D&D (2024) 2024 DMG: Thoughts on the Sample Adventures

[R_J_K75]

I just glanced over them, but I haven't had the opportunity to try and run any them. They don't strike me as combat fests, both have options for encounters that can be resolved without violence, and the first one has a couple puzzles for the party to figure out even.

The second strikes me as a horror-themed exploration of cat-and-mouse, with the possibility of a peaceful resolution if the party tunes in on what is going on.

Certainly, could be subtleties in them I missed I'll admit.

 

[R_J_K75]

I think the real question is "Are they easy to run for a new GM?"

I don't think they would be IMO

 

[R_J_K75]

The barebones structure just needs to you lay over the details, which was easy to do for me. Generate a few NPC names and locations for the starting town, give the NPCs a personality quirk, and we were off.

This is what I did too. Im just not sure a new DM would be as successful as we were.

 

[R_J_K75]

Thinking about it, I really think they should have fully fleshed out the first two adventures (with commentary) and then just had the abbreviated form for the rest. Give a guiding hand, and then let the DM take flight.

This is exactly my point, and you said it better than I did.

 

[GarrettKP]

This is what I did too. Im just not sure a new DM would be as successful as we were.

I know when I was a new DM, I was not concerned with making up a lot of those details. My friends and I were concerned with getting the plot hook, and then going through encounters one after another. And we had a great time.

As I grew, so did my games. And that’s ok. A new DM shouldn't be expected to have a game that feels like Critical Role or Dimension 20 or anything like that, and I know overly detailed adventures were hard for me to digest when I started.

I like these as starting points, because I would have loved them as a newbie. Make the first session simple. Here’s the hook, here’s two or three encounters on the way to the big fight, here’s the rewards. Done. That was enough for me and my group as first time experiences.

 

[Reynard]

I learned the GM with the 83 Red Box, so i am biased, but the nature of the teaching tool in that set still strikes me as the most successful way to make a DM: a purely narrative solo adventure followed by a solo D&D scenario, followed by a fully fleshed out dungeon level, then a drawn but not filled dungeon level, and finally a set of themes to make that final dungeon level yourself.

 

[R_J_K75]

As I grew, so did my games. And that’s ok. A new DM shouldn't be expected to have a game that feels like Critical Role or Dimension 20 or anything like that, and I know overly detailed adventures were hard for me to digest when I started.

You make some good points regarding how much experience the DM and players have. I'm coming from the perspective that I've been playing since the early 80s. My expectations could be greater than someone who is new to the game. I felt I needed to add some details, (not so many that the plot or encounters we overly detailed) but there would be some thinking on your feet if you didn't prep some superfluous details to make things fluid and coherent from adventure to adventure.

I know when I was a new DM, I was not concerned with making up a lot of those details. My friends and I were concerned with getting the plot hook, and then going through encounters one after another. And we had a great time.

Definitely a valid way to play, and if you had fun that's all that counts. My group expects a little more, so as a DM I wouldn't be doing my job if I didn't deliver.

 

[R_J_K75]

I learned the GM with the 83 Red Box, so i am biased, but the nature of the teaching tool in that set still strikes me as the most successful way to make a DM: a purely narrative solo adventure followed by a solo D&D scenario, followed by a fully fleshed out dungeon level, then a drawn but not filled dungeon level, and finally a set of themes to make that final dungeon level yourself.

I owned the Red Box but I don't recall the solo aspects of it, but that was 40 years ago so. Sounds like a pretty logical way to go about it. I've never particularly liked short 10–15-page starter adventures in settings or starter sets, and I've never found one that taught how to DM very well if at all. I believe the new Arkham Horror RPG starter set by Fantasy Flight Games(?) has a starter adventurer written to teach. I think this was a missed opportunity in the new DMG. Last starter adventure I remember running was "Beneath the Twisted Tower" in 1996, so there may be something I'm missing on the subject and design innovations of intro adventures.

 

[Sorinth]

I think the real question is "Are they easy to run for a new GM?"

I don't believe they were intended to be run by a new brand new GM, that's what the starter set type stuff is for. My understanding is these are meant to show off the procedure that was presented early in the chapter about how to turn an idea into an adventure. So they serve as examples of what your homemade adventures should sort of look like after you've moved on from running published adventures and want to start using homemade adventures.

 

[R_J_K75]

I don't believe they were intended to be run by a new brand new GM, that's what the starter set type stuff is for. My understanding is these are meant to show off the procedure that was presented early in the chapter about how to turn an idea into an adventure. So they serve as examples of what your homemade adventures should sort of look like after you've moved on from running published adventures and want to start using homemade adventures.

That is a point Id not thought of. Pretty sure I made it clear from the start Id not read the entire DMG, but the adventures make more sense now, and ironically, I thought those adventures looked like my adventure outlines. If their intentions were to get a new DMs adventures/sessions sheets down to a page and still allow for improv, they nailed it and this changes my interpretation a bit. I might even read the whole DMG.