Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="wayne62682" data-source="post: 5219839" data-attributes="member: 40455">My problem with the WotC modules has been mainly that there's little or no plot.  I played up through P2 before things fell apart and it really felt strained because there was nothing tying the adventures together.  I've heard the same thing about Scales of War - a real Adventure Path is like what Paizo does; they outline the entire campaign in the preview, so the DM/GM knows what's going to be in the next adventure.  They flesh things out, there are hooks.Also, I found the early adventures were VERY skimpy on the loot, and had a TON of mindless, boring fights.  Pretty much everything was "They attack you on sight" and "They fight until the death", and the treasure was really few and far between, so much that I found our defenses were not scaling appropriately to the monsters and the further we got, the more we were getting demolished by encounters, and everything eventually turned into a total meat grinder that took all our dailies to overcome.Now, I don't know if some of these issues have been addressed in later modules.  But the main thing I have to say is, if you're doing an ADVENTURE PATH then do an Adventure Path.  Because the H/P/E series was a loose collection of adventures with a common theme, not an AP (and the 3.0 ones were the same way, I heard).  Scales of War was touted as an adventure path, and was again just a collection of adventures in the same locale with kind of a plot but nothing really tying them together.  Compare this to any of the Paizo APs, including the old ones they did in the 3.5 days, and it's a world of difference.Also, another thing that bothers me with the 4E adventures I've seen is, as others have stated, the shoddy editing and nonsensical encounters.  Most monsters aren't given any advice of how to operate properly, and really the entire combat does play out like an MMO - your defender gets "aggro" and the rest is history.  Also, I may be the only one, but I'm sick to death of "hazards" in nearly every encounter that only affect the PCs.  I recall vividly an encounter in H3 where you're fighting on ice, and every time you move you need to make a check to avoid falling prone, or something like that.  EVERY.  SINGLE.  TIME.  Except it's just you, because the enemies are "adept at moving across ice" and can do so without penalty.  Hazards are good if they add to the encounter; one of my favorites to this day is the from the adventure in back of the 3.5 Eberron book, where you're in a sewer and there are valves that shoot off randomly every round.  They had a minor effect (prone, again, as I recall) but they could affect both you OR your enemy.  This is a good hazard.  A hazard which is basically "Give the monsters an advantage versus the PCs" isn't a hazard at all.</blockquote>

Verification