D&D General How do you know an adventure is "good" just from reading it?

[Micah Sweet]

I think the error a lot of folks make is expecting that there is little to no work required to run a published adventure.

Yeah, because they are sold as exactly that.

Bad marketing! No biscuit!

 

[Shadowdweller00]

I like reading well-written stories and plots. But quality and variety of encounters is a major factor for me. As a general rule of thumb three or more uninterrupted combat encounters is poor adventure design IMO and at the very least needs alteration. (Because it gets boring in play). Interruptions can include exploration challenges, things to talk to, puzzles, random stuff to interact with that doesn't involve rolling up initiative yet again.

Also: Things the PCs can do that materially affects the plot.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

Sometimes you can't do both to your satisfaction. You'd clearly rather fall on the game side, but that is also personal opinion. Paizo wouldn't write for readers if it wasn't making them money, so there's clearly a market for it. A lot of the old 2e modules, while shorter, worked the same way.

I read the entire War for the Crown AP (PF1). It was a pretty entertaining read. The whole time I had one of my groups in mind - and I realized I'd have to do a bunch of work to get this thing to work for me.

For example, would need a relationship-map. Would need a timeline and the adventure nodes mapped out. Would want a better geography map. At that point I felt like meh - too much work. Fun read, would not play...

 

[SteveC]

For me it's pretty simple:
What's the premise, and do I like it? Will my players engage with it?
How much work am I going to have to do to run this? How much writing sidequests do I need to do?
Since I'm playing online: how are the maps? Do I have something that I can easily upload and add walls/lighting to? Better yet, is there a module where this has already been done for me?

A bonus: what online premise and help is there available? How much extra work have people already done with it?

For me, the perfect example is Curse of Strahd. The players loved it, I love classic Ravenloft, I found VTT maps for all of it, and there is so much info for it online. And Puffin Forest did a hilarious run through of it online that made the game much better for me.

 

[payn]

I read the entire War for the Crown AP (PF1). It was a pretty entertaining read. The whole time I had one of my groups in mind - and I realized I'd have to do a bunch of work to get this thing to work for me.

For example, would need a relationship-map. Would need a timeline and the adventure nodes mapped out. Would want a better geography map. At that point I felt like meh - too much work. Fun read, would not play...

This is an outstanding AP I'm currently playing in it and half way through. It looks like it is well above average in prep to run and I am very familiar with this era of APs.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

This is an outstanding AP I'm currently playing in it and half way through. It looks like it is well above average in prep to run and I am very familiar with this era of APs.

Above average in prep - you mean needs more prep? Or less?

 

[payn]

Above average in prep - you mean needs more prep? Or less?

More prep than usual. You have geography, a vast array of NPCs with relationships to the PCs to track, on top of the usual adventure mechanics.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

More prep than usual. You have geography, a vast array of NPCs with relationships to the PCs to track, on top of the usual adventure mechanics.

Sounds like work, but quite possibly worth it.

I think the error a lot of folks make is expecting that there is little to no work required to run a published adventure.

That's true. I do think that many adventures could be written with a better mind to running them, though!

 

[payn]

Sounds like work, but quite possibly worth it.

I view it a labor of love. Keep in mind I have not seen the GM material for War for the Crown, im just going off my impression so far and leaning on my extensive Paizo AP experience.

That's true. I do think that many adventures could be written with a better mind to running them, though!

Adventures? Sure, but I think the adventure path, as Paizo has stylized it, is a campaign. They supply meta-plot, NPCs, maps, encounters, supplemental fiction (this is the bit that makes folks say they are for readin not for runnin) etc.. On top of that each AP has a feature. War for the Crown, for example, is about political intrigue with role heavy emphasis. Kingmaker was about building a kingdom, Jade Regent was about running a wagon train and romance, etc..

If folks think they are getting Grandpappy's module 8 room dungeon or two, with a town that consists of shop keep and Mayor info dump, they are getting much more than they bargained for.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

More prep than usual. You have geography, a vast array of NPCs with relationships to the PCs to track, on top of the usual adventure mechanics.

Ah yes, then your perception of your GM's workload matched mine as I read through it...

If folks think they are getting Grandpappy's module 8 room dungeon or two, with a town that consists of shop keep and Mayor info dump, they are getting much more than they bargained for.

Totally. War for the Crown I think would be very rewarding, if I was able to put in the work. Maybe after Tomb of A finishes. But since we play once every 3-4 weeks, I don't expect that until 2027...