D&D 5E Rejecting the Premise in a Module

[MNblockhead]

My philosophy is similar though rules lawyering at the game table is one of my biggest pet peeves. If I make a ruling, you can tell me I'm wrong with a brief explanation, I'll then decide and move on. If you keep pushing from there, then we have a problem - game time and flow are much more important than the minutia of a rule. Now if you really want to discuss it, I will gladly do so after the game or over email (in every possible detail, I love rules discussions - just not at the table)

Yep, "pushing it" is a problem. We're playing a game with a judge/referee. If you don't like the judge's/referee's ruling save for Monday quarterbacking. The game must go on.

 

[MNblockhead]

My current group plays on Roll20. Because of the time needed to prepare things on the VTT, there's an unspoken agreement that the players will agree to the obvious plot hooks, but may later choose to abandon them for something else (this should always occur at/near the end of a session). Sometimes we still go off the rails mid-session, but everyone knows that everything will turn into Theater of the Mind the moment it happens. Two of my three last sessions both ended completely differently than I expected, causing me to re-prepare the following session, scrapping my previous work. I can't be upset though, because every time it was within the context of the story arc/adventure, just an unexpected twist.

I wonder if VTTs will be the death of sandbox adventuring. One reason I hesitated to get into VTTs is all the up-front prep time most seem to require. I finally figured out that you can still use a VTT without all the bells and whistles and that a VTT can save time over drawing something out on a chessex mat, but it seems that the norm is to prep a number of battlemaps for the upcoming session. If players go too off the rails it throws the VTT-using DM for a loop and the DM is highly incentivized to keep players on the rails so that all his or her hard work is not wasted.

This is what made it difficult for me to jump into on-line VTT play. I liked Table Tools because I could so quickly throw up a map and drop some tokens on it. I kept paying for and trying other tools and they all seemed to get in my way more than support me. But I missed not being able to have access to some of the cool features of the more modern VTT systems. I've finally jump all into Foundry, which--with the use of mods--hits all my current needs. I can have a set-piece location with all the lighting and line-of-sight and fog of war bells and whistles, or I can just throw up a map on the fly and manually remove fog of war with no prep needed. Tokens a bit more involved to plop on a the map than Table Tools, but then there is so much more I can do with them in Foundry. Add to that the integration with DnD Beyond (through mods) and World Anvil (again, through mods) and I can't ask for much more in a VTT to support my open-world gaming style.

 

[Mort]

I wonder if VTTs will be the death of sandbox adventuring. One reason I hesitated to get into VTTs is all the up-front prep time most seem to require. I finally figured out that you can still use a VTT without all the bells and whistles and that a VTT can save time over drawing something out on a chessex mat, but it seems that the norm is to prep a number of battlemaps for the upcoming session. If players go too off the rails it throws the VTT-using DM for a loop and the DM is highly incentivized to keep players on the rails so that all his or her hard work is not wasted.

This is what made it difficult for me to jump into on-line VTT play. I liked Table Tools because I could so quickly throw up a map and drop some tokens on it. I kept paying for and trying other tools and they all seemed to get in my way more than support me. But I missed not being able to have access to some of the cool features of the more modern VTT systems. I've finally jump all into Foundry, which--with the use of mods--hits all my current needs. I can have a set-piece location with all the lighting and line-of-sight and fog of war bells and whistles, or I can just throw up a map on the fly and manually remove fog of war with no prep needed. Tokens a bit more involved to plop on a the map than Table Tools, but then there is so much more I can do with them in Foundry. Add to that the integration with DnD Beyond (through mods) and World Anvil (again, through mods) and I can't ask for much more in a VTT to support my open-world gaming style.

I've been running Roll20 since March and have found similar issues. Much more up front prep and less support for off the cuff DMing unless we move to theater of the mind. So Roll20 serves, but just barely.

I've gotten roped into DMing for a group of kids (my 12 year old said he wanted to run a group but somehow It's been me DMing) and have been using Zoom. That's actually worked quite well.

BTW if you want to learn patience, DM for a group of 12 year olds! They couldn't care less for the "premise" of a module, if you can't keep their interest they will revolt on you in a heart beat. I find it's doing wonders for my descriptions and off the cuff plots.

I'll have to check out Foundry - have heard good things.

 

[MNblockhead]

I like Roll20 and recommend it to those for whom I think it is a good fit. I am grateful that Roll20 gave me that ability to find and participate games when I was overseas. It was the only hosted solution that worked in the country I was located in. It did better than expected with less than ideal internet. As a player, I love it. But as a DM, it just didn't fill my needs. I don't want to derail this thread, but I'm happy to answer any questions about the foundry in the VTT thread. I just finally decided to make the switch after months of testing many of the major tools out there.

 

[Hexmage-EN]

Apologies if this specific example has been brought up, but on another forum I frequent a commentator mentioned that his group had started Storm King's Thunder but balked at the idea that they were expected to help reinstate a caste system. Apparently this group dealt with Chief Guh by giving her a Headband of Intellect, convincing her that her plan to gorge herself until she was silly, and gave her ideas for what else she and her hill giants could be doing instead.

 

[Cadence]

My emphasis added in bold.

"Chaotic Neutral: Creatures follow their whims, holding their personal freedom above all else." PHB, 122.
You are leaving out the second part of CN's definition - personal freedom. They follow personal freedom. That means they follow freedom. They would be inclined to help those that are not free.

The "their" seems vital. A greedy person values their money, it doesn't mean they'll do anything to protect someone else's. Here it doesn't say they care about anyone else's or freedom in general. They don't, for example "act as their conscience directs, with little regard for what others expect", that's CG in 5e.

Looking for wordier interpretations...

