Temple of Elemental Evil Adventure

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com

Gabriel

Legendary Pubber
Joined
Mar 4, 2019
Messages
3,001
Reaction score
8,000
I have a pre-order in for Goodman Games's remaster of Temple of Elemental Evil. I've also been looking over some of my old modules, my copy of the AD&D 1e ToEE among them. So, I have a question.

Does anyone really like the Temple of Elemental Evil as a dungeon?

I'm not talking about Hommlet or the Moathouse. I've played and run the T-1 Village of Hommlet part of the adventure, and that part is pretty good. It's a bit Gygaxian, but it's servicable. Hommlet is solid. The Moathouse is a pretty decent dungeon.

But then there's Nulb and the Temple. And other than some dungeon level maps that look like a 13 year old dreamed them up (thinking specifically about the one where the map has a skull shaped room which would only be apparent from a mapmaker perspective), the Temple is just sort of blah. And then there's the true secret of the Temple, that it's all a cunning machination by... some mold.

I was watching DM It All's two video long overview of the Temple, and I have to say that a lot of it never occurred to me. It has been a long time since I read the module, but I feel like most of the key elements are buried in the text. Yes, whenever I or anyone I knew approached it, the Temple was seen as a megadungeon to be hacked through. And yes, in that role the Temple is just not fun at all.

IMX, ToEE is a campaign killer. It doesn't kill because it slaughters the party. It's that once the adventure reaches the temple and after messing around either trying to get in or exploring the initial sections, everyone loses interest. I've even been a part of at least one group that was going to just quit a campaign altogether because the Temple was so uninteresting, but the GM quickly sort of erased the whole plot with the Temple, has us realize the real threat was elsewhere, and saved the campaign that way.

Anyone here actually manage the endurance test of getting through this one? Anyone else have any thoughts? Is the Temple as bad as I remember and as bad as it seemed while I was skimming it?

I seriously think I might just use a couple of the map layouts rekeyed for my own megadungeon and forget all about the official presentation of the Temple.
 
I've run ToEE at least 4 times. The early attempts usually ended in TPK or enuii in the temple proper.

The 4th time (at university) the party totally ate up the politics and started to play factions against factions. They were about halfway through the elemental nodes before graduation hit and the players all moved away. That was one of my biggest gaming heartbreaks. That group ruled.

I've got the new ToEE on pre-order and have gotten buy in from my group to let me run the whole shabang.
 
I've run ToEE at least 4 times. The early attempts usually ended in TPK or enuii in the temple proper.

The 4th time (at university) the party totally ate up the politics and started to play factions against factions. They were about halfway through the elemental nodes before graduation hit and the players all moved away. That was one of my biggest gaming heartbreaks. That group ruled.

I've got the new ToEE on pre-order and have gotten buy in from my group to let me run the whole shabang.
Where did you pre-order from?
 
No, I don't really like the new material in ToEE very much. The moathouse published in T1 is good, but it's not hard to see the non-creativity brought on by the urgency of TSR's money problems, which is why T1-4 was shoved out the door in '85. It's grindy, boring, and doesn't grab me in any way.

Functional but not fun. I'd bet that dozens of homemade "T2" modules from DMs writing their own conclusions to the T saga, when TSR's publishing didn't meet their campaign needs, were much, much better than what eventually arrived.
 
No, I don't really like the new material in ToEE very much. The moathouse published in T1 is good, but it's not hard to see the non-creativity brought on by the urgency of TSR's money problems, which is why T1-4 was shoved out the door in '85. It's grindy, boring, and doesn't grab me in any way.

Functional but not fun. I'd bet that dozens of homemade "T2" modules from DMs writing their own conclusions to the T saga, when TSR's publishing didn't meet their campaign needs, were much, much better than what eventually arrived.
Most of us I suspect are buying our memories. Things don't have to be the best thing if you're doing them with the best people.
 
To be perfectly frank, my only real exposure to the module was the video game version by Troika (based on 3e) and it was . . . kind of a buggy mess. But technical issues aside I thought the premise seemed fine (if a little silly), but that actual dungeon of the temple was linear, boring and something I would probably reskin and re-do if I ever got around to purchasing it and trying to run it.
 
