ASC Review: Wreck Of The Spinefish

The Wreck of the Spinefish (ShockTohp)

ACKSII adventure for five to eight PCs of levels 4th-6th

I am reviewing these in the order they were submitted. For my review criteria, please check out this post. All reviews will (probably) contain *SPOILERS*; you have been warned! Because these are short (two page) adventures, it is my intention to keep the reviews brief.

I’ll be honest…I’m at a loss.

This is a great concept for an adventure site: a beached ship, a former prison hulk, rendered cairn by a demon and now a haunted place for exploration.

But it’s for ACKSII. I don’t know shit about ACKSII.

The first ACKS is a tarted up version of BECMI with a bunch of D20isms (DND3) thrown into the mix. I haven’t read ACKSII (nor do I have any plans to do so) but this seems…more of the same?

“Climb throws?” “Bludgeoning damage?” “Nonspeaking medium incarnations?” What the hell IS this? What the heck is this “Shadowed Sinkhole of Evil (JJ pg 88)” being referenced?

Hey man, I’ll take your word for it that you know what you’re doing. I just don’t have the time or inclination to learn ACKSII.

I’ll give this a *** (playable) rating and allow the more knowledgable judges to make a more nuanced argument, yay or nay, for this adventure.

My apologies.

ASC Review: Temple of Bast

Temple of Bast (Joe Nash)

A BECMI/RC adventure for PCs of 3rd level

I am reviewing these in the order they were submitted. For my review criteria, please check out this post. All reviews will (probably) contain *SPOILERS*; you have been warned! Because these are short (two page) adventures, it is my intention to keep the reviews brief.

Yet another repeat contestant. Nash gave us last year’s Sausages of the Devil Swine which I deemed good, but lacking functionality (it was, however, right at the top of my two-star rankings). Not that this kept him from being included in the winner’s bracket by the other judges (*sigh*). This year, however, he hits a solid line drive…using the BECMI/RC version of Basic D&D no less.

While no specific size of party is noted, the number of encounters along with the amount of treasure and the suggested level (3rd) suggests an average party size of 5 (4-6 in other words)…perfectly acceptable for an average group session.

With 24 keyed areas, Temple of Bast is definitely at the “high" end of qualification (personally, I think 9 to 14 be more appropriate , but it ain't my contest) and yet it still feels small and tight. The adventure is well-themed and has plenty going on without baking in any kind of story or plot. Yes, there is a situation. No, there is no particular way the party needs to interact with the situation. The temple itself is delightful, and perfectly reasonable for a BECMI party of 3rd level. Given that the adventuring party will probably have access to a sleep spell (to deal with the squads of gnoll brigands), only the mountain lion pack seems particularly rough (wandering into a den of FOUR is likely to take down at least two or three 3rd level characters; thieves and magic-users being particularly vulnerable to their multiple 3+ HD attacks). However, I do NOT fault the inclusion of a mummy as it is both thematically appropriate and completely avoidable by the party.

This is solid D&D, and while I give it a slight (-) downgrade for not being more specific with the expected party number and the killer lions, this is easily worth **** for BECMI/RC play. Well done!

ASC Review: Ophidian Temple

Ophidian Temple (Scott_M)

AD&D adventure for four to six PCs of levels 5th-7th

I am reviewing these in the order they were submitted. For my review criteria, please check out this post. All reviews will (probably) contain *SPOILERS*; you have been warned! Because these are short (two page) adventures, it is my intention to keep the reviews brief.

This is more than a simple “adventure site;” it is a full adventure with a situational objective and consequential objectives. For me, it seems a tad large, but it falls within Gibson’s criteria and will be judged as such.

*sigh*

When it comes to these sites, Scott_M seems to have a particular style, really attempting to “push the envelope” rather than simply “letting the game come to him;” I saw this in last year’s Owlbear Hill. This year, he’s going hard with the pulp S&S “snake man jungle” vibe which is, of course, a delightful trope of hack-n-slash D&D (didn’t I write my own Snake-Demon-Goddess temple a couple years back). Here, though, it causes him to stumble.

Writing for AD&D is not particularly hard, as the author shows…a good treasure count and distribution plus appropriately themed and coherent monster placement that doesn’t defy or insult when it comes to challenge is all one really needs. There are some nitpicks…extra word count is devoted to discussion of architecture and incense, but nothing at all said about the illumination/lighting of the temple area (a rather pertinent fact to AD&D adventurers who prefer encounter locations to be VISIBLY described). One can always make assumptions but, yes, this is a nitpick.

