D&D 5E The Audience - Do you feel like you're the target audience?

[ReshiIRE]

I'm going to assume I am part of the target audience*, even though my experience has primarily been with another system and setting. I am also looking at this from primarily a GM level; as a player, setting books are absolutely better than adventures, since they can easily inspire me to create characters much more easily.

To me, I wish that WoTC would produce more books for a particular setting, rather than create a ton of setting books for many different settings - but regardless, setting books are invaluable. Adventure books are useful to see how more experienced and competent writers and game masters would approach designing an adventure in all its different aspects (combat, exploration, social) and how they would integrate setting materials; however, so far I haven't had the strong inclination to run an adventure due to the fact that I am not sure it'd necessarily save me that much work, due to the game master style I am developing

Mainly, I am using a combination of what I've seen work and the Checklist from Return of the Lazy Dungeon Master. I've seen it described as a 'radial' - i.e., I'm mainly preparing things on a session by session basis, with some longer term plot hooks and lore; but not too much planned up front and planned out in detail. Generally, a lot of the adventures I've read have aspects you have to plan for and keep in mind; and while the Return of the Lazy Dungeon Master's Checklist can be adapted to running adventures and works well for that, to me it seems like a lot of work, particularly if I make a mistake.

In addition, it's often best to read through ALL of an adventure first, and depending on the length of the adventure and how much detail there is, that is a LOT of reading to do, then translate to the page and keep in mind; in a certain amount of the adventures I've read, I'm not sure how much I could actually just read on the spot for every section without grinding the game to a halt or making a critical mistake - even in a 'dungeon (or house or base or forest) crawl' situation.

But with setting books, particularly setting books that build upon an already established setting, I can get:

• Adventure hooks
• Places and locations to run and use different aspects of, such as cities, towns, forts, caves, the occasional dungeon, etc.
• How creatures fit into the world
• Ideas of how to handle exploration and travel in the world, and social aspects

There's a lot of depth and breadth there, and I can choose as a GM how much I want to use and how much I don't; to use NPCs that exist within the setting or not, or to remix them; change up locations or run them how the setting expects; wonder about what ideas I can mix in from elsewhere. I can even take individual setting stuff and place it elsewhere, into another world, while doing some work to remake history so that setting stuff is sensible. I can even decide to try and stat out and rule how setting elements as described would work mechnically, without necessarily following what is provided.

This is obviously personal bias and my own cognition talking (maybe even related to my neurodiversity!), but there's a lot of flexibility and gameablility in pure setting books, mainly from providing a solid backdrop that I can expand and contract to fit the party and adventure. It is so much easier, to me, to set a murder mystery in Baldur's Gate and use the sheer amount of information, lore, NPCs, etc. associated with it to create a compelling one, and then easily expand upon the city as required by the players' actions, and what I think would be fun for them to do, then to try and have to create a city by myself. Even more so if the players find the murderer is fleeing the city, and fail to stop them.

Then I can read about the Sword Coast, and lead them onto their next adventure.

And even then, maybe a setting isn't entirely to my liking - but I could always read a setting book, and poach or remix ideas from it and bring it into the setting I'm running or into my own. For example - I used Baldur's Gate up there not because I like or run games in Forgotten Realms, but because I think everyone will know what I'm talking about. From reading about the setting, there's a lot about Forgotten Realms that, to be blunt, I am not a fan of.

You know what I do think is cool, though? I've seen somebody create a thread on RPG.net about Neverwinter, the Neverwinter Campaign Setting, from 4e - going through the book and critiquing it. There is a lot of very interesting creative things in there, from both the player backgrounds to the factions. It is in many ways a book I'd like to get my hands on, purely for inspiration and for taking elements from to use in my own games, even in a completly different setting - maybe even somehow take the city itself and plop it into that setting**, and just remix it until it makes sense.

