Six Worst D&D Modules of All Time?

Paul Bellow · Mar 19, 2019

kaladorn said: ↑

I understand your criticism of B1, but perhaps you could consider this perspective:

1) There are story lines (some from rumours/encounters that lead to true adventure in the Caves of Chaos and some of the simple but effective 'the keep and area are under threat from a pile of monsters in these caves that need neutralized')

2) The module, as several original modules did, was generic enough that it could be fit into any game world and campaign with a bit of customization.

I can't understate the importance of that. That lets me rename all the PCs and assign origins as are appropos for my campaign world.

I find most later modules that were tied to Greyhawk, Maztica, Red Steel, Forgotten Realms, etc. were all A RAGING PITA to adapt to a GM's homebrew world. You could rename the characters and the locations, and so on, but you have to not slip up and use what was written in the module and most of the boxed text then became tied to the assigned names and histories and so on. NOT EASILY ADAPTABLE.

My favourite sci-fi game is GDW's/Marc Miller's Traveller. It's best modules were also fairly generic so you could set them in whatever sector/campaign you had created or were using.

Now, B1 goes a bit too far (no real story lines to speak of, too much unfinished that you have to fill in). But B2 gets the right idea for any GM that isn't using a published setting (as do other somewhat generic modules). It provides some setup for some storylines, some rumours that could be developed by the GM, and a good starting base for players to venture out from and return to after raids on the nearby caves or wilderness areas.

Because it is adaptable yet complete enough to provide some good adventure options, it is almost IDEAL for those of us that need to adapt published works.

Also, it is a bit sandbox-ish. It does not force the player's hand down a preset plot (aka 'The Railroad') unlike many other D&D modules.

----------
ASIDE:

IMO, the best adventure design strategy is not the 3 Act Structure, it is not the Linear Railroad Narrative... it is the Nugget format. In this format, you have loose linkages between events and people that are flexible. In this type of adventure, you have NPCs with objectives and plans (maybe even a timeline in their heads) and with their own motivations and ways of approaching problems. From the interaction of the player's choices (Yay, Player Agency!) and the actions and choices of the NPCs (not preset events, just what makes sense from what the NPC knows, is trying to accomplish, and the NPS's approaches and resources) ends up creating the interactions/encoutners and lets the story unfold heavily influenced by player choices. Pre-set encounters with pre-set outcomes to drive the next encounter or act in a pre-set story are quickly grating and dis-empowering for players.

The railroad is because module writers want to be novelists, where they can drive the narrative to a particular conclusion. RPGs are actually closer to a group story or a 'players-act, GM-reacts' system at their best (that's the entire basis of the Dungeon World game and if you haven't checked it out, you should even just to educate your GMing sensibility/style). The GM is only 1/4th to 1/8th of that contribution (a key part, but still... all of the players should be doing important things that matter and having input).

Now, railroads are simple for new GMs (the other simple alternative is the 'random dungeon' or a B1 type situation) but that also can leave new players disenchanted with their lack of choice.

----------

Sometimes sandboxes seem to open, sometimes the GM is short on creativity, sometimes certain stories can't be easily told in a sandbox game. BUT they do encourage player agency and the good sandbox games throw out a lot of good options (vaguely described) that a GM can choose to integrate and develop (if they are short of ideas of their own or interspersed with the ideas they have).

Often times players do things the GM doesn't expect. In a nugget style adventure, the NPCs (based on what they know about the player's choice) will react in line with their own motivations and plans. So the players help drive the narrative in key ways. On the other hand, a fixed narrative or plotline requires the GM to wrestle the player group back in line with that plot or the whole thing goes to Avernus in a handbasket. And that always feels forced and frustrating for players.

B2 gives enough hooks and ideas to get a GM started and enough room for them to flavour each of those options to his own world and to also add in his own. And it avoids the pre-set storyline that creates the railroad.

If I were to single out examples in D&D modules that were horrible railroads:

Most of the Dragonlance Series

A4 Aerie of the Slave Lords (you just automatically end up in the Slave Lord's prison)

Examples where Thieves trim down player wealth primarily because the module or GM handed out to much to the players!

