Help me make WotC adventures better.

[Deadline247]

I’ve only run two of your published 4e adventures, H1: Keep on the Shadowfell and now E1: Death’s Reach. Some of my suggestions may or may not match up with the majority here, but I’ll share them anyway.

• I wish villains were more fleshed out and gave the PCs reason to care other than wanting to beat the XP and magic items out of him.
• Someone else mentioned that today’s encounters generally take much longer than they did in the old days. Please keep this in mind when creating your adventures.. For example, I just finished DMing my 4th weekly session of Death’s Reach and my group still has two fights to go before they actually get to speak to the Raven Queen, which is where the adventure is REALLY supposed to start. I may not be the best DM in the world, but I think that 5 or 6 weeks worth of pre-adventure is a bit much.
• PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, make unmarked maps for each adventure available through DDI. I don’t mind printing them out myself and tiling them together, but the fact that I have to spend time Photoshopping out all of the NPC markers is incredibly annoying and time-consuming.
• This probably won’t be popular around here, but I personally would like to have monster tokens included with published adventures (or at a bare minimum, downloadable through DDI). My minis collection is rather small and I either have to use the same minis over and over or else I make my own tokens from the artwork you post. And someone who is brand new to the game is going to be stuck using coins or buttons or whatever is handy…which is lame.
• On occasion, why not tap into your stable of fantastic novel writers for adventure storylines and let your in-house team populate it with encounters? Personally, I would love to play a 4e adventure co-authored by R.A. Salvatore, Margaret Weis, or Tracy Hickman. These people know how to craft engaging stories!

 

[nedjer]

More of a heroic leap than an epic fail Your willingness to consult on this level immediately suggests that you're the guy to turn out some great modules/ scenarios . . .

Id like to offer a helpful reply but need to delay, as I've been know to cause the odd misunderstanding by teasing the occasional poster into debating a sticky/ touchy point.

And I've access to a tame scientist/ academic who specialises in active learning and case based learning methods. His view's would be more interesting than mine. I'll just rattle his cage

Later.

 

[im_robertb]

I like combat encounters to be fleshed out in a page or two, with everything present (encounter map, terrain, monster statblocks, tactics). This is part of why I like the Delve format; it actually gets this done.

Encounter maps need to be designed in a way that allows for easy map setup in in-person play. I consider myself a DM with a lot of options for the miniatures; I have 1 copy of 5-6 different sets of dungeon tiles, as well as a dry-erase battlemat (28x19 squares, which is just the laminated paper battlemat from the 3.5 DMG), but some the Scales of War encounters are just atrocious in terms of map setup.

Good Examples:
Dungeon 156, Rescue at Rivenroar: Indoor maps are simple and not excessively large. Outdoor maps, while large, have simple, sweeping features that can easily be drawn in a few sweeps of the marker.
Dungeon 160, Den of the Destroyer: In the fortress, most rooms are of reasonable size, and the ones with walls that don't conform to the gridlines are smaller and simpler. Despite this, every encounter area is still interesting.

Bad Examples:
Dungeon 159, The Lost Mines of Karak: P.76, the encounter on the dunes.
Dungeon 161: The Temple Between: Most encounters in the temple, but particularly M6: The Grand Cathedral (P 44). The room is 22 x 36, with multiple heights, and slopes that it took me 3 readings to understand. Consider how much my PCs will struggle with that. Knowing I'd come to this encounter at some point is one of the things that turned me off of running Scales of War.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Alot of really good ideas here, this is an excellent thread.

I haven't played alot of the published 4E adventures yet, but I have a few. I can sum up my ideas with:

Less combat, more exploration and story development.

Plots and storyline need interaction, discovery, and conversation, not an endless string of combat encounters.

I realize page count and leveling issues can constrain this, but maybe offer more XP rewards for the non-combat encounters, and maybe bite the bullet and publish larger adventures.

That's a good suggestion, I like that.

