D&D 5E Legends & Lore 6/16/14

[Uchawi]

I have to confess I prefer short adventures, like the old Dungeon adventures, and not big sprawling railroads. if they are sandboxy then cool. ill have to wait and see. I am glad kobold is on the job, but I definitely want some short modules to buy/download!

I am with you in regards to preferring short adventures that I may add my own content, versus long adventures, where I may skip a lot of content and/or railroad.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Yeah, I can see the appeal in theory. But there's a huge gulf between an internal reference document and something they'd ever release to the public. A lot of the stuff would be covered by the adventures, so you wouldn't want to repeat everything, and then you'd potentially have to rewrite a lot of it for consistency of tone and so on. Not sure there would be a big enough market, unless the adventure itself proved hugely popular.

Whilst I share the general feeling that this sort of thing would be hugely useful to DMs, I must concur with your reasoning here. Making such a thing release-able would be a non-trivial effort (because right now, it is probably a very messy set of documents, or wiki, or whatever), and I suspect that the real market might be somewhat limited.

 

[Thaumaturge]

Am I crazy to think a DM could get the adventures for Tyranny of Dragons and use that as their story bible? It seems one could read through the published adventures, see what the overarching story/plots/themes are, and then make adventures to fit in with said story/plots/themes.

Is it as perfect as having the whole story bible laid out in front of you? No. But is it workable? It seems like it to me. Especially if the DM in question bought the adventures with that mindset.

Thaumaturge.

 

[am181d]

You're right, i just assume they meant it since they seem to have like the experience and said they'd want to collaborate with RPG studio again.

It's certainly LIKELY that they will collaborate again, but it sounds like everybody is being cautious about publicly committing until they have contracts in place. (And maybe till they confirm a positive reaction to their first offering?)

 

[Blackbrrd]

I am with you in regards to preferring short adventures that I may add my own content, versus long adventures, where I may skip a lot of content and/or railroad.

I have the same opinion. I find it much easier to use two unrelated adventures and make them my own instead of trying to do the same with two adventures that are part of an adventure path.

I really liked how Red Hand of Doom was made. You had several interesting locations in the same region, and depending on what the players did you could use them, instead of "forcing" the players in the right direction. There was also a time line with events that would affect and be affected by the PC's. It's just what you would want from a tabletop rpg.

 

[Jan van Leyden]

Am I crazy to think a DM could get the adventures for Tyranny of Dragons and use that as their story bible? It seems one could read through the published adventures, see what the overarching story/plots/themes are, and then make adventures to fit in with said story/plots/themes.

Depends on what (amount of information) the story bible contains, I guess. My original angle was that the story bible is meant not only for the adventure writers, but authors for other media as well. As such it would be more comprehensive.

I wouldn't expect the story bible to contain an outline of the adventures but be more like a framework to which the adventures have to conform. This framework could be used to hang other adventures on as well, providing a coherent background for them.

Think of adventures a DM might devise to bring the party together or to act as lead in to the adventures.

Is it as perfect as having the whole story bible laid out in front of you? No. But is it workable? It seems like it to me. Especially if the DM in question bought the adventures with that mindset.

We will see.

 

[Agamon]

We will see.

Do we need to wait and see? I already do this. "Oh, hey that's a cool metaplot for a campaign" *Throw adventure away and build my own based around the idea for the adventure*

 

[I'm A Banana]

Am I crazy to think a DM could get the adventures for Tyranny of Dragons and use that as their story bible? It seems one could read through the published adventures, see what the overarching story/plots/themes are, and then make adventures to fit in with said story/plots/themes.

Is it as perfect as having the whole story bible laid out in front of you? No. But is it workable? It seems like it to me. Especially if the DM in question bought the adventures with that mindset.

Thaumaturge.

My impression (and I could be wrong about this because their OP info seems kind of vague as all get out) is that there are, essentially, three kinds of adventures.

First are at-home adventures, also to be used as Encounters adventures, which contain the "main story."

Then there's the other OP option, which is a bunch of other stories related to that main story.

Then there's Epics, which is a one-off related to that main story.

Not to mention board games, video games, novels, etc.

So anyone who wants to get the WHOLE story will have go go whole hog on D&D media. That's the point of a transmedia brand, after all -- get people to buy more stuff!

Which means most non-Organized-Play TTRPG folks are probably only going to get a taste of it, possibly via the "main story" of the at-home adventures, and maybe a little bit extra.

 

[Thaumaturge]

My impression (and I could be wrong about this because their OP info seems kind of vague as all get out) is that there are, essentially, three kinds of adventures.

Your understanding and mine match. I might separate out home play and Encounters, but, yep.

So yes, there's a lot of story that just the main adventures aren't telling. My idea was pretty much this:

Do we need to wait and see? I already do this. "Oh, hey that's a cool metaplot for a campaign" *Throw adventure away and build my own based around the idea for the adventure*

Though I wouldn't throw away the maps and pretty artwork. And pre-made monsters and such. But doing this would let players at such a table who then went to a con and played Adventurers League adventures to feel like a part of the overall campaign without playing the specific home play adventures.

Thaumaturge.

 

[Agamon]

Though I wouldn't throw away the maps and pretty artwork. And pre-made monsters and such.

Sorry, I didn't literally mean throw it away, as my enormous collection belies. And yes, I use maps as such often, as well.

But doing this would let players at such a table who then went to a con and played Adventurers League adventures to feel like a part of the overall campaign without playing the specific home play adventures.

Not saying it's necessary, just possible.