Tales from the Yawning Portal (or something like that) is a compendium of 7 adventures updated to 5e rules. Classics like Against the Giants, White Plume Mountain and Tomb of Horrors get re-skinned to the new edition.
Considering the zillions of adventures available at rpgnow for peanuts, personally, i think this is not needed as it's basically a piece of piss to convert old adventures to 5e.
Maybe they're running out of steam already.
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/news/tales-yawning-portal
Very cool. I like books. Don't care for PDFs.
Quote from: One Horse Town;939392Tales from the Yawning Portal (or something like that) is a compendium of 7 adventures updated to 5e rules. Classics like Against the Giants, White Plume Mountain and Tomb of Horrors get re-skinned to the new edition.
Considering the zillions of adventures available at rpgnow for peanuts, personally, i think this is not needed as it's basically a piece of piss to convert old adventures to 5e.
Maybe they're running out of steam already.
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/news/tales-yawning-portal
To be sure, if they had put out any other book with crunch or a new campaign, I probably wouldn't be interested. A book of mini-adventures, nostalgic or otherwise, holds more interest me right now. There is a large back catalogue to work through if that ends up the direction too.
I think I'm more positive than negative about this. As an old-time gamer I happen to own most of these adventures already, but I know a lot of 5E players who have never experienced any of the classic modules from pre-2000 or so and it seems to me that dusting those off and getting them back in print is a good idea. When I see the final product I may change my mind on this, of course, but my initial reaction is that it's a good idea and I would enjoy seeing even more of the classics getting a similar treatment.
Seems an interesting, if eclectic mix of modules to pack.
Neet idea. But an odd one too.
I am disappointed.
Yes, I very much like to see old modules updated and republished, even bundled. But mixing 1e, 3e, and Next modules?
I was hoping for a more sensible mix, like the S1-S4 reprint, Dungeons of Dread (https://www.amazon.com/Dungeons-Dread-Classic-Adventure-Compilation/dp/0786964618) (that btw contained White Plume Mountain, as well).
I don't have a problem with new edition stats for old adventures but for me personally, a big clunky hardback book with all the maps and things inside is too ponderous to be used easily at the table. Had they released this as a set of soft back individual modules complete with detached card stock covers containing the maps all included in a slip case then I would probably pre-order the thing.
Its all about usefulness at the table for adventure content. Thats why I haven't purchased any of their campaign books.
This is a mixed bag. The previous WOC offerings for 5E are mostly adventure path style books, which I detest. So, a book of adventures that you can approach and navigate on your own terms is welcome. And I only have about half of these as original hard copies, so there is stuff here that is new to me and will see use. But how pathetic is it that they can't create new content in this style? There are OSR dungeons getting produced on a regular basis that are as good as or better than anything in the portfolio of great old pastel TSR modules. It isn't a mystery how to make them: activate the creativity and fun centers in your brain, drop the attitude that players need to be led around like babies, keep the word count low, and make sure the map is detailed, complete and looks good. Lost Mines is unremarkable but pretty solid, so there is an existence proof that they can write modules in this basic mode. But as an organization they don't seem committed to really doing this regularly.
I don't mind this. It's nice to have the conversion work done, and they've chosen a very good selection of adventures (Tamoachan is something of a lost classic).
However, this only confirms my fears that WotC has only a skeleton of a budget for D&D. It seems Hasbro are doing just enough to keep the game and license alive. My hopes that 5E would be supported to the extent that 4E was are now completely dashed.
Yeah, I've been seeing plenty of mixed reactions in social media too. Funny how the world works.
I think it's neat that a classic adventure "anthology" is coming out for 5e, and as Larsdangly said above it's encouraging to see WotC think outside the "adventure path" box, but the cold hard truth of the matter is that I don't see anything worth buying here; WotC's offers pale before the OSR and TSR catalogue of truly intriguing and elaborate adventures.
