D&D 5E Why is Hoard of the Dragon Queen such a bad adventure?

[Joe Liker]

The real reason this adventure is so bad is because the writers were basically writing in the dark, and so much about the game changed after they had already finalized the manuscript.

I'm not saying this in any way excuses what happened. It excuses the writers to some degree, but not the product. WotC had to know this was a terrible, terrible way to run the show, but they did it anyway, probably because some marketing genius told them the staggered release would make people buy more product. I suppose it worked, since people did buy HotDQ, but they lost a lot of good will in this boneheaded maneuver. Selling future adventures is not going to be easy.

I know the OP means "why" in the sense of "what's so bad about it," and I can't believe there are still people fighting tooth and nail to defend this awful rubbish. But honestly, you can only claim it's good if you were either (a) a player with a veteran DM who knew how to avoid the numerous pitfalls endemic in the story, or (b) a veteran DM who didn't mind the shoddy, scattered presentation of the thing and who knew how to avoid the aforementioned pitfalls.

 

[Hussar]

Or, (c) an interested observer who does't actually have the module in question and is just going by what he's reading on the forums. I mean, you also have to look at the names of people who are so heavily criticising a product as well. There are some posters for whom nothing will ever be good if it has a WOTC name on the cover and will bend over backwards to constantly complain, criticise and whatnot every single product they see. Additionally, play style comes into the mix as well. I mean, take Kraydak's complaint about a lack of spell books. Good grief, that's fairly standard in a lot of modules that they don't list the spell books. You have to expect to do some work as a DM. An NPC's spell book has his memorized spells plus a few others. Done.

So, it really can depend on point of view. I've seen people defend Keep on the Borderlands as one of the greatest modules ever written. Personally, I think it's terrible. I think it's terrible as a teaching tool and terrible as a module in general. Especially compared to other beginner modules like The Lost City which is, IMO, ten times better than Keep. But, I know there are people who love Keep. Different strokes.

 

[GameOgre]

I agree that running HOTDG strait out of the book would make for a sucky adventure but with just a medium amount of DM alteration and enhancement I think it would make a wonderful adventure.

 

[swordnut]

if you need to tell a story, start with character creation. You need characters that will buy in to the story you want to tell, and that is a colaboration between the DM and the players. "railroading" happens to lazy DMs and uncooperative players

 

[Sailor Moon]

I agree that running HOTDG strait out of the book would make for a sucky adventure but with just a medium amount of DM alteration and enhancement I think it would make a wonderful adventure.

I see that as the problem. AP's are supposed to be good right out the box.

 

[GameOgre]

I see that as the problem. AP's are supposed to be good right out the box.

Never found that to be the case myself. Even Pathfinders adventure paths need heavy alteration in order to fit my group and work out as a good experience.

I'm not a huge fan of adventure paths though. Too long, too much railroad and too unresponsive to players input.

but to each his own! I still love stealing stuff from them!

 

[swordnut]

For me, I use APs to do the heavy lifting. Im a storyteller, but i dont have time to do all the prep that goes with an original campaign, so I accept that ill be telling other peoples stories in my own way.

 

[trentonjoe]

you AREN'T supposed to assume that using an NPC's clothes would help you infiltrate the enemy organization.

THis is the one that bothered me.

 

[trentonjoe]

Additionally, play style comes into the mix as well.

So, it really can depend on point of view. I've seen people defend Keep on the Borderlands as one of the greatest modules ever written. Personally, I think it's terrible. I think it's terrible as a teaching tool and terrible as a module in general. But, I know there are people who love Keep. Different strokes.

I think this has a lot to do with it as well. Part of the beauty of HotDQ is that it tries to include A LOT of different play style.

Chapter 3 is a dungeon Crawl
Chapter2 is an infiltration stealth mission
Chapter 1 is a race against the clock.
Chapter 4 (or 5 Can't remember) is a meet the realms.

You've got sessions for your slayers, story tellers, strategists and actors.

Because it is tries to do everything, it's going to dissapoint when a players playing style isn't emphasised.

I really liked the trip the to Waterdeep (I am the story teller type) but guys in my group thought it was to long and drawn out.

Our dice roller loved Chapter three while our Captain Role Player thought that part was poorly written.

HotDQ has a piece for everyone. I think this is a good thing but I understand why others have problems with it.

And, I LOOOOOOOVE Keep!
The slayers are going to be

 

[SuperTD]

That the PCs do not know about.



Again, the players (and PCs) do not know this.

The players do not know that "the adventure explicitly says". The DM should know that, but not the players.

The players (and PCs) know that a dragon is attacking.

But why would the players ever assume that the dragon WOULD specifically go for them? As a player I'd expect the dragon to just carry on what it's doing, not up and leave the keep to attack 4 random people entering town (assuming you didn't use stealth and the dragon even saw you). As a hero I'd be wanting to go in and help save as many as possible without confronting the dragon, and the way I read the adventure this is what it expects you to do.