for combat, read my blog entries about making it faster and making it descriptive. They are compatible.
For plotting, that gets trickier. Go read up on the "3 act model" for plays and movies. The gist is:
act 1:
see hero be awesome (introduction of character)
see hero run into problem (or it runs into him)
see hero start working on problem
act 2:
see hero work on problem (a few more encounters...)
setback on here (hero had moment where it looked like problem was solved, then it got worse, much worse)
act 3:
hero works to overcome worse situation
hero confronts BBEG (climax)
hero is shown afterwards with happy ending (denouement)
Now in a D&D game, you've got to be fairly flexible in using any framework of "what happens", because players should be free to do anything.
However, often you'll find that once the players choose to "solve a problem", there's a fairly predictable path they will take. Any choices in a given encounter may be random, but if the BBEG lives in Castle NorthFromHere, you can bet they're going to go there when they say "we want to kill the BBEG in his castle"
So, as other folks have said, talk to your players about what they're PCs want to pursue next (relative to what the PCs know). They may be looking for a business or political opportunity. They may be wanting to solve a problem that you've left dangling.
Make your next adventure be one or two of those items.
The introduction is you telling the players how everything's going for them since the last game (how much time has passed, has anything changed).
Then you bring in the problem (or opportunity) that the players were interested in. Try to make it personal, something they will want to pursue with an obvious vector of where to start (he went thataway!).
Now you're in Act 2
You're next elements you need are going to be the "path to the solution". Expect the PCs to do some investigating, so you'll need an NPC or two with information.
Expect some NPCs to try to stop the PCs (competition, or the BBEG sent them), so you've got a combat encounter or two. These are probably goons, this isn't a major combat yet.
Now for the setback. When the PCs are close to the goal, it's good literary practice to have a twist or setback that makes things look worse and harder.
The setback will vary as it must pertain to the plot (goal) and the environment. It might be the bridge collapsing, ship sinking, information that was false, a betrayal by an NPC, or even the BBEG was really a puppet, so they're work isn't done. Don't over-use the betrayal angle in your games, you need your PCs to trust others, or you can't use the betrayal tool.
Now you're in Act 3
More encounters, whatever makes sense for the PCs to finish pursuing the goal and re-arm themselves (figuratively or literally). This might mean getting the a new item to defeat the BBEG, or just getting un-lost.
This should wrap up with the big boss fight, or challenge with the "opposition".
The final scene shows the aftermath. The PCs have won, so show them back at the inn, celebrating their victory, maidens offer their services, the mayor holds a parade, etc. if the PCs fail, the aftermath is appropriate to whatever failure means. The cool thing about failure, is then this adventure is really "Act 2" of a larger scope play. Just like Empire Strikes Back was reall Act 2.
The key to remember is the 3 act model is a just a model. Deviate to add flavor (though in the beginning, deviate less). It can be layered, where each Star wars movie had 3 acts inside of them, and each movie in the trilogy represented 1 act of the model.
And at all times, be flexible. If the PCs find a way to invalidate or bypass something you wrote, then bypass it. If you can recycle something, fine, but don't penalize good player ideas by neutralizing them just so you can stick to what you wrote.
As a general rule, I avoid writing "The players will do XYZ" or "the NPCs will do XYZ to the PCs"
Instead, I write sections for "If the players do XYZ..." and "the NPCs will TRY to do XYZ to the PCs"
The difference is in expecation of what may happen, versus forcing the matter.
For plotting, that gets trickier. Go read up on the "3 act model" for plays and movies. The gist is:
act 1:
see hero be awesome (introduction of character)
see hero run into problem (or it runs into him)
see hero start working on problem
act 2:
see hero work on problem (a few more encounters...)
setback on here (hero had moment where it looked like problem was solved, then it got worse, much worse)
act 3:
hero works to overcome worse situation
hero confronts BBEG (climax)
hero is shown afterwards with happy ending (denouement)
Now in a D&D game, you've got to be fairly flexible in using any framework of "what happens", because players should be free to do anything.
However, often you'll find that once the players choose to "solve a problem", there's a fairly predictable path they will take. Any choices in a given encounter may be random, but if the BBEG lives in Castle NorthFromHere, you can bet they're going to go there when they say "we want to kill the BBEG in his castle"
So, as other folks have said, talk to your players about what they're PCs want to pursue next (relative to what the PCs know). They may be looking for a business or political opportunity. They may be wanting to solve a problem that you've left dangling.
Make your next adventure be one or two of those items.
The introduction is you telling the players how everything's going for them since the last game (how much time has passed, has anything changed).
Then you bring in the problem (or opportunity) that the players were interested in. Try to make it personal, something they will want to pursue with an obvious vector of where to start (he went thataway!).
Now you're in Act 2
You're next elements you need are going to be the "path to the solution". Expect the PCs to do some investigating, so you'll need an NPC or two with information.
Expect some NPCs to try to stop the PCs (competition, or the BBEG sent them), so you've got a combat encounter or two. These are probably goons, this isn't a major combat yet.
Now for the setback. When the PCs are close to the goal, it's good literary practice to have a twist or setback that makes things look worse and harder.
The setback will vary as it must pertain to the plot (goal) and the environment. It might be the bridge collapsing, ship sinking, information that was false, a betrayal by an NPC, or even the BBEG was really a puppet, so they're work isn't done. Don't over-use the betrayal angle in your games, you need your PCs to trust others, or you can't use the betrayal tool.
Now you're in Act 3
More encounters, whatever makes sense for the PCs to finish pursuing the goal and re-arm themselves (figuratively or literally). This might mean getting the a new item to defeat the BBEG, or just getting un-lost.
This should wrap up with the big boss fight, or challenge with the "opposition".
The final scene shows the aftermath. The PCs have won, so show them back at the inn, celebrating their victory, maidens offer their services, the mayor holds a parade, etc. if the PCs fail, the aftermath is appropriate to whatever failure means. The cool thing about failure, is then this adventure is really "Act 2" of a larger scope play. Just like Empire Strikes Back was reall Act 2.
The key to remember is the 3 act model is a just a model. Deviate to add flavor (though in the beginning, deviate less). It can be layered, where each Star wars movie had 3 acts inside of them, and each movie in the trilogy represented 1 act of the model.
And at all times, be flexible. If the PCs find a way to invalidate or bypass something you wrote, then bypass it. If you can recycle something, fine, but don't penalize good player ideas by neutralizing them just so you can stick to what you wrote.
As a general rule, I avoid writing "The players will do XYZ" or "the NPCs will do XYZ to the PCs"
Instead, I write sections for "If the players do XYZ..." and "the NPCs will TRY to do XYZ to the PCs"
The difference is in expecation of what may happen, versus forcing the matter.