Last edited:
Most of us I suspect are buying our memories. Things don't have to be the best thing if you're doing them with the best people.
For sure. To make clear, I'm not talking about Goodman's work in any way. I have no idea what "new material" might be in its version of ToEE.
 
I always thought that ToEE didn't love up to it's name. The Hommlet part was ok, and the small wilderness. But it always seemed to me that the Caves of Chaos and the Keep should have been incorporated into it somehow.

He actual dungeonnoarts of the temple were utter shite, if you ask me. Bad map layouts, confusing keys and just not pleasant on the eye.

I only ran it once and it fizzled around level 2 of the temple proper. Nobody could be bothered and one day, they just didn't want to go back there.
 
I'm curious how much Goodmans team will try to do to repair any deficits in the original. We know we'll get a word for word reprint of the original and maybe even a reprint of the Return. How much will the do to improve? I feel like they've done a reasonably good job adding to X2 and B4. I don't recall how they did on the others
 
I've been collecting the whole series of Goodman Games' Reprints and I have found them to be uniformly awesome. I've run Into The Borderlands, am currently running Isle of Dread, and have paged through the others extensively. They are basically coffee table books in my house. I love how they do the deep dive history with interviews, reviews, and critiques of the originals. I don't expect to run them all but they are fantastic reading and I'm planning on stealing bits from each of them for my own homebrew.

I can't wait to see that treatment with ToEE. I expect there will be plenty of discussion of what went on behind the scenes as the original was being published - I'm not sure who they're interviewing but it'll definitely be interesting. I'm also looking forward to see what extra content they are going to put in. Will they expand Nulb? Will they offer advice for how to manage the factions in the Temple?
 
The Temple of Elemental Evil module published by TSR in 1985 has a very complicated history. In 1975 Gary Gygax decided it was time for a "soft reboot" of his Greyhawk Castle campaign after about 2-3 years of play, so he handed the castle dungeons (which had then grown to something like 100 levels) and city, and the 50 or so players who were active in them, mostly over to his co-DM Rob Kuntz and carved out a rural area to effectively start over with a new batch of players (mostly his younger kids) with new 1st level characters and a new dungeon. That became Hommlet, Nulb, and the Temple of Elemental Evil. It was in play for a few months but kind of petered out - the players were apparently mostly embroiled in stuff going on in Nulb and weren't making much progress in the dungeon, so in order to goose things along Gary allowed Rob Kuntz to take his high-level PC Robilar into the dungeons and Robilar ended up single-handedly wrecking the whole place, freeing the big trapped demon, and drawing armies from both sides to the location, effectively ending the sub-campaign (though some of the players and characters went on to participate in Gary's next sub-campaign, the Giants-Drow series).

Fast forward a couple years to 1979. AD&D is out, the World of Greyhawk is being prepared for publication, and Gary dusts off the notes from that old campaign and publishes the first part of them as The Village of Hommlet, which has been expanded and includes most of the original PCs as NPCs (Otis, Burne and Rufus, Jaroo the Druid, and the clerics at the Church of St. Cuthbert we're all PCs in Gary's campaign). That module was popular and people were eager to see the next part, covering the actual Temple, which created a problem for Gary because it, effectively, hadn't been written - apparently in the original run much of it was created randomly/procedurally, which he didn't feel was suitable for a published product. That was also the same time (late 1979) when D&D really took off in popularity and Gary suddenly found himself fully occupied with the business end of the business and little to no time for new adventure design work (and what time he did have was devoted to new rules, which were easier to create in piecemeal chunks, instead of the concerted effort needed to design a large-scale dungeon). For the next couple years there would be an update in Dragon magazine every few months with Gary either swearing that work was still being done on T2 or promising that he would get back to it very soon. But by about the end of 1982 even those updates stopped.

Fast-forward another couple years to the fall of 1984. TSR is in desperate financial straits and Gary Gygax has just gotten the CEO (Kevin Blume) fired by the board and himself installed in his place with a promise to turn things around. One of his plans for doing so is to release several high-profile, long-delayed products that fans had been clamoring for and would be certain to buy. The AD&D rules expansion (which became Unearthed Arcana) was one of them; T2 was another one. The problem was T2 was still nowhere near finished and Gary still didn't have time to work on it. So he handed a couple hundred manuscript pages over to his #2 guy Frank Mentzer and told him to finish it up in time for it to be published at GenCon '85.

