D&D 5E Hoard of the Dragon Queen - a solid D effort.

[Sacrosanct]

Correct. The Encounters PDF has additional text to convert the adventure to Encounters; in particular, it provides guidelines as to what encounters to run to make sessions fit in an Encounters format. The adventure as a whole is not designed for Encounters. Heck, it's very, very far from what an Encounters adventure should and has been.

!

Well, yes it is. However, you can't assume it was designed to be what 4e encounters were. Mearls replied to me himself a few weeks ago in this very forum and said that D&D Encounters for 5e are not going to be like Encounters were for 4e. So this adventure was very much so designed for 5e Encounters. Also, it was the adventure they promoted heavily to kick off the Adventure League. Even if you're not living in the 21st century and didn't seen any of the online promotion, every game store I had been in that participates in Encounters had big posters promoting Tyranny of Dragons, and HotDQ as the adventure to kick off the AL.


All I'm saying is that if you have an adventure that was designed and intended for league play (emphasizing the need for general shared experiences among groups of players), it's not fair to the product, nor all that accurate, to mark it down for elements of railroading since those elements are required in order to achieve the requirement of the game. Just because you can play the game at home doesn't change the fact that the adventure was designed and intended for the AL. The designers aren't idiots.

 

[drjones]

I don't want spoilers so I admit I have not read the review besides a very minor skim. So I will just ask this: If this AP is a D then what 5E adventure is an A+? And pre -5e what is an A+?

 

[Agamon]

Yeah, but those old AD&D modules say *right in the book* that they were originally created for tournament play.

That doesn't change the fact that at least 6 of the Top 30 D&D Adventures were tournament modules. If I were to run any of these exactly as printed, they'd all pretty much suck, nostalgia aside.

I might be in the minority, but, as an experienced DM, I never look at a published adventure as something I can just open up and start running. All adventures "suck" until I'm able to make whatever changes I deem fit to make it work in my campaign.

 

[DaveMage]

I might be in the minority, but, as an experienced DM, I never look at a published adventure as something I can just open up and start running. All adventures "suck" until I'm able to make whatever changes I deem fit to make it work in my campaign.

Have you seen/run Slumbering Tsar?

I've had to make zero changes - it's a blast. Easiest GMing I've ever had.

 

[Agamon]

Have you seen/run Slumbering Tsar?

I've had to make zero changes - it's a blast. Easiest GMing I've ever had.

Is it a megadungeon/adventure path? I know you can run adventures as is, I just don't want to. Anything that can run itself, should, because I don't want to. Being the go-between for the players and some words in a book isn't all that fun, in my opinion. For me, DMing is about creativity, so if I do use published stuff, it gets a work over, and I leave things open ended to let the players do what they like, as well.

 

[Ranes]

I know you can run adventures as is, I just don't want to. Anything that can run itself, should, because I don't want to. Being the go-between for the players and some words in a book isn't all that fun, in my opinion. For me, DMing is about creativity, so if I do use published stuff, it gets a work over, and I leave things open ended to let the players do what they like, as well.

Great point well made. I'm not allowed to XP you for it though.

A general question: is it a good idea that what is in effect a flagship module for the launch of a new edition be one that is also designed for league play, given all the limitations of that kind of module, as outlined by Sacrosanct above?

Should the primary objective at the launch of a new edition be to get people playing a shared experience (whatever that means, apart from getting their email addresses on a database) or should the effort be directed into creating a module that illustrates to them that in D&D their choice of action can rapidly and substantively dictate the narrative?

 

[Libramarian]

This is a great (if overlong) review!

I don't want spoilers so I admit I have not read the review besides a very minor skim. So I will just ask this: If this AP is a D then what 5E adventure is an A+? And pre -5e what is an A+?

You might check out [MENTION=6688546]bryce0lynch[/MENTION]'s reviews for his favorite OSR modules here: http://tenfootpole.org/ironspike/?page_id=844

 

[DaveMage]

Is it a megadungeon/adventure path? I know you can run adventures as is, I just don't want to.

