I disagree. A well written adventure has a good summary that gives you the basics you need to run the adventure. If the details are separate from the basic info then it gets pretty easy to run on the fly.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
D&D 5E Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle - what did you think?
- Thread starter Morrus
- Start date
I disagree. A well written adventure has a good summary that gives you the basics you need to run the adventure. If the details are separate from the basic info then it gets pretty easy to run on the fly.
Blackwarder
Adventurer
Only of the adventure you are running is in a delve format, simply going from one encounter to another is easy, but if I wanted a game that is solely about encounters I would have played decent.
A good adventure, be it a dungeon, wilderness or an epic quest to save humanity, is a living breathing thing with many interchangeable parts in it, and the DM need to understand the consequences of the PCs actions in order to run it properly.
Warder
keterys
First Post
I ran the first 3 areas. They were decent enough and the group echoed that it all felt a lot more D&D than the Baldur's Gate run we did before it.
I was getting a bit exhausted of it as a DM a bit into the 3rd area; once the PCs got high enough level nothing really threatened them and the combats weren't varied enough. I actually combined the last, eh, four or so encounters together for a big badass finish.
I was getting a bit exhausted of it as a DM a bit into the 3rd area; once the PCs got high enough level nothing really threatened them and the combats weren't varied enough. I actually combined the last, eh, four or so encounters together for a big badass finish.
A good summary will describe the major NPCs and plot points enough for a DM that likes to improvise to be able to do so. If the ensuring details are modularized and labeled well enough then each DM can use as little or as much as he wants.
If everything is all lumped into one continuous narrative then it is hard for each DM to choose the right amount of detail he wants to review before play. For example if the story about why Daggerford is called dagger ford is mixed in with basic plot points then it would be hard to skip that info if you don't care about it. A well written module would have a section labeled "How Daggerford got its Name" or something like that so it can be skipped if you don't care.
Last edited:
Blackwarder
Adventurer
I understand you now, you are correct in saying that a well laid out adventure is a must, but I don't think that you can realy run an adventure by only reading the summery unless it is in a delve format...
Warder
pming
Legend
Hiya.
I'm going to add my 2 coppers in here...
I think there is a bit of a "generation gap" thing going on here. Back when I started DM'ing (1980), adventure modules were fairly skeletal as far as "story/plot/NPC-interaction" went. Why? Simply put, story/plot was up to the players actions and, basically, the DM's job. The person writing the module doesn't know what your campaign world is like, nor does he know what kind of players you have. So, all the stuff that would actually take *time* was in an adventure...maps, encounter tables, a new monster or two, perhaps a new spell or magic item. *That* is the stuff that sucks up a DM's time. Drawing out 3 full-page maps and "stocking" them (as it was called in the day) took a hell of a lot of time. Scribbling down some notes about how Evil-Bad-Guy plans on subjugating the small town and setting it up as his own base of operations is *not* where time is spent. If I had to estimate how much time I put into story/plots/sub-plots vs. drawing maps and "stocking" them....I'd say it's around 1:4 (that is, for every 10 minutes writing down story/plot ideas, I do about 40 minutes of drawing/stocking).
As an example, one campaign I recently run, I used "Dyson's Delve" (here: https://rpgcharacters.wordpress.com/maps/dysons-delve/ ...I used the "Dyson's Delve Delux" PDF). The campaign was low-powered 1e set in my personal world of Eisla. There is a very loose story premiss...which I ignored and substituted my own. In my story, a young boy named Billem got upset with his father and ran away, finding a cave entrance to the top level. Billem was captured by some lizard-fish kinda guys who live in the very lower depths of the dungeon; they were planning to sacrifice him to awaken their "god" (a magically-enduced sleeping black dragon). During the course of the campaign, the PC's were almost captured by cultists, almost eaten alive by a hoard of giant rats, attacked by a group of bandits lead by an evil witch-woman who wanted the dungeon for herself, and got stuck in a time-trap. The time trap had two NPC women who were watching the 'camp' up in the cavern/entrance on dungeon level 1 take them for dead. The two women took all the camp stuff, including treasure, two horses and a mule, and head off to the closest settlement. Of course, the players all think the women "screwed them over", and are planing to hunt them down...just as soon as they rescue Billem (or recover his body). There is much more to Billem then anyone knows...and that will be revield when the time is right. At any rate, the point of this little aside is this: comming up with the base story and NPC motivations for this campaign (which lasted about 6 or 7 months...and is on pause right now...may start again this very day!
