Yes, I'd prefer it if the default was to stat a "Goblin Lair" as a single, multi-room, encounter. Make that encounter Party Level +4 if it's likely to be the only battle of the day. Use lots of minions - a single PL+4 battle with 30 goblins is more fun than 3 PL+0 battles with 5 goblins each, anyway.
Help me make WotC adventures better.
- Thread starter RodneyThompson
- Start date
Yes, I'd prefer it if the default was to stat a "Goblin Lair" as a single, multi-room, encounter. Make that encounter Party Level +4 if it's likely to be the only battle of the day. Use lots of minions - a single PL+4 battle with 30 goblins is more fun than 3 PL+0 battles with 5 goblins each, anyway.
Klaus
First Post
Look at Keep on the Shadowfell: you open by fighting kobold slingers and defenders. Then defenders and wyrmpriest. Then defenders, slingers and minions. Then slingers, minions and skirmishers. Then defenders, wyrmpriest and a goblin. Over the course of 5 encounters you battle the same 4 varieties of kobolds. That can get a bit redundant.The tough part is doing both of these at once!
It can be done, of course, by varying locales, encounter goals, that kind of thing. But it can be tricky to pull off.
-The Gneech
For instance, you can have an adventure set against orcs, using all the orcs in the MM, plus the 8 or so variants from the Dragon article Creature Incarntions: Orcs, and have little to no repetition (aside from minions... those are meant to go down fast, so bring more!)
Nebulous
Legend
It was me that said that and Pyramid was not boring at all. I reduced it to fights that MATTERED, many of the best battles, and i added Paldemar from Thunderspire Labyrinth running ahead of the PCs on his quest for the Hand and Eye of Vecna which were posessed by Karavakos. I also added non-combat encounters and NPCs to talk to, something Pyramid was woefully lacking. The Pyramid still features in my current homebrew campaign with an open portal straight to the Far Realm. Pyramid had a lot of great ideas buried in endless combat and a weak plot and a weak villain.
Honestly, I think the best adventures are those in which the players get invested in.
Let me use the Witchfire Trilogy as an example. It was terribly lead you by the nose. But the characters were vibrant, three dimensional, and memorable. The story itself was intriguing, and it wasn't something like the threat of invasion or the destruction of the world (at least, not at first). No, it was about a young girl wanting revenge for the murder of her mother.
Reminds me of a book by Lois McMaster Bujold called The Spirit Ring, in which a daugther was trying to rescue the soul of her dead father from slavery in a magical ring.
In other words, I think that having a compelling list of interesting characters, characters that are three dimensional, beautiful and flawed, with good and bad aspects to them, in a story that may not necessarily be of the typical dangers we see in plotlines, might be a wonderful way to go.
For example, what about an adventure in which there are two sides, and neither are clearly the hero or villain? A shades of grey adventure where the PCs get entangled in, make friends/allies from both sides, and a generally good, but tragic and tormented npc who is about to do something terrible due to his misery?
Or how about a game where the PCs are left with a terrible choice? Kill a child or see a kingdom destroyed kind of thing? I remember a movie about the coming of the antichrist, a young man who is said to become possessed by him; at the end of the movie, as the clock ticked down to the final hour, the man, who had been fighting the "inevitable," looks worried... then the digital clock in the car suddenly switches to 666, his lips start to twitch into a smile, and the heroine pulls the trigger and kills him. End of movie.
I dunno. I've always liked shades of grey, and while throwing in monsters and such is fine to a degree, I really like games where you could take an alternative point of view and say that the other side is in fact the villains.
Another is a more complex, convoluted plotline, in which there are several antagonists working towards different goals at cross purposes, leaving the PCs in the middle of a several way proverbial crossfire.
Anyway. Just some ideas.
James
Let me use the Witchfire Trilogy as an example. It was terribly lead you by the nose. But the characters were vibrant, three dimensional, and memorable. The story itself was intriguing, and it wasn't something like the threat of invasion or the destruction of the world (at least, not at first). No, it was about a young girl wanting revenge for the murder of her mother.
Reminds me of a book by Lois McMaster Bujold called The Spirit Ring, in which a daugther was trying to rescue the soul of her dead father from slavery in a magical ring.
