• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

The Awesome Endurance of D&D's First Modules

TerraDave

5ever, or until 2024
In a moment of temporary insanity inspired by this countdown and my 10 year old multi-poll survey of most popular adventures I made this table that shows all the adventure modules published by TSR up through 1983:

Great Early Adventures.jpg

(*Indicates that it was ranked as part of a compilation. Temple of Elemental Evil was included for having an earlier adventure in it, and being based on much older material).

The table shows the ranking on: Morrus’ countdown thread, my poll(s) and the best adventures as chosen by Dungeon magazine some time back. It confirms that many of the most popular/best adventures where published in this pretty short window of time. 12 of the 15 in the countdown thread, almost all the ones from the Dungeon article, and the top 16 from my polls, which made every effort to include later modules.

So, what accounts for this enduring popularity? Is it the advantage of going first? Common experience? Nostalgia? Gygax, Hickman, Moldvay and Cook? Missteps in later adventure design? Something else?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

So, what accounts for this enduring popularity? Is it the advantage of going first? Common experience? Nostalgia? Gygax, Hickman, Moldvay and Cook? Missteps in later adventure design? Something else?

Yes.

Basically, to make such a list you need to both be very good and familiar to a large number of people. An adventure published back in the day was one of fairly few, which means it was automatically familiar to lots of people, so only had to be very good. An adventure published today is one of thousands that are out there, so has a much harder struggle gaining the familiarity needed to get votes. (And virtually nothing not by WotC need even apply, except for some of the Dungeon adventures - notably the early parts of the three APs.)

But I do also think that WotC have actually produced very few adventures (for any edition) that would even qualify as 'good', never mind 'very good' or 'great'. There are some notable exceptions - "Sunless Citadel", "Red Hand of Doom", "Lost Mine of Phandelver", and I've heard really good things about "Madness at Gardmore Abbey", but they're few and far between. And, of course, such exceptions do tend to be the ones to make the list.

However, as for what the specific missteps were, or what should be done to correct them, I'm much less sure. I suspect "I6 Ravenloft" and the Dragonlance series marked one point where some wrong lessons were learned (despite Ravenloft, in particular, being an excellent adventure), and the introduction of the Delve Format was another point where things went wrong. But beyond that... I dunno.
 

One reason is that they took low hanging fruit. For a module like Tomb of Horrors, it took the low hanging fruit of 'Trap Filled Tomb', and it used it. So any similar module is now going to be seen as derivative, and if it uses any obvious ideas is going to find itself looking very close to the original. That isn't to say that Tomb of Horrors doesn't do some really ingenious things, but anything that has to compete with it has to be more creative, more original, and more elegant than the original while not relying on simple obvious tropes. In other words, it takes more skill to make a better Tomb of Horrors than it took to make the original.

Another reason is that Gygax, Hickman, Moldvay, Cook, and others really were good. Gygax is insanely creative in certain areas, and Hickman has 'big picture' sense of dungeon design that has never been equaled. So in edition to needing to top the bar to receive the same acclaim, the bar was set pretty high in the first place.

Additionally, we've gotten a lot pickier since then. We demand more from a module than we used to. We expect more from a game. The old modules are largely judged by the standards we held at the time. A new module with the same degree of craftsmanship would be held to a much harder standard.

Finally, in some cases I do think there is a nostalgia factor. IMO, most of Gygax's more popular works - 'Keep on the Borderlands' and 'Temple of Elemental Evil' for example - are deeply flawed, very primitive designs that I would expect any modern DM with decent ability to draw a map can equal. Aside from a few very Gygaxian touches where he really draws on his deep knowledge of pulp fantasy and emulates it, there isn't a lot to like about the module itself. Compare for example Gygax maps or even 'setting plots' to what Judges Guild was doing in the same period. What they are however judged by is less what Gygax provided, than what the GM's that ran them improvised and made from them, as seen through our eyes 30 years ago when the whole idea of an RPG was novel and amazing. Yes, you can turn 'Keep on the Borderlands' into a really great mini-campaign. But it requires developing tons of stuff on your own that is at best implied by the text. As a 10 year old DM, I wasn't up to the task. As a 17 year old DM much more used to inventing vast swaths of setting, I did a lot better - though looking back it was still fairly primitive what I did. But the module is really primitive, doesn't really teach you how to go beyond it, and outside of its context I'm sure would not be rated as a great module. By the time I was 12, I was creating things roughly of the same quality as B2 (once I'd learned the value of asymmetry instead of intuitively drawing buildings that were laid out logically like real world ones, with rooms of similar size lining corridors).