Seriously, if that adventure needs to cover 3 levels and all you have are two dungeons to work with, considering "cheating". Use skill challenges and many high value Quests for extra awards.

Maybe an approach here would be: Every time the PCs gather important information, meet a crucial NPC, or make an important decision (preferably one that changes the adventure in a meaningful way and not favoring one in the design of the adventure), this could be a Quest.
- PCs interrogated Luisa Krause: Minor Quest.
- PCs discover that the Mayor has been replaced by a Changling: Major Quest.
- PCs convince the Kobolds to rebel against Irontooth: Major Quest
- PCs kill all Kobolds serving Irontooth: Major Quest
- PCs steal the Red Dragon's hoard while he's absent: Major Quest
- PCs kill the Red Dragon: Minor Quest
- PCs found the great Kobold Waterfalls: Minor Quest

The players might be unaware such a quest existed, but still quests provide the "mechanical framework" - a justification, so to speak - to give XP for stuff that's not combat. It allows you to keep the desired progression rates without forcing a great combat density. You can reward stuff that is not just combat-combat-combat. The last example with the waterfall could be a reward just for exploration - and whatever a game rewards will become what the players want to do. Even in a dungeon-heavy adventure, this can make a difference, as the PCs are driven to explore the dungeon and discover features, even if they don't help stop the evil ritualist or drive the kobolds out of the region.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Oh, I just remembered a more "minor" thing - sometimes I don't understand what's supposed to be going on. This can apply to weird trap descriptions (I still don't know how the trap with the Otyough in the Pyramid is supposed to work - Understand the mechanic, but not the visuals) or to PC powers whose names are not sufficient to explain or visualize the effect.

 

[Stoat]

Another point. I know you have Dungeon Tiles to sell, and I suppose its a good idea to use them in adventures. But use them smart.

Let me direct you to Web of Chains from Dungeon 168. This is a pretty terrible adventure anyway, but the maps are drek.

1. Encounter E3. The map on page 15 is entirely too small for four large monsters. The trench/ditch makes little sense and is poorly placed. It's obviously only there because you have a tile with a chasm on it. Also note that this is a 3 page encounter, defeating the purpose of the Delve Format.

2. Encounter G1. "Although represented on the map as two parallel rivers, this is in fact one waterway 4 squares wide." Look at this map and be ashamed.

3. Encounters G2 and G3. Use of dungeon tiles just makes these maps look ugly. Especially weird is the way the background abruptly changes around the tower from grass to dirt and the fact that the walls don't look anything like walls.

On the other hand, I found most of the maps in Dungeon Delves to be good looking, creatively shaped and interesting.

 

[diaglo]

Hello there everybody,

In case you don't know me, I'm Rodney Thompson, a D&D developer at Wizards of the Coast. Over the years I've seen WotC adventures take some knocks, to put it mildly. To put it more bluntly, I've seen comments to the effect that WotC adventures are, ahem, the worst. I'm not sure I agree, but there is a perception out there that some WotC-published adventures are sub-par.

I'd like to change that.

I'm making it my mission to change the way we design, develop, and edit adventures. It's not going to be a fast process, or an easy one, but I've formed my task force and have visited the quartermaster for ammunition and supplies. However, like any mission, mine needs some good Intelligence before the work can begin.

So, what I'd like to hear from the community is what you think would make published adventures better. What areas are WotC adventures lacking in that could be improved? What makes a good adventure for you, and why are the published adventures so far not doing that for you?

print them for OD&D(1974)

yes, i am serious.

If you want to just post some thoughts, that's fine by me, and I'll be eager to read them. However, if you REALLY want to be a superstar, when you talk about something that can be improved, give me an example of a WotC adventure that does that thing badly (or not at all), and an example of an adventure that does that well.

