What are your favorite adventures (and why)?

[pemerton]

A2 Slaver's Stockade is an excellent module if you make one minor change: put a few more doors on each level to give some choice where to go. It's very linear as written (hardly surprising for what is at heart a tournament module), but bust up the linearity and it's great! It can work just fine as a stand-alone if you're not running the whole A-series.

I ran this, or at least bits of it, in Rolemaster 20-something years ago. I remember the blind fighter - Ikar? - who wears the helmet without eyeslits (and one of the PCs took the helmet and used to use it to train his blindfighting); and the wereboars in the kitchen who throw their axes at anyone who enters. Am I remembering the right module?

 

[Lanefan]

I ran this, or at least bits of it, in Rolemaster 20-something years ago. I remember the blind fighter - Ikar? - who wears the helmet without eyeslits (and one of the PCs took the helmet and used to use it to train his blindfighting); and the wereboars in the kitchen who throw their axes at anyone who enters. Am I remembering the right module?

Yes, except the blind-helmet guy (Ikar?) is in the kitchen. The were-(boars? wolves? I forget) are elsewhere, on the lower level I think.

Lan-"the no-eyes helmet gives him another advantage too, but no spoilers here"-efan

 

[delericho]

Yes, and - er - yes.

Some adventure modules "read" well - you check it out in the store, it looks like it'll rock, and you buy it and run it - but don't necessarily "play" well once your group gets started on it. The reverse is true for others - they "read" like garbage but once you play them you realize they're pretty damn good.

Of course. But I would argue that the former is still a bad module - the weaknesses may be disguised, but they're still there and they're still weaknesses. The latter is better... but could be better still given another round of polishing. Given the choice between style and substance, I'll certainly prefer substance. But I'm greedy - if were talking about good adventures, then I want both.

My criteria for a good adventure module:
- minimal or no built-in backstory - I want to be able to wrap my own backstory around it with a minimum of effort

The problem with a requirement for "minimal backstory" is that it really limits what the adventure writer can do. In a lot of cases, the design of the dungeon should itself imply a backstory, and even things like the choices of monsters and traps may well tie in. Even something as simple as a temple used by an evil cult isn't immune - I would expect a temple to Orcus to be rather different from one to Pazazu.

And yet, on the other hand, I can certainly see the other side. Very few adventure modules (and certainly standalone adventures, as opposed to Adventure Path instalments) are used strictly as-is - there's at least some adaptation to the ongoing campaign. And that means that the adventure needs to be flexible to allow for that sort of adjustment.

- numerous different ways to approach and-or enter it and to move around once inside. Too many dungeons don't have enough staircases between levels, for example; or only one entrance.
- twists, turns, and unexpected developments

Yes, absolutely.

(And, incidentally, this is why I don't consider something like "King of the Trollhaunt Warrens" to be a good adventure, even though I don't doubt groups had fun with it - there's basically one way into the adventure, then one route through the encounters until the BBEG is encountered. And if the players jump the tracks, the DM is basically on his own.)

- detachable hard-card maps (21st-century adventure publishers, are you listening?!?)
- some attention to proof-reading and playtesting e.g. if there's an area 19 shown on the map is there an area 19 written up in the module? (Forgotten Temple of Tharizdun, I'm looking at you)

Agreed again. I've broken these two away from the others, though, because while the previous ones are about the design of the adventure itself, these are really about the design of the physical product. If you will, it's the software/hardware split.

Going forward, I think companies will need to be aware that many, if not most, adventures are going to be electronic products (certainly as well as, if not instead of, physical products). That makes things like the "detachable map" a bit less of a concern. At the same time, it does mean that they should be looking at ways to leverage the technology - there should be a map, and it should probably link each keyed entry on the map to the relevant text in the module itself.

 

[Mercurius]

Of course. But I would argue that the former is still a bad module - the weaknesses may be disguised, but they're still there and they're still weaknesses. The latter is better... but could be better still given another round of polishing. Given the choice between style and substance, I'll certainly prefer substance. But I'm greedy - if were talking about good adventures, then I want both.

Me too.

The problem with a requirement for "minimal backstory" is that it really limits what the adventure writer can do. In a lot of cases, the design of the dungeon should itself imply a backstory, and even things like the choices of monsters and traps may well tie in. Even something as simple as a temple used by an evil cult isn't immune - I would expect a temple to Orcus to be rather different from one to Pazazu.

