Adventure Design Philosophy (was: Best D&D Adventures)

[MerricB]

Forked from: Best D&D Adventures

Yeah I wouldn't say that I categorically hate *all* the classics; hell I even included one in my top five =P

Its just that when I go through the old adventure books, they seem to be very vague compared to adventures found today. I mean, I look at the Caves of Chaos in B2 and although I can see "hey-there's some nifty encounters here", its largely just a bunch of rooms. Or I can look at the Giants series and say "hey this is a neat concept, but where's the plot to tie this together?"

I dunno I guess I just tend to prefer adventures that have strong plot and fascinating villians. Stuff like B2 just doesn't interest me because I see a stat block for a Dark Knight...but there's little/no detail into why he's in the caves, whats his motivations/alliances. He's just another guy in a room. And I know this is a fantasy game, but dungeon ecology is pretty much lacking in 1st/2nd ed. Its more of a room-room-room-boss-town experience, and I'm sure thats fun for some people...its just not my cup of tea.

Thats why the adventures I've picked are more focused on having great plot (drow war) awesome dungeon ecology (banewarrens and RttToEE), and settings with a lot of depth to them (ravenloft).

Again I'm not bashing all the classics, I'm just shocked that so many people here prefers 1st/2nd ed adventures when it seems like everybody on this forum discusses 3rd/4th ed.

I'm curious as to what you think the "design philosophy" of earlier adventures are compared to modern ones? To me, it seems to be a dichotomy between vague sandboxes which give the DM alot of room to maneuver (early) against more-defined storylines that the PCs flesh out.

Honestly, it does depend on the adventure you look at. 3rd edition had a dearth of official (non-Dungeon) adventures during its run, but you get a wide variety of adventures even from the official ones.

The Sunless Citadel, The Forge of Fury and Deep Horizon are pretty classic sandbox-style adventures, although they provide more hooks than, say The Keep on the Borderlands.

The Speaker in Dreams is a situation/urban adventure, of which there aren't that many classic examples. The Veiled Society, a basic adventure, comes to mind.

Red Hand of Doom is a storyline adventure; of similar vintage to some of the Dragonlance adventures. Indeed, the classic Against the Giants series has a linear plotline, although the players have a great deal of freedom of how they approach each part.

I don't think many adventures of classic times used the "investigation" plot - The Assassin's Knot, perhaps, but mostly they're either exploration or goal-orientated.

###

You mention that you don't see a plot in "Giants" - I suggest you haven't looked hard enough. It's there, and indeed, it's as linear as they come. It might just not be presented in a form that you're familiar with. (It's also utterly confused by Q1, which bears little relationship to the motivations laid out in D1-3!)

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

Many of the old adventures came with a predefined goal; the actual route taken might vary according to the players. Here are a few sample goals:

G1-3: Chasten the giants, and find out what has caused the giants to raid human settlements!
D1-3: Chase the drow and chasten them!
Q1: Lolth was behind it (no she wasn't), chasten her in her own plane!

A1-4: Find the slavers and chasten them.

I3 (Pharoah): Survive in this forsaken desert, which becomes "Help the Pharoah".
I4-5: Help stop the Efreeti

T1: Look for trouble in Hommlet. (Honestly, it's the adventure you need the DM to do the most work with).

B2: Kill monsters and loot their stuff!

S1: Avoid traps and loot stuff!
S2: Recover the stolen swords
S4: Kill monsters and loot their stuff (before someone else does). No seriously, you're actually hired by a government to loot stuff before someone else does!

Goals are important. One of the weaker points of some of the adventure path modules has been when the goal isn't immediately apparent, or it doesn't seem to connect to what else you've been doing.

"Kill monsters and take their stuff" or "we're bored, let's be adventurers" is one of the weaker goals, but it's quite popular.

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

Apart from the adventure goal (which is very important), you also have the structure of the adventure.

The classic D&D structure is that of a static dungeon - the PCs can encounter any of the encounters at any time, and their only restrictions are with the connections between rooms. (One of the reasons that Barrow of the Forgotten King is so disappointing is that the connections are basically linear).

Perhaps more typical of the dungeons Gary Gygax and other good DMs actually ran (run), you have the active dungeon, where the residents respond to threats. Keep on the Borderlands and Against the Giants are meant to be run in such a fashion. Novice DMs probably didn't... One problem with some modern designs is that conceptually they should be active, but the room/encounter design makes it very difficult for them to be active - they're presented as static encounters. (In some ways, the Tactical format of linked rooms is meant to help with this).

