I'm aware of the hack and slash might hate it but I've asked them if they where interested and did warn them it was combat light and more thinking. They told me they where for it I think having something little different can be interesting and me adding some more combat for those that do want it should help.
To be honest, I would NOT put in more combat. It's not like TOH is an entire adventure path, so it's not going to be more than a few days (or, in 1e terms, a few minutes .... SHOULD HAVE CHOSEN THE OTHER TUNNEL!).
The entire point of the module is that it is different. That it is all puzzles and traps. @Stormonu addressed this, and I will concur; if you want to up the difficulty, then make the puzzles and traps more "save or die" type. Adding more combats would take away from the experience. IMO.
If you are looking for tips, try purchasing the original pdf version and compare!
Depends on what you want out of it. This is not an adventure for hack n' slash. The preface from the original module said it's a "thinking man's dungeon."
It was an anti-hack 'n slash adventure, Gary's answer to players who thought they'd collected enough magical items and tricks of the trade to plow through anything DMs could shove at them. I've run this in AD&D, 3.5, and 5E, and I don't use conversions. I run it from the original module, which takes very little work. Some things to consider:
Fights are irrelevant. They were supposed to be. You can rest as much as you want, making fights pointless. In the original module, there's only 1 true combat in the entire dungeon (gargoyle). Everything else is avoidable or actually a puzzle/trap. Yes, the original boss is actually a puzzle if you read closely. You can only beat this puzzle by doing X, Y, or Z. A great irony is (spoiler for anyone who wishes to play it):
you don't have to fight the boss. It's so built into us that there's a final boss level to fight that players likely would never consider they could simply ignore the hostiles, grab the loot and leave.
Traps were originally solved by cleverness. Poles, patterns, and quick thinking. Originally, you could think your way through the traps. You didn't get a "Perception" roll set on autopilot. You had to tell the DM exactly what you're doing, and it was all being done originally on a time limit (tournament play). If players know this coming in advance, that they're going to have to puzzle their way through it, it will raise the stakes. And, it puts life and death of the character solely in the decisions of the players. Many of the original traps were "make the right choice or be screwed."
It used to be a badge of pride: I survived. The easier you make the dungeon, the more the legacy of the Tomb is diminished. It can be a meatgrinder, but it's a unique one in that a party of 20th level characters might fail, but a party of 3rd level characters, in theory, could puzzle their way through and succeed. Your combat prowess is supposed to be largely irrelevant. Hence, the "thinking" part.
To be honest, I would NOT put in more combat. It's not like TOH is an entire adventure path, so it's not going to be more than a few days (or, in 1e terms, a few minutes .... SHOULD HAVE CHOSEN THE OTHER TUNNEL!).
The entire point of the module is that it is different. That it is all puzzles and traps. @Stormonu addressed this, and I will concur; if you want to up the difficulty, then make the puzzles and traps more "save or die" type. Adding more combats would take away from the experience. IMO.
If you are looking for tips, try purchasing the original pdf version and compare!
I have purchase the original (green book) pdf and the print on demand. I do agree the art is great. Hmm maybe I should have posted that I want to run TOH but with a different spin? My intention is to run something fun with TOH part not trying to run as is if that makes sense? I will talk to my group and see if they want OG or a spin on it. Really comes down to that really. The encounters arent supper deadly just some spice but yes might look into puzzles that involve combat like @Stormonu suggested
Most of my players are newer like me and i dont think really care about the presidge of it. If I keep in the spirit of it does that really detract from the idea of it? Maybe later on i can run it again as is?
Depends on what you want out of it. This is not an adventure for hack n' slash. The preface from the original module said it's a "thinking man's dungeon."
It was an anti-hack 'n slash adventure, Gary's answer to players who thought they'd collected enough magical items and tricks of the trade to plow through anything DMs could shove at them. I've run this in AD&D, 3.5, and 5E, and I don't use conversions. I run it from the original module, which takes very little work. Some things to consider:
Fights are irrelevant. They were supposed to be. You can rest as much as you want, making fights pointless. In the original module, there's only 1 true combat in the entire dungeon (gargoyle). Everything else is avoidable or actually a puzzle/trap. Yes, the original boss is actually a puzzle if you read closely. You can only beat this puzzle by doing X, Y, or Z. A great irony is (spoiler for anyone who wishes to play it):
you don't have to fight the boss. It's so built into us that there's a final boss level to fight that players likely would never consider they could simply ignore the hostiles, grab the loot and leave.