) was the easy part. That took all of 15 minutes. Now, if I had to draw out and 'stock' all 11 levels....I guarantee it'd take more than 15 frickin' minutes!
So...hearing stuff about Ghosts detailing "NPC motivations and story for a few pages"....that does NOT fill me with a sense of calm. In fact, much of what I read pretty much finalizes my initial prediction: WotC will create a decent 5e system, and it will then slowly tank due to crappy 'adventures' that can pretty much only be played one way, one time. If they give me a 5e "Keep on the Borderlands" in the same manner that Kenzer & Co. gave me a Hackmaster version of it...I'll eat my words and be changing my shorts. Unfortunately, I think we'd get something where Keep on the Borderlands consists of a small keep with 6 areas detailed, a map of caves A and I (all the other dungeons would have "caved in long ago" or something lame like that), and the other 20 pages would have story lines and NPC "information" and why they want the PC's to go to the Caves of Chaos.
^_^
Paul L. Ming
I'm going to add my 2 coppers in here...
I think there is a bit of a "generation gap" thing going on here. Back when I started DM'ing (1980), adventure modules were fairly skeletal as far as "story/plot/NPC-interaction" went. Why? Simply put, story/plot was up to the players actions and, basically, the DM's job. The person writing the module doesn't know what your campaign world is like, nor does he know what kind of players you have. So, all the stuff that would actually take *time* was in an adventure...maps, encounter tables, a new monster or two, perhaps a new spell or magic item. *That* is the stuff that sucks up a DM's time. Drawing out 3 full-page maps and "stocking" them (as it was called in the day) took a hell of a lot of time. Scribbling down some notes about how Evil-Bad-Guy plans on subjugating the small town and setting it up as his own base of operations is *not* where time is spent. If I had to estimate how much time I put into story/plots/sub-plots vs. drawing maps and "stocking" them....I'd say it's around 1:4 (that is, for every 10 minutes writing down story/plot ideas, I do about 40 minutes of drawing/stocking).
As an example, one campaign I recently run, I used "Dyson's Delve" (here: https://rpgcharacters.wordpress.com/maps/dysons-delve/ ...I used the "Dyson's Delve Delux" PDF). The campaign was low-powered 1e set in my personal world of Eisla. There is a very loose story premiss...which I ignored and substituted my own. In my story, a young boy named Billem got upset with his father and ran away, finding a cave entrance to the top level. Billem was captured by some lizard-fish kinda guys who live in the very lower depths of the dungeon; they were planning to sacrifice him to awaken their "god" (a magically-enduced sleeping black dragon). During the course of the campaign, the PC's were almost captured by cultists, almost eaten alive by a hoard of giant rats, attacked by a group of bandits lead by an evil witch-woman who wanted the dungeon for herself, and got stuck in a time-trap. The time trap had two NPC women who were watching the 'camp' up in the cavern/entrance on dungeon level 1 take them for dead. The two women took all the camp stuff, including treasure, two horses and a mule, and head off to the closest settlement. Of course, the players all think the women "screwed them over", and are planing to hunt them down...just as soon as they rescue Billem (or recover his body). There is much more to Billem then anyone knows...and that will be revield when the time is right. At any rate, the point of this little aside is this: comming up with the base story and NPC motivations for this campaign (which lasted about 6 or 7 months...and is on pause right now...may start again this very day!
) was the easy part. That took all of 15 minutes. Now, if I had to draw out and 'stock' all 11 levels....I guarantee it'd take more than 15 frickin' minutes!So...hearing stuff about Ghosts detailing "NPC motivations and story for a few pages"....that does NOT fill me with a sense of calm. In fact, much of what I read pretty much finalizes my initial prediction: WotC will create a decent 5e system, and it will then slowly tank due to crappy 'adventures' that can pretty much only be played one way, one time. If they give me a 5e "Keep on the Borderlands" in the same manner that Kenzer & Co. gave me a Hackmaster version of it...I'll eat my words and be changing my shorts. Unfortunately, I think we'd get something where Keep on the Borderlands consists of a small keep with 6 areas detailed, a map of caves A and I (all the other dungeons would have "caved in long ago" or something lame like that), and the other 20 pages would have story lines and NPC "information" and why they want the PC's to go to the Caves of Chaos.