All that being said, I1-I6, S1, N1, U1, T1, UK1, and L1-L2 is an amazing set of modules coming out in a very short period and rarely do I see designers even coming close to those in terms of good design. Almost everything with a '1' on it during that period is amazing. And seriously, has there ever been remotely a run of quality by any publisher like I1 through I6?
 

A lot of the old adventures defined the genre - they didn't go by the playbook, they invented it. The Tomb of Horrors invented the "trap-filled dungeon." The Temple of Elemental Evil invented the "megadungeon." They may not actually be all that great in retrospect, but they are what all others are measured by because they were first.
 

I agree that there is an advantage to being the first to plant a flag in a particular area, which increased exposure and tended to overshadow later, related work.

However, having played some of these in later years and editions (or some close versions of them), they do tend to stand out for strong themes, impressive details, and being open to players, or the DM for that matter, going in different directions.

Some of this has to be the creators, especially but not just Gygax. My guess is that it is also time and thought. We know, for example, S1, was an early tournament module, was used in Gygax's home game, and was around for a few years before publication. Clearly it gave time to refine in an ever nastier and more creative piece of work. Hickman's early work has similar histories and for Moldvay, some of that has to be coming from his own games...or he just had a very fertile mind.

It probably goes without saying that many latter modules have lacked that time and thought.
 

We know, for example, S1, was an early tournament module, was used in Gygax's home game, and was around for a few years before publication. Clearly it gave time to refine in an ever nastier and more creative piece of work. Hickman's early work has similar histories and for Moldvay, some of that has to be coming from his own games...or he just had a very fertile mind.

It probably goes without saying that many latter modules have lacked that time and thought.

That's an interesting point and probably has some merit, though I'm skeptical that that plays a big role because further attempts at refinement have usually failed. For me, adventures like 'Return to the Tomb of Horrors' and 'Expedition to Castle Ravenloft' show that even with a lot of time to reflect, and even with some very talented designers, it's not easy to improve on the originals. Indeed, I'd argue in many cases they show evidence of failing to understand why the original is so good or how to replicate it - a problem I think is more pervasive in the industry than even time crunches and deadlines.

S1 is one of my favorite modules, and I'm very familiar with the text and also with the genera it spawned. There have been many attempts to capture the essentials of S1 and improve on it, but mostly they have failed pretty badly - though Mud Sorcerer's Tomb did come really close and seemed to understand S1 the best. I think it is possible to improve on S1, so I don't actually believe that we've reached the height of the RPG module as art, but it remains to some future designer to initiate that new renaissance.

One of the reasons its hard to improve on S1 is that Gygax really throws the kitchen sink into the module, challenging the player with just about every obvious sort of trap. Gygax loves the kitchen sink approach, and it fails for him elsewhere, but it really paid off here. Unfortunately, that means that he's left very little for anyone else to work with. All the low hanging fruit is in Tomb of Horrors. Mud Sorcerer's Tomb (and in less of an obvious knockoff, The Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan, again proving how good the '1's were in AD&D) hit upon one big area that Gygax overlooked - fluids. But I'm not convinced that Gygax didn't avoid fluids on purpose because he realized how hard situations with fluids are to adjudicate and how poorly the AD&D rules set copes with them. Further, while MST does really capture the fair but lethal aspect of ToH in a way that things like RttToH don't, S1 continues to excel it in that ToH remains the only module I can think of that usually wipes out whole parties of 9th and 10th level characters while at the same time mere 1st level characters could reasonably loot the Tomb successfully through careful play. In fact, the only horrendously unfair encounter of the module at all IMO is the demilich himself, and this mainly because their is no real way a player could be expected to know the abilities and weaknesses of the demilich without recourse to OOC knowledge. Assuming you've snuck a peek at the MM2, a party of quite low 1e explorers with the right equipment could beat the module without loss of life. Thus to me, S1 is an unparalleled test of player skill compared to character skill precisely because it lacks the unavoidable combat and active foes you'd normally expect of a module - especially a Gygaxian module. It's easy to imagine how easily S1 humbled his best players. It was radically and I think consciously like nothing they'd seen before. But it is also in some key ways like nothing since.

Decried as an unfair meat grinder, what actually strikes me about the text is how little effort it is putting into actually killing the characters. If Gygax just wanted to show that he could exercise his fiat as a DM and kill PC's, that would have been a lot easier than what he actually did. It would have been easy to have the mists and devil's mouths and various other features of the tomb leap out and grab anything coming close to them, resulting in a far more lethal module. Instead, it leaves everything fairly passive and then requires you to manipulate them without getting yourself killed. And even then, it isn't as horribly unfair as it could be. The solutions are far from obvious and sometimes counterintuitive, but its usually more than obvious what you shouldn't do even to a novice player. And yet, players eventually get frustrated and do it anyway. Thus, the usual experience of play is, "a) Observe you shouldn't do something, whether enter the mists, pull a lever, or touch something glowy, b) Get stuck, c) Do what you've already know you shouldn't do. d) Die horribly knowing that you just did something extremely boneheaded." Some players get mentally stuck at that, but I found it refreshing compared to dying because the DM rolled high or because you rolled low. One of the biggest flaws with RttToH, which isn't a bad module in its own right, is that it doesn't really get that, thinking instead that having things jump out and grab you improves the design when actually it only improves the lethality.

