D&D 5E Why (and when) did "Adventure Paths" replace modules?

[Mark CMG]

I like to have the whole Pathfinder AP before I start running, but I definitely don't read the whole thing (terrible, I know). I generally skim the book (eg book 1) before starting, and try to read the chapter within that book in reasonable detail. From what I've found, an hour spent reading material likely to be used next session is vastly more useful than an hour spent reading stuff 5 books away.

Are the PF APs you have run written in such a way that you know all you need to know before running part one?

 

[Libramarian]

OotA is a sandbox adventure with an overarching plot running through it. There are various events that are going to happen, and the players can jump from place to place in the sandbox with relative freedom until they pick up on what's happening (and then end up on their quest to solve the problem in the second half). That means that yes, you need to read chapter 2 to learn how to run the "we're walking through the Underdark from point A to point B" parts of the story, and you should probably have some vague idea of what can/will happen at the various places they might go. You don't need complete understanding of everything that happens at Gracklstugh until your players get there though, for example.

I admit, they probably could have done a better job of providing you with the "big picture" part first, as opposed to assuming you were just going to read the whole damn thing (well, more like "the whole damn half", since the first and second halves are pretty independent of each other), but all in all I think it works pretty well.

I think OotA is best described as what Justin Alexander would call a node-based funnel adventure. The players have some agency, but less than it appears. The DM definitely has to read ahead because right from the beginning you have NPCs in the party who are all from different areas of the underdark and who advocate going to their home area first. A big picture overview would definitely help.

It's not entirely about the amount of time spent preparing the game though, but how enjoyable it is. Different DMs enjoy different sorts of prep. I find it draining to prep a plotted adventure (how am I going to keep the PCs on the rails...) whereas I find it energizing to put a sandbox together (I wonder how this will turn out!).

I don't enjoy reading RPG adventures as stories. I like to make houserules and use rules that create chaos rather just resolve it. Most people ignore these rules or consider them unplayable. I'm probably the only person in the thread who's tried to use the entire social system in AD&D (reaction/loyalty/morale).

I will run a complex node-based adventure once in a while but I prefer to use Call of Cthulhu for that. Much better scenarios in that style and the funnel structure feels more consonant with the theme of the game.

I think that's a great point. My sandbox 5e Wilderlands game and my TSR-module-based
Classic D&D game both take vastly less prep time than running a Paizo Adventure Path. I think a lot of this is quality of presentation though - I noticed that high quality early modules by Gygax & Moldvay (Keep on the Borderlands, Against the Giants, Isle of Dread, Castle Amber) take much
less prep to play than later '80s TSR stuff (War Rafts of Kron), because they are presented much more effectively. There is a consistent decline in quality of presentation such that I found Lost Mine of Phandelver really painful - indeed I gave up on it - and my experience with WoTC 4e
modules and Paizo material is similar. Paizo do seem to have made a bit of an effort in their more recent APs to improve things, to make the presentation more playable - Curse of the Crimson Throne was horrible, so far Shattered Star has been quite a lot better. From what I hear that is not
the case with the WoTC adventures.

The old modules had a better sense of what to describe in detail (maps, tactical situations) and what to leave open for improvisation or procedural generation (colour, NPC interactions). The NPCs especially are underdeveloped compared to modern adventures...and yet I still always managed to have memorable NPCs.

 

[Libramarian]

On a different note, the idea that designers can't assume someone would "read the whole damn thing" before running it speaks to another point being discussed in this thread regarding attention spans. I cannot imagine someone buying a module/adventure and not reading it all AT LEAST once before attempting to run it. Reading it at last twice is the assumed norm, as well as spending time making notes (in it or on the side, perhaps in a GM's notebook)

I've run modules with almost no prep before. Maybe a 10 minute skim. Works fine if you're just using it for a pre-made dungeon.

 

[Mark CMG]

I've run modules with almost no prep before. Maybe a 10 minute skim. Works fine if you're just using it for a pre-made dungeon.

I'm not saying it can't be done, just that it isn't advised or the expected norm when it is being designed. And you seem to be a fairly experienced DM from what I've read in your posts.

 

[Mark CMG]

I'm probably the only person in the thread who's tried to use the entire social system in AD&D (reaction/loyalty/morale).

