterly destroyed and can't be raised."

The rules don't prevent it; it's the DM advice and culture around 4E that would be the biggest hurdle.

I for one hope they leave the deathtraps intact.

 

[TrainedMunkee]

Ahh Fond Memories

I made it through Tomb a couple of times, but we used the infamous pig on a stick and had to go back to town every time the pig died. I don't know why we didn't buy multiple pigs? We also bought a cart to haul all our booty.

I would much rather see White Plume Mountain, Barrier Peaks, or Land Beyond the Magic Mirror. These modules were all very creative and pushed the genre. Don't have the time to convert them myself, but they would make my DnDi subscription worth the money if they were released there. So far it hasn't been worth the cash.

Most modules were run at cons originally, so were very deadly, but Gygax is infamous for save or die. D&D is based on wargames.

 

[Jack99]

There's no reason why you can't have a trap that says, "+19 vs. Will; dead" or "This is a sphere of annihilation. Anyone who touches (no attack roll needed) it is utterly destroyed and can't be raised."

The rules don't prevent it; it's the DM advice and culture around 4E that would be the biggest hurdle.

I for one hope they leave the deathtraps intact.

Sphere is already in the DMG; so they might need it to call it something else. Am not sure I want a return to death saves, but perhaps something along a good deal of intial damage and perhaps ongoing necrotic enough to kill people in a round or two would do the trick.

 

[doctorhook]

Sphere is already in the DMG; so they might need it to call it something else. Am not sure I want a return to death saves, but perhaps something along a good deal of intial damage and perhaps ongoing necrotic enough to kill people in a round or two would do the trick.

In 4E, there's hardly any damage effect more terrifying than losing a Healing Surge, or losing HP equal to a Surge.