Traps were originally solved by cleverness. Poles, patterns, and quick thinking. Originally, you could think your way through the traps. You didn't get a "Perception" roll set on autopilot. You had to tell the DM exactly what you're doing, and it was all being done originally on a time limit (tournament play). If players know this coming in advance, that they're going to have to puzzle their way through it, it will raise the stakes. And, it puts life and death of the character solely in the decisions of the players. Many of the original traps were "make the right choice or be screwed."
It used to be a badge of pride: I survived. The easier you make the dungeon, the more the legacy of the Tomb is diminished. It can be a meatgrinder, but it's a unique one in that a party of 20th level characters might fail, but a party of 3rd level characters, in theory, could puzzle their way through and succeed. Your combat prowess is supposed to be largely irrelevant. Hence, the "thinking" part.
That's just it was originally design with time limit because of tournament play. We aren't running a tournament this is at home so in that sense adding some combat could perhaps add a timer back in and the tension. Having a great big monster coming at you while trying to open a door and your in a hurry because eit is going to kill you unless you get throught the obstacle it adds tension does it not I've seen it in horror games and mboies/shows?
Depends on what you want out of it. This is not an adventure for hack n' slash. The preface from the original module said it's a "thinking man's dungeon."
It was an anti-hack 'n slash adventure, Gary's answer to players who thought they'd collected enough magical items and tricks of the trade to plow through anything DMs could shove at them. I've run this in AD&D, 3.5, and 5E, and I don't use conversions. I run it from the original module, which takes very little work. Some things to consider:
Fights are irrelevant. They were supposed to be. You can rest as much as you want, making fights pointless. In the original module, there's only 1 true combat in the entire dungeon (gargoyle). Everything else is avoidable or actually a puzzle/trap. Yes, the original boss is actually a puzzle if you read closely. You can only beat this puzzle by doing X, Y, or Z. A great irony is (spoiler for anyone who wishes to play it):
you don't have to fight the boss. It's so built into us that there's a final boss level to fight that players likely would never consider they could simply ignore the hostiles, grab the loot and leave.
Traps were originally solved by cleverness. Poles, patterns, and quick thinking. Originally, you could think your way through the traps. You didn't get a "Perception" roll set on autopilot. You had to tell the DM exactly what you're doing, and it was all being done originally on a time limit (tournament play). If players know this coming in advance, that they're going to have to puzzle their way through it, it will raise the stakes. And, it puts life and death of the character solely in the decisions of the players. Many of the original traps were "make the right choice or be screwed."
It used to be a badge of pride: I survived. The easier you make the dungeon, the more the legacy of the Tomb is diminished. It can be a meatgrinder, but it's a unique one in that a party of 20th level characters might fail, but a party of 3rd level characters, in theory, could puzzle their way through and succeed. Your combat prowess is supposed to be largely irrelevant. Hence, the "thinking" part.
To be honest, I would NOT put in more combat. It's not like TOH is an entire adventure path, so it's not going to be more than a few days (or, in 1e terms, a few minutes .... SHOULD HAVE CHOSEN THE OTHER TUNNEL!).
The entire point of the module is that it is different. That it is all puzzles and traps. @Stormonu addressed this, and I will concur; if you want to up the difficulty, then make the puzzles and traps more "save or die" type. Adding more combats would take away from the experience. IMO.
If you are looking for tips, try purchasing the original pdf version and compare!
True, many modules and many campaigns de-emphasize the second 2 but often that's a disservice to the fun of the table.
The whole point of Tomb of Horrors is that combat is not the solution.
Tomb of Horrors is meant to give players a different experience from what they are used to. IMO opinion (seemingly shared by many here) adding combats would take away from that.
Look, if your instinct when reading it is, "I need to put in more combat," then you should probably run a different module. I'm not saying your preferences are wrong, but that the reason TOH is so well-known is that it took that instinct (if every problem is a bag of XP waiting to be slain, then every solution is my sword!) and turned it on its head.
There are countless APs and modules that have bountiful combat. This is one of the few exceptions (Crystal Cave being another notable one from ye olden days).
I'm going to echo the others and say to not put more combat in the tomb. If you must have more combat, have it outside the tomb. A fun way to do that might be good (or at least neutral) guardians trying to keep explorers away from disturbing the tomb and awakening what's inside.
Otherwise, my main advice for the tomb is to get the PDF of the original adventure and print out all the illustrations. They're great and iconic and help draw people in. One of the illustrations of the initial hallway actually contains useful clues, which will help the players get into the idea of the dungeon as well, IMO.
There are countless APs and modules that have bountiful combat. This is one of the few exceptions (Crystal Cave being another notable one from ye olden days).
I bet Beyond the Crystal Cave would be incredibly popular if it was re-released today, as it sits in a territory D&D has moved more and more into over time.