It's really a mega-sandbox. Very minimal plot, and totally dependent on character actions. You can tinker with it as much as you like - or not at all.

You can download the first chapter for free to see if it's something you'd like to see more of...

(Although the full book is the way to go if you are interested. The "chapter" books were polished and combined into the single book later.)

 

[FitzTheRuke]

That doesn't change the fact that at least 6 of the Top 30 D&D Adventures were tournament modules. If I were to run any of these exactly as printed, they'd all pretty much suck, nostalgia aside.

I might be in the minority, but, as an experienced DM, I never look at a published adventure as something I can just open up and start running. All adventures "suck" until I'm able to make whatever changes I deem fit to make it work in my campaign.

I don't know if we're a minority or not, but that's exactly how I feel about it. In fact, I didn't even RUN published adventures AT ALL for the first 20 years that I played the game. I only do it now because I'm too busy to write my own. (Although sometimes I think it doesn't save me any time - I could make stuff up faster than it takes me to read an adventure.)

 

[jrowland]

I don't think you understand the criticisms. It's not a new-school/old-school divide. Both old adventures and new adventures require you to "make it your own." I don't think there's any RPG experience that isn't customized by the GM. We want to customize adventures. My problems with HotDQ (like most TSR/WotC/Paizo adventures) are:

1. There are flaws/playtsyle differences I have to fix, which forces me to customize it before I can use it (i.e., railroading, dumb encounters).
2. It's written in a way that makes it difficult to customize it (i.e., wall of text).

I understand the criticisms. I wasn't making it a new/old school divide, "old school" was a short hand descriptor for a style of DMing. Brand new DMs could/can DM that way.

as to point 1: I take it, despite saying , "We want to customize adventures" you have a problem with "forces me to customize". I am sure you don't mean that literally (Mike mearls isn't at your house with a gun is he?), so I can only scratch my head and wonder why you want to customize, but don't actually want to customize. I'll just assume you didn't mean it as a separate point and it is there to only reinforce point 2. Personally, I feel railroaded if (as DM) a module is so "good" as to not require customization.

as to point 2: a "wall of text" makes customizing hard? Reading is hard? Of course not, you seem literate. It's poorly written? Yes...sort of...maybe. and that is where the difference lay. Ever read the original G1? Wall of text. Not much to the story. That is what I meant by old school. For some DMs, G1 is great simply because it is the skeleton of an adventure. If HotDQ was 10 pages, I'd like it more, but I do enjoy the wall of text. Gives me ideas. For some, G1 is horrible because its this wall of text keyed encounter booklet with a weak plot that expects the DM to fill out the details. who has time for that? AmIright? It comes down to what you are looking for in an adventure. Which brings us to:

Isn't the whole point to save time?

No. It's to have fun. But you meant that as a rhetorical question I think.

If I had all the time I needed, I'd create my own damn adventure. The whole value of using a published adventure ("module") is that it makes my life more convenient. If I have to take more time customizing the module than it would take to just come up with my own ideas (of similar quality), isn't it a waste of money?

Yes, In your opinion, given your requirement that the "value" is to make your life more convenient. Others disagree, mostly because others have different values. Who knew?. I value the story itself. I have a number of Pathfinder APs I'll likely never run (I hope I do). Certainly was not a waste of money, IMO. They are good stories. I bought a pdf of G1 to run my group through during the 5E playtest. Wasn't a waste of money and I spent more time modifying it than If I had just ad-libbed a hill giant "fortress", but I had fun doing it, so it was money well spent. (besides, I didn't want to dig through the boxes in the basement for the paper copy I have).

I appreciate the OPs review. I certainly didn't notice some of these things because I tend to ad-lib modules and change on the fly anyway to fit my homebrew world and my players stories. But even so, those criticisms are worthwhile so I don't inadvertently create those sorts of wtf moments at my table.

Is it worth getting? maybe. re-read my previous post.