Help me make WotC adventures better.

I'll echo what others are saying and say that WotC modules (or at least KotS and Pyramid) are overloaded with grindy, boring combat encounters. In both cases I had to remove a good number of useless fights, and in Pyramid I also made most of the various NPCs there more open to negotiation and less hostile in general.

I suspect that the only reason my group had any fun with these two modules was because I heavily edited them. They really turned me off to WotC modules, since if I need to do lots of editing I might as well just come up with something on my own for free.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

My problem with the WotC modules has been mainly that there's little or no plot. I played up through P2 before things fell apart and it really felt strained because there was nothing tying the adventures together. I've heard the same thing about Scales of War - a real Adventure Path is like what Paizo does; they outline the entire campaign in the preview, so the DM/GM knows what's going to be in the next adventure. They flesh things out, there are hooks.

Also, I found the early adventures were VERY skimpy on the loot, and had a TON of mindless, boring fights. Pretty much everything was "They attack you on sight" and "They fight until the death", and the treasure was really few and far between, so much that I found our defenses were not scaling appropriately to the monsters and the further we got, the more we were getting demolished by encounters, and everything eventually turned into a total meat grinder that took all our dailies to overcome.

Now, I don't know if some of these issues have been addressed in later modules. But the main thing I have to say is, if you're doing an ADVENTURE PATH then do an Adventure Path. Because the H/P/E series was a loose collection of adventures with a common theme, not an AP (and the 3.0 ones were the same way, I heard). Scales of War was touted as an adventure path, and was again just a collection of adventures in the same locale with kind of a plot but nothing really tying them together. Compare this to any of the Paizo APs, including the old ones they did in the 3.5 days, and it's a world of difference.

Also, another thing that bothers me with the 4E adventures I've seen is, as others have stated, the shoddy editing and nonsensical encounters. Most monsters aren't given any advice of how to operate properly, and really the entire combat does play out like an MMO - your defender gets "aggro" and the rest is history. Also, I may be the only one, but I'm sick to death of "hazards" in nearly every encounter that only affect the PCs. I recall vividly an encounter in H3 where you're fighting on ice, and every time you move you need to make a check to avoid falling prone, or something like that. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. Except it's just you, because the enemies are "adept at moving across ice" and can do so without penalty. Hazards are good if they add to the encounter; one of my favorites to this day is the from the adventure in back of the 3.5 Eberron book, where you're in a sewer and there are valves that shoot off randomly every round. They had a minor effect (prone, again, as I recall) but they could affect both you OR your enemy. This is a good hazard. A hazard which is basically "Give the monsters an advantage versus the PCs" isn't a hazard at all.
 
Last edited:

Others have already covered a lot of major changes that can be of great help. I have a some suggestions for a stylistic shift that would make me interested in buying modules again.


Don't Tell a story:

Part of the problem is that the modules AREN'T telling a story. They are presenting threat, detail its location and the combat encounters that will be encountered there. But that's not a story, that's just a collection of challenges. All of which are potentially deadly (so no one encounter is more important than another), and all of which end in a confrontation with the Bad Entity behind the whole nefarious plot.

On the other hand, explicitly telling a 'real' story in an RPG module is a difficult endeavor. Many times, the major NPCs are the real heroes of the story and the party are nothing but bodyguards who traipse along to fight a few threats and bear witness to all the interesting things the NPCs experience. This was the case in Ravenloft 2, the Randal Morn trilogy in 2e, but also in many Paradigm modules for 3e (in one of them, the PCs are literally the bodyguards of a senator who has to make difficult political choices - and I'm not meaning to slam Paradigm, I think they made Arcanis into one of the most interesting game worlds around. But many of their adventures are very disappointing). And the trilogy which started the Iron Kingdoms line also suffered from the same problem.

Another thing I dislike very much (though YMMV quite a lot) is all these dungeon crawls which have pages of background info which are a) pointless to the current plot b) cannot be discovered by the characters c) tell an exciting, intrigue-heavy tale which is now over and done with and leave the current PCs with nothing more to do but kick down doors and slay whatever monsters are behind them. The whole DCC-line was proud of its lack of NPC-interaction, which I personally find deplorable.

I think many of the modules written for the original West End Star Wars game are good examples, though. They are cinematic, generally put the characters in the driving seat, start with a slam bang opening which is often really exhilarating, and generally offer enough non-combat scenes during the adventure to keep the experiences offered by the module varied and exciting.
Same thing applies to the James Bond modules, several of which even improved on the plotting of the films (Live and Let Die, Dr. No, View to a Kill...). They read well and played well.

More recent good work can be found in the last Conan mega-module (Wrath of Asgard???). Many Elric/stormbringer modules are quite good. And for D&D, the UK series for 1e had some pretty good modules, the B/X module was very, very good (as were X4 and X5 for the Expert set). And Aaron Allston's introductory module in the N-series (where you started with 0-lvl characters marooned on an island and came to choose your class through your actions) was also exemplary.

