D&D 5E How We Beat the HD, HotDQ, Spoilers

As table dynamics go, having a young DM and a veteran player, very much set up in his view of the social contract at the table, who is ready to write dozens of posts to fight a war which is not yet his (trashing the design of something you haven't read sounds as player entitlement to me - you should enjoy your game, play it till kingdom comes, and then read the actual product and give your opinion on it), who happens to be her father and the host of the game, is quite interesting...

It is my fight. I do not like the dragon encounter and I do not like the half dragon encounter.

As for player entitlement, I am the person who bought the module. Even if I have not read it, I have as might right to discuss it and have an opinion on it as every other person here.

This issue shows when the DM is complaining about the module layout in front of her players, for example, bickering rather than sucking it up and ensuring everybody is having a good time.

Nope. Not happening. She has never complained in front of the group. She has mentioned things to me because I am her father. Just normal conversations. And it's all editing type stuff with the exception of one section that she just thinks will be very difficult to run. I have no idea what that is, but she has mentioned that she wants to change it.

(But I have to add that I envy you and I am now looking forward to the day one of my kid would do the same for me !)

I'm enjoying it.

Concerning encounter difficulty, the encounters in Greenest are supposed tobe easy, but not insignificant. Some of the reviews you mention do indeed note they quickly add up. I think your DM (not you !) should take into account your superior tactical acumen, and also the fact that surprise give a bigger advantage to a 6 PCs group than to a 4 PCs group, because of focused fire (I wouldn't blame the module designers for this issue).

So, let me get this straight? The module designers design a game for 4 PCs and do not even take into account 5 PCs or 6 PCs and you consider this to be a DM issue?


As for focused fire, you are just flat out mistaken about that. Your idea here would be a good argument in higher level circumstances. But, not for low level 5E monsters. 80% of attacks kill these guys in a single hit. So mathematically, focus fire is actually often detrimental here.

6 PCs have surprise against 8 foes is little different than 3 PCs have surprise against 4 foes.

Now as encounters start getting higher level and foes are not the equivalent of one hit minions, then focus fire comes more into play.

But not for the vast majority of monsters in this town. Focus fire is sometimes a mistake against low hit point monsters like this. The fighter doing 10 average points of damage should rarely attack an NPC with 2 hit points remaining, rather he should attack a fresh NPC with 6 hit points. That way, when the wizard uses his cantrip against the 2 hit point foe, both NPCs will often be taken out. By using focus fire, the fighter will take out the 2 hit point foe and the wizard's cantrip may or may not take out the 6 hit point foe.


I would even opine that a lot of 4E players used to foes that take 3 to 4 hits to take out might be using tactically inferior focus fire in 5E and taking even longer in some cases to take out foes.

The low damage PC (typically using cantrips) should often focus fire. The high damage PCs, not so much unless the foes are tough.

And you mentioned that your DM is basically offering you auto surprise with her not-so-clever setups.

So are you saying that the setups are not part of the module? Are the designers not putting in any encounter maps with creature tactics and potential locations at all?

Are you saying that the first chapter was not supposed to be a night time set of encounters? If not, then every group of players should have the option to be able to ambush a lot of foes (assuming that the group is designed to be a bit stealthy).


The only setup that I mentioned where I thought it was subpar was the rearguard one. I suspect that many DMs here (possibly yourself in the past) have set up NPC camps where the camp is lit up at night. I don't consider this a major mistake, but I did suggest to her that with how potent surprise is in 5E, she might want to think about it.

The rest of the encounters were just surprise material because of PC abilities and the fact that it was nighttime. I firmly believe that our group of PCs would have kicked butt on the same encounters run by most DMs.


Having DMed and played for over 35 years, I can truthfully say without bias that she is a decent DM (actually better than me when it comes to roleplaying). She had the blue dragon conversing with the fighter in Draconic. She roleplayed many of the NPCs well. She created a unique magical silver dagger with a backstory. She has NPCs shouting out commands in combat. People here that comment on her are fairly clueless about it. She is inexperienced, but I've seen a lot of experienced DMs make more mistakes in my time. And the bottom line is that 6 players who have averaged about 20 years of gaming each are having fun (3 less than 10 years, 3 more than 30 years). That is the proof in the pudding to me.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

So are you saying that the setups are not part of the module? Are the designers not putting in any encounter maps with creature tactics and potential locations at all?
I don't know what [MENTION=69074]Cyberen[/MENTION] is saying, but I can tell you that encounter maps are not included. Tactics (strategy, really) are included in the description of a given mission, but stat blocks do not have round-by-round tactics.

For example, the Mill encounter doesn't have a map of the mill. Heck, the mill isn't even labeled on the map of the town. The map of Greenest (the only map in Episode One) has numbers on it, but no key. Steve Winter talked about the key being cut fairly recently. I think it's on enworld's news page.

Each mission describes the situation and typically tells the DM what skill checks need to be made to learn what. DCs are provided and they're pretty reasonable. No map is provided, but the monsters are bolded in the few paragraphs the book takes to describe the encounter. While general strategy is laid out, specifics are usually not given. For the most part, monster tactics are left up to the DM. There are some exceptions. The module usually discusses what happens when things go wrong or when the PCs make certain choices.

