What are your thoughts on I6 Ravenloft, or any of its remakes? The original is supposedly one of the best modules ever published and it ends up on Top 10 lists. But what do you think of it? Why does it work, assuming it works?
Boring, the beginning of serious railroads in terms of "plot" (you can walk away from any of the older modules and go adventuring elsewhere; the DM is told directly that "barovia" is surrounded by a fog that stops the characters from leaving and ONLY lifts after they've run the dungeon).
Pretty map by Dave Sutherland, though.
I'd drop the fog and add it as an adventure locale in Greyhawk.
I personally think it is a great module, but it may require a veteran dm to shine. Works best for players that are not jaded ravenloft veterans.
As with most modules; its as good as the gm makes it.
But it does have a ton of cool stuff inside.
A vampire that is actually dangerous.
Spooky village with sinister castle looming over it. Huuuuge castle.
Deadly monsters lurking about.
Vistani are a gold mine if handled well.
Great module, lots of fun in play. One of the best ever? Dunno, I find it hard to make such judgements, particularly since it's tied to one's preferred style of play. I6 is a really good adventure locale, however, with tons of interesting (and gameable) detail.
As mentioned, the fog around Barovia is ridiculously heavy-handed, and is probably the most glaring issue with the module. Having said that, the notion that the party being able to just walk away is always a virtue rings hollow to me. In the real world not everyone is running a sandbox, and a DM running a module is, more often than not, doing so precisely because they don't have a plethora of other material for the party to wander into. The party "walking away" in these cases means the players not engaging with the material the DM is running, and is really a table problem that the participants need to sort out.
At some level the players either engage with something the DM is presenting, or nothing happens and everybody watches TV for the evening, instead.
Quote from: Bobloblah;714493Great module, lots of fun in play. One of the best ever? Dunno, I find it hard to make such judgements, particularly since it's tied to one's preferred style of play. I6 is a really good adventure locale, however, with tons of interesting (and gameable) detail.
As mentioned, the fog around Barovia is ridiculously heavy-handed, and is probably the most glaring issue with the module. Having said that, the notion that the party being able to just walk away is always a virtue rings hollow to me. In the real world not everyone is running a sandbox, and a DM running a module is, more often than not, doing so precisely because they don't have a plethora of other material for the party to wander into. The party "walking away" in these cases means the players not engaging with the material the DM is running, and is really a table problem that the participants need to sort out.
At some level the players either engage with something the DM is presenting, or nothing happens and everybody watches TV for the evening, instead.
Also, the fog here is a bit of a trap. Yes it does confine the party to that location, you want be careful about that kind of stuff in general, but it works for the horror mood the module has in mind.
I'd call it one of my favorite adventures ever. It had some neat elements -- the fact that a lot of the core elements shift based on the card setup was nice, and Strahd was an impressive villain, meant to be engage the DM's "evil genius" gears. It also had a very sharp sense of humor, which later iterations, like the Expedition to Castle Ravenloft, don't capture.
OTOH, I always thought the fog was too railroady, and some of the monsters didn't fit the atmosphere. (IIRC, there was a bigass dragon roosting in the top of the tower, and I'd have liked to either see it replaced with something more atmospheric or tied into Strahd's backstory in some way.)
But overall, a really great adventure, IMO.
Quote from: Bobloblah;714493At some level the players either engage with something the DM is presenting, or nothing happens and everybody watches TV for the evening, instead.
Seriously. When I and the rest of the table were 14 year old boys it made sense to add that sort of hammer to the DM's tools. We are generally middle aged now, and we respect our DM and his time enough that we aren't going to intentionally be jerks.
On a recent re-read, I was impressed by how evocative yet efficient the text of the original module is. It is something all the subsequent rewrites and sequels lacked.
Quote from: Bobloblah;714493Great module, lots of fun in play. One of the best ever? Dunno, I find it hard to make such judgements, particularly since it's tied to one's preferred style of play. I6 is a really good adventure locale, however, with tons of interesting (and gameable) detail.
As mentioned, the fog around Barovia is ridiculously heavy-handed, and is probably the most glaring issue with the module. Having said that, the notion that the party being able to just walk away is always a virtue rings hollow to me. In the real world not everyone is running a sandbox, and a DM running a module is, more often than not, doing so precisely because they don't have a plethora of other material for the party to wander into. The party "walking away" in these cases means the players not engaging with the material the DM is running, and is really a table problem that the participants need to sort out.