^_^
Paul L. Ming
That's pretty much it pming. I still mostly use 1e and basic modules.
if the story involves a King's brother betraying him I don't need 2 or 3 pages of backstory for why the brother wants to betray the king.
if that backstory is there I might take a look at it to story ideas but if I don't have time I want it to be easy to skip when reading through the module.
if the story involves a King's brother betraying him I don't need 2 or 3 pages of backstory for why the brother wants to betray the king.
if that backstory is there I might take a look at it to story ideas but if I don't have time I want it to be easy to skip when reading through the module.
Last edited:
Blackwarder
Adventurer
Hiya.
I'm going to add my 2 coppers in here...
I think there is a bit of a "generation gap" thing going on here. Back when I started DM'ing (1980), adventure modules were fairly skeletal as far as "story/plot/NPC-interaction" went. Why? Simply put, story/plot was up to the players actions and, basically, the DM's job. The person writing the module doesn't know what your campaign world is like, nor does he know what kind of players you have. So, all the stuff that would actually take *time* was in an adventure...maps, encounter tables, a new monster or two, perhaps a new spell or magic item. *That* is the stuff that sucks up a DM's time. Drawing out 3 full-page maps and "stocking" them (as it was called in the day) took a hell of a lot of time. Scribbling down some notes about how Evil-Bad-Guy plans on subjugating the small town and setting it up as his own base of operations is *not* where time is spent. If I had to estimate how much time I put into story/plots/sub-plots vs. drawing maps and "stocking" them....I'd say it's around 1:4 (that is, for every 10 minutes writing down story/plot ideas, I do about 40 minutes of drawing/stocking).
As an example, one campaign I recently run, I used "Dyson's Delve" (here: https://rpgcharacters.wordpress.com/maps/dysons-delve/ ...I used the "Dyson's Delve Delux" PDF). The campaign was low-powered 1e set in my personal world of Eisla. There is a very loose story premiss...which I ignored and substituted my own. In my story, a young boy named Billem got upset with his father and ran away, finding a cave entrance to the top level. Billem was captured by some lizard-fish kinda guys who live in the very lower depths of the dungeon; they were planning to sacrifice him to awaken their "god" (a magically-enduced sleeping black dragon). During the course of the campaign, the PC's were almost captured by cultists, almost eaten alive by a hoard of giant rats, attacked by a group of bandits lead by an evil witch-woman who wanted the dungeon for herself, and got stuck in a time-trap. The time trap had two NPC women who were watching the 'camp' up in the cavern/entrance on dungeon level 1 take them for dead. The two women took all the camp stuff, including treasure, two horses and a mule, and head off to the closest settlement. Of course, the players all think the women "screwed them over", and are planing to hunt them down...just as soon as they rescue Billem (or recover his body). There is much more to Billem then anyone knows...and that will be revield when the time is right. At any rate, the point of this little aside is this: comming up with the base story and NPC motivations for this campaign (which lasted about 6 or 7 months...and is on pause right now...may start again this very day!
So...hearing stuff about Ghosts detailing "NPC motivations and story for a few pages"....that does NOT fill me with a sense of calm. In fact, much of what I read pretty much finalizes my initial prediction: WotC will create a decent 5e system, and it will then slowly tank due to crappy 'adventures' that can pretty much only be played one way, one time. If they give me a 5e "Keep on the Borderlands" in the same manner that Kenzer & Co. gave me a Hackmaster version of it...I'll eat my words and be changing my shorts. Unfortunately, I think we'd get something where Keep on the Borderlands consists of a small keep with 6 areas detailed, a map of caves A and I (all the other dungeons would have "caved in long ago" or something lame like that), and the other 20 pages would have story lines and NPC "information" and why they want the PC's to go to the Caves of Chaos.
^_^
Paul L. Ming
There is no generation gap mate, I fully understand what you are saying, but i disagree (btw, I've been playing since 1990 and stated with the black box+rules cyclopedia) but what you are describing is your own homemade adventure, i'm talking about a published adventure.
I've read many 1e adventures, 2e adventures, 3e adventures, 4e adventures and even 5e adventures and ran some of them and IME it is essential to read the adventure from front to back at least once in order to run it successfully.
I've read GoDC, I ran MiBG and i'm planing on running LotCS soon, and while GoDC might be a bit on the railroad side you can be rest assured that the other two adventures aren't one way railroading crap.
btw, you got Dayson's Delves pdf, i got the limited edition hardback copy
Warder
pming
Legend
Hiya.