Also, mechanical conversion is not difficult, at least not so difficult as to justify shelling out what they usually ask of it.
If I was in charge I'd be trawling the OSR scene for adventure-writing talent and selling the adventures as cheap as possible. Softcover, B&W, recycled old art, who gives a shit? Make 'em official and make 'em cheap.
Also campaign settings. Sure, everyone loves FR, but where's Eberron for the pulpy magitech fans? Dark Sun for the barbaric S&S crew? One of the few great things 4e had going on for it was the Spelljammer/Planescape mash-up, so you can world hop while you world hop, as Xzibit would put it. Still miffed I never got to run my "Astral Sea Traveller" 4e game.
There's a lot they could be covering with 4e but so far they've gone with the "yearly token adventure path" road that just screams "legacy thingie we're keeping around for the IP". I don't even think 5e is a bad game but there's epic shit happening at the fan-driven old edition scene. I wish WotC the best of luck, really, but I really haven't been a customer since picking up the 5e core rulebooks.
I am more positive than not on this development. D&D serves best as a gateway to the hobby. The OSR is a good example of the creativity blossoming in the hobby. Bringing back good adventures is a reasonable tactic for WotC to continue to put out content that helps new entrants see how good adventures are created.
Sure, really new stuff would be better but this could be well done. And if it leads people to the awesome small press material, that is even better.
I have to be a little puzzled here, too. I just ran White Plume Mountain for my 5e campaign. Converting was no big deal at all. I don't think it's even possible to run WPM as a 4e style module, but 5e is so lean on rules that it doesn't take much at all. Similarly, I did the Slavers modules, actually running an adventure I hadn't played since, uh, 1988? Not a problem.
I grant that this was an easy/cheap thing for WoTC to do, so I see their point of view here the same way I understand crappy horror movies are made because the ROI is so great but...c'mon, let's get some new material.
Nostalgia is easy money.
I'm not a 5e fan, but I can't blame them.
I expect it will sell well and lead to a sequel.
Thumbs up for converting classics, not that it would be so hard as already mentioned.
For me though, I rather have my Manual of the Planes or Deities and Demigods. Still wondering where those are on the to-do list.
Quote from: JamesV;939617For me though, I rather have my Manual of the Planes or Deities and Demigods. Still wondering where those are on the to-do list.
Personally, I'd prefer them to make a Planescape campaign, with setting material included.
Quote from: One Horse Town;939392Maybe they're running out of steam already.
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/news/tales-yawning-portal
I'm not really bothered by this but it does make me think about this edition.
Please, bear in mind that I am totally talking out of my ass and I know I'm certainly wrong. But hey, it's the internet.
The D&D team is, what ? 15 people ? It looks like Hasbro merely wants to keep the brand alive but not much more.
A common practice of the business world : outsourcing, usually used because it's considered to be more cost effective (and I guess 3rd party publishers offered the chance to write official material are pretty cheap by corporate standards). Even more cost effective is the use of the back catalogue.
So the whole thing is actually managed with (very) basic corporate methods but they actually managed to make people think that producing 2-3 books a year was a bold move. 1 point for the PR department who actually made us see standard corporate practice as "bold moves".
And now Hasbro sees the result :"
Hey, you manage to still be n°1 ? With a skeleton crew ? With much less releases than the competition (Pathfinder) ? Awesome ! Next time we'll do it with 10 people". And why pay for tv commercials ? Youtube is the place to go viral, just film some vaguely famous guys play D&D, that should cut it.
All of this doesn't necessarily make bad games or bad products (I really like D&D5) but the whole thing seems to be managed like a clothing company.
Next "
bold step" will be to promote a campaign written by a polish/Czech/whatever company paid nickels but promoted as a "
wonderful opening of the D&D license to the whole world, truly making D&D a worldwide phenomenon".
Don't tell me I'm wrong, I know that. In fact I want to be.
