D&D 5E D&DNext WotC Adventures

[GX.Sigma]

Sorry mang. Not saying it's not cool. Just saying it's not an adventure...more like a DM's tool for the DM who wants a short cut to making their own adventures. Which is helpful...just not what I'd call a module or adventure in itself.

What makes you say it's not an adventure? What does "an adventure" have that this product doesn't have? It has maps, keyed encounters, monster stats, and treasures. Are you saying it doesn't feel like an adventure because it has a low page count and no box text? That's just a matter of personal taste. For me, a lower page count means more value for my time.

You can criticize that module for a lot of things, but saying it's not an adventure? I mean, I didn't like Grapes of Wrath, but I'm not going around saying it isn't a book.

 

[Mistwell]

What makes you say it's not an adventure? What does "an adventure" have that this product doesn't have? It has maps, keyed encounters, monster stats, and treasures. Are you saying it doesn't feel like an adventure because it has a low page count and no box text? That's just a matter of personal taste. For me, a lower page count means more value for my time.

You can criticize that module for a lot of things, but saying it's not an adventure? I mean, I didn't like Grapes of Wrath, but I'm not going around saying it isn't a book.

It has nothing to do with page count. You can do a (short) adventure in one page, and EnWorld has done such in the past. And it doesn't need the format of box text either.

But it needs details beyond random maps, monsters, and treasure. As I said, a computer program can do what that tool does. In fact, they have. It's not much different from this relatively simple computer game.

As mentioned by Pming, it lacks plots, sub-plots, NPC motivations and personalities. He lacks most room details, and most color. There is no atmosphere, nothing to pull players into feeling like this is a living, meaningful place.

To "run" it, you need to fill in all those details yourself, making it a tool, not an adventure in itself. It's like a rough draft of what could be an adventure - the raw notes.

 

[GX.Sigma]

But it needs details beyond random maps, monsters, and treasure. As I said, a compute program can do what that tool does. In fact, they have. It's not much different from this relatively simple computer game.

Maybe it's a bad adventure (I don't like the content much myself), but it is an adventure.

As mentioned by Pming, it lacks plots, sub-plots, NPC motivations and personalities. He lacks any room details, any color at all. To "run" it, you need to fill in all those details yourself, making it a tool, not an adventure in itself.

That's like getting a sandwich with turkey, lettuce, tomato, and mayonnaise, and then complaining that it's "not a sandwich" because you "need" to add mustard. It lacks pieces that you would want, but that doesn't mean it's incomplete or non-functional for its intended purpose/audience. If you run it completely as written, it is still a game. Maybe it's not the kind of adventure you want to run, but it is an adventure.

 

[Mistwell]

Maybe it's a bad adventure (I don't like the content much myself), but it is an adventure.

That's like getting a sandwich with turkey, lettuce, tomato, and mayonnaise, and then complaining that it's "not a sandwich" because you "need" to add mustard. It lacks pieces that you would want, but that doesn't mean it's incomplete or non-functional for its intended purpose/audience. If you run it completely as written, it is still a game. Maybe it's not the kind of adventure you want to run, but it is an adventure.

First I am not going down that silly sandwich analogy. You know what an adventure is. I know what an adventure is. Neither of us needs to turn to an analogy (and a terrible one at that) to understand each other.

Second, it's not "what I want". There are optional things you can take or leave for an adventure, and there are necessary things you need. For a dungeon, one necessary thing you need is room details. Eg. your players enter a room. They ask you what it looks like. You answer...? If you need to add all those details, then it's not supplying all the things needed for an adventure - just some of them.

Room details are a necessary element of an adventure, it's not really a matter of subjectivity that's one of the objective items you need to call something a complete adventure. One optional way to present such details is a box of text, but that's not necessary. But some details? Yeah, some details are necessary. For example, Level 1, run 5, says a hobgoblin and 4 goblins live there. So if they live there...there must be something in the room they are living with? A place to sleep? Table? Chest? Some details are obviously missing here.

It's audience has spoken in this thread, and they all said they need to add details to run it. Remember, the mention of "this level feels like it's water based, so I added...".

I didn't say it doesn't meet the needs of it's audience (indeed I said the opposite - it meets their needs fine, and it is cool for what it is). I said it's not, in itself, a complete adventure. Instead it's a tool, the rough notes that you can use to run a complete adventure by filling in some details yourself.