In 3.5, the CN character explicitly "doesn’t strive to protect others’ freedom".

In 2e, they "tend to follow whatever whim strikes them at the moment". "They are totally unreliable. In fact the, the only reliable thing about them is that they cannot be relied upon!". There is nothing there that says they can be depended on to protect the freedom of others. "Lunatics and madmen tend toward chaotic neutral behavior".

In 1e, the CG character "seeks to spread their values throughout the world" and these include "respect for individualism". The CN character on the other hand puts "randomness and disorder" at the top. They don't value freedom, they value "ultimate chaos".

[4e is left out because there is no Chaotic except as part of Evil. An essay in D&D and Philosophy addresses an example of what could be CN and sues Karsa Orlong as an examplar].

 

[RangerWickett]

Every AP I've played in, the goal has been to finish the AP (even though I've never played an AP to the end); my experience is that people play differently with that goal as opposed to more character-oriented goals. Every AP I've played in has had little-to-nothing to attach the characters to, other than finishing the AP; because they're written to be suitable for any bunch of characters, there's nothing in them to particularize them for the characters in the party. Every AP I've played in has had something in it that broke my suspension of disbelief, usually violently.

When writing ZEITGEIST: The Gears of Revolution, I included eight different character themes linked to social trends that would matter during the adventure path, and made sure each adventure (at least for the first 15 levels or so) had hooks that would hopefully motivate people of that group to pursue the adventure.

But moreover, the very first part of character creation for the adventure path was, "You're making characters who are loyal to the country Risur and who are committed to their job as constables, tasked with protecting it. You are in your position because you have passed tests to verify your devotion to your nation."

That way, at least for the first few adventures, the PCs are just doing their job, so it shouldn't have been immersion breaking for them to want to 'finish the adventure.' And after that hopefully the PCs would be invested in thwarting the villains and protecting various NPCs they'd come to know.

What APs have you played that there wasn't anything to attach PCs to?

 

[prabe]

When writing ZEITGEIST: The Gears of Revolution, I included eight different character themes linked to social trends that would matter during the adventure path, and made sure each adventure (at least for the first 15 levels or so) had hooks that would hopefully motivate people of that group to pursue the adventure.

But moreover, the very first part of character creation for the adventure path was, "You're making characters who are loyal to the country Risur and who are committed to their job as constables, tasked with protecting it. You are in your position because you have passed tests to verify your devotion to your nation."

That way, at least for the first few adventures, the PCs are just doing their job, so it shouldn't have been immersion breaking for them to want to 'finish the adventure.' And after that hopefully the PCs would be invested in thwarting the villains and protecting various NPCs they'd come to know.

What APs have you played that there wasn't anything to attach PCs to?

Paizo's Rise of the Runelords, Skull & Shackles, Mummy's Mask, Hell's Rebels. WotC's Dragon Heist.

It's possible-shading-to-probable that the adventures aren't the problem: the Paizo APs were all in the same group, though split between two GMs, and the guy who offered to run Dragon Heist in another group ... found DMing too stressful pretty quickly.

I'm also not trying to crap on the people writing APs--sincerely. They don't work for me as a player or as a GM (for what feel like different reasons but might just be sides of a coin) but that just means that when I DM I homebrew all the adventures and when I play I ... cope with whatever the GM is running, or at least try to.

 

[Scott Christian]

No we actually had a lot of fun, and managed to go in all kinds of unexpected diretctions and stuffed up majorly quite a few times. I'd like to go back to it but the DM has been unwell and not in a positon to run (or play) for over a year now and he is the best new DM I've seen in 35+ years of gaming and keen to et him back into the group as soon as he feels well enough.

Good to hear you guys had fun. I kind of took it as you didn't. And I hope your DM gets better soon.

Tomb of Anniliation worked well when I started with a 7-8th level group and instead of pissing round in the wilderness for 2-6 levels till high enough level for the actual adventure we, you know went and did it- a few encounters in the wilderness with some of the areas I wanted to run then straight to their objective- the city itself. It still took 3-4 months to complete but made more sense the way i ran it (at least to me).

This sounds like a great way to run Tomb for your group. Clever thinking on starting at that level. I am playing Tomb right now. We are third, and we are enjoying exploring the area. But, we also are not really dealing with the main quest line yet. We're just meandering with dino races, the lost tomb with the guy who carried a croc everywhere (very cool setting), and a very deadly assassin vines.

Stadh is the same- trim it down and pitch the adventure for level 6-10th level pcs then (maybe they were onto something with the original module) and it would be a great, much tighter experience.

Fair enough. If it works for your table, more power to you.

We enjoyed the the Death house (but WTF how was that ever designed for a newbie party?) However, once we had completed that we were eager to get on with the adventure but intead we are spinning our wheels grinding through the "side quest" type stuff till we get high enough level to actually deal with the adventure so to me it is simply a waste of my precious free time. the Dm did do a good job and dealt with our curve balls but still after 6 months we felt we were getting nowhere, were bored and ready to move onto something new.

I understand. The story's quest should feel like you are always nearing the destination, not travelling away from it. Like climbing a mountain, you should always be trying to go up, even if slightly, as opposed to walking around the base.

 

[Scott Christian]

In 3.5, the CN character explicitly "doesn’t strive to protect others’ freedom".

That is my point. They took it out specifically to let it imply that they care about freedom. I get that it is "theirs." But, I have yet to meet a person that holds a primary value (freedom, honesty, devotion, etc.) that doesn't apply it to others. The, "I'm honest, they should be honest too," or "We have freedom here, it's what I value most, other people should be free too." See, if that is their primary value, freedom, then they are going to apply it to their world view.