Quote from: The Butcher;939568Sure, everyone loves FR, but where's Eberron for the pulpy magitech fans?
I'm pretty baffled by this too. I've now run three 5e campaigns in Eberron with almost* no official mechanical support in sight. True, it's not
that difficult to improvise conversions from my 3e and 4e Eberron material, but that's still money sitting in my pocket that would instantly be theirs if they bothered. I'm far from alone judging by the polls too. Even forgetting the setting there is a broader interest in artificers, warforged, and magitech that a theoretical Eberron book could satisfy.
* UA article with issues to resolve.
This seems like a good thing to me. I don't play 5e, but from what I've seen, it is very popular. Shows like Critical Role are definitely helping in that regard. Browsing the reddit or G+ DnD places, it seems to have a very enthusiastic audience that so far has been eating up WotC's adventure paths. Those of you suggesting WotC copy the OSR are forgetting that the OSR, or rather the whole DIY DnD community, is already there, and these people are still playing through Storm Kings. So if WotC updates these old dungeons for 5e and releases them as a collection of standalone adventures to drop in any game, that's great. That could really spark some interest in other old modules, and since WotC has been releasing all its old stuff in pdf, they may drive additional business that way. Makes sense to me.
I'd just convert them on my own. But Putting a fresh coat of paint on these old modules, and getting them on the store shelves might expose some new players to classic adventures.
I don't mind the nostalgia ... but I could wish that they'd broaden the horizons of the nostalgia beyond Gygax-era Advanced and early 3rd Edition.
But then,
a) I'm not really interested in 5E to begin with, and
b) 5E's one attempt to press my nostalgia buttons--Curse of Strahd--was a mixed bag, feeling like almost a pure homage to I6 and its era. A couple setting elements drifted in, but a lot of others were ignored or flatly contradicted. And elves, elves everywhere ... :)
I was kinda hoping for some of Undermountain. But then again, I personally dislike Tomb of Horrors, which I'm pretty sure everyone knows why by now.
This just keeps speaking to the influence of the OSR.
If they keep releasing retread products then I would worry. Otherwise I don't see anything wrong with this release. It consistent with marketing of 5e that it does new things while respecting the old.
Out of curiosity, is there anyone that considers Forge of Fury worthy of inclusion? I don't remember anything bad about it, but it wasn't really that memorable at all. I saw an interview where they defended its inclusion simple based on its sale numbers. I guess it really isn't that surprising it sold well at the start of the 3E boom. I think any module released at that time would have done well. I'm just wondering if there is whole generation of gamers who consider this a classic because they were newer to gaming at the time.
Sunless Citadel seems justified, as I have heard plenty of people's stories about playing that. I just can't recall ever having heard anyone talk about Forge of Fury.
Quote from: Baulderstone;940159Out of curiosity, is there anyone that considers Forge of Fury worthy of inclusion?
Two people in my circle agree with each other than it's a solid starter adventure for newbies of any stripe precisely because it's so generic. No weird shit to worry about while you're figuring out the ropes apparently. I have a copy somewhere, but I've never felt a strong desire to read past the first few pages, let alone run it.
Quote from: RPGPundit;940121This just keeps speaking to the influence of the OSR.
Nah, it's more that gamers don't like anything new, so they feel that they have to rehash old stuff to make sure they have money.
Quote from: Christopher Brady;940203Nah, it's more that gamers don't like anything new, so they feel that they have to rehash old stuff to make sure they have money.
A set of one is not a pattern.
Quote from: estar;940207A set of one is not a pattern.
A remake of Curse of Strahd? Now this? I'm seeing the beginning of one. I could, of course, be wrong. Time will tell.
Every release that isn't some horseshit "expansion" of the game is a great sign.