 

[GX.Sigma]

First I am not going down that silly sandwich analogy. You know what an adventure is. I know what an adventure is.

Evidently not, if we don't agree whether or not this product is an adventure.

Second, it's not "what I want". There are optional things you can take or leave for an adventure, and there are necessary things you need. For a dungeon, one necessary thing you need is room details. Eg. your players enter a room. They ask you what it looks like. You answer...? If you need to add all those details, then it's not supplying all the things needed for an adventure - just some of them.

What do you mean? There's a complete map of every dungeon level.

Room details are a necessary element of an adventure, it's not really a matter of subjectivity[;] that's one of the objective items you need to call something a complete adventure. One optional way to present such details is a box of text, but that's not necessary. But some details? Yeah, some details are necessary. For example, Level 1, run 5, says a hobgoblin and 4 goblins live there. So if they live there...there must be something in the room they are living with? A place to sleep? Table? Chest? Some details are obviously missing here.

I must disagree. This is just a matter of degrees. This adventure gives few details; other adventures give more details. It's not like any adventures give "all" details, and it's ridiculous to assert there's a clear, objective line between "not enough" and "enough" detail. In the end, no matter how much detail is in the module, every adventure requires some imagination from the DM. That's kind of the whole point of having a DM. This module just happens to be further on one end of that spectrum. There are definitely examples from even further on that end (with room descriptions like "empty" and "3 kobolds [hp 3, 1, 1]").

 

[pming]

Hiya.

I think what Mistwall is saying, is that and adventure has the core things "setting, opposition, description, map w/key". And that if an adventure doesn't have all of those, it doesn't count as "a full adventure". Kind of like a story needs a beginning, middle and end. You can't just say "He went to the beach" and call that a story. "In the morning, he got up. Then he went to the beach. He came back". That is a story. For an adventure, you'd need "Room 3. Study. A table, some books, papers and writing utensils. A lantern hangs overhead. Seated at the table is a lich. [there are 5 silver pieces in the desk]"...you couldn't get away with "Room 3. A lich with 5sp".

I'm more along the thinking of GX.Sigma (obviously), but only kinda/sorta. An adventure with "Room 3. A lich with 5sp" isn't an adventure as far as "needed content". However, and mind the fine line here, "Room 3. A lich with 5sp" is an adventure as far as a usable role-playing game adventure goes.

Role-Playing games necessitate imagination. Without it, you have...well, I don't know what you have. IMO, just because a room doesn't have a lot of description (or any; "Room 7. Empty", for example) doesn't mean it isn't useful. There are TONNES of adventures published out there that don't describe or even have mention of many aspects of the "adventure"; it's assumed the DM will make $#!t up when needed (that's his job, really).

Dyson's Delve, level 1, has this:

10. Tomb. A sarcophagus is in the centre of the room. If opened, a chain mail clad zombie(AC: 5, HD:2, hp: 14, ATT: 1d8, Mv:
120 (40), S: F1, M: 12) attacks from within. The zombie was entombed with a dagger +1 embedded in his chest. The small room
to the west has a stone door sealed with wax. Inside is another more ornate sarcophagus containing skeletal remains.

That is more than enough information for a DM to do his job. Ergo, it is enough information to qualify as "adventure material".

No matter how you slice it, I think what "qualifies" as an actual adventure is indeed up to the reader...at least as far as it is meant to be used by a DM in a RPG. Do I think Dyson's Delve is an adventure? Hells yeah...and a rather awesome one at that. As I said in my original post, I DM'ed it for roughly 8 months more or less 'as is'. Everyone had a blast and it felt very real to all involved. It was evocative. It was believable. It gave all the players a sense of foreboding as they delved deeper and deeper into the earth, slowly realizing that there was "something" down there they really didn't want to find. The "lack" of boxed text, dense room detail, background plots, etc. was a BONUS. It allowed me (the DM) to easily place it in my world and fill in the blanks to fit it. It gave me the freedom to work with the players and "write" the actual adventure, as opposed to the more modern "Pathfinder" style of basically "here's the story, now have your players discover it as they play through the modules".