So that's just what Frank did - he took all of Gary's notes and maps and pulled them together and filled the gaps and created something reasonably complete and coherent that fit within the mandated page count and was ready for publication on the mandated date. By that measure, Frank did exactly what he was supposed to, and true to expectation the module sold very well and remained in print well into the 2E AD&D era (collector site The Acaeum documents a printing from 1992 or 93, after TSR had changed their logo). The problem is, outside of its scope and the promise carried over from T1, most of it just isn't very good. The maps are bland. Most of the encounters are boring and grinds. Most of the NPCs aren't very interesting and neither are their machinations or plots. It's pretty much a solid B- module, with a couple of decent ideas and set-pieces but a lot of stuff that feels like uninspired filler and a final section (the Elemental Nodes) that is flagrantly unfinished - basically just giving the DM some maps and monster-lists and instructing them to write it up themselves.

For people who had read and played T1 and were waiting expectantly for T2, this really wasn't what they were hoping for. It's not clear that anything could have lived up those expectations, but this certainly didn't. And yet, is it better than nothing? Is this highly-flawed implementation better than T2 being another piece of legendary Gygax vaporware? Some people will surely say it's not - that we would have been better off left with our dreams - but I don't agree. T1-4 as-published is frustrating and not anywhere near as good as it should have been, but there's still a fair amount of decent-to-good stuff and I think we're better off having it as a model from which to devise our own "improved" versions than having to start completely from scratch.

But yeah, once you know all of that history T1-4 makes a lot more sense - why it's not very good and seems kind of perfunctory and incomplete and doesn't seem to live up to the promise of T1 at all.
 
One of the big problems with the T1-4 dungeons (beyond bland mapping and encounters) is that Gary - and Frank following his notes - decided to stick with the pure dungeon-key method, where even major NPCs are fully described in-line with the room where they live/sleep so you both get big walls of backstory text that aren't relevant to running that specific encounter and also have to piece everything together by combining all of those disparate elements.

A module of that scale really needs an overview/summary section that lays out all of the important NPCs and their relations to each other and their allies and followers and plans with matrices and charts and schedules of where they're likely to be at various times (and alert levels) and so forth, so that the DM can keep all of that stuff in mind and make the dungeon live and breathe and react to the players' actions and not feel like a grind of a bunch of personality-less goons sitting around in their 20x30 bedchamber waiting for someone to come kill them.

I'm confident that Gary actually ran his own games that way, but for whatever reason he never figured out how to convey that effectively in written form, even though Jennel Jaquays had pretty much already done exactly that in Dark Tower in 1979. In his early modules - the G series, T1 - the scale is small enough that he's able to get away with describing everything in-line (though even there Lareth the Beautiful feels like a wasted opportunity if he's waiting in his chambers and not more active); in his later module WG4 (Forgotten Temple of Tharizdun - 1982) he does give detailed info on the movements and organization of the bad guys, how they act to intrusion and regroup after an initial engagement, etc. - but for whatever reason he didn't try to do something similar with the TOEE. Possibly WG4 was written after he had stopped working on the TOEE.

I feel like if the active organization of the dungeon inhabitants had been detailed in this manner not only would it have made the adventure easier to digest and run but it also would have perhaps made it more clear that there's not actually much going on with most of them and he would have been inspired to add to the contents and give them more personality and motivation, more goals, more ways for PCs to interact with them outside of just combat. Maybe that's wishful thinking, and the truth is this was just an "off" product - that Gary wasn't inspired and tried to force it and couldn't recapture the same magic that animated his best adventures. And if so, that's okay - nobody bats .1000. And yet it's still frustrating and still makes me want to tinker with it and try to improve it because it's almost good and I feel like with enough work I could perhaps manage to push it over the edge...
 
Last edited:
ToEE has a weird spot in my gaming history, as when I played it ot was the first time the DM wasn’t the guy who introduced me to RPGs, and (to put it mildly) The DM and several players were not the best examples of humanity. I’n kind of amazed I kept with gaming after dealing with them.

i really shoukd get a copy of ToEE, to see how much of my exierience was the module, and how much was the DM screwing the new guy.
 
.... And yet it's still frustrating and still makes me want to tinker with it and try to improve it because it's almost good and I feel like with enough work I could perhaps manage to push it over the edge...
I'd say do so. I did all those where are they/org charts you mentioned for G1-G3 and other modules. Worth every minute spent.
 