However, the true downgrade comes from the manifesting demon-god of the snake-men, the entire “story/plot” of the adventure. Sure, we’ve seen this before (H2 anyone?) but here we have a wholly invented godling that grants clerical spells (not really part of the ophidian ecology) summoned by a ritual outside the standard spell-craft of AD&D (this is not how AD&D magic works…and non-humans do not, generally, have access to such power), in order to summon a 10 HD scratch “demon” that exists solely as a stat block and visual description.

Sorry but this is not how we do “AD&D.” Demons have a hierarchy…is this a Prince? What is its relationships with other demons. Is it a god (it appears to grant spells)? Then why is it so weak in comparison to other gods? What are the ramifications of it being manifested on the Prime Material Plane? What are the consequences of it being slain? The idea of a the snake-man priest is divorced from the description of the ophidian monster as it appears in the MM2, and seems to contradict the description of them being a servitor, "non-independent" species.

So, not good as it goes against some basic AD&D assumptions. This would be MOSTLY playable, if not solid D&D…but the appearance of this Asthask'ss thing (which seems mainly present in order to ape the style of trope-pulp S&S) is sadly lacking. ** with a “+” for being otherwise okay.

EDIT: bumped up to *** after discussion with the designer. Not quite 'elegant in execution,' but playable. See the comments section on this post.

ASC Review: Save Vs. Sarnoth

Save Vs. Sarnoth (Riley)

S&W (OD&D) adventure for four to six PCs of levels 4th-5th

I am reviewing these in the order they were submitted. For my review criteria, please check out this post. All reviews will (probably) contain *SPOILERS*; you have been warned! Because these are short (two page) adventures, it is my intention to keep the reviews brief.

We start the contest with a submission from Riley, author of last year’s excellent Tower of the Necromancer. Unfortunately, few of you will have heard of Tower of the Necromancer despite it being 4-star (“solid”) D&D because it did not make the final cut of the ASCII adventure compilation. Of this I can only say that my values and priorities with regard to adventure design often differ from my fellow judges.

This year’s offering from Riley is not as good, in my estimation. An S&W (read: OD&D) adventure, the size is right, and the treasure count accurate…if perhaps a tad on the high side (not by much!). But the danger level seems woefully slim and the actual amount of “stuff” in this adventure…a colloquial term I use to indicate “interactive situations and environmental factors”…feels thin indeed. A handful of feral centaurs, readily encountered as wandering monsters (50% chance each turn!), and a single gorgon makes this not much more than an elaborate “lair,” though I wouldn’t go so far as to downgrade it…the thing is a true “adventure site,” with SOME weirdness and non-combat encounters to provide a change of pace.

Still: 17 keyed encounters of which only three are overtly hostile, and the two “traps” that appear being in the same location as two of the hostile monsters makes for a site that’s pretty empty of challenge and danger.

Totally dig that several of the playtest characters show up as statues in the gorgon’s lair…this is the kind of touch I like to add to my own adventures. The elaborate spine-forged sword, while passably interesting, is pretty extraneous.

This is playable D&D: *** with a (-) sign added due to the lack of challenge. Yes, a gorgon is tough, but there’s more treasure to be had in the rest of the site (treasure that's far easier to obtain) without ever setting foot in its grotto. Would also like to know what the hell is the relationship between the centaur, dryads, nixies, and gorgon.

Judgment

Currently at the American Airlines Lounge of the DFW, drinking an extra dry Bombay gin martini (three olives) and wearing my 'Hawks jersey as I watch the Seahawks game...we've got three-four hours before our next flight so we should be able to watch the thing in its entirety. Had a bit of a WTF moment today when I turned on the internet and found we'd invaded another country and kidnapped their president (and his wife), but...well, the booze and the football helps take my mind off that particular piece of madness.

So instead, let's talk adventure writing contests.

Once again it is time for Ben Gibson’s delightful Adventure Site Contest (ASC3), in which dungeon designers from around the globe test their design chops in delivering a delightful evening’s play in the form of a smallish adventure…something larger than a lair, but not quite a full-blown dungeon. An adventure site…something that might be stumbled upon during a hex-crawl or between larger mission objectives.