Not the only one. Henchmen and hirelings always underwent a series of rolls when first met and during the trials of dungeon exploration or far out in the wilds. Sometimes being a turncoat to save one's neck when outnumbered by bandits is the only way to ensure the next group of PCs had someone to hire!

 

[BryonD]

I'm not saying it can't be done, just that it isn't advised or the expected norm when it is being designed. And you seem to be a fairly experienced DM from what I've read in your posts.

I know quite well that many people see grab-n-go as the reason for modules in the first place.
To me personally, running a module in a game that lives up to the standards I expect takes at least as much time as making it up. I want (need) to really understand how everything fits together.
And if the players take a crazy left turn in a game I've developed myself, I'm far more comfortable rolling with it because I already know backwards and forwards how the pieces are acting in the PCs absence.

A really good module is worth the effort, but the effort is still there.

 

[Olaf the Stout]

What some of us would really like is an adventure that will take multiple sessions, but can be dropped into any campaign--without taking it over.

Quite frankly, I want Dungeon magazine again. They gave you multiple adventures of various lengths in each issue. Heck, if they just scanned in all the old TSR-era issues and sold them in some pdf collections I'd be satisfied.

The last two campaigns I've run have been adventure paths (Shackled City and Age of Worms, both in a 3.5E game). I'm playing, rather than DM'ing at moment, but I have given serious thought to basically coming up with a Dungeon Magazine campaign the next time I DM.

Basically I'd put a whole heap of plot hooks for relatively level-appropriate Dungeon Magazine adventures into the game and just see which ones the players decide to go with. It would take a bit of work as I'd need to read up quite a few different adventures that may not get used. I'd also need to convert the adventures from 3.XE to 5E, but from what I've read, that bit shouldn't be too hard.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

The old ones can be bought on the secondary market singly or in bunches at quite reasonable prices. I know a game store that has piles of them at the front of the store in various states of condition for a buck or two a piece. Unless you've had them all and have run every adventure in them all, I can't see why the old ones wouldn't be just as useful to you as anything new.

Heck yeah I'd snap those up. When I looked online a few months ago, Paizo had some copies of old ones, but it was hit or miss which ones they had and they were running about $5 each (I have a psychological aversion to paying significantly more for a text that a paid for it new). Now, maybe they had inexpensive pdfs of all of them (but I don't remember it that way).

If I still had my old copies from a year or two worth of a subscription, I'd have plenty to work with for years. Unfortunately, they got accidentally thrown out with some other stuff while lent to cousins. Trying to reacquire those issues at a reasonable rate hasn't gone all that well.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Feeling like you are being rushed through an adventure path is usually up to the DM, not the path. SOME paths have modules that back on to each other (ie - you hop straight out of X into Y), but plenty don't really push that sort of approach. When our group went through Wrath of ashardalon for instance, there were downtimes measured in years between the adventures. When I ran shattered city, I put multiple month breaks between the sections that could handle it.

I'm sure that if you request more downtime from your DM, he'll be able to fit it in.

 

[Libramarian]

I'm not saying it can't be done, just that it isn't advised or the expected norm when it is being designed. And you seem to be a fairly experienced DM from what I've read in your posts.

I'm experienced with this particular campaign model where you stitch together modules into a sandbox.

I believe the "lazy DM" skills I've developed will aid me in the future running more complex campaigns.

I have an Aristotelian approach to D&D: one should build their skills (and the sort of campaign one can reasonably pull off with their current skills) from the bottom up. If you can get to the heart of the random dungeon bash, you can get to the heart of any D&D campaign in the world. If you go the other way and start with big picture story/setting, your adventures, dungeons and encounters are likely to be facile railroads. (IMO).

Not the only one. Henchmen and hirelings always underwent a series of rolls when first met and during the trials of dungeon exploration or far out in the wilds. Sometimes being a turncoat to save one's neck when outnumbered by bandits is the only way to ensure the next group of PCs had someone to hire!

Oh I love semi-random henchman betrayals. Much preferable to writing some psychotic NPC companion into the adventure ahead of time. I'm not really into the whole henchman interview process anymore though. It's kind of funny in an "are we playing dungeons & dragons or heroes & HR managers?" way but that wears thin. I allow the PCs to try to recruit any adventurer-type NPC they happen to come across, but they're too rare to find one by buying everyone a round at the tavern, handing out flyers and so forth.