I don't remember there being all that much in the way of specific lore or description about the ToEE outside of its specific module. It seems like it oughtta be wide open to interpretation and re-imagining... full on replacement by something more suitable and 'epic'. Is there anything like that floating around?
 
I've been running Dungeon of the Mad Mage with little to no prep and this week I finally had more time to prep. The outcome is much better. Sure the PC's are currently being held hostage by a Drow and Bugbears but it's not just another hack and slash week so I think it's more interesting for them.
 
I don't remember there being all that much in the way of specific lore or description about the ToEE outside of its specific module. It seems like it oughtta be wide open to interpretation and re-imagining... full on replacement by something more suitable and 'epic'. Is there anything like that floating around?
Swear had seen years ago where ToEE had been modified to make the deep evil Lovecraft based.

The Lovecraftian aspect can make the illogical dungeon layout make sense....may add in a few teleporting mists that randomly appear at the end of halls...that could Jaquay it up a bit.

I tend to "re-write" every module anyway...just go through and make my own key where things differ (really just notes not a full re-write); especially on details and certainly on politics.
 
I don't remember there being all that much in the way of specific lore or description about the ToEE outside of its specific module. It seems like it oughtta be wide open to interpretation and re-imagining... full on replacement by something more suitable and 'epic'. Is there anything like that floating around?

Swear had seen years ago where ToEE had been modified to make the deep evil Lovecraft based.

The Lovecraftian aspect can make the illogical dungeon layout make sense....may add in a few teleporting mists that randomly appear at the end of halls...that could Jaquay it up a bit.

I tend to "re-write" every module anyway...just go through and make my own key where things differ (really just notes not a full re-write); especially on details and certainly on politics.
There's the Temple Of Existential Evil for Hackmaster, which I haven't read, but I suspect rewrites the adventure at least somewhat.
 
I ran 1-4 twice, once in the 80s and once in the 90s, and both times interest faded and things petered out and we entered a sort of "fast forward" mode to get the thing finished up and move on to something else - the Elemental Nodes section in particular was pretty much ignored and glossed over both times. It's funny to realize that something similar seems to have happened both in Gygax's original campaign run and also in his attempted design of the module (that he lost steam and essentially gave up before getting to the end). This leads me to believe that T1-4 actually represents a failed experiment - a design paradigm that didn't actually work out.

Greyhawk Castle was famously an anything-goes funhouse with dozens and dozens of always-changing levels and sub-levels and gates leading to pocket Demi-planes that drew inspiration from anywhere and everywhere and had no concern with thematic or tonal consistency - you've got the standard sort of barracks and crypts and temples and laboratories and museums but you've also got a giant alien garden and a level of machines and an underground lake and a gate to Wonderland and a gate to King Kong's island and a gate to Jack Vance's Planet of Adventure and a gate to Ancient Greece and the Bottle City of Krandor and a bowling alley for giants and a room with animated furniture that attacks anyone who enters and a slide that dumps you out on the other side of the world, and anything else that Gary or Rob thought the players might find fun and challenging. They were making this stuff up as quickly as they could to keep up with a very large and active base of players who were always hungry for more.

With the Temple of Elemental Evil sub-campaign Gary wanted to do something different. He wanted a dungeon that was more thematically consistent, that fit together and made sense and felt like a naturalistic living environment and was serious and "good" in the manner described in the AD&D DMG - something more sophisticated and "mature" than the anything-goes gonzo-ness of Greyhawk Castle and its insane demigod creator. But he still wanted the same basic paradigm from the original campaign, where the players continually return to the same large dungeon and gradually explore deeper and deeper into it, uncovering its mysteries, defeating its villainous inhabitants, and gathering up their treasure.

And yet, all the evidence seems to suggest that that model doesn't really work. The players (and the designer/DM) burn out and lose interest, and get antsy to move on to other things instead. Greyhawk Castle was able to keep players coming back for years because it always offered something fresh and different because there were no rules, it was all "we made some shit up we thought would be fun." The TOEE-model doesn't offer that - each new deeper level is really just more and more of the same. It gets stale and feels like a grind (and also becomes increasingly implausible to justify why the inhabitants aren't being more proactive about defending their homes from repeated incursions). "Module-size" dungeons with 2-3 levels and maybe 100 rooms total, that can reasonably be cleaned out within maybe 6 sessions (or less) work much better in this mode - you can actually make them tonally consistent and naturalistic and detail the organization and make it a living environment without it either becoming overwhelming or overstaying its welcome.

