Are adventures becoming less setting flexible?

[Psion]

The big adventures I've run, RttToEE and Shackled City don't really portray these things. Both are ported pretty well into other settings, like Forgotten Realms in my case.

I agree. But to be fair, I see those as "older" adventures for the purpose of this thread.

Though Shackled City isn't all that old. Perhaps my time-framing is a bit short term here, my contemplation of what to run in the immediate future is seeing me faced with this dilemma.

 

[Dykstrav]

I think I see where you're headed with this. I do agree that there seem to be fewer options for how to conclude an adventure these days, at least the official WotC ones. Those all seem to be "if the characters succeed" or "if the characters fail," which basically describes nothing more than if they defeat the bad-ass monster/villain or not.

This was one of the things that really disappointed be about Expedition to Castle Ravenloft. There were some roleplaying opportunities, yes, but the plot basically boiled back down to swatting monsters. I never understood why they wanted to make Danovich or Madam Eva something to fight... But I digress.

I do think that a chicken-and-egg scenario has developed recently in regards to fighting in the standard adventure. Adventure designers seem to want to make an "easy out" for groups that want it in the form of a combat. Players who get stumped or just tired of talking to someone start reacting with, "the adventure is probably designed for us to be able to solve this by fighting," so they try it. And the cycle continues...

There's a place for good, brutal fights in an adventure. But if every encounter is assumed to degenerate into violence, the decision to fight becomes meaningless and hence less fun to me.

 

[Psion]

All the great RPG scenarios are set in particular worlds.

Please provide me a short list of "great RPG scenarios" for this purpose. I suspect if you say that, you are a setting fan, and your love is more setting love than scenario love.

I'd feel shortchanged if an adventure didn't tell me about the places where it's set, I can't see how you'd achieve depth without that detail, and I'd rather have the choice to change it than be obliged to make it up.

I don't buy that. Worlds are big places. It's not all that hard to drop a city into a world, and then tell you about a city. The smaller the setting, the more this becomes true.

Even an adventure written for a very specific setting can be made portable. Banewarrens is set in Ptolus, but all the villains' organizations are described with an eye to what sort of organizations could replace them, what qualities they would nominally have, and what in the adventure would have to be changed.

Here's a data point for you: Mad God's Key. Seems well loved around here. I just completed it... but did not run it in the world of Greyhawk. All that's really needed is a city with docks, temples, a library, and a nearby wilderness with ancient cairns.

 

[Faraer]

I mean the usually acknowledged ones, like Masks of Nyarlathotep, The Enemy Within, the Pendragon campaign, the Gygax modules... I can just about imagine how a scenario could be great and setting-neutral at the same time, but I can't think of any examples.

 

[Numion]

I agree. But to be fair, I see those as "older" adventures for the purpose of this thread.

Though Shackled City isn't all that old. Perhaps my time-framing is a bit short term here, my contemplation of what to run in the immediate future is seeing me faced with this dilemma.

I agree that RttToEE is old, but Shackled City? What adventures are you talking about? Age of Worms? Is there anything else?

Besides, the problems you listed affect RttToEE worse than Shackled City. AoW is more tied to the setting due to the increased geographical scope, but that's a single adventure. Red Hand of Doom is pretty well portable, so is Savage Tide (you can plop a jungle island anywhere in the oceans) .. what other examples do you have?

 

[Crothian]

Has anyone else noticed this/find this a problem? What adventures have you seen lately that confirm this trend, buck this trend, or show that it just isn't so?

The adventures I've been looking at lately are the DCC and the Bleeding Edge. Both os those series of modules seem to be very setting flexible.

 

[Psion]

I agree that RttToEE is old, but Shackled City? What adventures are you talking about? Age of Worms? Is there anything else?

Ah ah! Not so fast! I'm asked you what your experiences were first. I don't own Red Hand of Doom, for example, so I am relying on you (as I asked in the OP) to provide me with insight to adventures that might buck (or disprove) the trend I perceive.

Yes, I am alluding to longer adventure paths, and (in response to Crothian) not so much talking about dungeon crawls. (Also in response the Crothian, I find Bleeding Edges, so far, to be a pleasant exception.)

Besides, the problems you listed affect RttToEE worse than Shackled City.

"The problems I describe?" Well, since I was sort of giving one of them a pass over the others, that they contrast isn't of great concern to me, but would agree that RttToEE is worse, but for a different reason: it's mostly a megadungeon. Megadungeons disinvolve you from the setting for long periods and I implicitly dislike them for that reason.

AoW is more tied to the setting due to the increased geographical scope, but that's a single adventure.

It is? I thought it was 12.

Red Hand of Doom is pretty well portable,

How so. Tell me more.

so is Savage Tide (you can plop a jungle island anywhere in the oceans)

Again, it seems to me to fall into the megadungeon trap. Yeah, I could put it in any world, but not at the same time as integrating into the setting. It's almost a setting of its own.

And I guess that's fundamentally what I am getting at: adventures that provide a setting of their own.

 

[RangerWickett]

Alan, I'm watching this thread with intense interest, to make sure that War of the Burning Sky stays flexible.

Also, just last night I was playing the "defend the city" part of Red Hand of Doom, and some of the other players got frustrated by what they perceived as an inability to apply smart tactics (and, almost more damningly, lack of good tactics on the part of the villains).

 

[MarkB]

Also, just last night I was playing the "defend the city" part of Red Hand of Doom, and some of the other players got frustrated by what they perceived as an inability to apply smart tactics (and, almost more damningly, lack of good tactics on the part of the villains).

I got that to some extent when I ran it.
[sblock=Spoilers for Red Hand of Doom]In particular, they had their own priorities and plans when it came to how best to defend the city, and didn't like being effectively shepherded from one encounter location to the next.

As for enemy tactics, the final battle against the enemy general went extremely quickly - the party wizard had spent the majority of the 'battle fund' cash upon a single scroll of prismatic spray which took out the general (banished to another plane) and all but two of his bodyguards, variously sent insane or petrified, all in the first round. After that, it was just a matter of mopping up.[/sblock]
Back on the thread topic, I've run RHoD and am currently running Savage Tide, both adapted to Eberron, and I haven't found portability a problem at all. And as a DM, I greatly appreciate how well defined these adventures are - it makes it far easier to present them coherently and clearly to the players, and whilst it may limit my flexibility somewhat it also empowers the flexibility of the players. In RHoD, they can pick and choose where to go through the Vale without me needing to worry too much about finding things for them to do there, and in Savage Tide, they've been able to choose street addresses for each of their homes, plan shopping trips, and consider voyages further afield during downtime.

 

[Shadowslayer]

There were some roleplaying opportunities, yes, but the plot basically boiled back down to swatting monsters. I never understood why they wanted to make something to fight... But I digress.

Yoiks...that's sort of a spoiler. Might want to black text that or something. Also, as far as M.E. goes, you don't necessarily have to fight her. I'm pretty sure that in most of the suggested scenarios, you're not supposed to.