I have several Tomb of Horrors adventures, from the 1978 original onward, and I'm about to play one using Pathfinder rules. In your guy's opinion, which Tomb of Horrors is the most fun? I haven't ran any of my Tombs of Horrors yet, and I don't know which to pick.
|
I have several Tomb of Horrors adventures, from the 1978 original onward, and I'm about to play one using Pathfinder rules. In your guy's opinion, which Tomb of Horrors is the most fun? I haven't ran any of my Tombs of Horrors yet, and I don't know which to pick.
The one that was the most fun was the one I never entered.
DM: You see three tunnels reaching back into darkness.
Party: F this man. We go back to town and have some ale.
But for a DM the fun one is the first one. Even players who have been in it before forget how to kill the big bad and forget half the traps.
But for a DM the fun one is the first one. Even players who have been in it before forget how to kill the big bad and forget half the traps.
Agreed. First time I went in, I died in the mouth and watched the game for the rest of the 10 or so hours (there were a *lot* of players).
(hmmm. Come to think of it, maybe let them bring lots of henchman and dead PCs can run a henchman; Um.... Maybe the henchmen have hirelings.. and the hirelings could have animal companions and familiars... yeah yeah.)
If you want your players to be able to say "I played the Tome of Horrors" it has to be the first edition. Do or die...or just die.
If you want the PCs to be able to say "I survived the Tome of Horrors", it has to NOT be the first edition.
If you do it as a one-shot, give them several backup PCs and go, starting at the tunnels. For longer play, I'd recommend using the storyline from the 2nd edition update, not the 4th edition which...fails.
If you'd like a fuller campaign, you can tie it into some Vecna storylines/campaigns from 2nd ed. (Swap liches, or have them as rivals.)
Have fun, just make sure to warn the players not to get too attached to the PCs, but rather the challenge.
I have several Tomb of Horrors adventures, from the 1978 original onward, and I'm about to play one using Pathfinder rules. In your guy's opinion, which Tomb of Horrors is the most fun? I haven't ran any of my Tombs of Horrors yet, and I don't know which to pick.
Hard question to answer without knowing what your group's playstyle and what they consider fun;-). Not to mention level ranges...pregens or your campaign characters?
If you're looking for some old school dungeoneering that will run from 1 to 3 sessions (depending how time efficient your group is and what complications you throw their way), I'd go with the original Tomb. Wotc did up a 3.5 conversion a bit ago that I think ran in the 9th to 12th level range.
There are some tactics, spells and abilities in 3rd ed ++ that may make it quite a bit simpler but honestly there were things in 1e that could turn the Tomb into a cakewalk as well (Find the Path and Monster Summoning to mention two).
Return to the Tomb of Horrors can run long... if you choose that one be prepared to run it for months. While I didn't find it nearly as grindy as ToEE or RtToEE, it can get long in the tooth towards the end. So you may have some player fatigue by the time you reach the Fortress of Conclusion if your group are not a bunch of hard core dungeoneers. Conversion wise, there are a number of things in this one that are in the epic CR range..
It does however make a nice capstone for a campaign and assuming your players like and can handle a challenging crawl they'll probably have a story or two to tell about this one for years. If your players tend towards fairly optimized PC builds and play style this is the one I'd use.
I haven't run or played the 4e Tomb yet but it's meant to run in more manageable interludes. More or less you are supposed to run one chapter of the the tomb then go do something else (your normal campaign) until the next tomb related adventure pops up. Conversion from 4e to Pathfinder would probably be the most work of the three (you could probably wing Monsters somewhat but 4e magic item\treasure to pathfinder may take some thought).
There is some kewl\memorable stuff here, but not sure how it plays. Of the three it's the most organic...easy to insert in an ongoing campaign and you probably can convert the challenges in it to suit most levels of play (well careless players will still die but this one seems the most forgiving of the three...).
I have several Tomb of Horrors adventures, from the 1978 original onward, and I'm about to play one using Pathfinder rules. In your guy's opinion, which Tomb of Horrors is the most fun? I haven't ran any of my Tombs of Horrors yet, and I don't know which to pick.