Quote from: Baulderstone;940159Out of curiosity, is there anyone that considers Forge of Fury worthy of inclusion? I don't remember anything bad about it, but it wasn't really that memorable at all. I saw an interview where they defended its inclusion simple based on its sale numbers. I guess it really isn't that surprising it sold well at the start of the 3E boom. I think any module released at that time would have done well. I'm just wondering if there is whole generation of gamers who consider this a classic because they were newer to gaming at the time.
I have very fond memories of it, although the version I ran in play got jaquayed to make it less linear and I used adversary rosters (http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/38547/roleplaying-games/the-art-of-the-key-part-4-adversary-rosters) to turn it into a dynamic siege scenario on the upper levels.
Off-hand I can't think of a better "ruined dwarven fortress" scenario at the sort of medium-scale that
Forge of Fury provides. So I think it's a great choice for WotC.
Quote from: Justin Alexander;940671Off-hand I can't think of a better "ruined dwarven fortress" scenario at the sort of medium-scale that Forge of Fury provides. So I think it's a great choice for WotC.
But then, how many Moria-style dungeons did TSR/WotC do?
Without consulting my shelf only these come to mind:
N5 Under Illefarn
DL4 Dragons of Desolation (and Thorbardin is not even a ruin)
...?
What I think they should do is reprint the most popular self-published/indie modules as a best of compilation with 5E stats. Hasbro easily could afford to purchase rights to do a 5E version of Tomb of the Iron God, Anomalous Subsurface Environment, Deep Carbon Observatory, etc. It would be a win/win for Hasbro and the module writers. Solid adventures for Hasbro + increased exposure for the writers.
Quote from: estar;940145If they keep releasing retread products then I would worry. Otherwise I don't see anything wrong with this release. It consistent with marketing of 5e that it does new things while respecting the old.
Bingo.
And I'd rather see this than another rigid 10 or 12 level adventure path.
Quote from: One Horse Town;939392Tales from the Yawning Portal (or something like that) is a compendium of 7 adventures updated to 5e rules. Classics like Against the Giants, White Plume Mountain and Tomb of Horrors get re-skinned to the new edition.
Considering the zillions of adventures available at rpgnow for peanuts, personally, i think this is not needed as it's basically a piece of piss to convert old adventures to 5e.
Maybe they're running out of steam already.
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/news/tales-yawning-portal
I'm firmly in the "less Path in my Adventures, please" camp. While I would have preferred to see some new standalone stuff, I have been pleasantly surprised at how little rehash there has been to this point, so I don't begrudge a collection like this at all. Conversion might be fairly straight forward for those familiar with the various editions, but making these modules accessible to newer players is a worthy goal.
Also, if this ends up providing updated artwork and unkeyed maps for online use, that would be a bonus.
I have a warm, squishy soft spot for Tamoachan, so that might be swaying my judgement a bit. If they end up doing something I don't like to my baby, I reserve the right to come back here and say it was all a terrible idea and that I was against it from the start.
I will be buying Yawning Portal. All those adventures in one book already converted for the D&D edition that I currently quite enjoy.
Correction... I just preordered it.
Quote from: Christopher Brady;940209A remake of Curse of Strahd? Now this? I'm seeing the beginning of one. I could, of course, be wrong. Time will tell.
Reading the Curse of Strahd the focus didn't strike me as a literal translation of the original module. Rather in a expansion into a full blown campaigns like the Realms of Terror version. The Yawning Portal on contrast more focused on literally translating the older modules into 5e.
I wonder if they are going the fix the ultimate treasure in the Tomb of Horrors like they did with the 3e version. That was pretty cheesy to do in the 3rd edition version which was otherwise a faithful translation.
Quote from: estar;940871I wonder if they are going the fix the ultimate treasure in the Tomb of Horrors like they did with the 3e version. That was pretty cheesy to do in the 3rd edition version which was otherwise a faithful translation.
One of the issues for Tomb of Horrors is that it's not very rewarding for the risk involved. If they keep it the same, I can tell you, a lot of local players will not have fun (Which is purely anecdotal, and does not represent the entire D&D market.) There has to be reason the players should be willing to accept all the cheap deaths and 'gotchas'.
