D&D 5E What do you want in a published adventure? / Adventure design best practices?

[Quickleaf]

Given the mixed opinions on boxed text, I'd like to see Wizards supplying boxed text as a web supplement, so those GMs that find it useful can have it. I realise that smaller publishers might not be able to manage that.

An interesting idea. While I agree that providing web supplements can be useful, I think there's a better solution for boxed text. Use the boxed text as neutral barebones (5 senses) description: visible things/monsters/threats, lighting, sounds/smells, dimensions. No assumed verbs for PCs such as "upon entering." Clarify up front in the adventure that boxed text is intended for the DM who may choose to read or paraphrase it as he or she sees fit.

It is a common piece of advice that there should be secrets, but quite often I find there is background material taking up space which is just for the GM, with no way for the players to ever find out. One solution for this which I came across for the Warhammer adventure "Eye for an Eye" (not sure of the original source- Gumshoe?) is to supply Clue cards which can be handed out at appropriate times. This has the benefit of saving the players from writing notes, which can lead to errors. They also specifically say clue 2 of 5, so the players know if there is still information they are missing.

That's a stroke of genius. There is a benefit to players piece together clues more organically, come to their own conclusions, take their own notes so they remember. But for many many players, I imagine those Clue Cards worked wonders. Thanks for sharing about it!

Finally, I would like to see some adventures which specifically call out, if you have a pc with background X, then it's feature can tie into the adventure like this, etc..

Funny, I was just wondering about the same thing. Sounds like you're saying you'd like to see backgrounds used as hooks to involve the PCs in the adventure?

 

[Charles Rampant]

Storm King's Thunder, and the nifty new Giant Runic Items, is a good example. It's new, it's cool, and it makes sense for the adventure. It also forms a good example for the DM to follow. Another example is new gambling rules for a scene in a festhall, complex enough to be a meaningful component at the table. Out of the Abyss has a bit with spider webs, and it goes into a bit of detail on how the characters interact with that, as well as a bunch of new madness tables to suit its theme....

 

[JonnyP71]

What are examples of that? In a war-based scenario like Red Hand of Doom, including "light weight" mass combat guidelines in the form of victory points?

If you get the sequel to The Sentinel, The Gauntlet, then you will find just that - a huge set-piece of a battle, which initially looks to be impossible, until the party realise they need to use their defensive position to their advantage. It's done using normal AD&D rules though, not new rules for the adventure, but it's presented in such a way as to make the whole thing very workable.

It's one of my favourite modules ever.... clever puzzles, intoxicated gnolls, and having to defend a keep while outnumbered 30 to 1 - marvellous stuff!

 

[Inchoroi]

Sandboxes that have an overarching plot that makes sense.

 

[Jester David]

I've heard a couple people mention the desire for "sub-systems" / "variant rules" to be incorporated, [MENTION=32659]Charles Rampant[/MENTION] and [MENTION=996]Tony Vargas[/MENTION] and I think [MENTION=37579]Jester David[/MENTION].

What are examples of that? In a war-based scenario like Red Hand of Doom, including "light weight" mass combat guidelines in the form of victory points?

That's a good example.
Another might be horror in Curse of Strahd.

Paizo has more examples. I've seen reputation in a Pathfinder adventure, a corruption mechanic, a Sin Points in Runelords. The mass combat and kingdom building of Kingmaker. Ship combat and plunder in Skull & Shackles. Caravan rules in Jade Regent.

 

[Yavathol]

That's a stroke of genius. There is a benefit to players piece together clues more organically, come to their own conclusions, take their own notes so they remember. But for many many players, I imagine those Clue Cards worked wonders. Thanks for sharing about it!

Did a quick google to see if I could track down the original source, you might like to check out these links which go into more depth:
http://slyflourish.com/clue_cards.html
http://www.gnomestew.com/game-mastering/gming-advice/clue-cards-pacing-a-mystery/

 

[Inchoroi]

That's a good example.
Another might be horror in Curse of Strahd.

Paizo has more examples. I've seen reputation in a Pathfinder adventure, a corruption mechanic, a Sin Points in Runelords. The mass combat and kingdom building of Kingmaker. Ship combat and plunder in Skull & Shackles. Caravan rules in Jade Regent.

I used a variation of the Sin + Virtue points in my Runelords 5e campaign; was pretty fun, actually. The players actually had to question their own actions a lot. In the end, the only person who didn't have Sin points was the Monk.

Did a quick google to see if I could track down the original source, you might like to check out these links which go into more depth:
http://slyflourish.com/clue_cards.html
http://www.gnomestew.com/game-mastering/gming-advice/clue-cards-pacing-a-mystery/

I'm doing Clue Cards for my upcoming campaign, as it's a fairly long mystery. I don't expect my players to take notes, and they're not weird like me and just remember this .

 

[JonnyP71]

1) Avoid chaotic unbalanced sandboxiness and make it direct encounter-encounter with linkage notes

2) full page write-ups on the encounters ala 3.5

3) BALANCE! level appropriate encounters (scaled up if easy access to rest and <6 likely encounters in area); balanced treasure

4) guidelines for limiting rests (ie a time crunch or such)

5) limit histories of region, NPC backstories, etc ("fluff") and focus on the beef

6) in essence, throw a bone to the D and D faction that has been ignored thus far in 5e, the strategy Gamists; don't take their support for granted

Of those 6 point, it's only #4 I agree with.

I've rather my players wrote their own stories, rather than play events laid out by someone else.

The best adventures ever published are those that create one or more locations, carefully populated with plenty to explore, where the party can more freely and interact with the inhabitants and the environment. A plot is good, but not a heavy handed one which guides the party from set piece to set piece. Village of Hommlet, Lost City, Dwellers of the Forbidden City, Castle Amber, Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth, Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh, the original Ravenloft are perfect examples. There were a few very good adventures that were more heavily plotted - The Gauntlet, When A Star Falls and The Oasis of the White Palm - but these tended to be exceptions.

The cumbersome event-based approach that came in late 1E, lasted throughout 2E and which pervaded afterwards is very much a low point in the history of adventures!

 

[aco175]

I think that I'm one of the few that would like to see modules set up like 4e where each encounter was laid out with full monster stat blocks. I know that it takes up more room and page layout, but it makes the game run faster and better on the DMs end.

Giant maps and pictures for each room and NPC are cool, but may not be needed. I want the PDF modules easy to print and laid out sensibly. For books like Wizards make, I would rather have an easier layout over pictures and other art. Maybe the cost would be less as well. $50 is a steep price, but they do take PCs from level 1-15 or such. I guess if there are 5 smaller modules that do the same for $10 each it works out. For DMsGuild modules I like to have a good preview to see the layout and style. I should also have a good idea of the location and plot. Typically these are only a few dollars or even free, so I expect less than I do from Wizards, although I have seen some that are very well done.

I find that low-level modules can be more basic is plot and background. If they are designed for new groups then you need a fairly straightforward adventure. They can be more generic and placed most places or can be made for a specific location and DMs can move them if they feel confident enough. As the level of the adventure goes up, so should the complexity of the plot and the need for more background and things like NPC motivations.

New monsters and new items are ok but not needed. I think that some of these are in a module just to have them and they may not add to things. Modified monsters are fine if they fit, such as a camp of orcs and there is a chief or wolf master orc rather than saying the one with max HP is the leader. Another hold over from 4e that I like over the design of 5e.

 

[Ath'kethin]

Oh! Here's another bit that should be obvious, but even companies like Frog God miss it sometimes: indicate clearly on the front of the module and on its cover page what level of characters it is intended for.

Thank you.