At some level the players either engage with something the DM is presenting, or nothing happens and everybody watches TV for the evening, instead.
You don't really need to trap anyone in Barovia with the Mist. Let them leave.
I would reccomend giving them a reason to want to investigate the area.
Quote from: Bill;714540You don't really need to trap anyone in Barovia with the Mist. Let them leave.
I would reccomend giving them a reason to want to investigate the area.
The module, and Ravenloft generally, are not new to me. As myself and others have mentioned, the problem is with the idea that, even after you've provided said reasons to investigate, the players should be able to just decide to leave. This notion is all well and good, and works fine in a sandbox environment, but it ignores the reality of many tables where the module in question is what's for dinner tonight, and if you don't like it you're going to go hungry.
Forget the heavy-handedness of the mist (even if it kinda fits the module, like Brendan said), there's a table expectation that the players are here to play what the DM has prepped. Going off-script is fine, and to be expected, maybe even encouraged. Deciding that, "Nah. We're not gonna play that!" is not.
Quote from: Bobloblah;714546The module, and Ravenloft generally, are not new to me. As myself and others have mentioned, the problem is with the idea that, even after you've provided said reasons to investigate, the players should be able to just decide to leave. This notion is all well and good, and works fine in a sandbox environment, but it ignores the reality of many tables where the module in question is what's for dinner tonight, and if you don't like it you're going to go hungry.
Forget the heavy-handedness of the mist (even if it kinda fits the module, like Brendan said), there's a table expectation that the players are here to play what the DM has prepped. Going off-script is fine, and to be expected, maybe even encouraged. Deciding that, "Nah. We're not gonna play that!" is not.
So let them leave. Its only a problem if you, as the gm, make it a problem.
The map is great, and the setting material is presented in a very thorough and attractive manner way for the time. But it is a railroad. My players (unintentionally) broke it when they:
*************SPOILERS*********************
A) Threatened the girl Straad loved in order to make him appear at a time and place of their choosing.
B) After a wounded Straad fled, they scouted the premises of the castle, rappelled down the cliff at back, smashed through the dungeon-level windows, made a bee-line for his coffin, and spiked him.
So it took us about 90 minutes to finish the thing.
Quote from: Bobloblah;714546Forget the heavy-handedness of the mist (even if it kinda fits the module, like Brendan said), there's a table expectation that the players are here to play what the DM has prepped. Going off-script is fine, and to be expected, maybe even encouraged. Deciding that, "Nah. We're not gonna play that!" is not.
The question is whether 'what the DM has prepped' is the setting, or the setting
and story. If your formative years of playing D&D involved the DM presenting the setting and the players generating the story in play, then fixed plots are an unwelcome imposition, and likely to be broken by players without any malice or breach of table expectation.
Quote from: Bill;714550So let them leave. Its only a problem if you, as the gm, make it a problem.
Bill, I have really no idea what your point is. As I've pointed out, "letting them leave," in the sense of allowing them to go do something else, may or may not be an option compatible with playing the game that night. If it isn't, "We're leaving!" is a table problem, and one that I don't think the mists around Barovia actually fix.
The DM not having something else prepared, or not feeling like coming up with something completely different on the fly when there was already a scenario prepared, is not the DM "making it a problem." It's a table problem rooted in some sort of mismatched expectations. I might even go so far as to say it's a problem with the players; if they really don't want to even engage with what the DM preps, perhaps one of them needs to put on their big person pants and run the game themselves...
Quote from: Haffrung;714551The map is great, and the setting material is presented in a very thorough and attractive manner way for the time. But it is a railroad.
The only portion I found truly railroady was the mists, and I've yet to have a party run into trouble with them. Ignore those and there was still more than enough to keep the players engaged.
Quote from: Haffrung;714551My players (unintentionally) broke it when they:
That's not breaking it, that's clever play. I actually see problems with the latter part of the plan, and have seen something along those lines attempted and go completely pear-shaped, but hey! I wasn't there, and it worked, so good on 'em.
Quote from: Haffrung;714551The question is whether 'what the DM has prepped' is the setting, or the setting and story. If your formative years of playing D&D involved the DM presenting the setting and the players generating the story in play, then fixed plots are an unwelcome imposition, and likely to be broken by players without any malice or breach of table expectation.
