Worst D&D adventure of all time?

[ColonelHardisson]

Worst module I ever bought: Whichever Vecna module had the hand-headed guy and was set in Greyhawk. I couldn't even finish reading it. It's just over-the-top and silly and too save-the-world-made-for-TV-movie-ish. I hate that the 3rd ed core rules have Vecna as a deity.

That was Vecna Lives! I actually like this module, and didn't find the hand and eye creatures to be any more silly than, say, the beholder or displacer beast. Anyway, the module was actually one that I wouldn't normally like - too much railroading, for one thing. Still, it had an atmosphere to it that I thought was appropriately creepy.

 

[Hussar]

Well, I've stepped up on the Dragonlance modules before, so I'll do it again. I tried to run them with four different groups over the years. I've even played in them once. The farthest we managed to get was DL 8 or 9 (I forget which now). Like someone smart once said, the goal of an RPG is not to write an epic story. Sorry, you want to write a book, go write a book and leave me out of it.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

I ran the full DL modules about 10 years ago & yup, parts of them were outrightly rejected by the players. Not so surprisingly the battle for the High Clerist Tower ran for about 5 straight sessions & was a load of fun because we deviated from the plot & turned it into an epic battlefront.

Somehow I managed to put together some half-baked rules (this is 2nd edition folks, nothing made sense) Kobold & Ogre siege tower assaults, Dragon strikes with Draconian paratroops; & all the while the Rose Knight Sir Derek Crownguard was pushing the war council to sally forth... this was run by a player. The pc's even got themselves captured on a recon mission & The Dragon Lieutenant Bakharis maimed them.

Zipping above the evil capital of Sanction fighting the 'battle of Britain' on Dragons was pretty cool too.

 

[TheGM]

Well, I've stepped up on the Dragonlance modules before, so I'll do it again. I tried to run them with four different groups over the years. I've even played in them once. The farthest we managed to get was DL 8 or 9 (I forget which now). Like someone smart once said, the goal of an RPG is not to write an epic story. Sorry, you want to write a book, go write a book and leave me out of it.

While I agree with the assessment of DL, I disagree with the sentiment that RPGs can't do epic stories. You just have to have a GM that makes the epic story fit the characters and the world. I don't think they make good premade modules, I think the epic adventure happens in context.

Many of my games tend toward the epic, my players and I prefer that, and it works out well if there's not too much railroading and plenty of character reasons to be involved.

 

[Psychic Warrior]

You guys are all short sighted about the Dragon Lance Modules. First of all, the modules were an attempt to tell an EPIC story from start to finish. If your idea of a great 'epic' adventure is going through a dungeon randomly populated with monsters (that have no business being there no matter how you try to explain it.)

I really don't think anyone's idea of an epic storyline is a random dungeon crawl. You do not help your position with such absurd statements.

The DL modules called for some changes to the way normal adventures had been played (up to that point), but the PAYOFFS were IMMENSE. A Good DM took away the feeling of being Railroaded, and instead gave you the feel of taking part of an EPIC adventure, becoming heroes in a true world saving story.

I played in 6 of the DL modules and the only 'payoff' I can remember was killing the Black Dragon. Most of the rest of it was just forgettable. Probably not the worst modules ever made or anything but hardly the most entertaining.

A second point is that the first novel in the series, Dragons of Autumn Twilight, told the story of the first two modules. This turned a lot of players and DMs off because players who read the book ruined the adventure. They realized their mistake, and the further modules and novels told different stories.

Yup - this is true. I remember by about DL4 that the modules were finally deviating from the novels. There was still the feeling that you were doing the little things to help the "main" characters go along their merry way but at least you didn't know exactly what to expect from the module because you had read some book.

[/quote]
Third, most of the modules are VERY well done, with really innovative maps, NPCs, puzzles, monsters, and settings.

If you felt railroaded through these adventures, your DM FAILED YOU.[/QUOTE]

I disagree. Aside from Draconians the new monsters were pretty weak in concept and design (even the Draconians were hardly original but at least there were losts of different types all based on what dragon eggs they used to make them). I don't recal any innovation maps I know the first module had a "3-D" type map liek Ravenloft but not much else.

People felt railroaded through these adventures because they were. Typing in capitial letters about how the DM failed to rework the modules so they actually allowed you to deviate from its preset conclusion doesn't make these modules any less of a railroad.


For myslef my least favourite module is I10 Ravenloft II: House on Gryphon Hill. Mainly because of the preset ending which the PCs are not allowed to change. What's worse is that the ending it describes couldnot possibly result in the death of Strahd in anyway (he falls off a cliff). It also had a high degree of technology but at least it was more Victorian era than futuristic.

