Worst D&D adventure of all time?

[egomann]

I can't belive no one has said it yet...


Throne of Bloodstone.

Has anyone ever tried to run this adventure? Maps and illustrations that don't make sense, horribley munchkined out encounters. A laundry list of every Demon Prince used as a simple encounter for the players to overwhelm.

Hell it even says in the introduction that it is for a "Monty Haul" game.


Bad Bad Bad.

 

[Shemeska]

however my alltime crapatistical award goes to The Deva Spark (PS). The module is you following a demon across the planes, nearly getting killed in the Abyss (opening of the module) and creating a new mosnter type (half-deva, half-bebelith) that is neither described well nor pictured, let alone statted.

Miserable, just miserable.

I rather liked the module. I never played it, but having read through it, it had some pretty imaginative concepts sprinkled throughout. Outside of not providing hard stats for the possible new critter at the end of the module (which I can't view as a flaw. Stats are often superfluous, and especially in this case), what's the complaint?

 

[diaglo]

Many of the DL campaign modules are open ended and feature some of the greatest maps ever done for D&D in any edition.

DL1 is a heavy handed railroad. It lightens up progressivley until the railroad disappears half-way through the series.

They were feeling their way. To dismiss all 12 modules because of the first few, or worse, one DM you had 20 years ago, is naught but uninformed opinion.

i can tell you with a very informed opinion that the DL modules are crap.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Very much so. I used to have them back when DL was fairly new, and even then after looking at them I thought it would be more fun for the group to just sit around and read the novels together. At least then you don't try to fool yourself into thinking your choices make a difference in how the plot plays out.

 

[MonsterMash]

Big effing snakes and giant frogs are both marks of quality, AFAIC

Agreed, and it has been a long time since I looked at the Blackmoor supplement. Unlike the Blackmoor campaign setting released this year which rocks.

 

[Keeper of Secrets]

I can't belive no one has said it yet...


Throne of Bloodstone.

Has anyone ever tried to run this adventure? Maps and illustrations that don't make sense, horribley munchkined out encounters. A laundry list of every Demon Prince used as a simple encounter for the players to overwhelm.

Hell it even says in the introduction that it is for a "Monty Haul" game.


Bad Bad Bad.

Hmmm. And I loved MINES of Bloodstone.

 

[Voadam]

So...of all the _______________OFFICIAL_______________________ D&D/AD&D/oD&D scenarios you've played or DM'ed, which one is the worst.


jh

That I've DMd or played? Castle greyhawk was silly but the parts I ran were fun when I ran them.

I'd have to say Ship of Horrors for Ravenloft. It doesn't make enough use of its cool elements such as the three ghosts or the undead who can pull off their limbs. Ravenloft empowers undead to grossly powerful levels but the necromancer's created undead are not empowered. There is a whole section of the plot where the DM is left on his own with just a family chart and set of personalities, no guidance on using them or even a map of the home where the party will interact with them. I ran a really cool adventure using the module, but it was cool because I fleshed everything out on my own and put the elements they had in there to some relevant use that the PCs could interact with and notice. As a DM tool for out of the box use it was really poor.

Lord of the Iron Fortress is pretty much the same way for 3e. No real intro hook. It fleshes out a planar city where the PCs are supposed to do major investigation with half a page of description. Important NPC information scenes happen because the party just runs into them radomly at coincidentally the right time. The information clues leading to the next stages are just dumb gimmes and don't explain why the NPCs don't act on their information even though they have more direct interests than the PCs. BBEG is a cult follower but all his clerics are followers of different gods. The Macguffin doom sword is pathetically unimportant even if the PCs fail and it is completed/created. Major rewrite required throughout.

 

[francisca]

Many of the DL campaign modules are open ended and feature some of the greatest maps ever done for D&D in any edition.

DL1 is a heavy handed railroad. It lightens up progressivley until the railroad disappears half-way through the series.

They were feeling their way. To dismiss all 12 modules because of the first few, or worse, one DM you had 20 years ago, is naught but uninformed opinion.

1) First impressions mean a lot.
2) By your own admission, the railroading continues, for 4-5 more modules. I was, in fact, informed of that. We didn't give DL another look until DL3 or 4 was out. We saw more railroading. We walked away, and chalked it up as a "novel hiding as an adventure" that it was. End of story. We saw 3 or 4 modules in a row of the DL series, each with what we considered to be a fatal flaw. We then decided we wouldn't enjoy it. Hell, we even tried to play one! I'd say that is a pretty well informed opinion. It's not like those of us bad-mouthing DL1 are just taking part in an internet dogpile.
3) Hindsight is 20/20. At the time, no way. Today? No way. Why wade through half a series just because of the maps, hoping the railroading goes away?
4) Since then, I have played in DL, and enjoyed it. It's a very rich setting. I would just rather explore it, rather than take the guided tour.

So, DL setting? Pretty cool! Early DL modules? Well, in my opinion, DL1 belongs on the "crappy modules" list, because it is a "heavy handed railroad". I didn't give the others a chance, because when we looked at them, and talked to other gamers, we found the same set of tracks. But, not having played them, they don't make my list of crummy modules.

 

[Numion]

I actually thought that Heart of Nightfang Spire was actually pretty good, as far as adventure path modules go. Nice atmosphere, good 'tools' for the DM (I hate DMing pushover adventures) and the location was pretty cool. My players did good against the dreaded Girallons, so it was no biggie. A bit repetitive, though. But otherwise a stand-up adventure.

For bad adventures, Lord of the Iron Fortress was baaaad. While some locations were ok, the alien-lookalike iron beasts were stupid, but it was the end fight that ruined the whole thing. My players, who usually never give up, never went back to the end fight after retreating once, and I can't blame them.

Also, Deep Horizon sucked pretty bad. It was a mess, and it had the Desmodus. Holy hell, were they actually supposed to be cool? Too much wasted space on them, so I wasn't too happy when they appeared in MM2 also ..

However, Bastion of Broken Souls was a worthy end to our adventure path campaign. Give it a try. The end fight is nice, even though pretty challenging.

 

[freebfrost]

I'd have to throw my vote in for the Dragonlance series, if only because they were so railroaded from the start.

While I enjoyed running Castle Greyhawk as a comedy module, I wished they had done it with a serious note, but on the whole it was good for what it was.

I thoroughly enjoyed the first Ravenloft module, even if everyone knew what Strahd was - it is an homage to Dracula after all. I just wish they had left out some of the comedic elements in that one too - the lame names on the tombstones for one.