This module is laid out completely differently from every 4e module ever.
 

I would say the adventure has more of an AD&D feel than a Pathfinder AP vibe. Descriptions are a bit terse, and encounter setup is minimal.
Also, please take into account the first chapter (Greenest) is meant to be training grounds for the DM and the players. Nothing you do here has a real bearing on the following chapters, but at least this heavy handing provides a firewall. It would be disasterous if some misinterpreted rule or poorly run encounter at this early stage could derail the entire campaign.
[MENTION=2011]KarinsDad[/MENTION], it seems that your daughter is still leagues beyond you concerning tactical efficiency, and as the module doesn't provide scripted combats as 4e did, it could be an issue at your table.
 

Each encounter appears to be linearly following the previous encounter with virtually no ability to really go off the beaten path. I don't know if this is really true, or whether that is just my perception based on our game.

It just feels like a subpar adventure so far. To me. Obviously, YMMV.

It's not. I'm running the Encounters version. It is largely up to the GM to set the sequence...

In Part 1, it's a series of missions and events...

There are 3 "event" encounters after you have gotten into the keep. (the sally port, the dragon, the half-dragon). Two of the three are allowed to happen at any point the party is at the keep. The third ends the chapter.

There are 3 encounters that are missions - the mill, the chapel, the tunnel.
There's a 4th mission that isn't itself an encounter; it's an add-on.
The 4 missions can be run in any order, prior to the half dragon.

Plus, there's a procedure for random encounters in town, should the players opt to or have to travel through town. My players chose longer routes, and intermediate stops... and so had lots of random encounters.

2 of those missions can be done as events should the players be near the right features. (Chapel, mill.)

If the players aren't motivated to skulk around town, then, yes, it can be run linearly. But there's no requirement for it to be so.

In section 2, it's a single, longer, brutal mission. I've only skimmed section 3, because I've just finished section 1.
 

There are 3 encounters that are missions - the mill, the chapel, the tunnel.
There's a 4th mission that isn't itself an encounter; it's an add-on.
The 4 missions can be run in any order, prior to the half dragon.

Ok. It just seems to me that the PCs cannot enter the town, go take on the mill, go take on the tunnel, and then go to the keep.

It seems more like: you have to enter the keep before you can enter the tunnel. Yes, I guess that a DM could allow PCs to find the exterior tunnel entrance, but wouldn't the dozens and dozens and dozens of NPCs then also be able to find it?

It just didn't feel like the flexibility of Phandalin.
 

I was pointing to the reviews by fellow gamers here on EnWorld or suggested here. I wasn't trying to support any position. I was just pointing out that no, I did not directly read it myself, so I had to base any knowledge on reviews.


And did you actually read those reviews on Amazon?

7 of the 13 5 star reviews are one or two sentences. That's not a review. In fact, the vast majority of reviews there are 10 sentences or less.


And we get gems like:

1) "Cons (I would not actually say there are any *real* cons to this product, but I would like to address some issues other users have mentioned):"

This guy didn't actually read it if he didn't find the omissions, errors and typos. He's read what other people wrote on Amazon and then commented on those comments.


2) "I just got my copy of this and while I have not had a lot of time to dive in and digest the book..."

This is not a review. A review means that you've actually read it.


3) "Nice."

That's the entire review. It says nothing.


I'll take serious reviews over these quick blurbs 10 minutes after the guy picked up the book any day of the week. Granted, there are about a half dozen reviews there that are slightly more detailed, but nowhere near a real review like Neuroglyph's. Three quarters of them are not reviews. They are first impressions.

No doubt. When many of these people picked up these books, they liked what they saw. Did they read them cover to cover like some of the reviewers here? Doubtful.


Neuroglyph gave it a good rating and he had a fairly detailed review without drilling too much into spoilers.

There is no doubt that some people here on EnWorld like the module. Just like there is no doubt that some people are not impressed.

At the moment, the only things that did not impress me are the Dragon, the Duel, and the railroading. Other than that, it seems ok. Since I've been told here that there are no more impossible fights, I suspect that I'll enjoy it as a player immensely.

It is my fight. I do not like the dragon encounter and I do not like the half dragon encounter.

As for player entitlement, I am the person who bought the module. Even if I have not read it, I have as might right to discuss it and have an opinion on it as every other person here.

.


And this folks, is some serious irony (bolded by me). Those people's opinions don't count because even though they bought it, they must not have read it, but your opinion should count, because even though you haven't read it, you bought it?

Okaaaaay.
 

Ok. It just seems to me that the PCs cannot enter the town, go take on the mill, go take on the tunnel, and then go to the keep.

It seems more like: you have to enter the keep before you can enter the tunnel. Yes, I guess that a DM could allow PCs to find the exterior tunnel entrance, but wouldn't the dozens and dozens and dozens of NPCs then also be able to find it?

It just didn't feel like the flexibility of Phandalin.