If you're looking for it to be fun, whatever you do, DO NOT PLAY THE 3.5 VERSION.
It is NOT fun. It's not deadly. It's just annoying.
Let me say one thing, and some people may disagree with me: The Tomb of Horrors is not a very good adventure. I don't mean it's not enjoyable, I don't mean a lot of work didn't go into it, but plain and simple, the only reason it exists is because Gary Gygax wanted to prove that nobody in 1st edition was invincible. Too many people claimed they were so good at the game, or their characters were so powerful, that they couldn't be killed. Gary Gygax came back by creating the Tomb of Horrors- a dungeon where every other trap killed you instantly, in a game where the only way to find traps was to actually describe HOW you were searching for the traps. The entire thing was a death-filled gauntlet, and there was a real sense of accomplishment for the few that managed to complete it (or even for those who just died a bunch of times and had a good time doing it).
Not so with 3.5. In 3.5, you don't make adventures to kill PCs anymore. Every adventure is intended to be beaten (with a statistical "goal" of each encounter taking a certain percentage of resources, etc. etc.). That alone goes against the Tomb of Horrors' entire point (which, while it could technically be beaten, it was very very difficult to do). Add in two more things that completely neuter the Tomb of Horrors: 1. Practically nothing kills instantly anymore (everything that used to kill instantly instead do an amount of damage appropriate for an Xth-level encounter), and 2. You can find literally every trap/secret door/whatever by simply rolling a DC XX search check.
I ran the Tomb of Horrors 3.5 a few years back, and halfway through the dungeon, nobody had died (nobody had even been brought below half HP), and the constant search checks/disable device checks/unnecessarily complicated descriptions for hallways left my players more annoyed and bored than anything else.
If you want to run the Tomb of Horrors the way it was meant to be run, you're going to have to do it in 1st edition. If you would rather use 3.5/Pathfinder rules, then the only way it's going to be in the least bit threatening would be to run it for 2nd- or 3rd-level characters. I did that once (and I can give you advice on how to make it work if you'd like) and it was a relatively good time.
The thing is, it is easily convertable. Take the original module and update very few elements and you are go. The deathtraps are there, and do not need changing. I played the original with, if I recall, three 11th level characters, specially made for the occasion. It was a different experience, and it had a great conclusion that I am sure was never intended. They were paranoid enough and did not die. It took us three sessions. The sad part? It's mostly hype. There are far more deadly scenarios out there.
Hope I am not stepping on anyone's toes here.
Absolutely.
As long as you don't mind it taking a long time, a wand of augury rules in ToH. "Weal or woe if I put my hand in the demon's mouth?"
|
The thing is, it is easily convertable. Take the original module and update very few elements and you are go. The deathtraps are there, and do not need changing. I played the original with, if I recall, three 11th level characters, specially made for the occasion. It was a different experience, and it had a great conclusion that I am sure was never intended. They were paranoid enough and did not die. It took us three sessions. The sad part? It's mostly hype. There are far more deadly scenarios out there.
Hope I am not stepping on anyone's toes here.
Except the official way that traps work under PFRPG makes them rather impotent, incapable of anyone willing to "take 20".
|
|
Except the official way that traps work under PFRPG makes them rather impotent, incapable of anyone willing to "take 20".The thing is, it is easily convertable. Take the original module and update very few elements and you are go. The deathtraps are there, and do not need changing. I played the original with, if I recall, three 11th level characters, specially made for the occasion. It was a different experience, and it had a great conclusion that I am sure was never intended. They were paranoid enough and did not die. It took us three sessions. The sad part? It's mostly hype. There are far more deadly scenarios out there.
Hope I am not stepping on anyone's toes here.
oh, oh, oh
I got it. Every trap is actually a creature. A very passive deadly & unique creature. Use your trap finding now suckers.....mu hahaha.
Depends what you do with them. A good number of them are die, no save, which fits thematically. They should be that vicious. However, it's still not impossible.