And yet, on the other hand, I can certainly see the other side. Very few adventure modules (and certainly standalone adventures, as opposed to Adventure Path instalments) are used strictly as-is - there's at least some adaptation to the ongoing campaign. And that means that the adventure needs to be flexible to allow for that sort of adjustment.

I think as a general rule,it isn't the adventure that is flexible or not, but the DM. Any adventure can be ported and adapted to a different campaign setting.

Now I have to disagree with @Lanefan in his preference of minimal back-story for a different reason. For me, the back-story sets the tone and feeling of the adventure; it inspires the DM. Perhaps there are degrees of this, and maybe a more "impressionistic" back-story is preferable to a detailed one, but the point being that there's a huge difference between the following:

A) In Room 32 there's a lich with the following statsB) Room 32 is the crypt of the long-dead priest king Amennatep II, now a lich. Amennatep was the last ruler of the 44th Dynasty of Medalhur, called the "Cursed Dynasty" because....etc

You don't have to use B, but it gives you something to work with and, most of all, sets a kind of atmosphere that A doesn't offer.

 

[billd91]

Yes, except the blind-helmet guy (Ikar?) is in the kitchen. The were-(boars? wolves? I forget) are elsewhere, on the lower level I think.

Lan-"the no-eyes helmet gives him another advantage too, but no spoilers here"-efan

Icar is definitely one of the most memorable NPCs I've ever seen in a D&D module, though if you play this one with some flexibility, Markessa and some of the others can also be pretty memorable. This adventure really did have some interesting personalities in it.

 

[Lanefan]

I think as a general rule,it isn't the adventure that is flexible or not, but the DM. Any adventure can be ported and adapted to a different campaign setting.

Obviously. But there's different degrees of work involved...

This...

A) In Room 32 there's a lich with the following stats

...is easy to port.

This...

B) Room 32 is the crypt of the long-dead priest king Amennatep II, now a lich. Amennatep was the last ruler of the 44th Dynasty of Medalhur, called the "Cursed Dynasty" because....etc

...is much more difficult.

However, a fine middle ground would be C) Room 32 is the crypt of Amennatep, once a priest but now a lich with the following stats... - so now he has a name (useful in any situation), a previous class (also useful), and the rest is left up to me to develop or not as desired without getting bogged down in the other stuff.

You don't have to use B, but it gives you something to work with and, most of all, sets a kind of atmosphere that A doesn't offer.

I agree it sets an atmosphere, but there's too many things to change either ahead of time or on the fly. (I'm not saying it wouldn't be useful for some, but if there must be backstory put it somewhere else - the introduction, for example - and leave the actual adventure write-up as (pun only vaguely intended) bare-bones as possible.

Lanefan

 

[Stormonu]

As others have said, I6 - Ravenloft is probably the epitome of module design. It drips with story and atmosphere and has a intelligent villain who doesn't just wait for the party to come kill him - he goes after the party. Conversely, I10 - House on Griffon Hill, the sequel, does everything wrong. A wimpy bad guy, boring investigation (more in line with Call of Cthulhu than D&D), a finish PCs only get to watch instead of participate in ... everything about it is just poor, including the Mesmerist ploy for determining what goes on (ala the Tarracota deck method of Ravenloft, which conversely, works extraordinarily well).

I haven't seen it mentioned yet, but from the DM's perspective, I love X1 - Isle of Dread. Part of its charm is mapping and exploring the mysteries of the island. There's plenty of places for the DM to flex his creative muscles with making forgotten, interesting and dangerous places to explore.

 

[pemerton]

Icar is definitely one of the most memorable NPCs I've ever seen in a D&D module, though if you play this one with some flexibility, Markessa and some of the others can also be pretty memorable. This adventure really did have some interesting personalities in it.

I remember some mutants (?) in a cave complex who worship Markessa. Is that in the module, or did I make it up myself?

 

[billd91]

I remember some mutants (?) in a cave complex who worship Markessa. Is that in the module, or did I make it up myself?

You remember correctly. And then there's the bodyguard and the double too. It's got potential to be a very dynamic module. My players (in a 3.5 conversion) had to retreat a few times to take it on. Each time, the avenue they invaded through the time before was sealed off or trapped or otherwise prepped for their return - they had to keep finding other ways in or face extra difficulties… that is until they managed to finally crack the joint for good.

 

[Raith5]

I also remember the adventures located in the early Dragon magazines quite fondly. I cant recall the names but there was an adventure which had Drow living in a gigantic tree house and the one that had evil druids and rangers (I used this a fair while ago for a 3rd ed adventure and it played really well). All I can recall is the Roger Raupp (sp?) artwork.