I use maps for combat almost 100% of the time; but I don't need much time and certainly not a printer to make them: I draw them on the fly as required, on the gridded chalkboard that is our gaming table.
Confession time: I am the world's worst drawer. If the room is not square, then I will mess it up. That is why programs online are important for me. But if you can pull it off, that is awesome. Skill like that is great to have.
I don't count that as prep time in any case. That said, there's already enough minis here (painted or not) that if you can't find one that suits you're likely being far too fussy.
Too true.
Time as in maybe a minute or two for a complex map, plus another minute if I have to dig out the right minis for the foes (rather than just use generic pawns, which I do about half the time).
I hear you. The time I do with maps and minis is never in game time. It is the: Alright, they are doing this which means it might go these three ways. So I need those giant scorpions and the canyon map. I also need the griffin and the cliff map in case they do it this way. And I need the tomb they are heading towards and all the creatures in it. Might as well grab the NPC's and the city map in case the tomb doesn't last as long as I think it will. Then I stare at the map and think about possible implications - but not for too long.
Some of these are quite valid and I'd guess we all have to do them: 1 and 12 in particular, and lesser versions of 2 and 5.
I agree. These are the foundation of the house. And you can use them to build an entire house.
3 - If I'm running a hard-line AP this should never be a problem. If the players get stumped they get stumped. If they find an unforeseen solution then good for them. If they want to go off on side quests then I'm not running (or they're not playing) a hard-line AP any more, as a hard AP somewhat requires both the players and DM staying firmly on the rails in order to work (which is in part why I largely eschew them).
4 - I expect the module to provide me the required DM-side maps. I don't expect battlemaps nor do I prepare them ahead of time if for no other reason than I can't guarantee that the bit I map would be the place where the combat actually occurs. Battle maps are what the chalkboard is for.
6 - no matter what I'm running I'm going to run it neutrally, and quite intentionally not tailor it to specific players and-or characters. It's up to the players to factor in their characters' interactions with the module elements once they're introduced, not me.
7 - I admire this but most of the time I just make something up on the fly. Rarely, I'll rehearse something; but whenever I do it doesn't come off in play nearly as well as when I rehearse it, largely because in play I'm too busy trying to "remember my lines" instead of just improvising them like I should.
8 - see 6. If they do something off-script that has negative (or positive!) consequences, so be it.
9 - see 6. I expect the module to tell me what treasure they're going to find, and that's what they'll find. If the module doesn't give me specifics then I-as-DM have a right to be annoyed, as specifics are what I'm paying for.
10 - I do not (and if I have my way, will never) run online unless it's completely TotM; in part because of the amount of prep time it demands.
11 - again admirable, but IMO not necessary. If I have music going it's just background music; and while pictures are nice it's extremely rare that a picture exactly conveys the scene you're describing unless a) the picture is specifically of that scene e.g. it's included in the module, or b) the picture came first and you've built the scene around it (homebrew only; this can't happen in a hard AP as you're not building the scenes there, the module is).
It is admirable you can do these things so effortlessly. Experienced DM's like us have it easy in the fact that we can run the game without doing all the above steps I listed. We can roll with whatever the players want, make something up on the spot, then roll some more. But, if I have time, my preference is to do most of these steps. I was just explaining to Rune how it might take two hours. Lastly, it is natural to think the AP should include all of the stuff listed above. But, and I will never forget it, when I started to play with people who liked maps and minis (3e), I was like, holy cow - this AP is missing a whole lot of stuff!
My overarching question is this, however: given all the prep you're doing wouldn't it take you less time (and save you some money) to just design and write your own APs? And by 'write' I don't mean in nearly the same level of detail as the published modules; just maps (which you're doing anyway) and enough scratch notes on each encounter to get you by.
Well, I do both. Some years I will write all my own stuff, and others I jump into AP's. When there is no free time, I don't do all those things. I write my notes and go. But, when there is time, I do it all. But the preference lately has been to write my own stuff. But even then, it starts to get absurd. I posted earlier, my last AP was lengthy. But it was fun to write. And the nice part about it is I had already play tested it with two groups. So writing it after playtesting helped make the path delineations more streamlined. (There are always multiple paths.
)
Thing is, forcing the players down a railroad is what running these APs is all about.
Otherwise you'd not be running them: you'd be running sandbox or stand-alone adventures or hex-crawl or some other version of play where the players have far more choice in what their PCs do next than is given by a typical AP.
True again.
The very few times I've ever tried using anything like this I found it bogged things down to a complete halt as I kept having to take down and rebuild the pieces every time the party moved - which can happen an awful lot if-when they're in explore mode.
Never again.
They have magnetic bottoms now.
So now you can build the house without watching it collapse. And yes, it used to happen all the time!
As written, however, the published APs don't suit what I do or the games I run; though I can mine them for individual adventures to drop in somewhere else (Princes of the Apocalypse is great for this!)
Fair enough. That is how many DM's I know use them. They'll take a mansion they like and throw it in their setting. It's all good. I have fun playing at their tables.
But the overall point could be this: the amazing flexibility D&D has, to be played so differently by so many different people, yet still build the same house; one with fun memories, high fives and maybe, just maybe, a little love.