In other words, I think that having a compelling list of interesting characters, characters that are three dimensional, beautiful and flawed, with good and bad aspects to them, in a story that may not necessarily be of the typical dangers we see in plotlines, might be a wonderful way to go.
For example, what about an adventure in which there are two sides, and neither are clearly the hero or villain? A shades of grey adventure where the PCs get entangled in, make friends/allies from both sides, and a generally good, but tragic and tormented npc who is about to do something terrible due to his misery?
Or how about a game where the PCs are left with a terrible choice? Kill a child or see a kingdom destroyed kind of thing? I remember a movie about the coming of the antichrist, a young man who is said to become possessed by him; at the end of the movie, as the clock ticked down to the final hour, the man, who had been fighting the "inevitable," looks worried... then the digital clock in the car suddenly switches to 666, his lips start to twitch into a smile, and the heroine pulls the trigger and kills him. End of movie.
I dunno. I've always liked shades of grey, and while throwing in monsters and such is fine to a degree, I really like games where you could take an alternative point of view and say that the other side is in fact the villains.
Another is a more complex, convoluted plotline, in which there are several antagonists working towards different goals at cross purposes, leaving the PCs in the middle of a several way proverbial crossfire.
Anyway. Just some ideas.
James
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
RE: Monster Variety
I think it's important that the monsters have an ecosystem.
So you don't wind up with "what the heck is this ooze doing hanging out with this orc?!", but you also don't wind up with "all of these kobolds are starting to look the same to me."
I think easing up on combat in general will also help this -- if there's only 6 combat encounters for each level, it's easier to avoid repeats. And note that "combat encounters" effectively just mean minis-grid combats. You can, say, fight a sea monster while on a ship, or a colossus attacking the town, in a much different way than you can fight a group of orcs. Think of Shadow of the Colossus or God of War or even some of the immense critters in Final Fantasy XIII. There is a lot going on there that isn't just "I hit, and do damage, and inflict a condition."
I'd also say that I would like fewer monsters per encounter. Make use of elites and solos, not just as "boss monsters," but as regular features. Those 6 combats should be dramatic.
If a combat ever feels like filler, it's probably best to jettison it. Battles for life and death shouldn't be boring. Make at least 3 combat encounters per level an actual struggle for the PC's to avoid TPK, and make at least 3 noncombat encounters per level something that the success of the current strategy ultimately relies on. Risk death and failure. Don't play nice. Even, use fewer encounters, but make those encounters MORE EPIC. You don't have that many pages. Pick three solos at Level +3 and let the PC's figure out how to take them down.
And that way, when you do have these encounters with kobolds, you have fewer of them, making the fact that there's only 5 or so varieties less of a pain.
Part of what I think would help is an actual system for noncombat encounters that makes use of character roles, archetypes, and powers, in the way that combat does. But noncombat roles and powers are things I've been advocating for a long time, so I might have a bit of an axe to grind on that point.
But that way, whether you're killing kobolds, or negotiating with the king, everyone can contribute, everyone risks something, and everyone stands to gain with a success, in a unique way that is resonant to their archetype, rather than in some generically broad way.
I think it's important that the monsters have an ecosystem.
So you don't wind up with "what the heck is this ooze doing hanging out with this orc?!", but you also don't wind up with "all of these kobolds are starting to look the same to me."
I think easing up on combat in general will also help this -- if there's only 6 combat encounters for each level, it's easier to avoid repeats. And note that "combat encounters" effectively just mean minis-grid combats. You can, say, fight a sea monster while on a ship, or a colossus attacking the town, in a much different way than you can fight a group of orcs. Think of Shadow of the Colossus or God of War or even some of the immense critters in Final Fantasy XIII. There is a lot going on there that isn't just "I hit, and do damage, and inflict a condition."
I'd also say that I would like fewer monsters per encounter. Make use of elites and solos, not just as "boss monsters," but as regular features. Those 6 combats should be dramatic.