My players discovered a story I didn't even know was there. Originally I had *no* idea; just "Theres what seems to be a small cave entrance over there". A random encounter with some humans one night while resting at the entrance gave way to the whole "Billum" (kid, ran away, thought he may have come here). One of them, a farmer, went with them and actually survived for a while (after being equipped by the PC's); his death was quite traumatic to several PC's (and players, who became quite attached to his bravery), urging them on deeper into the dungeon. After getting stuck in a "time trap", the PC's got back to the surface to discover the remaining two NPC's (two women; aunt's of Billum; one was husband to the slain farmer) figured the PC's were dead, so they took their two horses, mule and equipment they had left at the entrance and left for Gregor's Pass...in deep sorrow, knowing that poor Billum and his ill-fated rescuers had died. The PC's didn't see it this way. They vowed revenge (or at least a very stern lecture) on the women who "stole all there loot and took their horses!". ...ahem...wow. Rambled a bit there. Sorry!

So, yeah. With a "fully detailed adventure" that would never have unfolded the way it did. I would have been trying to introduce clues and whatnot to keep the PC's on track of the "real" adventure/story and the players would likely have subconsciously tried to 'follow the plot' as opposed to just playing their characters as they should. I don't know about you guys, but I'll take group-created story over published-adventure-story every single time.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Mistwell]

I must disagree. This is just a matter of degrees. This adventure gives few details; other adventures give more details.

I agree it is a matter of degrees, but there is a basic level of detail (degree of detail) required before you can call it a "complete" adventure. You don't have to say every single thing that can be found in that room, though you could go that far. You do however have to say SOMETHING about what is found in that room. If you say nothing, then unless you want almost every room simply a blank 10 x 10 walls (or whatever size the room is on the map), you as DM will have to add those details yourself. Which means it's not complete.

It's not like any adventures give "all" details, and it's ridiculous to assert there's a clear, objective line between "not enough" and "enough" detail.

There might not be a bright line, but you can know when you're at one extreme or the other, and this one is at the extreme of "not enough detail".

And honestly, other than you, I am not sure that's even disputed. I would guess even the author expects the DM will use this more as a tool, and will add details on their own. It's not drafted to even have the appearance of completeness. Maybe he will tell us.

And getting back to the topic, you really think WOTC should draft their adventures like this? The author of this admits most of this simply follows the random tables (and I just linked to a program that can do that for you, and I myself programmed a random treasure generator here at EW). You think this is the sort of thing people are clamoring to pay for, for D&D Next? Randomly generated maps and randomly generated creatures with randomly generated treasure, and almost no details or plot points or adventure hooks or anything like that?

 

[Mistwell]

It allowed me (the DM) to easily place it in my world and fill in the blanks to fit it. It gave me the freedom to work with the players and "write" the actual adventure,

And this is my point.

So, yeah. With a "fully detailed adventure" that would never have unfolded the way it did...

And so is this.

If you have to "write the actual adventure" yourself, then it's missing a component to call it a complete adventure itself. You just said it does not itself contain the "actual" adventure. That it was merely a tool that gave you space and time to write the "actual" adventure yourself.

And you agree it's "not a fully detailed adventure". That sure sounds like more of a tool than a complete adventure to me.

 

[frogimus]

Back to topic would really just be a listing of DDN adventures.

Back to the first tangent would be discussing SotSC having too much 'story' elements to wade through to find the adventure.

I see what WotC is doing to progress their in-store journey whatever thing. But many groups aren't playing this big meta game of theirs and just want a decent adventure to use in their own campaign. To those, trimming out the story continuity stuff is a lot of work.

Now to the sub-tangent of the first tangent: many of us desire adventures that leave the minutiae to the DM. Some desire fully detailed. Is there an absolute right and absolute wrong here?

 

[heptat]

Back to topic would really just be a listing of DDN adventures.

Back to the first tangent would be discussing SotSC having too much 'story' elements to wade through to find the adventure.

I see what WotC is doing to progress their in-store journey whatever thing. But many groups aren't playing this big meta game of theirs and just want a decent adventure to use in their own campaign. To those, trimming out the story continuity stuff is a lot of work.

Yeah, bugger that for a joke. Just want good adventures wor! Also good beer.

Now to the sub-tangent of the first tangent: many of us desire adventures that leave the minutiae to the DM. Some desire fully detailed. Is there an absolute right and absolute wrong here?

Too many subtangents. Back to beer.