D&D 5E Out of the Abyss or Curse of Strahd?

[pontinyc]

Just like the title says. . . I'll be finishing a converted Rise of the Runelords campaign in a month or so and am looking into what I'll be running next. This ROTRL campaign has been the first time I've DM'd in almost 30 years and it's been a blast but I've made tons of mistakes (railroading, creating too much bloat around the story, over designing encounters. . . lots of noob stuff). I'm sure I'll continue to make them but hopefully with decreasing frequency.

Anyway, which adventure would you all suggest for someone who's getting back into DMing? I'll, of course, ask the group if they have a general preference of setting but I'm asking more to learn which you all think would be more noob DM friendly.

Many thanks for any input!

 

[Jester David]

I love Ravenloft and like Curse of Strahd.
But Out of the Abyss is excellent. It's less railroady. It's more complicated and advanced, but after RotRL you should be able to handle it. And the villain is different, while Strahd and Karzoug are somewhat similar.

 

[pontinyc]

OoTA SPOILER INCOMING:

Thanks for the reply, Jester Canuck. Great to know. My goal for OoTA would be to have the pc's get to 20 and then fight each demon lord individually. I'm not really interested in the finale of that adventure as written (with each player taking control of a single lord and then take out the weakened Demogorgon). Do you think this would be feasible for someone who's still getting their bearings as a DM?

 

[Mouseferatu]

My goal for OoTA would be to have the pc's get to 20 and then fight each demon lord individually. I'm not really interested in the finale of that adventure as written (with each player taking control of a single lord and then take out the weakened Demogorgon).

Obviously you know your players better than I do. (At least I hope so. ) So this may or may not be at all useful. But speaking for myself...

If I were a player in an OotA campaign? I really wouldn't care for your proposed change.

Yes, demon lords are cool, and fighting a demon lord can be cool. But multiple demon lords in a single campaign? I would get bored, and kind of annoyed with it. It turns the climax of the campaign into a series of big, potentially sloggy fights. Worse, it's a waste of potential, drama-wise. Any given demon lord is viable as the final confrontation of an entire campaign. If they fight each other, it's at least 1) something we haven't seen/played through before, and 2) it doesn't feel like I, as a player, has battled them all.

But having the PCs battle all of them? It feels like, what's the point? We're fighting glorified cameos by characters who could have driven entire plotlines.

Again, only speaking for myself. If you think your players will prefer what you have in mind, by all means, go for it and have fun. But I wanted to present the other viewpoint in case it's one you haven't considered.

 

[pontinyc]

Very much appreciated, Mousferatu, thank you. It's a very valid point and I hadn't really considered the fact that fighting them all could turn into a real slog with the only variations being their CR's and tactics after awhile. Thanks for the input, exactly the kind of thing I'm looking for here. Will rethink that.

 

[Mouseferatu]

You're welcome. Glad I gave you a new angle to think about, whatever you decide to do.

 

[MNblockhead]

I recently returned to roleplaying after a roughly 25-year absence (hadn't played any DnD since 1e). I bought 5e, which I love, and am running a homebrew campaign. Nothing about the prior adventure paths interesting me enough to buy them, but I bought Curse of Straud, partly out of nostalgia for the I6 Ravenloft module. I love the book so far and am thinking of putting my homebrew campaign on hold for a while to rune CoS. Ultimately, it depends on whether a gothic-horror setting appeals to you more than yet another stop-the-apocalypse in the Forgotten Realms.

 

[Bruce Vistani]

I've not read Out of the Abyss but have sat in on some sessions. I'm currently working my way through Curse of Strahd (reading modules is a slow process for me as I let my mind wander off on tangents and possibilities).

Strahd is very different from standard D&D. Just the tone of it is very different, and that could be good or bad depending on your group. The group I play with are all a bit wacky and tend to do unexpected and comical things. TBH I'm not sure if Strahd is going to go over well with them. As a setting it lacks diversity, and whilst I wouldn't call the game a rail-road necessarily, the options available to the PCs are certainly limited. I'm afraid we might get bored before we finish the quest. Still its a nice change of pace if you are tired of dungeon-crawling and fighting orcs.

 

[pontinyc]

Thank you both for the reply. As I'm trying to resist the temptation to railroad and instead allow my imagination and the players to wander, it sounds as if maybe OoTA is the better option. Unfortunately, due to work, kid, etc., creating a homebrew campaign isn't really an option right now. Would love to someday.

 

[Jester David]

OoTA SPOILER INCOMING:

Thanks for the reply, Jester Canuck. Great to know. My goal for OoTA would be to have the pc's get to 20 and then fight each demon lord individually. I'm not really interested in the finale of that adventure as written (with each player taking control of a single lord and then take out the weakened Demogorgon). Do you think this would be feasible for someone who's still getting their bearings as a DM?

By the time you reach that far into OotA, you won't be someone who's "still getting their bearings as a DM", you'll be a DM with two campaign almost under their belt.
You don't need to decide how you'll end OotA right now. You have months to decide as you play. As you get to the end, the players might be itching to try something new and each demon lord might be too much . Or they might be loving each lord and having a little mini-challenge fighting each demon lord appeals to them.