As a DM, I'd be okay with any of that happening. The encounter with Linan Swift would give the PC's the knowledge to "seek the keep," but I have all of the other options ready to go, whether they obtain the quest info from the keep, or stumble upon it themselves. If they get into town and decide to roam, they could easily come across the Mill as the outer group of raiders is preparing to set the fires, rather than getting there after the fires are burning.

As for the module itself? There are a lot of empty spaces in between the lines, but I think that's just because a lot of DM's (myself included) allowed 4e to make us a bit lazy about things. I have spent about 2 weeks preparing to start HotDQ. During that time I've been able to find my stride again, and flesh out all of the extras, like I used to have to do back in the 80's & 90's.

As I've done that I think the First Episode is really coming together into something that is going to be impactful, and allows for the PC's to feel like they are guiding the story. When push comes to shove, HotDQ is not going to hold the hands of any DM's, new or old. The way 5e seems to be designed, I don't think any future modules are going to do this either. Battlemats are gone, and TotM is set to take over again. If DM's aren't going to be willing to put their own flash and flair into the storylines, then there are going to be a lot more complaints about the modules/adventures.

When I was 10 years old (nearly 28 years ago), and started to learn how to DM the best piece of advice I was given was to always, "make the story your own." Pre-published modules aren't there to take your place, but to give you an outline. It's up to the DM to adjust from there for their PCs and their group's playing styles. HotDQ is no different. If the DM is not willing to expend the time to make it their own, then the adventure, as written, is going to fall flat.

ETA - This is not a criticism of the OP's DM. It sounds like she was willing to allow his character to do something extra, and did a fine job of it. This is more about the criticisms of the adventure book seeming to be missing a lot of things.
 

And this folks, is some serious irony (bolded by me). Those people's opinions don't count because even though they bought it, they must not have read it, but your opinion should count, because even though you haven't read it, you bought it?

Okaaaaay.

What is your fricking problem dude? Wife not giving you any, anymore?

You have been on my butt ever since I started this thread. First you accused me of cheating (which anyone with a real brain would realize was a stupid notion because fog cloud is not really a defensive spell against creatures with breath weapons or pack tactics, the best strategy in that fight is to just go off and do the duel once one knows the designer intent of that encounter, it involves less risk) and not playing my LG PC correctly (I cannot believe someone would go down that rabbit hole), then you moved on to how your style of using impossible foes is better than my preference of not liking it, and for the last few pages, you've just been sniping and arguing, just to snipe and argue.

You have devoted pages to how your preferences are better than my preferences and how my opinion sucks.

Go away if you do not want to contribute to the conversation in a civilized manner.
 

When I was 10 years old (nearly 28 years ago), and started to learn how to DM the best piece of advice I was given was to always, "make the story your own." Pre-published modules aren't there to take your place, but to give you an outline. It's up to the DM to adjust from there for their PCs and their group's playing styles. HotDQ is no different. If the DM is not willing to expend the time to make it their own, then the adventure, as written, is going to fall flat.

Agreed.

That is the advice that I gave my daughter. This is your adventure. Own it. Do not just rely on what is written in the book, but change it when you don't like it. Add to it. Embellish on it.

ETA - This is not a criticism of the OP's DM. It sounds like she was willing to allow his character to do something extra, and did a fine job of it. This is more about the criticisms of the adventure book seeming to be missing a lot of things.

No offense taken. And yes, she did fine.

The adventure book, based on what people have written, yourself included, does appear to be missing some vital information that the DM is required to flesh in himself. Probably ok for experienced DMs, a bit lacking for brand new DMs that might not be used to filling in the gaps, especially on the fly. If the intent of 5E is to get new players and DMs playing D&D, a weakly fleshed out flagship adventure is probably not the way to go. The purpose of buying an adventure book is so that the designers give the DM a fairly complete adventure with options and so that the DM does not have to create an adventure from scratch.

I will have to read it after we finish playing it, just to find out the adventure path when the PCs say "Hmmm, Greenest is burning with a dragon flying over it. Time to head in another direction". I'm really curious as to how the heck the DM is supposed to get this back on track when the players decide to head back to Berdusk or Scornubel or wherever. The fact that the entire adventure starts off like this does not really bode well for the designers taking into account that the first casualty of a scripted adventure is the adventure itself.
 

Ok. It just seems to me that the PCs cannot enter the town, go take on the mill, go take on the tunnel, and then go to the keep.

It seems more like: you have to enter the keep before you can enter the tunnel. Yes, I guess that a DM could allow PCs to find the exterior tunnel entrance, but wouldn't the dozens and dozens and dozens of NPCs then also be able to find it?

It just didn't feel like the flexibility of Phandalin.
In the sample of HotDQ that Mearls runs here, the PCs do just that. They rescue some villagers, ask about other ways to the keep, and the villagers lead them to the tunnel. The tunnel hasn't been used in years, the entrance is overgrown, and it's barred by an iron gate that's locked on the inside. So it's not a great choice for villagers that don't have adventurers with them. As for the cult and their kobolds, they're not interested in taking the keep; they are there for loot. They have the dragon keeping the militia busy on top the keep, and a small force tying up the sally port so no one can come out in force. They aren't searching the brush and brambles near the river for a five-foot wide tunnel into the keep.
 

Remove ads

Top