Quote from: Christopher Brady;940892One of the issues for Tomb of Horrors is that it's not very rewarding for the risk involved. If they keep it the same, I can tell you, a lot of local players will not have fun (Which is purely anecdotal, and does not represent the entire D&D market.) There has to be reason the players should be willing to accept all the cheap deaths and 'gotchas'.
Not very rewarding ? Then you didn't pay enough attention to the descriptions :)
QuoteThese doors are 14' wide and 28' tall. They are made of solid mithril, 3' thick, and impregnated with great magicks in order to make them absolutely spell and magic proof.
But not dwarven mining proof.
I ran this module back in the day. The exchange went something like this.
QuoteMe: At the top of the stairs you see a pair of doors. These doors are 14' wide and 28' tall. They are made of solid mithril, 3' thick, and impregnated with great magicks in order to make them absolutely spell and magic proof. Where these valves meet, at about waist height, is a cup-like depression, a hemispherical concavity, with a central hole.
Tim: I start examining the door jamb carefully for traps and then look at the center part with the hole.
Dwayne: Wait! Rob read that again.
Me: OK, These doors are 14' wide and 28' tall. They are made of solid mithril .....
(me starting at the text for a few seconds)
Me: Oh shit.
Dwayne: Guys the treasure isn't what inside the treasure is those damn doors.
So they dealt with the lich, they sacrificed their bag of holding by empyting it and pushing the demi-lich inside of it. Gathered what they could of the treasure, used it to hire a bunch of mercenaries, and a company of dwarves. Made sure that the one group watched the other. And had the dwarves dig out the entire room. Focusing on the two slabs of mithril and the two smaller doors/panels made of adamantite. The party used it split it 50/50 with the dwarves.
Then promptly when to the Invincible Overlord of City-State and traded about 2/3 of their slab for the right to carve out a Duchy in the name of the Overlord. Used the rest to hire and train a army.
All and all they were quite satisfied with what they got out of the Tomb.
The 3.5e version nerfed this by explicitly saying that the mithril and the adamantite were just a thin veneer.
Quote from: estar;940896Not very rewarding ? Then you didn't pay enough attention to the descriptions :)
But not dwarven mining proof.
I ran this module back in the day. The exchange went something like this.
So they dealt with the lich, they sacrificed their bag of holding by empyting it and pushing the demi-lich inside of it. Gathered what they could of the treasure, used it to hire a bunch of mercenaries, and a company of dwarves. Made sure that the one group watched the other. And had the dwarves dig out the entire room. Focusing on the two slabs of mithril and the two smaller doors/panels made of adamantite. The party used it split it 50/50 with the dwarves.
Then promptly when to the Invincible Overlord of City-State and traded about 2/3 of their slab for the right to carve out a Duchy in the name of the Overlord. Used the rest to hire and train a army.
All and all they were quite satisfied with what they got out of the Tomb.
The 3.5e version nerfed this by explicitly saying that the mithril and the adamantite were just a thin veneer.
It's clear you never had any geologists, or wannabe smiths (who do the research) cuz the doors are worth a fair amount, but as art pieces, not as raw materials. And you wouldn't get enough to pay more than the dwarves for the work.
Quote from: Christopher Brady;940955It's clear you never had any geologists, or wannabe smiths (who do the research) cuz the doors are worth a fair amount, but as art pieces, not as raw materials. And you wouldn't get enough to pay more than the dwarves for the work.
Two Thousand Three Hundred and Fifty Two cubic feet of solid mithril is more than ample to enable exactly what the PCs wanted to do with their characters.
Assuming Mithril is equal to the density of silver that roughly 700 lbs per cubic feet. Mithril worth 2,500 gp per pound (in accordance with the G-D-Q series). Multiply that by 700 and then 2,352 and the worth of the two doors are 4 billion gold pieces.