Or compare with the really terrible 'Grimtooth's Traps' that ToH seems to have inspired along with the mentality that goes with it. Instead of making it obvious what you shouldn't do, the Grimtooth works are all about making doing the obvious thing look entirely innocuous and then gleefully punishing the player for doing it. They seem to forget that any reasonable clever DM can always kill the PCs.

Gygax also manages to do something that would seem to be impossible - build a relationship between the antagonist and the protagonists when the antagonists is a pile of dust lying somewhere. Acererak becomes a reoccurring NPC in the module, always standing beside your shoulder and taunting you. By the time it is over, you know Acererak better than almost any other antagonist in any module - even though you may never encounter him. There are a ton of modern adventure writers that could learn from that. Even the best single module of modern times - Mona's 'Whispering Cairn' - has as one of its few flaws that the final fight is with a pair of nameless mooks that have played zero role in the story to this point. *yawn* (I kid, because the module is awesome, and I've stolen liberally from it.)
 
Last edited:

So, what accounts for this enduring popularity? Is it the advantage of going first? Common experience? Nostalgia? Gygax, Hickman, Moldvay and Cook? Missteps in later adventure design? Something else?

All of the above, as everyone else has already said.

delericho said:
However, as for what the specific missteps were, or what should be done to correct them, I'm much less sure. I suspect "I6 Ravenloft" and the Dragonlance series marked one point where some wrong lessons were learned...

They did learn from what had gone before but, in my opinion, they also introduced entirely new mistakes or missteps. For instance, I always associate the term 'railroad' in the context of RPG adventures with Dragonlance. Maybe that's unfair but DL and I parted company after the first module. And when Ravenloft appeared it was as as uncomfortably incongruous to me and some of my peers as Eberron was to some players when it appeared.

I also agree that module writers have it much harder now than thirty years ago. I wonder if some of the popularity of the adventure path format is down to an attempt, if not a necessarily self-conscious one, by designers, to ask or hope that people will accept that a certain quantity of good quality adventure design is equivalent to a historically smaller quantity of what thirty years ago was considered fresh and novel in a way that is now impossible to recapture.
 

Assuming you've snuck a peek at the MM2, a party of quite low 1e explorers with the right equipment could beat the module without loss of life.

The first generation of S1 players couldn't even do that. There was no MM2. I point this out not for reasons of pettifoggery but because I think it backs up your argument about the module's design in general.
 
Last edited:

The first generation of S1 players couldn't even do that. There was no MM2. I point this out not for reasons of pettifoggery but because I think it backs up your argument about the module's design in general.

I know.

The shorter version of that essay is that I think that the inability to discover clues how to defeat Acererak (and the lack of resources in the tomb to do so) makes sense in the context of a 'realistic' Acererak (who presumably doesn't want to ever die, else, he wouldn't become a lich) and might even make sense in terms of Gygax's metagoal of humbling players or winnowing down many parties in a tourney, but doesn't make sense in the context of a normal RPG adventure. The lack of clues on how to win the final encounter is I think the modules one major flaw. Boastful as Acererak is, it wouldn't be hard to include in the dungeon - scattered about the encounter levels - clues as to how to defeat him, as well as the resources needed to reasonably have a chance. Note that by comparison, the resources to get through the dungeon - magic rings, etc. - can be found in the dungeon.
 

I also agree that module writers have it much harder now than thirty years ago. I wonder if some of the popularity of the adventure path format is down to an attempt, if not a necessarily self-conscious one, by designers, to ask or hope that people will accept that a certain quantity of good quality adventure design is equivalent to a historically smaller quantity of what thirty years ago was considered fresh and novel in a way that is now impossible to recapture.

My biggest problem with the current AP structure is the arbitrariness of telling a coherent story between level and level 20. That to me is a CRPGism that is not needed and inappropriate in a PnP RPG, and it often crushes the quality of an AP as a whole by forcing the architect to insert a lot of unnecessary filler to ensure everyone is leveling up. It also tends to limit the sort of material in the AP or the sort of stories it addresses, and tends to make it hard to adapt to some other story.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top