If a combat ever feels like filler, it's probably best to jettison it. Battles for life and death shouldn't be boring. Make at least 3 combat encounters per level an actual struggle for the PC's to avoid TPK, and make at least 3 noncombat encounters per level something that the success of the current strategy ultimately relies on. Risk death and failure. Don't play nice. Even, use fewer encounters, but make those encounters MORE EPIC. You don't have that many pages. Pick three solos at Level +3 and let the PC's figure out how to take them down.
And that way, when you do have these encounters with kobolds, you have fewer of them, making the fact that there's only 5 or so varieties less of a pain.
Part of what I think would help is an actual system for noncombat encounters that makes use of character roles, archetypes, and powers, in the way that combat does. But noncombat roles and powers are things I've been advocating for a long time, so I might have a bit of an axe to grind on that point.
But that way, whether you're killing kobolds, or negotiating with the king, everyone can contribute, everyone risks something, and everyone stands to gain with a success, in a unique way that is resonant to their archetype, rather than in some generically broad way.
Echo what many of the rest of ye have said - from what I have read in WOTCs 4th Ed adventures to date, there are far too many combats. I've just started running the Keep on the Shadowfell for 2 separate groups and one group (who are more the "hack n' slash" type) I reckon will enjoy it but the 2nd group (who are almost the polar opposite of a hack n' slash group) I suspect will get bored fast unless I trim the combats somewhat.
The DMG gives definitions for various types of players - actors, storytellers, etc., and advises DMs to cater for all their players tastes. Yet, from what I can see, you (WOTC) dont seem to follow this advice and gear your adventures for those that like the combat part of the game.
I (and my players) would love to see more Skill Challenges, puzzles, non-combat encounters to balance out the fighting.
Something else I dislike - The location and NPC descriptions provided in, for example, KOTS, are very sparse. More attention should be given I think to NPC mannerisms, advice of playing them etc., and more attention should be given to the description of the locations/dungeon rooms within the adventure. I know that, as a DM, I can flesh out the encounter descriptions (and I do) but one of the reasons I bought the module in the first place is based on the assumption that a lot of this work will be done for me. I know you can only put so much into the pages of the module but my first impression on reading KOTS was that it half finished (lacking "detail" and containing some glaring errors). I dont know if it was a conscious decision by the company but it just appeared (to me) that lip service was paid to the role-playing elements and background depth in the adventure, and I felt short changed by its presentation.
I have tweaked the adventure and 'fleshed out' the various locations to my taste now but I would have preferred if this had been done (at least in part) for me by the author/WOTC.
Bruns.
The DMG gives definitions for various types of players - actors, storytellers, etc., and advises DMs to cater for all their players tastes. Yet, from what I can see, you (WOTC) dont seem to follow this advice and gear your adventures for those that like the combat part of the game.
I (and my players) would love to see more Skill Challenges, puzzles, non-combat encounters to balance out the fighting.
Something else I dislike - The location and NPC descriptions provided in, for example, KOTS, are very sparse. More attention should be given I think to NPC mannerisms, advice of playing them etc., and more attention should be given to the description of the locations/dungeon rooms within the adventure. I know that, as a DM, I can flesh out the encounter descriptions (and I do) but one of the reasons I bought the module in the first place is based on the assumption that a lot of this work will be done for me. I know you can only put so much into the pages of the module but my first impression on reading KOTS was that it half finished (lacking "detail" and containing some glaring errors). I dont know if it was a conscious decision by the company but it just appeared (to me) that lip service was paid to the role-playing elements and background depth in the adventure, and I felt short changed by its presentation.
I have tweaked the adventure and 'fleshed out' the various locations to my taste now but I would have preferred if this had been done (at least in part) for me by the author/WOTC.
Bruns.
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
S'mon said:
I think I would be in love with this.
Connorsrpg
Adventurer
1. Minions - we now have a mechanic to use lots of bad guys, but I don't see too many of them. Actually a bigger variety in monsters full stop (by that I don't mean weird and wonderful combos, just variances on same race/theme). For eg Trollhaunt warrens. How many fights vs same creature - I substituted many troll types from the compendium, inc sev minions and several of lower level. Some encs in that module (grell, etc) really didn't need to be there. I think this may have led to 2 other points.