Of course the economy couldn't absorb that but since Mithril is useful for making +4 armor and weapons the player can realize enough of that to enable their plans. Even if you peg Mithril at a hundreths of that it still a staggering amount of money.
Quote from: estar;940971Two Thousand Three Hundred and Fifty Two cubic feet of solid mithril is more than ample to enable exactly what the PCs wanted to do with their characters.
Assuming Mithril is equal to the density of silver that roughly 700 lbs per cubic feet. Mithril worth 2,500 gp per pound (in accordance with the G-D-Q series). Multiply that by 700 and then 2,352 and the worth of the two doors are 4 billion gold pieces.
Of course the economy couldn't absorb that but since Mithril is useful for making +4 armor and weapons the player can realize enough of that to enable their plans. Even if you peg Mithril at a hundreths of that it still a staggering amount of money.
I'm eargerly looking forward to the aggressive cognitive dissonance soaked responce post from Mssr Brady.
Quote from: estar;940971Two Thousand Three Hundred and Fifty Two cubic feet of solid mithril is more than ample to enable exactly what the PCs wanted to do with their characters.
Assuming Mithril is equal to the density of silver that roughly 700 lbs per cubic feet. Mithril worth 2,500 gp per pound (in accordance with the G-D-Q series). Multiply that by 700 and then 2,352 and the worth of the two doors are 4 billion gold pieces.
Of course the economy couldn't absorb that but since Mithril is useful for making +4 armor and weapons the player can realize enough of that to enable their plans. Even if you peg Mithril at a hundreths of that it still a staggering amount of money.
All right, a few things here. First, the doors are magical, yes? I'm going to assume that you're a rather lenient GM, and didn't realize that if those doors were not magic'ed for lightness, no one would have been able to open them. At all. Ever. We're talking several TONNES worth of metal. And taking them down? You probably had several deaths in the process.
Secondly, wouldn't the magic as evidenced by this statement:
Quote...[a]nd impregnated with great magicks in order to make them absolutely spell and magic proof.
Wouldn't that make it nigh impossible to remove the joints, cuz the weight? And like it said, magic would be impossible to use.
The main reason my team (I never ran it, and we didn't get far anyway, but it was a one shot meant to try it out) didn't take down the door was because it was just ungainly to haul back to a town that frankly had no resources to actually do anything with it. No magical bank with millions of gold to throw around.
It seems like the DM was being a little too lenient compared to what the adventure was meant to be. An unfair meat grinder, a supposed eff you to some players claiming they 'won' at D&D. (My opinion on that is: So what? You're not in my game.)
My initial claim to fame as a referee back in the day that I was the referee who allowed PCs to "trash" my campaign. Have a plan to toggle the king and take it for yourself. Feel free to try. Note the word try. People liked my campaigns not because I gave them this stuff. They had to work for it like they had to work for any adventure. Most referee I knew and still knew. Get really bent out of shape if the players try to make major alterations to the setting. My approach in contrast was to say "OK if that what you want to do, here what you know, give me a plan to make it happen.". Sometime the plans worked, sometime they didn't. Most of the time it would with the PCs achieving something altogether different than what they set out to do due to the way things unfolded. This was the time of the hex and counter wargame craze so I was well aware of how to create a scenario and how to use various kinds of rules to handle high level situation. The result was as fun and interesting for my players as poking around dungeons and wildernesses.
Quote from: Christopher Brady;940992All right, a few things here. First, the doors are magical, yes? I'm going to assume that you're a rather lenient GM, and didn't realize that if those doors were not magic'ed for lightness, no one would have been able to open them. At all. Ever. We're talking several TONNES worth of metal. And taking them down? You probably had several deaths in the process.
Quote from: Christopher Brady;940992Wouldn't that make it nigh impossible to remove the joints, cuz the weight? And like it said, magic would be impossible to use.
