D&D 5E How easy do you find first party adventure and setting books to use?

[Shardstone]

The question is in relation to how easy it is (requiring little to no editing) to how difficult it is (requiring editing or extensive prep to make work). No neutral option, as I'm really only interested in seeing how much people rely on edits to run their adventures.

 

[Lyxen]

It's a good question, but if the answers are like mine, they will probably based on an average of many experiences, with some adventures being really easy and others being really hard, including some in which it's unfortunately easy to make mistakes if you prep to quickly, like messing up something of the plot. It also depends on the source of the adventure, its innate complexity, etc.

 

[Gilladian]

I run my own, fairly unique Homebrew, so converting any module requires some work. Converting gods, fitting history elements in, renaming EVERY NPC, retailoring treasure hauls, writing new hooks, and sometimes even converting the environment all take a fair amount of effort. But I enjoy doing it, so it isn’t drudgery. And it keeps me thinking about WHY a given element is a part of my world…

 

[DEFCON 1]

I don't rely on edits to run the adventures... I could run then as-is for the most part... but I usually choose to edit things for any number of reasons. If the party is larger than the default 4 PCs then I will need to add in more enemies. If I decide to run the adventure in a different setting then obviously a lot of flavor text will need to be changed. I also may expand things or incorporate bits from other products into the adventure just to make it feel fuller when the players play. None of those are required, but I make the choice to do so.

So for example, when I ran Lost Mines of Phandelver over the pandemic I could have just run the adventure as-was if I had wanted to... but I decided to do it for 8 players online (which meant expanding the sizes / levels of encounters), and I wanted to make sure I had enough stuff for everyone to do so I incorporated Essentials Kit material as well as material from the 4E Neverwinter Campaign Setting book.

That being all said... I also don't have any issues with making edits as need be. I feel the desire to just run RAW (for simplicities sake?) to be tremendously overrated. I get no bonus points from anyone for not editing, so trying to avoid it seems unnecessary.

 

[Stormonu]

I mostly run as-is. However, more often than not, after running an adventure or campaign for some time the party does something that sends me on a tangent or requires me to start homebrewing some content to keep up with the party has done or intends to do. Usually starts happening around 3rd - 5th level and is mostly what would be considered side quests.

 

[overgeeked]

The question is in relation to how easy it is (requiring little to no editing) to how difficult it is (requiring editing or extensive prep to make work). No neutral option, as I'm really only interested in seeing how much people rely on edits to run their adventures.

Official WotC modules require heavy edits to be useable, which is why I don’t use them. The WotC setting books are light on lore due to having to squeeze in player-facing mechanics, so I don’t use them. I use TSR setting books for the lore, when I run official settings. I take situations and locations I think would be fun from official modules (mostly TSR) and drop them in where I need them.

 

[aco175]

I had run the 2 box sets with little problems and modifications. I also rant the Princes of the Apocalypse (PotA) book that started with no edits and ended up getting more than I thought at the higher levels. I think it is easy to keep things small in low levels and as the PCs world grows and they interact with things. It becomes harder to let them roam and also keep them on track.

I'm planning on using some of the Tales of the Yawning Portal (TofYP) book to make the next campaign and think that it will be a heavy lift to splice things together.

 

[el-remmen]

I don't find it difficult at all. But I also don't find amount of editing required as difficulty to overcome. I am going to edit anything I get my hands on because no one else's tastes and aesthetic is ever going to match perfectly with what I am going for or what the players like. As such I didn't vote.

For the record I exclusively use 1E and 2E modules and Dungeon adventures (or 5E adaptations of that material).

 

[Charlaquin]

I’d say most WotC published adventures require a lot of tweaking to make work. You can certainly try to run them “out of the box,” but they tend to end up as railroads if you do.

 

[Retreater]

It certainly varies from book to book, but I'd say that between the reading and prep, the tailoring it to the specific group's interests, the pull of making the group stay on task, the adjustments of levels/abilities to make sure situations are an appropriate challenge, etc., makes many of them more work than just creating something oneself. And that's saying something, coming from a guy who has very nearly exclusively run published adventures for the past 20 years.