This is all true, but, I think, still missing the point. If the DM has prepped a module (as in: pre-made adventure), consisting of a location, or series of locations, along with some NPCs and/or situations for the PCs to interact with, and the players decide, "Nah, let's go do something totally different!" there is a problem of mismatched expectations at the table.
Quote from: Bobloblah;714560This is all true, but, I think, still missing the point. If the DM has prepped a module (as in: pre-made adventure), consisting of a location, or series of locations, along with some NPCs and/or situations for the PCs to interact with, and the players decide, "Nah, let's go do something totally different!" there is a problem of mismatched expectations at the table.
Agreed. If you sit down at the table to play I6 Castle Ravenloft, and the players get bored after half an hour and decide to wander off the map to find an orc lair to assault, then you have problems at the table.
There are degrees of sandbox. I generally reject any sort of scripted plot. However, unless a campaign is explicitly about open-ended geographical exploration, I don't think I recall PCs simply walking away from the adventure setting mid-session. And when the PCs have wandered afield, players don't expect to find anything more than random encounters out in the wilds.
I'm often very harsh on I6 and mention it among the products which initiated some changes in the game that in the end weakened it, as far as I am concerned, but there are some good things to say about the module nonetheless. The 3D map is neat, for instance, though I'm not sure just how much better or worse that makes it for actual play. The ambiance in the module is great, and it gave birth to one of the better settings of the AD&D 2nd edition era. And we had a Vampire in the villain's role that really was "worthy" as an adversary.
So it's not all negative for me, far from it.
Quote from: Bobloblah;714553Bill, I have really no idea what your point is. As I've pointed out, "letting them leave," in the sense of allowing them to go do something else, may or may not be an option compatible with playing the game that night. If it isn't, "We're leaving!" is a table problem, and one that I don't think the mists around Barovia actually fix.
The DM not having something else prepared, or not feeling like coming up with something completely different on the fly when there was already a scenario prepared, is not the DM "making it a problem." It's a table problem rooted in some sort of mismatched expectations. I might even go so far as to say it's a problem with the players; if they really don't want to even engage with what the DM preps, perhaps one of them needs to put on their big person pants and run the game themselves...
Same here. I have no clue what we are talking about :)
I guess my point was that I don't see any problem with the Ravenloft module, or the mist.
Quote from: Benoist;714579I'm often very harsh on I6 and mention it among the products which initiated some changes in the game that in the end weakened it, as far as I am concerned, but there are some good things to say about the module nonetheless. The 3D map is neat, for instance, though I'm not sure just how much better or worse that makes it for actual play. The ambiance in the module is great, and it gave birth to one of the better settings of the AD&D 2nd edition era. And we had a Vampire in the villain's role that really was "worthy" as an adversary.
So it's not all negative for me, far from it.
I am curious; what are the negatives you see in I6?
Quote from: Bill;714588Same here. I have no clue what we are talking about :)
I guess my point was that I don't see any problem with the Ravenloft module, or the mist.
Ha! Okay. I think the problem with the mist, and suspect this leads more generally into what are likely Benoist's problems with the module (forgive me if I'm putting words in your mouth, Benoist), is that the
story of the players accepting the invitation and going to the castle became more important than whether or not the players chose to do so.
Spoiler
So, if you don't go, then DIE a choking death!!! MWA-HA-HAAAA!
There are other aspects of the module that head in this direction, such as the Deus Ex Machina of the Vistani, or the more elaborate backstory for Strahd. In the latter case, however, I think it actually gets used to good effect in the module, with it affecting events, or the players actually being able to make use of it (see Haffrung's spoilers, above).
I'm an unabashed fan of I6. No point blaming it for being so good that it set up a trend for poor and railroady imitations. Here is an extensive review I posted originally on Dragonsfoot about 8 years ago.
***SPOILERS***
Review of Module I6 - Ravenloft
Although appearing later than most of the great 1st Edition modules (1983), Ravenloft can rightfully lay claim to being a true classic. This module proved to be so successful that it spawned an entire campaign setting for 2nd Edition. Ravenloft introduces one of the classic all time D&D villains in the form of Strahd Von Zarovich, the sorcerous vampire who terrorises the lands of Barovia. I ran this module for a seasoned group of players a few years ago and the result was nothing short of devastating. Four PC deaths, two PCs drained down to 1st level and the remainder experiencing such pants-wetting fear that they thanked the gods merely for having escaped with their lives!
