D&D 5E DMing "Out of the Abyss"

[zingbobco000]

I gave zingbobco000 exp for his post because having started DMing live with Princes of the Apocalypse I can tell you despite my problems (up to 9 players per game) it was a much easier book to read and since you are above ground you can do lots of fun sandbox stuff that will come more easily to you. There's also the fact that deep below the Dessarin Valley is the Underdark. OotA takes place 30 years later so you can offer your players a "trait" system if they want to play their former character's kids.

OotA was much harder to read, plus they throw Insanity and a ton of NPCs at you out the gate. This doesn't mean it is worse. I think it is volumes better than PotA because it allows you to play each of the areas in a more subtle fashion. Both are great adventures and both have great re-play-ability due to their openness.

Thanks! Also, I totally agree with you and the kids thing is a pretty cool idea.

 

[designbot]

OotA takes place 30 years later so you can offer your players a "trait" system if they want to play their former character's kids.

What is that based on? I haven't seen any published date for when Out of the Abyss takes place.

 

[Hussar]

Is the definition of "Sandbox" really "a handful of set-piece encounters that may be tackled in various sequences, with random encounter tables in between"?

At the base? Yup, yes, it is.

 

[Guest 6801328]

At the base? Yup, yes, it is.

Further confirmation that the "Sandbox vs. Theme Park" virus meme represents a false dichotomy.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I don't mean you need to be some kind of genius. It's not elitist crap like that.

This isn't one of those 4th edition dungeon delves where everything is laid out for you, and where you can simply jump in at a moment's notice, no.

By "experienced" I mean "will accept to read through a 250 page module well in advance of play, will accept having to make notes and juggle potential outcomes in your head". I mean DMs who have DMd before, who knows how to spot encounters where the party is outclassed, who knows how to improvise on the spot, who can keep scores of NPCs apart.

In essence, what I mean is DMs who take their time. I'm confident you the reader can do it, for example. Even I can do it!

Nix the condescension, please.

 

[Celtavian]

Is the definition of "Sandbox" really "a handful of set-piece encounters that may be tackled in various sequences, with random encounter tables in between"?

It depends. There are different types of sandboxes. You might have a megadungeon sandbox like Undermountain, Rappan Athuk, or the original Temple of Elemental Evil big book. Or a location sandbox like Keep on the Borderlands or the first Kingmaker module where you wander around an area finding encounters. Out of the Abyss is like the second type with a longer journey. These type of sandboxes require a lot of preparation or they become way too easy and monotonous. Kingmaker was an example of this. At low level almost any encounter is difficult, so the start was fine. Once the party gets a few levels they started to steamroll encounters that occurred once or twice a day. That's the big problem with sandboxes and the nature of random encounters. You might only get one or two encounters a day of relatively moderate strength. The party rolls over them like a steamroller and you have an adventure that becomes a monotonous string of weak encounters that bores everyone to tears. Players, especially veteran players, can only ooh and ahh so much at random encounters like glowing magical fungus or a rockslide before they go, "Let's get to some real encounters. This is boring."

I'm looking at some of these encounters and they'll get destroyed as soon as the party gets some AoE or has a cleric in the group. Won't even be a challenge. It will be less than a speed bump. It further illustrates how incompetent module designers are at encounter design. They love to tell a story or build an encounter with some history. They are bad at designing an encounter intended to challenge a party. Sandboxes are some of the worst designed adventures when it comes to providing a sufficient challenge. Smart players know how to avoid dangerous areas until they are appropriate level. They spend their time cherry picking weak encounters leveling up appropriate before hitting areas that become weak when they're the appropriate level.

There is some stuff to work with in the module. So far it's looking like monotonous, weak encounters strung together in a random fashion that my group will steamroll until their eyes glaze over waiting for something challenging.

 

[Hussar]

Further confirmation that the "Sandbox vs. Theme Park" virus meme represents a false dichotomy.

There's a sandbox vs theme park meme? I always thought theme park (as the term is generally used for MMO's) was simply a type of sandbox where the sandbox is somewhat less reactive to the presence and actions of the PC's than an open sandbox.

 

[Hussar]

It depends. There are different types of sandboxes. You might have a megadungeon sandbox like Undermountain, Rappan Athuk, or the original Temple of Elemental Evil big book. Or a location sandbox like Keep on the Borderlands or the first Kingmaker module where you wander around an area finding encounters. Out of the Abyss is like the second type with a longer journey. These type of sandboxes require a lot of preparation or they become way too easy and monotonous. Kingmaker was an example of this. At low level almost any encounter is difficult, so the start was fine. Once the party gets a few levels they started to steamroll encounters that occurred once or twice a day. That's the big problem with sandboxes and the nature of random encounters. You might only get one or two encounters a day of relatively moderate strength. The party rolls over them like a steamroller and you have an adventure that becomes a monotonous string of weak encounters that bores everyone to tears. Players, especially veteran players, can only ooh and ahh so much at random encounters like glowing magical fungus or a rockslide before they go, "Let's get to some real encounters. This is boring."

I'm looking at some of these encounters and they'll get destroyed as soon as the party gets some AoE or has a cleric in the group. Won't even be a challenge. It will be less than a speed bump. It further illustrates how incompetent module designers are at encounter design. They love to tell a story or build an encounter with some history. They are bad at designing an encounter intended to challenge a party. Sandboxes are some of the worst designed adventures when it comes to providing a sufficient challenge. Smart players know how to avoid dangerous areas until they are appropriate level. They spend their time cherry picking weak encounters leveling up appropriate before hitting areas that become weak when they're the appropriate level.

There is some stuff to work with in the module. So far it's looking like monotonous, weak encounters strung together in a random fashion that my group will steamroll until their eyes glaze over waiting for something challenging.

Celtavian, you have to admit that your group is somewhat unique, or at least idiosyncratic considering the number of people who are not having the issues that you are having with encounters being too easy. Not every group plays laser beam focused Navy Seal groups maxing out every single possible advantage. And, from your own descriptions, there is a possibility that the issues you are having are, to some degree, of your own making.

If there were large numbers of people complaining that 5e is too easy, I'd be more inclined to accept your point of view. But, since most groups don't appear to be having your issues, it might, not necessarily has to, but might, be less about game designers not knowing the game and more about your specific group.

 

[Celtavian]

Celtavian, you have to admit that your group is somewhat unique, or at least idiosyncratic considering the number of people who are not having the issues that you are having with encounters being too easy. Not every group plays laser beam focused Navy Seal groups maxing out every single possible advantage. And, from your own descriptions, there is a possibility that the issues you are having are, to some degree, of your own making.

If there were large numbers of people complaining that 5e is too easy, I'd be more inclined to accept your point of view. But, since most groups don't appear to be having your issues, it might, not necessarily has to, but might, be less about game designers not knowing the game and more about your specific group.

When is the last time your DM ran a module as it is written? My statement is not a problem native to 5E. Module designers in nearly every edition have done a poor job of designing challenging encounters. This problem is exacerbated in sandboxes using random encounters because parties that only experience two encounters a day get to blow off their best abilities to achieve victory without concern for preserving them for harder encounters. This happens in nearly every similar type of campaign. It happened when I ran Kingmaker after the PCs picked up a few levels. There has rarely been modules with seriously challenging encounters in any edition of D&D.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Maybe they've done an excellent job designing challenging encounters...if their goal is to challenge average players. You know, the bulk of their audience/market.