There are, of course, parameters for the contest. Gibson has stated that:

• The site must be small, something in the neighborhood of 8 to 24 keyed locations. 
• There should be a coherent “story” to the place (one I would call a “theme”) not just a bunch of encounters thrown together. 
• There is a hard limit of two pages of text, not including maps and (possibly) a title/cover page. 
• There must be at least one map.
•  And the adventure must be written for an “old school” edition of Dungeons & Dragons, specifically OD&D, AD&D, or Basic, or a “very close” retro-clone. ACKS, itself a BECMI (Basic) derivative, is specifically noted as a example of the latter.

These are the criteria for being legal entries in the contest…the regulations one must consider to be the “rules of play.” By my count, this disqualifies nearly half the entries from consideration.

Yeah. I’m a hard ass like that. Also, my time is finite.

Every ASC judge has their own personal criteria for judgment, and I am no different. Every entry I review will be given a “star” rating…from zero to five…that best describes my opinion of the adventure as a “made for use at the table” adventure module. For me, three stars (“***”) is the MINIMUM level to be considered playable D&D.

What is “playable D&D?” Playable D&D means: an adventure that a DM can pick up and use, at table, as written, within the designated system, regardless of the adventure’s subjective “quality.” Most, if not all, pre-1985 TSR-era adventure modules fall into this category. Before D&D began to drift into a region of posturing and railroad stories, the game was still a game to be played, and the designers (generally) knew the rule systems within which they were working, and adhered to those systems. While some may consider procedural-based D&D an obsolete relic of the past, the fact remains that it is a functional mode of play, ignored only at one’s peril, unless one’s group wishes to drift wholly into the realm of freeform, narrative-driven play (which may indeed be a form of enjoyable entertainment but is not, strictly speaking, a GAME with rules and objectives).

Four stars (“****”) is what I refer to as “solid D&D,” what every designer and Dungeon Master should aspire to. Five stars (“*****”) is a rating I reserve for truly triumphant game design…not only does it exhibit exacting and appropriate knowledge of the system, but it ELEVATES the material, using it in original or unusual ways that demonstrates exemplary design chops. Last year, I only awarded five stars to two of the thirty submissions.

Anything less than three stars falls outside the realm of “playable D&D.” Two stars (“**”) generally indicates a lacking or deficiency in one or (more usually) several categories. In my opinion, this often comes from the designer’s attempt to translate what “plays” at the table to the medium of the published adventure…things that designer (as DM) simply assumes or “wings” in play gets left out of the textual instruction, forcing the consumer to have to improvise in a way that may or may not conform to the designer’s expectations. This is BAD design…DMs who use published adventures are doing so for a multitude of reasons, but clearly they want the adventure to be functional without the need to do extra work themselves (reading the thing should be enough “preparation”). A two star adventure requires additional work on the part of the would-be DM just to run the thing, i.e. to make the adventure “playable.” One-third of last year’s entries fell into the two-star category.

A one star (“*”) adventure is one in which the designer exhibits a lack of understanding with regard to the game and/or system they purport to be designing for. Such designers are advised to go back and study the rules and instructions for which they are designing, because it matters little to a DM how creative and imaginative a scenario if it fails to function in the system for which it has been designed. For example: if an adventure is written for B/X or OD&D and uses monsters only found in the (AD&D) Fiend Folio, this is an example of non-functional, one-star design. If I am a B/X DM and I pick up a pre-written adventure “written for B/X,” I am expecting an adventure that can be run with the books I own and use. I should not be expected to know what a “githyanki” is (for example) because there is no such creature in the B/X rule books, and the inclusion of such a creature in the adventure requires the inclusion of its stat block and description or else the adventure is non-functional. Nearly one-quarter (7 of 30) of last year’s entries fell into this category.

Finally, the coveted “zero star” rating is reserved for adventures that are NOT adventures. These are ideas…perhaps even INTERESTING ideas…but not actionable content. A very rare categorization for Mr. Gibson’s contest; in the past, I’ve only seen fit to “award” this rank to one submission.

We’ll see what happens this year.

To ALL the contestants that I am about to read (and cast judgment upon): congratulations for making it this far. Regardless of how I judge your entry, you should take pride in the fact that you created something, that you got off your ass and put your name and reputation on the line. Regardless of whether or not I like your adventure, you have already shown your courage and mettle and should take pride in the accomplishment. You’ve put in the work. And if I judge your adventure harshly, please know that I am not saying QUIT. YOU SUCK. GO HOME. I am only asking you to try again and do better.

Please do not be discouraged. You’ve already beat out countless numbers of DMs who couldn’t be bothered to try.

