D&D 5E (2014) Are the AP's basically just a repeat of the previous complaints about FR? Why we need more short term adventures.

[Asatania_GM]

A story is what you end up with when an adventure is completed. Why would I buy that when the purpose of play is to find out what happens when the players interact with a scenario? Stories should be saved for novels.

What kind of scenario though? Most small scenarios that I see only progress if the players interact with them. The town with the wolf problem never solves it - they just sit frozen until the players stumble across it.

A scenario can be a part of a larger, living story though. A story can be happening whether or not the players choose to interact with it. If they don't, it resolves one way. If they do, their actions turn it from a mere story into a shared story.

The relentless pace of the story can give urgency to everything that the players do. "We could take a long rest here, but NPCXYZ is surely using his time more effectively..."

 

[Mistwell]

complaint

You never responded to anyones genuine analysis in the last complaint thread you started (which was only a few days ago) other than to basically hand waive dismiss people. Why should anyone trust you will engage in real conversation on this new complaint thread?

This is an issue you should address, if you want to have good conversations again here with people (people who are trying very hard to enjoy a back and forth with you). This appears to be another one of these threads from you, and people have a reason to not trust you to hold the ball:

 

[delericho]

What kind of scenario though? Most small scenarios that I see only progress if the players interact with them. The town with the wolf problem never solves it - they just sit frozen until the players stumble across it.

True. Ideally, adventures should include a brief "if the PCs do nothing..." section detailing that. That said, the space would probably be better used on something else.

The relentless pace of the story can give urgency to everything that the players do. "We could take a long rest here, but NPCXYZ is surely using his time more effectively..."

The problem with this is that one run of bad luck can break the adventure - the PCs use up too many resources in one encounter and so they either have to fight on (likely TPK) or use up one of their few 'allowed' rests. It's effectively the same problem as the death-spiral built into some games, except that it operates on a per-adventure rather than per-encounter basis.

Which doesn't necessarily mean that such things shouldn't be done. But it does mean that such adventures need to be designed very carefully, including contingencies for when it all goes horribly wrong.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Dausuul]

I don't see the issue here. Have you read any of the new APs? I picked up "Out of the Abyss" (not to run - I'm a homebrew guy - but just because I was curious), and it's anything but a railroad. The first half of the adventure is wide open. You get dumped in the Underdark with some drow chasing you, and it's totally up to you where you go and what you do. Anywhere you go, Stuff Is Happening, but it's your choice whether and how to engage with that Stuff. The second half follows a more traditional "quest" script, but even so, it leaves plenty of room for player agency. You have all kinds of choices about how to tackle the quest, and the adventure can end in a variety of ways.

Furthermore, it would be very easy to take bits and pieces from "Out of the Abyss" and weave them into your own Underdark campaign. The adventure is stuffed with weird locales, personalities, and encounters that could be repurposed without much trouble.

Now, if you don't want to shell out forty bucks for a mega-adventure and would prefer to mix-and-match smaller scenarios, that's a fair complaint. Apparently it's not a common enough one for WotC to cater to it, though.

 

[delericho]

Eh, I get what you're saying. But one person's agreeable discussion is another person's non-responsive argument. Did you see the whole disintegrate v. druid thread? If something is interesting enough to a person that they are posting about it- well, let 'em.

Yes, but Mistwell isn't suggesting the OP shouldn't be allowed to post his topics, merely noting that he's not going to engage in what he sees as a non-responsive argument.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Asatania_GM]

The problem with this is that one run of bad luck can break the adventure - the PCs use up too many resources in one encounter and so they either have to fight on (likely TPK) or use up one of their few 'allowed' rests. It's effectively the same problem as the death-spiral built into some games, except that it operates on a per-adventure rather than per-encounter basis.

Which doesn't necessarily mean that such things shouldn't be done. But it does mean that such adventures need to be designed very carefully, including contingencies for when it all goes horribly wrong.

Most assuredly.

Though, the game doesn't have to be quite that tightly scripted, and individual encounters can have notes that give guidance on how to adjust based on current party strength (strong is long rested, weaker if pushing, etc). The players need to believe that the world is moving whether they do or not. Sometimes (many times), it actually does - especially when they are faced with the proverbial fork in the road. Other times, maybe not as much.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[DEFCON 1]

Through the years I have heard the same complaint about the Forgotten Realms with regards to the super NPC's everywhere. People complained they felt their characters meant nothing in the FR universe because there were all these super NPC's running around that could do the job instead.

I personally never had this problem but I acknowledge the complaint from others. Now it seems that Wizard's strategy on "story, story story" is basically just a repeat of that but in a different way. Their plan is to tie in all the stories to basically have one continuous story that all fit together. Well doesn't this basically mean that players have no overall control how the stories will turn out? In the scheme of things your characters are not going to change the outcome of how the stories end up because they need them to happen in a specific way in order to tie in things like the video games etc....

This is why I think short term adventures should be available to everyone because the Realms is huge and things that take place in small and obscure places don't really affect the overall Realms as a whole but can affect things in specific regions.

Sure, short modules would be nice... but why does WotC have to provide them?

Plenty of other companies are writing and selling short adventures. EN World itself has a goodly number of them you can pick up through EN5IDER. If you want short modules, they are available all over the place (let alone all the modules you could easily adapt from previous editions.)

But now if the next point is that those aren't "Forgotten Realms" modules... well, my response to that is always...

"You're the DM for pete's sake... if you need a Forgotten Realms adventure, then put in the work to MAKE something a Forgotten Realms adventure. And if you don't have the TIME to make something a Forgotten Realms adventure, then perhaps you should relax on all of the grand plans for your campaign and only do what you are capable of. If you can't handle putting in the work to make your Forgotten Realms campaign a masterful Forgotten Realms campaign (or indeed any campaign setting), then just don't. Keep your campaign simpler. But don't try and fob off the responsibility onto WotC and then complain that they aren't providing you what you need. Especially considering they ARE providing you what you need... a complete Forgotten Realms adventure campaign (three of them really) that allow you to play the Forgotten Realms for years on end without the DM really needing to do a damn thing."