Now, most of these are IP-driven lines, and the adventures try to approximate the feel of the original works. Perhaps that's one of the key elements - try and reproduce the excitement found in the original source material. And I don't think that source material should be CRPGs (based on D&D's own paradigm, anyway, so the snake is eating its tail), but instead good and/or classic heroic fantasy and sword and sorcery stories, novels and (a much rarer breed, alas) movies.

Maybe take a look at some structural models used for screenwriting (Hero's Journey may be very appropriate, or Blake Snyder's Save The Cat) and figure out how to use them for RPG module storytelling purposes (with one major caveat - instead of one protagonist who generally changes through and because of the adventure, you now have a group of protagonists you have absolutely no narrative control over). These models will in any case help you think about the overall shape of the adventure, the story reason for the encounters, and give them different weight.

And oh yes, ditch skill challenges for anything except purely physical activities (like escaping from a collapsing temple during a volcanic eruption). They're a truly wrongheaded design choice, a pain to read and obviously bloody difficult to design as well.
 

Wow, I wish I had seen this thread sooner, not sure how I missed it. Skimming over the other responses, I will say my piece.

Better villains for sure. I ran KotS for my group and they found out Kalarel's name right before he got dragged into the rift. He wasn't in the adventure. I, as others did, had to remove several boring encounters and actually removed the entire area that had, IRC, an ooze or cube.

Overland maps. I would like to see overland maps that present possible side encounters. In KotS, there wasn't a map that showed where everything in the adventure was, in relationship to the village. Granted I used it in a homebrew with a different settlement, but I would have liked to see the general area that the writer had in mind. I believe "Into the Dragon's Lair" did this fairly well, but it has been years since I open that book.

I'm tired of orcs, goblins and kobolds and so are my players. New, believable alternate races in adventures would be great. The Freeport series did this well with the underground serpent people.

More functionality. Orcs of Stonefang Pass had a giant stone slab that locked the orcs in, yet the other side of the tunnel going to the citadel didn't have one. On that note, the dwarves were supposed to be locked in for a 100 years before that. How did they lock themselves in, if the gate tower was on the outside? I added more slaps so it was an array of two working slabs on each side of the Glintshield Clan. A little realism would be better. My players ask lots of questions, so explaining how things work in the adventure would be nice, for instance, how did the dwarves eat for 100 years underground? I know I have my own thoughts on dwarven society, but I don't want to have to make to much up on the fly.
 

Hooks. Lots and lots of good hooks, especially outgoing hooks. Give me lots of ideas to build on and I can deal with losing out on details that might otherwise fill that page-space. Especially hooks that I can build a campaign on, not just hooks that lead to the next adventure.

Also, give me a new way of looking at old material in each adventure, and it will help spark my imagination.

In short, give me tools with which I can make the adventure mine and set it within my own campaign, or, better yet, reason to adapt my own campaign around the ideas therein, and I would find it useful and inspirational.
 

My players ask lots of questions, so explaining how things work in the adventure would be nice, for instance, how did the dwarves eat for 100 years underground? I know I have my own thoughts on dwarven society, but I don't want to have to make to much up on the fly.
Cannibalism: 100 years ago there were a whole lot more dwarves.
 

Another thing I dislike very much (though YMMV quite a lot) is all these dungeon crawls which have pages of background info which are a) pointless to the current plot b) cannot be discovered by the characters c) tell an exciting, intrigue-heavy tale which is now over and done with and leave the current PCs with nothing more to do but kick down doors and slay whatever monsters are behind them. The whole DCC-line was proud of its lack of NPC-interaction, which I personally find deplorable.
I look at those background stories as guidelines rather than anything cast in stone, and most often either modify the hell out of them or replace them entirely to fit what's already going on in the campaign. As for the lack of NPC interaction, when compared to the module suggesting or forcing certain NPC interactions I find it easier to add such things in than to take 'em out.
... And Aaron Allston's introductory module in the N-series (where you started with 0-lvl characters marooned on an island and came to choose your class through your actions) was also exemplary.
"Treasure Hunt" is certainly a clever departure from the norm, even if not to my tastes.
SoulsFury said:
More functionality. Orcs of Stonefang Pass had a giant stone slab that locked the orcs in, yet the other side of the tunnel going to the citadel didn't have one. On that note, the dwarves were supposed to be locked in for a 100 years before that. How did they lock themselves in, if the gate tower was on the outside? I added more slaps so it was an array of two working slabs on each side of the Glintshield Clan. A little realism would be better. My players ask lots of questions, so explaining how things work in the adventure would be nice, for instance, how did the dwarves eat for 100 years underground?
Orcs of Stonefang Pass looks like a module where someone had a good idea and just didn't spend enough time on it. But it can be used as a good example of something I noted above: backstory as guidelines only. The idea of an awakening Titan fits perfectly with my game setting thus I'll eventually (I hope) run this in my 1e game; the module will be mostly the same but the backstory will be unrecognizable.

Lanefan
 

Remove ads

Top