Or how about the Time of Troubles? From everything I've read about it, the idea was a mixed concept in how it affected Forgotten Realms, producing novels that apparently weren't that great - and producing some absolutely horrifically awful, railroady and 'the NPCs are the most important and the heroes suck!' adventures. But the core concept of it - the gods falling down to the Material Plane? The idea of the consequences and how it affects the world? How it inspired the main plot of one of the most influential CRPG games of all time? *** Now THAT is something I can adapt, by reading setting material.

THAT is gameable to me. THAT is what I want from TTRPG books.

* I do not buy WoTC books but that has everything to do with WoTC as a company and how they treat staff, and because they don't sell PDFs; nothing to really do with book quality, so I'm going to ignore my issues with them and assume on some level I am the target audience, as while I have issues with 5e I do think it's overall a pretty good system that can shine well, and there have been books WoTC has produced I'd be interested in.

** Golarion.

*** Without spoiling anything, the Time of Troubles is important background information for Baldur's Gate...

 

[delericho]

I haven't been the target audience for D&D for at least two editions now.

I don't mind whether they publish adventures or settings - I can find a use for either. What I really don't like, though, is buying what I think is an adventure and that turns out to be a setting; or buying a setting that turns out to be an adventure.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I don't want to be the target audience. I have far more D&D stuff than I need (or have room for) and I can't afford to keep buying more. Unfortunately the latest WotC releases all look very tempting....

 

[wedgeski]

I've purchased big chunks of every edition of D&D all the way back to AD&D, as a teenager with a tiny crumb of disposable income, all the way through into my sixth decade when I could probably purchase every release, if I wanted, but I tend to select only that material which will find use at my table. So D&D has kept me in its audience for almost its entire life (and mine).

I've certainly changed over the years. I've played and run dozens of other systems, but always I come back to D&D. Partly it must be nostalgia; mostly, it's because if I want to build and run a weekly game amongst all the other demands on my life, it needs to be one with so little friction that I can chuck out a few sessions with practically zero effort.

So, yes, I've always felt like the target audience. That's quite a trick on their part.

 

[Hussar]

I guess I’m don’t really understand the problem with running adventures. I’ve run Ghosts of Saltmarsh, Candlekeep, and Dragonheist all pretty much by the book and had a blast. Sure I added some of my own stuff too. Of course.

But the idea that I’d have to rewrite adventures to use them just never occurs to me. I look at something like TheAlexeandrians rewrite of Heist and wouldn’t even begin to consider making that many alterations to an adventure.

I’ve run heist. It was a blast. Ran a good chunk of it a second time and it was even more fun.

I must be really easy to please or something.

 

[BookTenTiger]

It's funny, I'm a fan of 5th Edition, but I'm a terrible customer. I'm such a DIY / anti-consumer that once I have the core three books, I rarely buy anything else. The last book I bought was Tasha's!

So I'm not the target audience of 5e from a purchasing standpoint, despite enjoying the game. However, I'm not sure what would get me to buy new books! I guess they'd have to be toolboxes, not settings or adventures. I'd find it useful, for example, to have a book of puzzles and traps, a book of templates... But even as I'm typing this, I'm realizing there are a million of these on DMsguild and other 3PPs, and I still don't purchase them because I just enjoy the process of making them myself!

But then again, I do teach a lot of new people to play, and they go on to buy books, so I guess in a way I'm helping!

 

[Hussar]

Oh, absolutely. I totally agree with what you're saying @BookTenTiger . There is a big difference between being the target consumer audience and being a fan of the game. Like I said, I was mostly on the other side of things for a very long time in D&D. I've never really been a lore guy. I just haven't. So, most of 2e and 3e and even 4e passed me by. So 5e has really been a turn around for me. This is the stuff I've been begging for for years. And I'm getting it in spades.

 

[ReshiIRE]

I guess I’m don’t really understand the problem with running adventures. I’ve run Ghosts of Saltmarsh, Candlekeep, and Dragonheist all pretty much by the book and had a blast. Sure I added some of my own stuff too. Of course.