I have divided this review up into the following sections:
Presentation
Setting
Story
Rules
Conclusion
Presentation
Ravenloft is a 32 page module with two double panel covers providing numerous maps detailing castle Ravenloft's levels and one sketch of the lands of Barovia. The maps are attractively presented and much effort is made to show the complex multi level castle in all its glory. Unfortunately, the connections between the levels are not always clear and the hard pressed DM had better be on the top of his game when the players run screaming through the castle. More than most modules, it is vital that the DM be well prepared and intimately familiar with the material.
The module is illustrated with large, black and white drawings. They are clearly attuned to the theme of the module and work nicely with the text.
Setting
The module is set in the lands of Barovia, initially a small, isolated land which is largely cut off from the rest of the world. Later on with the introduction of the Ravenloft campaign setting, it becomes a demi-plane of the plane of terror. Either scenario is relatively straight forward and whether you just have the party wander into the mists and appear in Barovia or whether you place it in your campaign setting, the module is quite easy to slot in. For players of D&D this is particularly true. The Grand Duchy of Karameikos is loosely based on Polish society, as is Ravenloft.
Story
Once again, the Hickman's are at their worst when trying to come up with a hook to get the party involved. According to the module, the party receives a plea for help in the form of a letter supposedly sent by the Burgomaster of the village of Barovia. It directs them to come to the nearby village. Once suitably railroaded into going there, they set along the road and soon encounter the body of a messenger, with the original missive. This letter indicates that the party should not come to the aid of Barovia. While the purpose of the two letters is to set the party immediately on edge, I feel that they are a poor device. Who would send a message to a previously unknown adventuring party to tell them not to come? Conversely, why would Strahd or his minions seek to bring a party of adventurers to make trouble? Far better for the party to just wander into Barovia by accident or have then claimed by the mists. The evocative description of the landscape is enough to set them on edge.
Once the party passes the gates at the border of Barovia, they will sooner or later discover that they cannot leave! The lands of Barovia are surrounded by a choking mist that will eventually kill those who persist in trying to escape. This is an excellent device. Not only does it give the PC's a feeling of being trapped, but it also inevitably compels them to the brooding castle which dominates the landscape. Railroading isn't always bad, and this is an example of how to do it in an appropriate and imaginative way (just as the letters at the start of the module are a poor way).
Before they even see the castle, the PC's are pursued by howling wolves to the outskirts of a small village. It is immediately clear that things are far from sunny in little Barovia. The module does an excellent job of evoking the mist choked gloom of the place and the citizens abject resignation to their fate is a real feature. How things proceed from this stage is largely up to the players and the DM.
One of the most innovative aspects of the module is The Fortunes of Ravenloft. Essentially, through randomly picking five cards from an ordinary deck (or rolling a series of d8s), the DM determines the path the adventure will take. The cards determine the placement of key items like the Tome of Strahd, the location of Strahd himself and Strahd's goal. This device gives the module significant replay value as no two games will ever be identical. Adventurers who braved the castle years ago will most likely get every bit as much enjoyment going through it a second time. Especially as the size of the Castle makes it unlikely to be fully explored in any one game. The secondary component of the Fortunes of Ravenloft is that if the players get their future read by gypsies (quite likely), they can gain a valuable insight into what they need to do in order to escape. All in all, this is a brilliant device that adds richness and mystery to the module.
Once they find themselves in the village of Barovia, the PCs have to decide what to do next. They can stay as long or little as they wish, depending on what they do. The village is sparsely detailed, and the DM may wish to invest some time in fleshing out its details. Some thought might also be given to the reactions of the inhabitants. The premise of the module is that the peasants have been trapped in Barovia for centuries. This would mean they would conceivably be very eager for news of the outside world. Fortunately, the detail that is provided is enough to gives the party plenty of scope for action. They can tangle with the evil merchant and his son, try to get information from wily Gypsies, try to protect Ireena (who is the object of Strahd's unholy lust), or they can try to help out Donovich, the beleaguered priest of the village. The PC's may end up under siege, trying to protect the town form waves of wolves and undead or they might leave quickly to take on the castle head on.
On their way to the castle they may come across a gypsy encampment. Once again, while details are sparse, the resourceful DM can add quite a bit of sparkle to this encounter. The party can get their fortunes read and can also haggle with the canny gypsies for information or goods. Naturally, the gypsies will try and fob the party off with false charms and incorrect information as they are in league with Strahd. I would suggest making several of the gypsies mid level fighters and rogues. The party should not be able to get away with attacking them indiscriminately and they may be tempted to do so because of rumours that the gypsies are capable of leaving Barovia.