Judgments to come.

Year's First

Happy 2026!

It's 4:54am, Mexico time, and everyone has finally gone to bed. Well, everyone in our house anyway...there's at least two parties still going on this block (I can hear Achy Breaky Heart playing in Spanish outside my bedroom window...and it's playing LOUD).

*sigh* Mexico.

But I'm not tired (note that I'm blogging instead of sleeping). Might have something to do with the caffeinated coffee I've been on since I got here. It doesn't help to be up till 3am every night and then drinking coffee from noon till 4pm. Just...rough. But a good time, too. I'll be back in Seattle by Saturday night, but I'm not sure how long the readjustment will be. 72 hours? Hopefully.

Looking back at last year's resolutions, I see that I hit on two of them. Which kind of sucks but whatever. THe main thing I wanted to do was sell my (deceased) mother's house. Unfortunately, I had to evict my brother first, which was an eight month legal process, lasting from April till October. Now that he's gone, that's again at the top of the list and will be my "January project;" the holidays were just too busy to get shit done.

SO, let's see; here's the list of resolutions for 2026:

• Sell the house.
• Coach Sofia's volleyball team to the playoffs.
• Coach Sofia's soccer team (in the fall) to the playoffs (again).
• Publish my two Blackrazor Cup tournament adventures.
• Finish the first draft of my "How to DM" book

That's it...still a fairly modest, fairly doable list, so long as I don't get too sidetracked by "stuff."

I would like to keep up a good pace of blogging...158 posts in 2025 was my most in a single year since 2011 (although 2012 saw me post 157 times). If I can just keep a 100+ pace, I think I'll be doing fine...better than fine, really. But that book needs to get written, too. Maybe I'll just post some excerpts as it comes along? Maybe. 

Okay. That's it. I can't keep my eyes open and the screen is swimming in front of my eyes. 5:21am and it's time to call it. Good night everyone...hope your New Year turns out excellent! Cheers!

: )

"Dear JB" Mailbag #52

Over the course of 2025, I've done 52 of these...an average of one per week. While it made for an amusing (if sometimes frustrating) series, I'm done now. This last one I just dredged up by going to the "r/dnd"...it was the first thing that came up, though it was from four years ago. As usual, Wednesday's child is full of woe....

Dear JB:

Been DMing for 15 years and I think I just played my last session of DnD. I just don't want to do it anymore. Built a world and no one remembers any details. Add a puzzle and no one even tries. 

It might seem minor but this last session frustrated me more then it should have. Players walk into room. Huge obvious McGuffin in room. Only detail provided is a bunch of books are also in the room. No one explores. No one tries to read a single book. "I'd like to examine the bookcases" is literally all they had to do to get the knowledge they needed for the knowledge puzzle. Could have also examined the floor or climbed a staircase but that was less obvious. But no one bothers to do any of it.

I end up trying to change the encounter last minute to prevent a party wipe because they didn't get a piece of info they needed. Whole encounter ends up being clunky and bad because of it. This is a constant thing.

I don't want to DM if I have to hand feed every detail to the players. I also don't want do nothing but create simple combat encounters. So I'm gonna take a week and think it through but I think I just don't want to play anymore. Sucks.

After 15 Years DMing I Think I'm Done Playing DnD

Dear Done:

I've seen (and answered) several "quitting" type letters. Yours is the only one who said he was quitting after DMing for 15 years.

Fifteen years is a long time. I worked for the same organization for fifteen years. Hoo-boy...that is a LONG time to spend on something you don't love and aren't passionate about. Truth be told, I was passionate about it...probably for the first decade or so. After that, it was mainly just a paycheck and benefits.

Did your DMing net you a paycheck and benefits?

According to your profile, you wrote this letter when you were 37 years old. I turned 52 last month; it's been fifteen years since I was 37 years old. That was 2010...I'd been writing this blog for a year and a half at that time. Had been playing D&D (and other RPGs) for more than a quarter-century at that time. Had zero desire (at that point) to quit playing.

Why? What's the difference between you and me?

Am I just a bigger nerd than you are? Or a more stubborn one? Do you just have a "quitter gene" in your DNA, while I do not? Hardly. I've quit plenty of things. Hobbies. Jobs. Relationships. Always for good reason. Fencing for example...I loved fencing. But at the age of 30 my knees were starting to break down and I didn't like the direction my physical health was heading. Rehab (via years of yoga) helped put me back together. 

