Do you Run Published Adventures As Is?

[Nail]

In the past, I've only rarely run a published modele, and then really only used the broad outlines -- all of the detail I worked up myself.

When 4e comes out, though, I might be tempted to run a published module right out of the box. We'll see what's available.

Where's the 4e adventure path series?

 

[Crothian]

Most of the tome yes. I will alter the who to get the PCs involved to fit my campaign and tweak a few things to make it flow with the campaign better but it is just easiest to leave it stay as much as is as possible.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Well, obviously, I make them fit the setting, but beyond that, I also adapt to personal taste.

I'll be running the Freeport Trilogy soon, along with (probably) Crisis in Freeport after (and the PDF modules in between, if there's time and inclination from my players). Beyond fitting Freeport into the world of Praemal (which it does, and admirably well), I'll be swapping the cult stuff from Lovecraftian to Lovecraft by way of Monte Cook, which necessitates some other flavor and mechanical tweaks. The end result is a very Ptolus product that just happens to be set on a tropical island full of pirates.

 

[amethal]

I'm running War of the Burning Sky pretty much as written

I'm simplifying it a bit here and there to avoid giving too much info to the players at once.

I'm also trying to do a bit more foreshadowing (although there's plenty in there already) since I now have about 7 adventures but we are still in the second one.

As a general rule, I rarely run published adventures, but when I do I normally run them as written.

 

[Mr. Patient]

For the most part, I run them as written, but I do tailor the proper names and geographical details to my homebrew, and occasionally swap out a monster or two to suit my preferences. That said, I have actually run Maure Castle in Nyambe, which required a little more fiddling, to say the least.

 

[freyar]

You know, I suspect that I'd treat an adventure path much differently than I would a published adventure that I'm sticking into my own campaign. Probably I'd run an AP nearly as written. Would anyone else have such a distinction?

 

[Arnwyn]

I change very little - as with others, I run published adventures to save time.

Most of the time, I'll change a name or two (geography mostly, NPCs sometimes) and the adventure hook. I change little else.

 

[Voadam]

I find myself changing a lot. Adding in different monsters, different classed NPCs. Changing plot around to a story I like better (changing Demon God's Fane to be not a time travel thing, changing Dungeon Interludes plot successes from saving the X to discovering that X has been stolen). I have fleshed out a bunch more in a couple of modules where details and development were lacking severely (Lord of the Iron Fortress, Ship of Horrors). I like to foreshadow future modules as much as I can so I often have clear little elements for higher level modules show up throughout lower level adventures demonstrating that other things are going on.

 

[Angel Tarragon]

Never.

 

[Rechan]

I once tried to run Death in Freeport out of the box. The PCs got approached by the hook, the characters looked at eachother and went "We have no reason to work together." Or rather, one of the PCs was like "I have no reason to do this; my character wants to go frickin' EXPLORE this city." This is me, hitting my head against the wall.

In general, I have to make minor adjustments so the hook or the background fits more in line with the characters. The Chimes of Midnight, however, I am certain I can run as is - I've all ready dropped foreshadowing into my campaign, had the PCs meet the main antagonist, etc.

I find myself using parts of adventures just as inspiration, or possibly stealing this trap or that map. For instance, I took the Death in Freeport module, and have altered it so much that basically it's a whole different animal entirely.