Ultimately, all that is left for the party is to enter the castle. This is a huge structure covering some ten levels. The module is written with some set pieces of action occurring on the ground floor. These are based on the assumption that the PC's will enter the castle by conventional means through the front door. If the PC's do so, well and good, they get to experience Strahd's heart stopping welcome to the utmost. However, no real harm is done to the adventure if they enter in a different manner and there is no need for the DM to try and force the issue. In any case, the party will generally have to get around using conventional means. The adventure is pitched at adventurers of levels 5-7 and this is not by accident. At that level, the characters are tough enough to weather a few misfortunes but do not have access to game changing things such as passwall, rock to mud and teleport.
One of the note worthy features of the castle is that there are many situations which can lead to the party splitting up. From trapped passage ways that can whisk an unsuspecting PC four stories up and deposit them in an enchanted hallway, to the sudden loss of all lights and the panic inducing screeching of a thousand bats, to some truly diabolical teleportation traps (including one where the hapless PC is teleported without his possessions into a stone coffin, outside while over a dozen wights wait to 'help him out'), the PCs may well find themselves wandering the castle on their own. Splitting the party is never a good idea at the best of times, and in Ravenloft it can prove particularly deadly. While this situation inevitably puts a strain on the DM, it is well worth it for ratcheting up the fear factor another notch. The whole purpose of this module is to scare the crap out of the players and the DM must take every opportunity to do so.
As the party wanders the castle they have the opportunity to find several items that can help them overthrow the castle's dark master. Many rooms are not populated, which just serves to heighten the tension. Others are harmless unless the party is trying to leave the castle. All the while, they endure some rolls on a nasty wandering monster table and occasional guerrilla attacks from Strahd. The evil vampire can either dog the party at every turn or be a remote figure that the party only comes to grips with in the climax. What is certain is that he will be a deadly foe for them unless they have managed to get their hands on the Holy Symbol of Ravenkind or the sunsword. Unless you are a sadistic DM to who seeks to kill the party at any cost, it is a good idea to use Strahd as terrifying figure the party flees from rather than a 'finisher' that could randomly kill the party at any time. There are plenty of other deadly encounters in the castle in any case. Remember, however, the purpose of this module is to scare. Far better for a PC to flee screaming for his life than him to end up dead and having to watch the rest of the action from the sidelines. Once they are dead, you can't scare them anymore!
More likely than not, the party will end up in the crypts, a massive area containing an assortment of undead in their tombs as well as the resting place of Strahd von Zarovich. It is here where I have a minor quibble with the module. I have commented on the Hickman's poor use of comedy in my review of I3 - Pharaoh, and it is once again in evidence here. A succession of third rate puns are scrawled across the sarcophagi on the crypt level. They are not funny, and more importantly they are not scary. They completely undercut the fear the DM has been painstakingly building. I strongly suggest that the DM excise such abominations as "King Intree Katsky" and replace them with more appropriate names. Gripes aside, the crypts can build to a stunning climax where Strahd is overthrown or alternatively, a brilliant scenario whereby the party flees screaming while being pursued by a hoard of undead, the laughter of Ravenloft's dark lord reverberating in their ears.
Rules
There are no new rules introduced by this module. However, as already stated the module itself spawned an entire campaign setting. A couple of new monsters are introduced in the back of the module. While the Barovians and Gypsies are pretty run of the mill, the Strahd Zombies are a nice touch and will definitely add to the horror factor for the PCs. Several interesting and unique magic items are also introduced. All are geared towards giving the PCs a chance of defeating the evil Strahd Von Zarovich.
Conclusion
Once you get past the awkward beginning this is a hugely enjoyable adventure. Ravenloft is the original 'horror' module (Tomb of Horrors could be a frightful experience for the players but its ultimate aim was to kill the party, not scare it). It is also one of the more demanding ones for a DM to run well. In order to keep the party on the knife edge of terror, the DM needs to be totally on top of the material as well as be quick to respond to unseen twists and turns. From the moment the party realizes that something is deeply amiss they should be constantly behind the eight ball. Step by unwilling step they are compelled to the castle where with courage, fortitude and large helping of luck, they might triumph over an ancient evil. I6 is definitely one of those adventures where the survivors still talk about it years later.