The only other things I ask are this: 1) Be polite and respectful. I am not going to take you seriously if you rant and rave. 2) Avoid hyperbole. If I see the words "epic fail" or "worst adventure ever" there's a good chance I won't take your comments seriously. 3) Don't use this as a soapbox from which to launch complaints about 4th Edition. We're here to talk about adventures, people, not game systems.

So, that's pretty much it. Help me out, would ya?

some of the problems i have encountered with adventures developed and released by WotC.

1) too long. too much. too railroady to get the job completed. return to the temple of elemental monotony.
not every adventure needs to be an Adventure Path style or mini campaign.

2) forcing the players to go to area 1 to fight. get clue 1. go to area 2 to fight. get clue 2... ad naseum. is just frustrating. it gets the PCs ramped up to the level you want them for each encounter. but it is a poor exercise in teaching roleplaying. also it means many times some levels are just dump levels since you bump them up for the next encounter without even giving the player a chance to flex his new found/won powers.

3) not enough back ground notes. why is monster X here. what other monsters does he know about or has had interactions with. who can he get aid from. how does he eat. what about replacements. returning patrols. how does the complex react to intruders that have cleared out areas? background. background. background. and along these lines it means helping the DM figure out some hooks or leads he can give for his campaign. give npcs and monsters quirks or something memorable.

4) timed adventures. city of the spider queen did this. but at the same time it messed it up since the first 30 days the party had no influence on... avoid setting up unobtainable time plots. yes, make it challenging. but when a party decides to take a year off in game to study navel lint/ trade/ buy / or make their own kewl items instead of adventure it can be a bummer for them to get railroaded into it instead.

5) speaking of railroads. avoid the obvious. you can make the rube goldberg machine adventure. but if the players come up with an alternate solution make it feasible. ergo, give notes to the DM about what might be a feasible alternate for the encounters you require the previous one to have been completed.

6) charts and tables in a detachable appendix. hand drawn pics and other hand outs. get the players involved. not just their characters.

7) avoid +1 sword. give each item an unique name or flavor. rename some spells in found spellbooks. make some potions have odd tastes, smells, or appearance.

 

[ArcaneSpringboard]

In fact, better yet, do what you must with your print product adventures, and then publish extensive digital supplements to the product through DDI. Not only can this help you fill perceived gaps in the itches your community is looking to scratch, but it's yet another draw to the subscription service. Publish NPC backgrounds online, extra non-combat locations (in towns and such), extra novel treasures for the party to come across, etc. You have this really amazing tool for delivering whatever content you want to a huge fraction of your fan base. Leverage it every single opportunity you get.

This.

I've become very disillusioned with Dungeon over the past year. I'm just getting less and less use out of it. In fact, if it weren't for the Monster Builder I'd probably dump my DDI sub. I loved the Eberron conversion article for Keep on the Shadowfell, and was very disappointed when that feature turned into a one-shot.

It got even worse when E1-3 came out and I decided I wasn't going to buy them because I really couldn't see a decent way to run it in Eberron due to the non-existence of the Raven Queen.

The problem is that while WotC says that they want to have their adventures generic, the fact is that they're becoming more and more entwined with the PoL setting.

But what I'm really disappointed with is that one-off adventures in Dungeon have become an exception as opposed to a rule. I love the concept of the Chaos Scar (and in parallel the Dungeon Delve book), but it's been months since it started and we're still only seeing Level 1 or Level 2 adventures for it. A lot of us are into Epic now.

The Adventure Path I'm not interested in at all. I'm not interested in comitting to 30 levels of a single adventure path, yet space and money on the scale of 20 months of Dungeon magazines are taken up by it. Especially once the plot gets going I can't really take those adventures and slot them into something else.

 

[fuzzlewump]

Thanks for stopping in Rodney, I think we all appreciate at least having the chance at being heard. I hope you get a few 'unanimous' opinions.