Quote...[a]nd impregnated with great magicks in order to make them absolutely spell and magic proof.
Oh you are quite right, but note the THEM. Says nothing of the surrounding earth and stone matrix. And the Tomb of Horrors is a single level dungeon, which means you can get it at it from above, given enough time. It a totally impracticable approach when you are first doing the adventure. But once you cleared it out and are able to map it properly. Then all you need is time and labor to get at them.
It didn't happen with a wave of my pencil. They had to go to the dwarves, go to the Overlord, make the deals, do some favors, keep the site secure. It was THE focus for the next few session. And in the end, it was a fair ruling that they were able to get the doors out and secured their share of the wealth.
Also it helped that the PCs were rootless wanderers. One was name level and had a keep to his name. The other was just about name level and had connections lined up. So forth and so on. They lev
Quote from: Christopher Brady;940992The main reason my team (I never ran it, and we didn't get far anyway, but it was a one shot meant to try it out) didn't take down the door was because it was just ungainly to haul back to a town that frankly had no resources to actually do anything with it. No magical bank with millions of gold to throw around.
The problem here you are thinking of ways they can't leverage the door to their advantage. Whereas I am willing to deal with alternatives that are hard to achieve but are doable. And
Quote from: Christopher Brady;940992It seems like the DM was being a little too lenient compared to what the adventure was meant to be. An unfair meat grinder, a supposed eff you to some players claiming they 'won' at D&D. (My opinion on that is: So what? You're not in my game.)
Context is everything, and can redeem any adventure including a meat grinder like the Tomb of Horror. The context in this case was a player reaching name level, then earned a keep from the Overlord, and was clearing the Wilderness around when he stumbled on the Tomb. And the demi-lich was connected to a nearby culture that was centered on death worship.
I guess I can place you in the referee who don't like their setting "trashed" in ways they don't approve of.
Quote from: estar;941019Also it helped that the PCs were rootless wanderers. One was name level and had a keep to his name. The other was just about name level and had connections lined up. So forth and so on.
Ah, I see, your team had more resources available to them, than the one shot (we had like 3-5th level characters) we tried it out for. Fair enough. I still don't like it, but I can understand how some other players were able to get stuff out of it.
Interesting. In my current 5e game, I ran the players through both Sunless Citadel and Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan.
So yeah, this seems like a good idea to me.
I like the idea though I would have added Keep on the Borderlands or In Search of Adventure and maybe Queen of the Demonweb pit myself
Also the 2e era and 3e era modules hold no nostalgia for me , we never touched them and we improvised everything
Are these old adventures still good by modern standards? Like, I hear a lot about how older adventures don't really stand up to the test of time, having been written with completely different assumptions and so forth than modern adventure making.
I suppose that's the point of WotC rewriting and rereleasing them, but I meant more the people who take these older adventures as they are now and insert them into their campaigns.
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;941176Are these old adventures still good by modern standards? Like, I hear a lot about how older adventures don't really stand up to the test of time, having been written with completely different assumptions and so forth than modern adventure making.
I suppose that's the point of WotC rewriting and rereleasing them, but I meant more the people who take these older adventures as they are now and insert them into their campaigns.
I can attest to the two I recently ran. Other than adapting them to 5e, I mostly ran them exactly by the book as originally published. (I ran Tamoachan with continuing PCs rather than the pregens, but in tournament mode starting from the landslide.)
I thought that Sunless Citadel was generally excellent. It is a dynamic situation where most of the inhabitants made sense. There are only a few minor tweaks I would make in retrospect.
I had high hopes for Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan, which is a beautiful design and has a lot of fascinating concepts. However, I was disappointed in the lack of connecting threads between the different encounters - particularly in the upper dungeon where the time pressure is off, and the players had an expectation that there would be secrets revealed. If I was running it again, I would revise particularly the upper dungeon to have clues about what happened to the shrine and how it ended up in its current state - and include a dynamic enemy.