 

[Joël of the FoS]

I have to agree, not all were crap.
Feast of Goblyns - remains to this day one of our favorites. We even did this one three times, albeit with some newer players (but not all) each time.
When Black Roses Bloom - one of my few "player" experiences (usually Im the DM), I had fun with this one even though Im not a fan of Lord Soth or any DL in general.
Night of the Walking Dead - Awesome the first time I ran it. A good starter module. Second time wasnt all that great.
From the Shadows/Roots of Evil - again one of the few player experiences. These two were great too, although at times the PCs to a back seat to NPCs. Given the scope and reprecussions of these modules, it was understandable.
Touch of Death - fun when I ran it. The players liked it alot. I dont think it's ever worth redoing.
Ship of Horror - not a bad read and it looked fine to me. I never did get a chance to run it.
Adam's Wrath - Very cool IMO. Lots of fun in this one too.
House of Strahd - one of the best reprints ever. It even had guidelines for running it at higher level. I will convert this one day when I have time.


The Bad?
Touch of Darkness? - forgot the exact name... the one with the Mindflayer crap for levels 12-15 IIRC. I was sorry I bought this book. This one will never see the inside of my backpack, let alone a gaming table.
Book of Crypts - again,not sure of the exact name (it was long ago). The one with all the short filler adventures. Same as above.

In the great ones, you forgot Evil Eye ! This free form module, with a geat DM, as the potential to be onf the greatest adventure.

This leads me to agree with another poster: a bad module modified / improved by a great DM can be a lot of fun. For example: what Veodam did with Ship of Horrors. The first part of the module was indeed fun, but then it had to be improved a lot.

Another example: we are all 20 years gamers in our group and Die Vecna Die was alot of fun. By putting emphasis on the fun parts, and making the bad part past quickly or changing them, the module improved a lot

In fact, now, modules that we do not change to add our own ideas are very uncommon

Joël

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

You guys are all short sighted about the Dragon Lance Modules. First of all, the modules were an attempt to tell an EPIC story from start to finish. If your idea of a great 'epic' adventure is going through a dungeon randomly populated with monsters (that have no business being there no matter how you try to explain it.) The DL modules called for some changes to the way normal adventures had been played (up to that point), but the PAYOFFS were IMMENSE. A Good DM took away the feeling of being Railroaded, and instead gave you the feel of taking part of an EPIC adventure, becoming heroes in a true world saving story.

A second point is that the first novel in the series, Dragons of Autumn Twilight, told the story of the first two modules. This turned a lot of players and DMs off because players who read the book ruined the adventure. They realized their mistake, and the further modules and novels told different stories.

Third, most of the modules are VERY well done, with really innovative maps, NPCs, puzzles, monsters, and settings.

If you felt railroaded through these adventures, your DM FAILED YOU.

The Role of the GM is to help the players tell thier own story, provide the canvas on which they will do the painting. Not have them be actors in the GM's proto-novel IMO. The writer of those modules failed the players is more like it.

 

[VirgilCaine]

For myslef my least favourite module is I10 Ravenloft II: House on Gryphon Hill. Mainly because of the preset ending which the PCs are not allowed to change. What's worse is that the ending it describes couldnot possibly result in the death of Strahd in anyway (he falls off a cliff). It also had a high degree of technology but at least it was more Victorian era than futuristic.

Reading the module ending...you have a point. But, perhaps that was the point--for the Creature (I love saying that!) to return to torment the heroes once more. Or you could just say that killing Strahd destroys the Creature...this is strongly suggested in the goals for the Creature.

 

[francisca]

While I agree with the assessment of DL, I disagree with the sentiment that RPGs can't do epic stories. You just have to have a GM that makes the epic story fit the characters and the world. I don't think they make good premade modules, I think the epic adventure happens in context.

Many of my games tend toward the epic, my players and I prefer that, and it works out well if there's not too much railroading and plenty of character reasons to be involved.

I'm kinda with you on this.

I think the epic story comes after the fact. I don't get the feeling that those involved in an epic story are "aware" of the epic-ness of the situation until after the fact.

But yeah, the DM keeping the players in the thick of the plot is all good, and if done right, does in fact lead to an epic recounting of the adventure's tales.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I'm kinda with you on this.

I think the epic story comes after the fact. I don't get the feeling that those involved in an epic story are "aware" of the epic-ness of the situation until after the fact.

But yeah, the DM keeping the players in the thick of the plot is all good, and if done right, does in fact lead to an epic recounting of the adventure's tales.

This is a great post. I think this hits the nail on the head for me.