D&D 5E An adventure start for new PCs isn't railroading...

[KarinsDad]

Isn't that a bit a presumptuous? The Conan stories were short stories. The movie took various elements from stories and incorporated some of their own material to create a very faithful rendition of Conan.The 82' movie was good. A very well done Conan story in a movie. Now the second movie...trash.

It isn't as though Conan stories were very long. It would have been difficult to make a movie of a Conan short story. Not to mention Robert E. Howard's prose was repetitive at times. He had some extraordinary prose that sung, but just as many stories that were quite boring. I pounded through Robert E. Howard quickly. By the time I was done, I could see why his stories were well-loved. I could also see stories written strictly for commercial purpose that were rushed and unoriginal.

Suffice it to say we disagree about the original Conan movie which I found entertaining.

I actually thought it was a good and entertaining movie too. But like many movie adaptations of written fiction, it changed up the story. You based your response of Conan being a punk from the movie, but he wasn't a punk in the books. I dislike the railroading of starting a campaign off being captured, or being marooned on a a desert isle without equipment, or the party doesn't know each other, or any of several other "you start out heavily disadvantaged because I feel like being a rat bastard DM right off the bat" scenarios. I prefer campaigns that start off with PCs that know each other, have their equipment, and are not "attacked by flying dragons at 1st level" (cough HotDQ sucks cough).

Obviously, other people have other preferences.

 

[Celtavian]

I actually thought it was a good and entertaining movie too. But like many movie adaptations of written fiction, it changed up the story. You based your response of Conan being a punk from the movie, but he wasn't a punk in the books. I dislike the railroading of starting a campaign off being captured, or being marooned on a a desert isle without equipment, or the party doesn't know each other, or any of several other "you start out heavily disadvantaged because I feel like being a rat bastard DM right off the bat" scenarios. I prefer campaigns that start off with PCs that know each other, have their equipment, and are not "attacked by flying dragons at 1st level" (cough HotDQ sucks cough).

Obviously, other people have other preferences.

I can understand that. I don't mind a little variety as long as the DM can make it fun. I certainly wouldn't enjoy such scenarios all the time.

I wonder if HotDQ started as it did to show off Bounded Accuracy. Show how even a low level group can do some damage to a high level dragon. It kind of missed the boat for me as well. A bunch of low level archers firing at a dragon with a low AC would hit it enough times to do severe damage as Hemlock has showed with his skeleton archers. There were twenty archers on the battlements. Add in the PCs firing, you had quite a bit of damage to an adult dragon. At first we were frightened given in past editions dragons were truly fearsome creatures that could rip apart armies. In 5E that isn't the case save if the DM narrates such an event. If you have an army of archers firing arrows, they'll kill a dragon rather quickly. Makes dragons seem rather weak. I didn't enjoy that aspect of 5E later on. Dragons are supposed to be immensely powerful. No DR and relatively low AC makes them weak against parties.

 

[Uchawi]

As a very experienced player, I am fine with starting as captives. Illusion of choice once play begins is more likely to get me to drop the game then any starting condition. The beginning status quo is simply that. You deal with it and play from there. Organizing specific outcomes in actual play is simply informing your players that you are telling them a story, and that they are just along for the ride. Their decisions don't really matter. Players looking for interesting game play in which they make meaningful decisions will abandon such a game.

That is a problem with illusion of choice, just as much as giving no choice, or just a railroad in general if the players on not on board. What works for a tournament, or game store experience, differs greatly from the home table. It is the latter where you have to be the most flexible. I don't have the adventure, and probably will not buy it based on early descriptions, so I don't know the details of how the adventure starts, or if there a multiple options presented so the DM may choose what works best for the group. It is gamble beginning it by being captured, because that is the most restrictive choice to place on a group. It would only be worse if they lost all their equipment.

 

[delericho]

You're talking about that silly '82 movie. The one that rewrote the story. Meh. People don't read books anymore. While it's true that Conan got captured a few times WHILE adventuring (e.g. Scarlett Citadel), his story didn't start out that way. He was raiding as a teenager.

"Scarlet Citadel" and "Hour of the Dragon", in which he gets caught out and captured using the exact same gambit twice in the space of two stories. Sure sounds like a punk to me.

(Of course, the main lesson from this is "don't read the Conan stories in a collected anthology arranged in chronological order". Because those two are essentially the same story told twice. Or perhaps the lesson is "if you're going to tell the same story twice, at least change the names", which would explain David Gemmell's career... )

 

[Quartz]

If this is the case, I'm going to run them getting captured. I think it will be interesting to run a drow raiding party capturing slaves and sacrifices.

How about letting the players run the drow raiding party?

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Celtavian]

How about letting the players run the drow raiding party?

I could do something like this if they choose to play drow. We'll see what the players feel like doing.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

To me its not a railroad when its the starting point. Its dropping you right into the game. Railroads are when my PC cannot affect the outcome of game sessions due to the DM or module writers weak story needing me to lose to X opponent or other such nonsense where I really have no impact no how the game plays out. HotDQ had a bit of this, if you kill X bad guy here a generic one with the exact stats shows up to take his place down the line. Just poor work. For L1 PC its no problem at all, its just a starting point.

 

[jrowland]

My PC failed a dex check and is now in a pit of acid, dissolving. It must be a railroad because my only choice is get out or die.

 

[ExploderWizard]

My PC failed a dex check and is now in a pit of acid, dissolving. It must be a railroad because my only choice is get out or die.

What was your PC doing that led to a dex check?