Oh, don't get me wrong...I also agree that any module should be read through at least once by a DM. What I'm on about is that the current writers of adventures seem more interested in presenting a series of encounters to tell their story. This is fine for a novel...not so much for an RPG. At least in my games, I want the players and myself (the DM) to write the actual story. For example, if the PC's end up deciding to have one of their members run for Mayor of Farshore (in the Savage Tide AP)...they shouldn't be "stopped" by the module because it assumes that NPC "L" wins later. If the PC runs a good race and should/does "win", the other modules should not have to be manhandled so much that 60% of the written material is useless. IME, when players think they are being railroaded, or when they think a particular event or NPC is "untouchable", that is faaaar more of a killer to the fun and excitement of playing an RPG in the first place. Also, IME, I've found that unexpected flukes have made the most memorable adventures. The ones that went "as planned and expected", as per the written story-line, are usually much less fondly remembered.
^_^
Paul L. Ming
PS: Lucky dog! I wish I had a limited hard copy of Dyson's Delve!
There is no generation gap mate, I fully understand what you are saying, but i disagree (btw, I've been playing since 1990 and stated with the black box+rules cyclopedia) but what you are describing is your own homemade adventure, i'm talking about a published adventure.
I've read many 1e adventures, 2e adventures, 3e adventures, 4e adventures and even 5e adventures and ran some of them and IME it is essential to read the adventure from front to back at least once in order to run it successfully.
I've read GoDC, I ran MiBG and i'm planing on running LotCS soon, and while GoDC might be a bit on the railroad side you can be rest assured that the other two adventures aren't one way railroading crap.
btw, you got Dayson's Delves pdf, i got the limited edition hardback copy
Warder
Oh, don't get me wrong...I also agree that any module should be read through at least once by a DM. What I'm on about is that the current writers of adventures seem more interested in presenting a series of encounters to tell their story. This is fine for a novel...not so much for an RPG. At least in my games, I want the players and myself (the DM) to write the actual story. For example, if the PC's end up deciding to have one of their members run for Mayor of Farshore (in the Savage Tide AP)...they shouldn't be "stopped" by the module because it assumes that NPC "L" wins later. If the PC runs a good race and should/does "win", the other modules should not have to be manhandled so much that 60% of the written material is useless. IME, when players think they are being railroaded, or when they think a particular event or NPC is "untouchable", that is faaaar more of a killer to the fun and excitement of playing an RPG in the first place. Also, IME, I've found that unexpected flukes have made the most memorable adventures. The ones that went "as planned and expected", as per the written story-line, are usually much less fondly remembered.
^_^
Paul L. Ming
PS: Lucky dog! I wish I had a limited hard copy of Dyson's Delve!
keterys
First Post
I think I want something between Keep on the Borderlands and your usual Adventure Path in detail. The AP has to assume a railroad mostly because it has to have the plot make sense as you go from 1 to 2 to 6 (or 13 or whatever) without being able to find out how things went at individual tables. Still, I'd like some strong seeds to start on - like a line about each prisoner and some motivations for how the tribes interact with each other, rather than just a set of stat blocks. Unlike a previous poster, it's actually trivial for me to generate a dungeon filled with stat blocks, but it takes me real time to have compelling reasons for them to be there, RP hooks and easter eggs, etc. Little details like finding a keepsake from a lost girl in one room, then finding her later on kinda thing.
Catering to a railroad on an adventure path was one thing that was frustrating (though also simplifying) about writing adventures for Living Forgotten Realms. I had to be working on the sequel to an adventure before I got the results from folks playing it, so decision branches had to usually be a year in advance. Since I was doing 3 adventures per year, that meant that I got to change things in the 2nd year adventures based on results from the 1st, but in other cases I just had to hope that DMs who ran it were willing to actually customize for their players, no matter what the adventure said.
Though in a couple of cases we had to quickly adapt our plans. Like when we had a plan to use 3 "macguffins" in the final year then found out that each of the 3 had been misused or destroyed in other adventures based on PC choices by (or simultaneously with) the time we got to them.
Catering to a railroad on an adventure path was one thing that was frustrating (though also simplifying) about writing adventures for Living Forgotten Realms. I had to be working on the sequel to an adventure before I got the results from folks playing it, so decision branches had to usually be a year in advance. Since I was doing 3 adventures per year, that meant that I got to change things in the 2nd year adventures based on results from the 1st, but in other cases I just had to hope that DMs who ran it were willing to actually customize for their players, no matter what the adventure said.
Though in a couple of cases we had to quickly adapt our plans. Like when we had a plan to use 3 "macguffins" in the final year then found out that each of the 3 had been misused or destroyed in other adventures based on PC choices by (or simultaneously with) the time we got to them.
Similar Threads
