D&D 5E Do You Tinker with Adventures to Make Them "Winnable"?

[Paul Farquhar]

Except that the person ultimately responsible for the attacks is behind the door and they can keep sending agents to harass the villagers (which is said in the adventure will be the outcome if she's not stopped.)

So what? Partial success is a valid outcome. The village will probably be incinerated by a dragon a few days later anyway, And the party still get paid.

 

[jgsugden]

Just a note: You need to check your own arrogance levels when you call something unwinnable.

You may not see the way to win, but that does not mean that 3, 4, 5 or even 6 other players putting their heads together can't come up with a solution you did not consider. Over the decades I've had entire adventures rendered moot by a creative solution of a PC. I could have fought the solution and forced it to not work with contrivance, but I learned to let the Wookie win and celebrate the victory of the group. I repurposed a lot of the material I prepared at other times, and continued on. Some of those situations were intended to be difficult challenges, but the PCs/players just outsmarted me.

Build the world that makes sense. Give your players and PCs the tools to recognize it fairly. Then let the story unfold.

 

[Retreater]

Just a note: You need to check your own arrogance levels when you call something unwinnable.

When the module says there are two (and ONLY two) possible solutions to a problem, both of which are beyond the levels of the party the adventure is designed for, I call that unwinnable and bad design.

 

[billd91]

When the module says there are two (and ONLY two) possible solutions to a problem, both of which are beyond the levels of the party the adventure is designed for, I call that unwinnable and bad design.

Even in cases like these, there are complete solutions, sufficient solutions, alternative solutions, and plenty of shades of interpretation. And in all of the case you cited in the adventure you cited, I'd say that there are ways 4th level PCs can handle them if they're patient enough, observant enough, and if a DM imparts enough information for them to understand the situation. Not all groups fit that description - but being a poor match for your group doesn't equate to being bad design.

 

[Reynard]

When the module says there are two (and ONLY two) possible solutions to a problem, both of which are beyond the levels of the party the adventure is designed for, I call that unwinnable and bad design.

Which quest is this? I'd like to read it.

 

[jgsugden]

When the module says there are two (and ONLY two) possible solutions to a problem, both of which are beyond the levels of the party the adventure is designed for, I call that unwinnable and bad design.

That is the specific example you raised, and I agree it is problematic - but I also disregard any of that railroad BS and allow PCs to solve problems with problem solving. I have never, in my life, run anything handed to me without some modification, too.

However, a lot of other people in this thread are applying 'unwinnable' more broadly than this specific example.

 

[Retreater]

Which quest is this? I'd like to read it.

In the spoiler tags: Rime of the Frostmaiden: Cave of the Berserkers

 

[TheSword]

When the module says there are two (and ONLY two) possible solutions to a problem, both of which are beyond the levels of the party the adventure is designed for, I call that unwinnable and bad design.

Well two options are given. The solution to the puzzle and a way of overcoming that puzzle with magic. Hardly beyond the party.

• They could also collapse the passageway, blocking the door and trapping the culprit inside ending the threat.
• They could lure him out.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

When the module says there are two (and ONLY two) possible solutions to a problem, both of which are beyond the levels of the party the adventure is designed for, I call that unwinnable and bad design.

1) It's designed for levels 1-3. My players opened it.
2) The door can be opened by a 1st level character, simply by waiting.
3) However, this is a bad idea, since what is behind the door will likely TPK a 1st level party. It's there for their protection.
4) The door isn't on the critical path, it leads to what, to use JRPG terminology, is a secret boss fight.
5) There are many quests in RotFM, including the main one, that can end in ways other than total victory for the PCs. If you don't like the PCs falling short of total victory then I would suggest playing a different adventure.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

They could also collapse the passageway, blocking the door and trapping the culprit inside ending the threat.

One thing that hasn't been made clear - without metagame knowledge there isn't any way for the party to know "the culprit" is behind the door. So far as they are aware they have already killed the culprit, and they are just searching the location for phat loot.