Gary must have at least instinctively realized that, because all of his later dungeon designs were at that scale - the Giant series, the Caves of Chaos, the Forgotten Temple of Tharizdun, etc. - and yet he still worked to bring the TOEE dungeons to publication, thinking apparently that he could fix what went wrong in the initial campaign run. But I'm not sure no matter how long he worked on it that he ever would've been able to make it work. I think that his conception was off - that the TOEE dungeons were too big fo their concept, that it was inevitably going to become stale and boring because there simply wasn't enough variety of activity and flavor and challenges. Which is a bummer, because the DMG talks about this kind of dungeon as if it's something of a Platonic Ideal of what AD&D should be about and instilled in my imagination as a kid that this is how the game can and should be. But looking back now I suppose it really is aptly described as a Platonic Ideal, which is to say something that can't ever actually exist in the real world...
 
And yet, all the evidence seems to suggest that that model doesn't really work.

I don't think I'd go that far. However, given my own preconceptions as well as what you have stated and some other remarks in the thread, I'd definitely say it has firmed up my opinion that it's not a good implementation of the model. It's not well written or organized. I'd definitely agree that it's a failed experiment, but I don't think it's a failure of the entire model.

I definitely lean to thinking that the Temple lacks the hooks to keep a group actually playing and having fun.
 
.... Which is a bummer, because the DMG talks about this kind of dungeon as if it's something of a Platonic Ideal of what AD&D should be about and instilled in my imagination as a kid that this is how the game can and should be. But looking back now I suppose it really is aptly described as a Platonic Ideal, which is to say something that can't ever actually exist in the real world...
The DMG says a lot of things that are unsubstantiated :smile: I do remember that ToEE came out long, long after the DMG.

Didn't the DMG come out like 6 years before ToEE (I cheated and used wikipedia to get the exact number)?

Or is it more ToEE looks like it was generated using the random dungeon generator in the DMG?
 
T1 came out in 1979, same year as the DMG, and the campaign that was the basis for both T1, and what was published years later as T1-4 from those campaign notes, was parallel in time to writing the core AD&D books.
 
The DMG says a lot of things that are unsubstantiated :smile: I do remember that ToEE came out long, long after the DMG.

Didn't the DMG come out like 6 years before ToEE (I cheated and used wikipedia to get the exact number)?

Or is it more ToEE looks like it was generated using the random dungeon generator in the DMG?
TOEE was published 6 years after the DMG, but the bulk of the creating/writing work was done contemporaneously with (or even before) the DMG, so it's likely the TOEE is what Gygax had in mind in those DMG sections that talk about how to design and run "good" dungeons, as opposed to the funhouse mode that had been the default in OD&D. TOEE was supposed to be the concrete example of what Gygax was talking about in the DMG, but he got distracted and lost steam and never finished it, and then 6 years later he called in a co-writer to finish it up, and the results weren't that great.

I suppose I am being overdramatic in claiming the whole concept is flawed - after all, Jennel Jaquays managed to pull it off twice (Dark Tower and Caverns of Thacia) - but it does feel ironic and poetic that the TOEE which Gygax built up the legend of for years and was supposed to be the quintessential example and proof of concept of the "Gygax model" of dungeon design ended up instead being more of a lesson in the faults and drawbacks of that model.
 
.....

I suppose I am being overdramatic in claiming the whole concept is flawed - after all, Jennel Jaquays managed to pull it off twice (Dark Tower and Caverns of Thacia) - but it does feel ironic and poetic that the TOEE which Gygax built up the legend of for years and was supposed to be the quintessential example and proof of concept of the "Gygax model" of dungeon design ended up instead being more of a lesson in the faults and drawbacks of that model.
Not sure what you mean by the whole concept is flawed. If you mean anything but fun house dungeons, the concept is not flawed.

Just because Gary didn't pull it off with ToEE just means Gary didn't pull it off.

As you recognized, Jennel pulled it off on a regular basis, before the DMG (unless Gary had a sneak peak ). Other people pulled it off at their kitchen table.