Set piece encounters of all sorts if they require a particular behaviour out of players to not break the story

B2 avoids most of that and offers a good, adaptable base that can fit into many campaign worlds.

For those who just want to play pre-located modules or play in pre-existing worlds and who are happy as players doing the obvious, following the plot, and being served the story rather than creating it... sandboxes are less enjoyable than pre-set narrative adventures with lots of setting-tied detail.

I hope I make a good case for B2 or other adaptable modules. There's a reason I haven't bought any 5E adventure paths and am adapting the old moduules... because they can adapt to my world, whereas the adventue paths require me to adapt my world to them (not what I want to do as a GM).
Click to expand...

Great points. Thanks for stopping by and sharing with us. Maybe I need to enlist you to write a follow-up for the blog. Only half-kidding!

jcsamuelson · Feb 23, 2022

I'm very, very late to this party but I just had to comment. First, I agree with most of your "worst" list here, and for the reasons you listed, but with one caveat. Of B2, you wrote:

"...it’s so old that you really can’t even play it any longer – it’s based on rules that are just over the line of being complex, residing somewhere comfortably in the world of the arcane."

This is funny to me because B2 was designed for the Basic ruleset. In fact, the Basic rules came bundled with it if you got the 1980 Moldvay edition (my first experience with the game), and they were so easy to parse a 10-year-old me (along with my cousin & best friend) started playing within 30 minutes of opening the box, including the time it took us to find a quiet spot to play in. IMHO they were at least as easy as 5e, and very, very far from being arcane.

Also, it was chuckle-worthy because the Moldvay rules were available at the DM's Guild site when you wrote the article. Yes, you could, in fact, play this module with the original ruleset in July 2017, and five years on you can also play it with OSE or even 5e now, thanks to Necrotic Gnome & Goodman Games respectively.

I think you might have actually been thinking of AD&D 1st Edition, which was indeed more complex and written in a, shall we say, less-than-user-friendly manner. They weren't quite so esoteric as to be incomprehensible - my friends & I were playing by the time we were 12 - but I'd agree they were needlessly complex.

As to the review itself, I mostly agree with you - as a new (and very young) DM, I could've used a little more help running it - but it was still a lot of fun for us back then, and it will always be one of my favorites for that reason alone.

Paul Bellow · Feb 23, 2022

jcsamuelson said: ↑

I'm very, very late to this party but I just had to comment. First, I agree with most of your "worst" list here, and for the reasons you listed, but with one caveat. Of B2, you wrote:

"...it’s so old that you really can’t even play it any longer – it’s based on rules that are just over the line of being complex, residing somewhere comfortably in the world of the arcane."

This is funny to me because B2 was designed for the Basic ruleset. In fact, the Basic rules came bundled with it if you got the 1980 Moldvay edition (my first experience with the game), and they were so easy to parse a 10-year-old me (along with my cousin & best friend) started playing within 30 minutes of opening the box, including the time it took us to find a quiet spot to play in. IMHO they were at least as easy as 5e, and very, very far from being arcane.

Also, it was chuckle-worthy because the Moldvay rules were available at the DM's Guild site when you wrote the article. Yes, you could, in fact, play this module with the original ruleset in July 2017, and five years on you can also play it with OSE or even 5e now, thanks to Necrotic Gnome & Goodman Games respectively.

I think you might have actually been thinking of AD&D 1st Edition, which was indeed more complex and written in a, shall we say, less-than-user-friendly manner. They weren't quite so esoteric as to be incomprehensible - my friends & I were playing by the time we were 12 - but I'd agree they were needlessly complex.

As to the review itself, I mostly agree with you - as a new (and very young) DM, I could've used a little more help running it - but it was still a lot of fun for us back then, and it will always be one of my favorites for that reason alone.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback.

Here's something new I'm working on... using AI...

https://randomencountersai.com

Welcome to the site, btw!

Log in or Sign up

Six Worst D&D Modules of All Time?

Paul Bellow Forum Game Master Staff Member LitRPG Author Shop Owner Citizen Aspiring Writer

jcsamuelson Level 2 (Initiate) Citizen

Paul Bellow Forum Game Master Staff Member LitRPG Author Shop Owner Citizen Aspiring Writer

Share This Page