2. Theme - I love when a module follows a theme of some sort. Rewards players for investing in it too. From architecture to the creatures enc. (Eg: Adding Skalmad's son going hunting with troll hounds (thanks Blackdirge) was one of the most fun encounters in trollhaunt for the PCs. Having orcs from a certain tribe stand out from those from another, etc.
3. Description - I am not a fan of only encounter areas having a 'boxed description'. This is vital for theme and the 'feel' of a place. I love attention to minor details in descriptions (like Red Hand of Doom). Goblin songs, carvings reflecting previous inhabitants, etc
4. Villain - as many have already said BBEG shouldn't just be awaiting random bunch of good guys to come and defeat him/her/it. Needs to be active. PCs loved that Skalmad was exactly that. They really hated him by the 3rd time they had to defeat him.
5. Balance - Well 'not balanced' for me. I am not fond of the math-like theory of encounter balance. Rather than finding the fact that every encounter is around the PC level a challenge we find it a bore. I certainly do reading the module. Throw in encounters that ARE easy (as suggested in DMG). Make encounters that the PCs aren't meant to find a 'balanced encounter' or let them know they are VERY unlikely to survive. Not every encounter has to be a balanced fight. That green dragon is in the forest whether PCs are 1st or 12th. Why can't it encounter them at 1st? It doesn't have to kill them...
6. Odd adventures - now it appears every adventure has to be suitable for every campaign...I am finding a lot of them lame. I would like some more exotic adventures, especially some variance in setting. Deserts, snow, jungle, moats, completely fantastical. hard to put a finger on, but not many adventures are surprising anymore.
5. Treasure - include the new treasure ideas from books beyond PHB. Eg a lot more alchemical items, poisons, new weapons, boons or even suggest just boosting an item a player already has.
Hope that helps off the top of my head. C
2. Theme - I love when a module follows a theme of some sort. Rewards players for investing in it too. From architecture to the creatures enc. (Eg: Adding Skalmad's son going hunting with troll hounds (thanks Blackdirge) was one of the most fun encounters in trollhaunt for the PCs. Having orcs from a certain tribe stand out from those from another, etc.
3. Description - I am not a fan of only encounter areas having a 'boxed description'. This is vital for theme and the 'feel' of a place. I love attention to minor details in descriptions (like Red Hand of Doom). Goblin songs, carvings reflecting previous inhabitants, etc
4. Villain - as many have already said BBEG shouldn't just be awaiting random bunch of good guys to come and defeat him/her/it. Needs to be active. PCs loved that Skalmad was exactly that. They really hated him by the 3rd time they had to defeat him.
5. Balance - Well 'not balanced' for me. I am not fond of the math-like theory of encounter balance. Rather than finding the fact that every encounter is around the PC level a challenge we find it a bore. I certainly do reading the module. Throw in encounters that ARE easy (as suggested in DMG). Make encounters that the PCs aren't meant to find a 'balanced encounter' or let them know they are VERY unlikely to survive. Not every encounter has to be a balanced fight. That green dragon is in the forest whether PCs are 1st or 12th. Why can't it encounter them at 1st? It doesn't have to kill them...
6. Odd adventures - now it appears every adventure has to be suitable for every campaign...I am finding a lot of them lame. I would like some more exotic adventures, especially some variance in setting. Deserts, snow, jungle, moats, completely fantastical. hard to put a finger on, but not many adventures are surprising anymore.
5. Treasure - include the new treasure ideas from books beyond PHB. Eg a lot more alchemical items, poisons, new weapons, boons or even suggest just boosting an item a player already has.
Hope that helps off the top of my head. C
For me, the key to a better WOTC adventure is to focus on the reason I buy published adventures in the first place - to save prep time. Every writer, I think, strives to create an engaging story. Success will vary, but what does the adventure have to make my life easier? 4e is tactial - are all the battle maps included? If not, are there at least - as someone noted earlier - dm and player versions of the maps? Are there handouts and visuals to use? Tokens would be a godsend - During 3e, Fiery Dragon's modules stood out for me precisely because of their tokens and handouts. If a module had all of these things, I would scoop it up in a heartbeat and pay a premium.