As I mentioned in the introduction, I ran this adventure a few years ago for a group of very experienced gamers. They had just reached the climax of a year long home brewed campaign when they were sucked into the lands of Barovia before they could enjoy the spoils of victory. Things did not go well. Underlying tensions that had seethed in the party came to a head just when they had to cooperate at their utmost. The results were not pretty. The players received a lethal object lesson in what happens when PCs don't work together. They looks on their faces when they realized that they would have to enter the castle a SECOND time is one of the highlights of my long DM-ing career. For those of you who take up the challenge of running this adventure, I only ask that you live up to this module's proud history.
Great review Fiasco.
I6 is a mixed bag. I find the "assumed story" with its railroady elements to be heavy-handed and annoying. I understand the homages to Dracula, but it's a D&D game, not a novel, and the stuff like the carriage and dinner party and organ scene don't work well for the way I like to play D&D.
It has some usable elements, though. The village is okay (nice map, too). The basic concept of the curse/vampire/castle is classic and solid. I like the fortune telling thing, which is a good example of how you can make a "rumor table" into more than just a list of tidbits to roll and give out to players. The presentation of the castle map is neat to look at, but I find it disappointing in actual play, and would prefer a normal 2-d map.
I've run I6 twice. The first time I ran it pretty much straight, and I was disappointed with the result. The second time, I set it in the "Known World" (I was running B/X, at the time), and I used it for the cursed Koriszegy barony in the Grand Duchy of Karameikos, and Strahd became the undead Baron Koriszegy. I kept the module's "Dracula" atmosphere and concept, kept the village, kept the fortunes, and basically completely re-did the maps and encounters in the castle and dungeons. I dropped all the railroady encounters and the "expected path" of "scenes" PCs were supposed to follow at the beginning. I made the upper portion of the castle more ruined, and expanded the dungeons.
That worked well.
tl;dr version: I wouldn't run I6 as written, but with some DM work, it's worthwhile.
Three notes about the fog:
(1) Barovia in the original module is really a miniature sandbox setting. The fog just defines the edges of the sandbox, but is probably unnecessary.
(2) The fog isn't really much of a constraint. If you leave Barovia without securing an antidote, you make a single save vs. death. If you fail, you're dead. If you succeed, you survive. At the recommended level of play, the group will have pretty good saves and probably have access to raise dead; the fog is a speed bump not a wall.
(3) The constraint that the gypsies have a cure but the PCs will never, ever find it is pretty railroad-y. There's also one page suggesting an "ending" which is pretty railroad-y. But the idea that the whole module is a railroad is a radical misrepresentation.
I hadn't run it in over 20 years, but I'm planning to run it sometime next year, modified for Dark Albion.
I haven't run it in ages, but I've run it four times over the years, and it has consistently held up and been different each time.
Like any module, it is enhanced by personalizing it to the campaign.
While there are forced encounters, I would not call it a railroad at all, because there is no singular path for the PCs. It is designed with an active master villain with a plan, which can result in many different possibilities depending on what the PCs do. Whenever I have run it, there has been a lot of back-and-forth with Strahd where his plans changed based on the PCs, and their plans changed based on him, making for a very dynamic situation.
Quote from: jhkim;715658It is designed with an active master villain with a plan, which can result in many different possibilities depending on what the PCs do. Whenever I have run it, there has been a lot of back-and-forth with Strahd where his plans changed based on the PCs, and their plans changed based on him, making for a very dynamic situation.
This is one of the keys to the adventure I feel. You run strahd as a living character who reacts to the pcs actions, so you can be quite flexible with many if those forced encounters. This aspect of the adventure was repeated in a lot of later Ravenloft modules when the setting cane out, and its what always worked for me personally at the table. Feast of Goblyns basically takes the idea and hammers it home even more, with several living npcs and stronger emphasis on the point.
That's an extremely fair review of one of my favourite adventure modules. Thanks for that. I remember when this module first came out and DM'd it as a young man in his 20s, I ran it a few times after that, and last week ran it for a group of newbies (of mixed ages). For first edition, and for AD&D as a whole, it was a breakthrough module. It contained new flashy (if confusing) maps, a new way of playing a villain, and its trope was based on a Hammer Horror version of Stoker's Dracula novel. Players had never really had this before so I enjoyed it for what it was and it lead to the development of the Realms of Dread.
I totally agree about the poor humour contained within, it spoils the game so I just removed it. In fact, I've altered quite a few things but I don't need expensive accessories to make these adjustments just my imagination and a tweak of the rules to enable fair and fun play.