Hell. I loved smoking, too. Again, I quit that for health reasons. Decided I preferred to live longer than my pack-a-day habit (two-a-day on weekends) was going to allow.

But you, Mr. Done...what's your reason for quitting this activity you've been engaged in for the last 15 years? Because your players are bad at D&D? Huh? What?

Look: you either enjoy being a DM or your don't. If you enjoy being a DM, then it doesn't matter what your players do or don't do. I mean, maybe I'm weird. I just like making adventures and running them. Players that make poor decisions in my games usually see their characters end up dead. Which is (often) amusing for Yours Truly. Most of the time, this incentivizes players to get better...i.e. to become better players. And I do mean "most of the time." I just don't see a lot of players quit on me out of a dislike of the game play...in fact, I can't think of ANY off the top of my head.

[although that's with regard to D&D...I have had at least one player quit on a Vampire saga, because he decided he didn't like the game and its themes]

So, yeah...I run a straightforward game. Players get good or their characters get dead. Players come back for more until other priorities (life, etc.) get in the way. Yeah, that's about the extent of it. 

For me...I don't care. I just enjoy running D&D. I'm a Dungeon Master...that's what I do. I don't build worlds for my players; I build worlds for ME. I don't insert puzzles for my players to solve; I insert puzzles because it makes sense, or feels right, to have such a challenge in a particular adventure I'm designing. If the players can't figure it out...tough. If the players get killed in a fight...tough. THAT'S THE GAME. It continues to amaze me that folks don't seem to get this...even after fifteen years of being a Dungeon Master.

But I'm being silly, I know. I didn't understand what it was to be a Dungeon Master back in 2010 (after 25 years of running games for people). No one ever explained it to me, and I was too dim to see it myself. It wasn't until the last seven or eight years...maybe ten...that I've REALLY, truly grasped what it means to be a Dungeon Master. What it means as a calling...as a vocation. I've had it all along, but I didn't have the words to articulate it or the right ideas to conceptualize it. Now I do. 

Which is why, of course, I need to get back to writing my book on the subject.

Hey, Mr. "Done With D&D:" you need to stop worrying about whether or not your players are jackasses or fools. You need to stop worrying about whether or not they give a rip about your world building (spoiler alert: they DON'T except insomuch as it directly  affects their characters). You need to stop bitching-and-moaning about the shit your can't control, and start focusing on the shit you CAN control...like whether or not an encounter is "clunky."

Be okay with the total party wipe. Your players are (apparently) okay with it...otherwise, they'd try a little harder and pay a bit more attention. I'm so glad to hear you're tired of feeding them details...I can assure you that you are not doing your players (or yourself!) any favors by hand-holding them.

Just kill them already. Get over it.

*sigh*  Fifteen frigging years. Man, if I could go back to my 37 year old self with the knowledge I have today... Man, if I could go back to my 25 year old self (15 years into starting to DM)...

Eh. I probably wouldn't have listened to me, either.

Allow me to be frank: chances are you're not a terribly good Dungeon Master right now, even after fifteen years of taking the role. Yeah, probably not. Because from the words in your letter it's pretty obvious you don't know yourself very well in the "Know Thyself" Socrates kind of way. Because if you did, you wouldn't be whining NOW about an issue that's probably been going on for every one of these last fifteen years. Oh, what? It's only a problem after a decade and a half?

Hey, Done: this is the last one of these "Dear JB" letters I plan on writing...the very last. So I'm going to pull back the curtain for the people reading this blog. More than 1.7 thousand people replied to this letter of yours. And all the advice is of the stupidest kind: Find new players. Communicate your feelings. Take a break from DMing to "recharge." Use "quantum" encounters. Read "The Lazy  DM." Blah-blah-blah.

Garbage. All of it.

You don't need to communicate your feelings; you need to run the game. You don't need to take a break from gaming; you need to bring focus and attention to your work. You don't need to get new players; you need to train the players that come to your table. You don't need to use quantum encounters; you need to stop having attachments to whether or not the players take a particular specific action. And for the love of CHRIST, please, Please, PLEASE spurn the "lazy DM" and all his unholy works. Get thee behind me, Satan!

Your frustration, your discontent, and your lack of satisfaction all come from your approach to the game. That's it; that's all. If you want to fix those things, you need to fix your mind; you need to fix yourself. Nothing else you try is going to solve your problems until you get your head screwed on right.

After fifteen years, I'd say it's worth a shot before quitting.

Sincerely, 

JB