But the idea that I’d have to rewrite adventures to use them just never occurs to me. I look at something like TheAlexeandrians rewrite of Heist and wouldn’t even begin to consider making that many alterations to an adventure.

I’ve run heist. It was a blast. Ran a good chunk of it a second time and it was even more fun.

I must be really easy to please or something.

It's not about being easily to please or the quality of the adventure. It's about upfront complexity, how to handle player character involvement, and the length of the adventure.

First, what you have mentioned are, from my understanding, adventure collections and shorter adventures. Those are the ones I'd be most likely to adapt and run via the book, and my understanding is that Ghosts of Saltmarsh and Candlekeep Mysteries can link into each other if you want them to.

But compare those to adventures that are ran and intended to be run as one singular adventure - like Tyranny of Dragons or Curse of Strahd; adventures that to my understanding have a strong focal point and one main plot-line. If I miss important information and make a mistake relating to the story or events of the adventure, later parts of the adventure or book may not make sense. Or if my group ends up in a situation where players decide to do something that the adventure may not consider, now I am relying less on the book's adventure material and more on it's setting and background information. For Candlekeep - which is a collection of adventures - that's probably fine, as the adventures may not directly connect to each other. But it gets messier the more and more an adventure is tied together on a whole - especially if I haven't read the book in its entirety.

It is, essentially, upfront complexity - to handle these situations, I need a good grasp of the adventure.

That's not an insurmountable problem*, but sometimes it can be more work than say, if I make a mistake in my own adventure, based on my own setting or previous setting material; then in a way, it's not a mistake - it's canon, and I simply plan around that, adding it as a new twist that emerged from the table. Ditto if the players decide to do something completely different.

There is also the case of how player characters tie into events. How much should a character's background inform what happens in a game? An adventure module that doesn't make assumptions of what the players are playing is fine and can often be preferable - more adaptable - but that does mean that if those aspects are important to your group, you're going to have to start to do some extra work to tie characters into an adventure or introduce new elements. I find that easier to do with general setting information, especially stuff I've provided to my players, rather than then working with an adventure and seeing how I can change it to make it more relevant to the characters. Again, not necessary and can be done with adventures, but it's again something that, from my limited experience, seems much easier to tie in when I'm the one making the adventure.

It's very much a style and information processing preference. I don't want to seem like I'm criticising people for running adventures, especially running them almost straight from the book - with the right adventures for you and your group, that'll lead to a great time. I am just personally not sure it would be good for me or my group - though I am considering using adventures in the future to run a second game, as another creative outlet for myself.

** I also acknowledge it may not even be a problem with work to change around it, or taking cues from the players on their expectations and playing into them, as a way of delighting them.

 

[Professor Murder]

Real Talk: I should not be the "target audience". I'm an entrenched gamer in their late 40s. It's my take that about half of all material should be aimed at either onramping people to take on gaming, or geared to help people start GMing. I dont have much need for published adventures, but if its been found that they are the best way to help expand the hobby, I am fine with them being the focus. I'm aided by the fact that I buy multiple games over the course of a given year, so if even 1-2 DnD releases for example scratch my itch, I am going to be fine.

 

[Umbran]

So, finally, after decades of being told that nope, D&D books should be these lore tomes building massive libraries of material - what we got for most of 2e, 3e and 4e - I'm FINALLY dead square in the middle of WotC's target audience. Please excuse me for being really happy about that.

There's a kind of academic question about whether the target audience has changed, or if they've found a format that better serves the audience.

Whichever that is, like you, the products work a lot better for me than they used to. I find the mixture of setting and adventure of today to have far more utility than the setting material dominance of past ages.

Specifically, I am far more likely to buy these mixed setting-and-adventure products on the off chance I might use them than I am to buy an all-setting book.

This extends to non-D&D, for me. Deadlands: Lost Colony comes with a plot-point campaign ready to go in the rulebook, which lowers the level of effort I have to put in to get off the ground.