If one looks at G1-3 as one adventure, you actually have this interesting set of three (mostly) active dungeons separated by bottlenecks. The overall structure is linear, but within each section there's a lot of freedom for the adventurers.

Later adventures - mostly pioneered by Tracy Hickman - paid more attention to the story of the game, and the idea that events could be triggered by the villains that pay no attention to what the players have done! Dragons of Despair is a classic example of this, with wilderness and dungeon encounters... but also a separate track of events that take place regardless of PC location. It contains one "bottleneck", which is the PCs getting to Xak Tsaroth. The first part of the adventure is a lot of freedom with wilderness adventuring; the second part is more freedom exploring the city, but the PCs have to reach the city for the adventure to continue.

Cheers!

 

[vazanar]

T1: Look for trouble in Hommlet. (Honestly, it's the adventure you need the DM to do the most work with).
Cheers!

Have to agree I love T1-4, but the start up is all up to the DM. So much to do even in T1, but a lot of people missed it.

The older modules tend to rely far more on DM story design and provide more locations and challenges.

Hickman adding the story element in Dragonlance brought a new problem that many modern modules suffer from, railroading. A balance in my mind is the best. However, with so many 3pp both styles can be supported.

 

[MerricB]

Hickman adding the story element in Dragonlance brought a new problem that many modern modules suffer from, railroading. A balance in my mind is the best. However, with so many 3pp both styles can be supported.

One of the unusual points in Hickman's Desert of Desolation is that the series assumes that the PCs release the Efreeti, but there is in fact no railroading to assure this happens!

Cheers!

 

[Schmoe]

One of the unusual points in Hickman's Desert of Desolation is that the series assumes that the PCs release the Efreeti, but there is in fact no railroading to assure this happens!

Cheers!

That's a good point. It was only AFTER I had run one group of players through this and was reviewing it for a second group that I realized the encounter is pretty much the crux of the whole series.

Otherwise, eh, I'm not sure I buy the Tracy Hickman-railroad connection. There's not a big difference between "Help the Pharoah (in his tomb)" and "Chasten the Giants (in their lair)", after all.

 

[MerricB]

Otherwise, eh, I'm not sure I buy the Tracy Hickman-railroad connection. There's not a big difference between "Help the Pharoah (in his tomb)" and "Chasten the Giants (in their lair)", after all.

Hickman railroad refers far more to the Dragonlance series.

Cheers!

 

[vazanar]

Hickman railroad refers far more to the Dragonlance series.

Cheers!

I dont think Hickman was terrible with doing it either. However, once the plot story heavy modules started to be made and be popular, railroading was inevitable. Of course the best railroading is when the story is logical enough, that no one notices.

 

[MerricB]

I dont think Hickman was terrible with doing it either. However, once the plot story heavy modules started to be made and be popular, railroading was inevitable. Of course the best railroading is when the story is logical enough, that no one notices.

It depends on context and what the group wants to do.

The beginning of Dragons of Flame (by Douglas Niles) consists of one of the most railroaded portions of the entire series - the group is captured in Solace, and is taken to Qualinesti, and eventually ends up at the gates of Pax Tharkas (figuratively speaking) before they get to make a decision as to what to do next.

It's a real shock to players who have been experiencing Hommlet with a superior DM!

Of course, adventures like A1 (Slave Pits of the Undercity) are extremely linear due to their tournament origins. However, in each encounter the PCs can actually make decisions - that's just absent in the early part of DL2 - and the published module does give more areas and thus freedom for the PCs.

The nadir of railroading comes in the Avatar series, where not only do the PCs have very little choice of action in various sections, but they're not even the stars of the show - it's the NPCs that take all the glory. Urgh.

However, "plot-enabled" adventures do have a lot going for them. A recent example of a badly constructed adventure would be the Castles & Crusades adventure, "Usurpers of the Fell Axe". Now, don't get me wrong - not all C&C adventures are poor. The first in the series, "Assault on Blacktooth Ridge" is one of the better adventures I've read. I may at some point run it myself converted to 4e.

The problem with "Usurpers" is that it presents a town adventure... without any events, nor schemes that the NPCs have put into motion. It's written as a site-based adventure, but that isn't how it should play. A really good DM will be able to construct events that will make an adventure, but it doesn't work as written.

Cheers!

 

[Roger]

I don't think many adventures of classic times used the "investigation" plot

I'd be tempted to put The Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh into this category.



Cheers,
Roger