Judges Guild also pulled off the city, long before TSR, it also had a commercial campaign setting, before TSR. TSR did a lot of talk, a lot of telling people you need to play this way or it's not D&D...but backing up their talk with products people could use not so much.
 
I mean the concept of a large dungeon (anything more than about 60-75 rooms) that is structured and organized in the same "naturalistic" manner as a module-dungeon - that the whole thing is thematically consistent and populated in a manner that makes sense, that the monsters on level 1 and the monsters on level 6 are all connected, and so on. Jaquays did it (twice). Gygax held it up as the ideal but wasn't able to actually execute it without it becoming boring and grindy. I feel like most other attempts have ended up closer to Gygax's failure than Jaquays' successes.

Therefore, rather than this being the assumed default of the game the way Gygax seems to suggest in the DMG it seems instead like something that most DMs should avoid. Jaquays had a particular genius that most amateur DMs trying to create stuff for their home campaigns aren't going to be able to match or replicate, so rather than set themselves up for very likely failure (i.e. bored or dissatisfied players, DM creative burnout) I feel like they'd be better off following different models - sticking with smaller dungeons for the naturalistic/ecologized stuff and recognizing that a "campaign dungeon" (anything that's expected to hold the players' attention for more than maybe 6 sessions) needs a broader scope and more variety to remain fresh and engaging over the long term and not devolve into a grind (and Jaquays again is the example here - Caverns of Thracia is about the same size as the TOEE dungeons but has MUCH more variety in settings and challenges (it feels like about 8 different smaller dungeons combined into one big dungeon) so that it doesn't fall into the same grindy rut which is why it is a success and TOEE is not).
 
Last edited:
TSR did a lot of talk, a lot of telling people you need to play this way or it's not D&D...but backing up their talk with products people could use not so much.
You could replace "TSR" with either "OSR", or, "Every gamer who ever logged on to the internet" and the statement would remain true. There's no point singling out TSR here.
 
I'm going by memory here, but doing something like, take the surface structure of the Temple and the wilderness/Hommlet area. Keep all that, it's good stuff. But ditch 90% of the crappy dungeon stuff. I'd have to go through and reread it to see if anything was worth keeping. The Nodes are weird and I don't remember them. But wasn't there shrines to the various Elements?

Develop the factions a bit more, simplify simplify simplify the map and hope for a slightly more coherent experience.

That's what I'd like to do.
 
For me, the Reincarnated adventures are nostalgia, resolving unresolved business, and/or fulfilling unfulfilled youthful wants. It's also saving wear and tear on old original copies. Not to mention the Reincarnations have larger text on the remastered 5e sections which my aging eyes greatly appreciate.

But if you have no sort of nostalgia or existing affection for ToEE... I honestly don't think there's much reason to get it. The Reincarnations so far haven't really been revolutionary with the remixed material. They reprint the originals (sometimes multiple times) and then provide a version adapted to 5e with some minor touch ups and additions, maybe a bit of expansion. It's great if you're a nerd like me with memories, but of limited appeal otherwise.
 
You could replace "TSR" with either "OSR", or, "Every gamer who ever logged on to the internet" and the statement would remain true. There's no point singling out TSR here.
True, but was referring more to the specific time and specific products,...also the OSR and random internet gamer did not have the market power of TSR, or a national magazine that dwarfed all others, or the ability to buy up my beloved SPI...
 
You all are doing a crap job of selling me on a reprint
If you can afford it I find these things are always great to get. If it is on the edge of should I spend the money, then probably not.
 
If you can afford it I find these things are always great to get. If it is on the edge of should I spend the money, then probably not.
I mean I have the first 5 so I'll probably get it eventually. I usually wait until it's $35 for the ones that go for $50. Given this one is $100 I'll probably get it when I can find it for $70.
 
I mean I have the first 5 so I'll probably get it eventually. I usually wait until it's $35 for the ones that go for $50. Given this one is $100 I'll probably get it when I can find it for $70.
GameNerdz has it for that price. Although they'll probably charge you immediately for the pre-order. Plus, I'm just pointing out, not endorsing, as I've only placed my first order and waiting for it to arrive (something else).
 
Looking into it, I'm quite tempted to pick up one of the Original Adventures Restored line. Any suggestions which one?
 
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top