D&D 5E Am I the only one that dislikes Adventure Paths?

[Coredump]

My only exposure to Adventure Path is HotDQ. And I am not a fan. I prefer shorter adventures, even if they are tied together. As a DM it gives me more flexibility in presenting them, and often gives the players more flexibility in how to solve them.

Further, from what I know of HotDQ and RoT..... I think the desire to cram 15 levels of advancement into 2 adventures, (or into 1 adventure for PotA) leads to skimpy writing and skeleton adventures. It feels like the purpose is to level up, instead of to play the adventure and achieve the goal.


To be fair, this may be influenced by playing in AL.

 

[pming]

Hiya.

For me, AP's fail primarily because of the focus on a plotline. An overall story is good...a detailed plotline is not. I used to post on the Paizo boards back when I was DM'ing Pathfinder. When the topic of "What AP do you want to see next?" would come up, I would always mention one key thing. What I've always wanted to see in an AP is a MUCH shorter level range. I would have LOVED to see, for example, Savage Tide be from level 4 to level 11 rather than the level 1 to level 20. We played Shackled City back in our 3.5e days. Again, level 1 to 20 was just dumb. It would have been so much better if they would have narrowed the level range.

By having virtually all the AP's be "Level 1 to 20", it all but forces the DM and Players to play it the way the writers wrote it. Period. No going off on your own to do something else, like, say, help out a family member or a good friend. Nope, once you start down the path of the dark side, forever will it dominate your destiny. AP's, as they are now, are very much "the dark side". They may be quicker, easier, more seductive from a DM perspective...but once you start playing "only" APs...[insert the rest of a Yoda quote here].

Personally, I see AP's as "the lazy gamers choice". Sometimes this would be great; I don't always want to have to come up with everything on my own, and my players don't always want to have to choose their own way. Sometimes it's nice to just sit back and let someone else do the driving (re: the AP). However, IME, using an AP should be the secondary choice for a superior campaign. I'd much rather see a half-dozen individual adventures written as stand-alones, but with perhaps a "Using With Others" section at the back.

The Goodman Games "Dungeon Crawl Classics" I thought were/are an excellent style of adventure writing. They were all "individually written", but at the beginning of all of them was a little "Getting the Players Involved" section. This gave a few different ways to present the lead-in to the players. If they would have done the same at the end of the adventure, perhaps a section called "Continuing the Story" or something would be perfect. In the Continuing the Story section they could have a few suggestions for using other adventures already published as tie-ins to this one. So, one could run "The Mysterious Tower" first, then maybe run "The Sunken Ziggurat"...connecting the wizard's ghost with perhaps the original group of adventurers to battle Tiamat there. The PC's could have found a journel of the dead wizard describing what happened and how they managed to guard the place with glyphs and wards.

Anyway, yeah, AP's right now are pretty boring from a DM'ing perspective (for me anyway). I feel more like a director, trying to get the PC's to go down the left path in order to continue the story. I feel less like a writer, exploring various ideas and taking the input from my players, then using that input to make an even better story tailored to them.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[aramis erak]

I guess DMs can run an adventure path yet tailor it enough to allow player freedom, but it requires a lot more work and doesn't seem to be common.

With HotDQ, it wasn't any harder than just running what was written.

 

[Jester David]

Even if you don't run an entire AP they can still be a useful product. You can mine them for NPCs, plots, maps, and locations. You can start a campaign with one and go off the rails where needed, customizing for your group.
I imagine few people run an AP exactly as written without deviation.

 

[SirAntoine]

Adventure paths should cover five levels.

 

[DaveDash]

My main exposure to an AP is HoTDQ. As written I really wouldn't enjoy it. However, our DM is flexible and lets us break the plot as we see fit. We've taken out NPCs that we shouldn't have and done other such things.
Having said that, we won't be running RoT.

Now I imagine though there also is a world of difference between HoTDQ and something line Rise of the Runelords. I'm ok with an overall plot line as long as its engaging and makes sense.

 

[KidSnide]

What I've always wanted to see in an AP is a MUCH shorter level range. I would have LOVED to see, for example, Savage Tide be from level 4 to level 11 rather than the level 1 to level 20. We played Shackled City back in our 3.5e days. Again, level 1 to 20 was just dumb. It would have been so much better if they would have narrowed the level range.

Adventure paths should cover five levels.

Agreed. I like the idea of adventures that linked together but L1-20 (or even L1-14) is just way too long. I can't imagine ever wanting to run a published game that takes that goes through that much material and the focus on a campaign-long plot makes it harder to pick and choose individual components.

-KS

 

[Psikerlord#]

One of the worst things to happen to Pathfinder was Adventure Paths. I do get it and understand why some love them. As a DM everything is done for you and it all follows a story that works well together ect..

I just hate them though. Even the good ones are just too massive and too huge and allow for almost no character freedom. When I'm playing role playing games I like to be a proactive player interact with the game world how I want to. Not follow some railroad story to it's conclusion. When I DM my players feel the same way. It's like to start playing one everyone has to agree that they will not really play in character unless that in character role playing follows the adventure paths!

Those arshat nobles that badmouthed us and stole/taxed away all our gold need our help? Break out the picnic basket this should be fun to watch! Oh wait....the DM's hinting that in order to follow the story we need to help them....give me a minute while I shot myself in the head with my crossbow!

The worst thing is that as the adventure paths took off the regular adventure modules got put on the back burner or came out at a slower pace.

Now I just see 5E going down that same road.

Instead of short adventures there are two AP's and talk of many more.

Sigh, What is it with these things? I mean I know they are cool in some ways but in so many more they just suck!

Is everyone just fine following the ball as it bounces through the story line? It just seemed that rpg's used to be so much more.

I completely agree. I dislike long, railroady adventures which AP's tend to be. I was also never a fan of things like the Undermountain boxed set. Just too big/forced.

I am much more interested in short, cool adventures that are completely unconnected - except where the players specifically follow some hook/story element that interests them. I often make my own adventures for PC specific interests.

Luckily we have years worth of older style adventures we can easily adapt to 5e. And it seems independent publishers are starting to release short 5e compatible adventures too. It just wont be wotc who gets my money, adventure wise.

 

[Psikerlord#]

I run a Sandbox with some events and plot hooks style. I don't like adventure paths or adventures in general. HOWEVER, there is some wonderful tid-bits in Paizo APs. The NPCs are flavorful, the maps and illustrations are gorgeous, and of course you have yourself more place and people names than you could shake a stick at (unless you were on a motorized merry go round, but then who would be shaking a stick at that point? I digress...).

Generally, I will pick up something to borrow from. I really liked the "lost on the island" Skullport something or other first installment of one of their APs. It was a sandbox, had some fun ideas in it (Malaria! and camping rules!), and the NPCs were splendid.

So - don't hate them! Just use them for parts. :-D

Yeah actually this is the best approach isnt it - even if you dont like them overall - steal the bits you do like!

 

[TarionzCousin]

I have been DM'ing a six player group playing Pathfinder for the past fifteen months. The amount of prep and conversion time is almost enough to make me want to quit and start over. I run the game every other Sunday and the group just hit level 6. I figure I have another two years to go before the campaign ends.

I wish I had based the campaign around an Adventure Path; I would love to not have to spend ten hours between each session converting monsters, developing encounters, plotting the storylines, and brainstorming. The best part of the AP is that it has already done most of that; the DM doesn't need to spend quite as much time prepping between game session.