D&D 5E You Can Send D&D Next Adventure For Next Dungeon Magazine Submission Window in April

Plaguescarred

D&D Playtester for WoTC since 2012
You can send D&D Next adventure during the next Dungeon Magazine Submission Window in April Chris Perkins says!

Here's the email where to send pitches for those interested:submissions@wizards.com


D212 Editiorial: I’d like to wrap up by saying that April 1st is fast approaching, and you know what that means: Our submission window will be opening soon. We could use more short adventures and Side Treks, so keep that in mind as you send us pitches. We could also use a few more paragon tier adventures to fill some holes toward the end of the year. We don’t have all of our monthly themes sorted out yet, but some of theones we’re batting around include “the lost world,” “food,” “nature,” and “politics.” Proposals tied to specific campaign settings are fine, but we have a strong preference for adventures that are easy to adapt for home campaign use. Finally, if you’ve been playtesting “D&D Next” and have a great idea for a D&D Next adventure, go ahead and pitch it. We might just say yes.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Pour

First Post
I'm also going to suggest Epic adventures with substance, because it's what many actual 4e players want most.
 

Scrivener of Doom

Adventurer
I'm not a big fan of seeing adventures published for a system that is far from finished. I mean, it's great for the fans of Next to have some new toys to play with but who wants to see the next Keep on the Shadowfell: as in, an adventure designed for a previous ruleset so that it subsequently drives people away from the current (or next, in this case) ruleset.
 


Pour

First Post
What do you consider substance, in this case?

(Epic Writing Director for LFR)

I'm looking for as much original and usable Epic content as possible, things I could lift into my own campaign or reskin readily, which range from Epic material that was previously unusable (anything from MM1-2, Draconomicon, Open Dead, Elder Evils conversions, etc) to completely new (more Epic skill challenges, new artifacts and magic items, generally new and interesting locations, and untouched Epic and specifically 4th Edition design space such as Primal Spirits, Primordials, Far Realm entities, and the Feywild and Shadowfell). There is so much yet to explore, particularly in high-level play, that never was really much more than scratched.

The Court of the Dark Prince in last month's Dungeon was a great concept, but didn't hold very much for me in the way of new or usable material. I liked Iggwilv's boon, that was something new and interesting, and the Roleplaying Encounters were well-set, but so much was glanced over that I think would have made this adventure into a true Epic staple, something Epic DMs could refer to as a rare example and resource.

For instance, Graz'zt was not redesigned as any particular challenge for a modern level 24 party (despite being labeled 32 solo), even with added elite support, unlike the wonderful job LFR did with a redesigned Oublivae in the E series. The set pieces of the fight could have used substantial work, more terrain types, diseases, and traps for starters. And the stat blocks I wanted most were missing, namely Iggwilv, Cerulae (I'd love a high-level archangel to use as a future template for my own angels, which I don't believe Galewing at the end adequately covers), and Augillianast (an updated gold dragon solo stat block would also be VERY welcome).

I admit it would have been too much to hope for Kord's stats here, but wow what I pleasant surprise that would have been, and allowed the adventure to turn, even, into a double-cross should the oh-so-seductive Graz'zt defeat the party and make a deal to kill the god in exchange for their souls. That touches again upon the problem of linearity in many 4e adventures, and how, for the price of a few more pages in an adventure, providing us with extra things like stats, terrain, diseases, and traps empowers a DM to extend adventures organically, creatively, and with confidence.

Too many of the enemies in this adventure were recycled from past Epic supplements, also reducing the value to me. There was again such opportunity to enter into incubus variants and various Graz'zt minions, but instead we got old hat drow, mist hags, a yuan'ti malison, which I don't believe even strike the correct thematic chord. Reskin, sure, but I want more mechanical bases to reskin and a few new monsters would have been appreciated- particularly challenging ones, too, considering we enter the palace of a demon prince. I'll always remember Sly Flourish's advise which, in my experience, continues to ring true: Be fair in Heroic, Be challenging in Paragon, Be a straight bastard in Epic. We need more mean Epic monsters, even broaching or meeting Fourthcore standards, because not even one or two deaths is entirely an issue for many level 24 characters due to their destinies.

I am also always in need of high resolution maps, and this adventure has such potential to create Grazzt's realm. Instead it seems as if they threw together a few generic maps in Dunjinni, upped the contrast, distorted the color balance, and called it a day. Imagine what some of the cartographers we've seen in the magazine could have done with this opportunity...
 
Last edited:

Scrivener of Doom

Adventurer
I'm a big fan of the Epic adventures put out by LFR: they're everything the truly abominable Orcus series E1-E3 were not.

However, personally I'm not so interested in Epic material anymore. I like 4E at Heroic to early Paragon and I design my campaigns that way. I've also reduced the levels of most monsters to their 1E hit dice equivalents: ogres are 4th-level brutes, hill giants are 8th-level brutes etc... which means I can still use the higher level monsters but in lower level games.

And unfortunately for fans of 4E Epic games, I think a lot of DMs are sticking to lower level games.
 

Remove ads

Top