Adventures will set the tone more than the system

[Rechan]

There are a few things, above the mechanics, that WotC needs to do to make 5e very solid both with fans and as the First gaming system. Watch their PR very closely and Be beginner friendly from the get-go are the first two.

The third one is a good, solid adventure that isn't just 'teach the system' but an adventure that stands on its own. An adventure path is probably a great idea, but not necessary. A good starter adventure is essential. My guess is that most people are going to play that first adventure, so you want it to be the best introduction to the system.

 

[Greg K]

I do think that adventures say what something about the sytem. 4e intro adventures were grind happy, and told me this was a hack and slash system.

This. However, to be fair, a lot people "learned" from early 1e modules that D&D was just about going into dungeons/locations and killing monsters.

 

[KidSnide]

It seems clear to me that 5e needs a variety of adventures and that good third party support is part of the solution to that.

There needs to be a loose adventure path (like the red box, DM kit, MV 1 path), so DMs can pick up something simple. I would also like to WotC produce a set of linked 1 tier APs that are designed to play individually, but can be combined into a single super adventure.

A small number of site-based and event/war/mystery adventures could complement, as would a massive full-level-range AP, but third parties might be a better source for some of that material.

-KS

 

[trancejeremy]

As much as I loved the d20/OGL era, I think in retrospect the whole thing was a mistake from WOTC's point of view, as well as their "rulebooks sell, adventures don't" policy.

I mean, I own probably 300 d20 books. Out of that, maybe 15 were from WOTC. Sure, some of it was money I simply wouldn't have spent, but some of it likely would have gone towards WOTC stuff.

I also think it spreads the community too much. I mean, virtually everyone played the Isle of Dread or Castle Amber or Tomb of Horrors. I can't even remember any of the 3e adventures from WOTC (Sunless Grotto?)

They just need to make the adventures more appealing, and have a higher profit margin (in other words, no more 32 page or less ones). And they don't necessarily have to please everyone with every product - I think WOTC was too risk adverse during 3e. It's possible for them to have a line of adventure path style adventure, as well as more free-form, site based ones.

 

[RangerWickett]

a) A cool, ominous location.

b) A villain people will interact with for more than just a few rounds of combat.

c) A trap that will kill more than a few PCs and teach the rest of the party why dungeon crawling is exciting.



My thought? It's Dungeons & Dragons, but we don't want to cheapen dragons at 1st level, so how about an adventure to recover an item/person taken by a villain who wants to offer said item/person to a dragon. There'd be a city scene where you talk to the ne'er-do-well and get to hate him, but can't attack him because he's got too many allies, the noise of a kidnapping/theft in the middle of the night, the plight of the town who need your adventurers to save them, a wilderness ambush by some of the villain's allies, and finally the dragon's lair itself, a dungeon that you must get through before the dragon awakens.

 

[Dannager]

I love how typing adventure path now automatically links you to EN World's adventure path page. For their adventure path. Adventure path.

 

[Tymophil]

I think that adventures are important for a small subgroup of the gaming population, but I believe (purely my opinion) that the majority of people run their own games and don't use published adventures at all.

I don't use published adventures myself, but I am prepared to buy some if they show me how to design more interesting adventures. That is what I expect from WotC.

Personally, I have a lot of opinions on 4e, but absolutely none of them derive from its published adventures. I also happen to think PF's focus on published adventures, while obviously a business success, is one of mine and others' turn-offs about the game.

Personnaly, I think that WotC should publish a set of adventures linked into a path, but with different tones and styles : a site base adventure, a exploration one, an investigation, a dungeon crawl, etc. Just to show how D&D can do all this.

I wrote such adventures for my own campaign, and organized them in a adventure path. It is possible with D&D4. No published adventures are done like that, and most people think that it is impossible to play like that. My players were pleasantly surprised that there was more to D&D4 than combat grind.

I understand that some people either aren't interested in or can't create their own game, and I'm fine with some company doing part of the work for them if they're willing to pay, but I don't want to see them heavily emphasized. I try to encourage every player I meet to make the game theirs and tell their story.

I think you miss my point. Adventures are not only for lazy people, they are also for the ones that want to know what D&D is all about. They showcase the strengths of the game. Unfortunately TSR and WotC only published good (or average one in my opinion) adventures at the end of the life of each edition...

 

[Tymophil]

This. However, to be fair, a lot people "learned" from early 1e modules that D&D was just about going into dungeons/locations and killing monsters.

That's why I am disappointed with the showcase adventure description : the Caves of Chaos... It brings back bad memories.

 

[Jack99]

That's why I am disappointed with the showcase adventure description : the Caves of Chaos... It brings back bad memories.

Its a showcase adventure for a game in Alpha mode. Chill.

 

[Lanefan]

Now, if they want to do an adventure (*) path, and a site-based/event-based hyrid and then also a wide-open sandbox--and then show how the game works in all three, then I'm interested.

I second this motion.

Maybe a different bersion would be to do several stand-alone adventures and then give a rough guideline how they can be strung together into an arc if so desired.

I love how typing adventure path now automatically links you to EN World's adventure path page. For their adventure path. Adventure path.

I propose a motion: that when referring to a series of adventures that link together we henceforth use the term "adventure arc" or, failing that, "story arc".

Lan-"all in favour"-efan