My main problem with the modules is the story to fights ratio. The current modules should, based on the amount of story given, really only stretch over 1-2 levels, given the amount of time that it takes to get through 4E encounters (which by the way, isn't a bad thing on its own.) Every fight should be important; or there needs to be vast changes in the system. In previous editions you could spend 15-30 minutes on a non-important fight and it's okay. In 4E you're spending 50-70 minutes (if you're a fast group) per fight, so if the fights are unimportant it's a recipe for boredom.

For a module like H1: Keep on the Shadowfell, cut the encounters in half, at least. Maybe in a third. Then, write essentially another 4E module's worth of story, at least, and put in more encounters to accomdate that increase in story. For Keep on the Shadowfell, it could be that you find out that Kalarel is certainly a bad guy, but his plan is already going (as someone else mentioned.) You have to go to another location, perhaps in to the Shadowfell to stop it.

I'll let you guys do the creative thinking; the point is, if the story really only justifies/supports a few encounters, then don't stretch it out to 30.

 

[Ferghis]

I'm making it my mission to change the way we design, develop, and edit adventures. It's not going to be a fast process, or an easy one, but I've formed my task force and have visited the quartermaster for ammunition and supplies. However, like any mission, mine needs some good Intelligence before the work can begin.

So, what I'd like to hear from the community is what you think would make published adventures better. What areas are WotC adventures lacking in that could be improved? What makes a good adventure for you, and why are the published adventures so far not doing that for you?

If you want to just post some thoughts, that's fine by me, and I'll be eager to read them. However, if you REALLY want to be a superstar, when you talk about something that can be improved, give me an example of a WotC adventure that does that thing badly (or not at all), and an example of an adventure that does that well.

I'll really regret posting this if you take this as trolling, but being, by far, a player and not a DM, I don't read adventures that much, to preserve the mistery in the off-chance that I might play in them. Therefore, I'm unable to really make any superstar comments. To avoid such spoilers, I've also skipped over most of this thread, which otherwise would be a pretty rude thing for me to do. However, I have been playing the game since the 80s, and follow the industry with interest. A dear friend who I grew up with runs a gaming store, so, in particular, I follow some of the economics of the industry. For example, I'm an eager reader of Steve Jackson's annual report, the most recent of which should be coming out soon: Report To The Stakeholders - Page 15 - Steve Jackson Games Forums

My first though is this: have you considered paying adventure makers more? I can't say I know exactly what you pay them currently, but my impression is that it's less than they used to make. And I have doubts as to whether you are in a position even suggest such a notion to those that could make decision. Nonetheless, I can't help but wonder if you, or your task force, have discussed this idea.

I say this because the low pay may (and I do mean may) help explain why those who do author better adventures prefer to do that work outside of WotC. But also because I think better incentives may help foster better work from those that do submit their adventure ideas to WotC. Further, I fear that vague references to "the economy" stifle the real utility that "more money" may have when invested in specific ways. After all, a bad economy means that you have to be more careful where you spend your money, not that you should stop spending money.

I don't pretend that this alone may be the only solution, and, again, pre-emptive apologies if I am out-of-place or offend anyone when making this suggestion. But you asked what my thought was, and the above was my first thought.

My second thought is: make more and better skill challenges. I hear experienced, talented, and hard-working DMs that have only vague ideas of how to setup skill challenges. Giving them good, milestone-worthy skill challenges would greatly assist them in making their own. For example, I would love to see the effect that the adventurers can have on a large scale battle determined by a skill challenge of some kind. Or, put together some epic skill challenges that have the players administering a territory. Or, since sending one character alone to scout has become less feasible in 4e, make scouting skill challenges that only cost the party surges if failed (whereas otherwise, a failed scouting mission would cost the party a character).

I realize these suggestions are perhaps better incorporated into another DMG, but the truth is that most DMs I know buy adventures to cannibalize the ideas therein for their own adventures. Rarely do they buy and play an adventure as-is. This is, in part, what the points-of-light setting realizes. So, my hope in putting out my second though is to provide you with something I see a need for in adventures. Because any DM will be happy to read a great skill challenge in an adventure.