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

[KarinsDad]

... and with all due respect, Karinsdad, Occam's razor should give you pause. You haven't read the adventure, your DM is in highschool, and you blame the designer rather than the DM for your bland experience.

I never once stated that my experience was bland. I stated that I do not like this type of encounter.

And what does my DM being in high school matter?

What your DM seem to have been doing with gusto is rolling with your plan of teaching the HD some respect. On the other hand, she seems to have trouble adjusting to 6 PCs (the adventure is assuming 4 PCs, hence the cakewalk),

Are you sure? Were there supposed to be 12 combatants in the rear guard encounter?

My daughter said that she added foes to most of the encounters.

conveying the NPCs motivation, or coming with a sound tactical setup fot the rearguard at night.

Yes, she is inexperienced as a DM having only done it a few times before. That's how one learns. She probably took the layout more or less straight out of the book and added light to it.

Course, the designers must not have accounted for a night time raid on the rear guard, or they would have taken that into account. Or are your criticisms only reserved for high school kids and never for the module designers?

Maybe you should refrain your criticism of something you don't experience directly.

And it makes perfect sense the dragon doesn't kill everyone. The goal is quiet plunder, not destruction, and wanton killing would sooner than later be met with serious retaliation... even if I think DL1 kickoff, "dragonarmies have burnt our pub !" is far superior to this "Tiamat tax collectors" nonsense

Quiet plunder? Killing villagers is quiet plunder? Setting buildings on fire is quiet plunder? Killing the guards in the keep (but not the PCs) is quiet plunder?

I guess it makes perfect sense for you. Someone who criticizes a brand new young DM.

Maybe you should refrain your criticism of something you don't experience directly.


As for direct experience of this product, let's see what people who have read it directly say.

Review Page

8.6 out of 10 by Neuroglyph
D by bryce0lynch
C by TRDG
An evidently poor review at rgptreehouse by Baz King, but when I went in and saw the amount of spoilers, I stopped reading it.
Jhaelen agrees with Baz King.
Windjammer calls it a "turd of a module"

Neuroglyph has the only real good thing to say about the module in that thread.


Finally, a statement by Steve Winter about 1st Level characters quoted by Neuroglyph, “if a few of them die, it’s no big deal.”

Hmmm.


My daughter has made numerous comments on maps that have numbers, but the numbers do not appear in the text. Pages of text without quick help guides like tables or charts. Lack of encounter maps. Editing errors, etc. This seems to be the general consensus. A rather mediocre product with quite a few mistakes and editing issues.

If you have read it cover to cover, please point out where these other reviewers are wrong. I can only go by what other people are telling me and my limited experience with the railroading that appears to be happening. That railroading might be due to my daughter's lack of DMing experience, but that's not the general gist that I get from other people.

 

[KarinsDad]

Holy crap. It didn't take two hours to create the whole group in 5e...and that was with one shared Player's Handbook.

I would have hid the books and ran Savage Worlds if it took one player that long.

We had one shared PHB as well.

But, there are how many races and classes in the book? How many subclasses?

We started out 8:20 AM and by 6:00 PM (with about an hour and a half break including driving time), we got 4 PCs finished. But, one player was from 8:20 until about 9:30 when the second player showed up. The third player showed up at 11:00. I then drove over to the fourth player's house around 2:00 (half hour drive).

But since this was mostly sequential, I often had to repeat the same information to additional players when they arrived. There were lots of discussions on multiclassing (2 PCs will eventually multiclass), how weapons worked, armor, spells, etc. These players evidently wanted to make informed decisions. Some players wanted to read stuff out of the book directly, others asked my opinion, etc. It just depended. Even something as simple as generating ability scores took a while.

But since I did not have everyone at the table at the exact same time, it took longer.

And if your players know exactly what they want, then sure. Much faster. Four of our players had played a handful of sessions in 4E and before that, had either never played D&D or played 2E. One player played 3E and 4E, and the last player (myself) played all of the versions.

My wife told me to create her a Halfling Bard after about 10 minutes of discussion on races and classes, and I just went off and did it. We then added another maybe 15 minutes with her deciding what background she wanted, what skills she wanted and what spells she wanted. I had already taken care of all of her ability scores, equipment, and had a suggested list of skills and spell for her. She was a lot faster because she did not sweat the details.


One thing that I do not like about the PHB is the alphabetical listing of spells. It takes a while, even for a first level PC, to go off and read each of the cantrips and spells for that class due to all of the page flipping.

 

[Jester David]

That's not many reviews for a WotC book.

Darn... I might have to buy a copy and write a review.

 

[Mercule]

In a published adventure everything is scripted. If you want to escape that, don't play published modules.

This is exactly why I don't typically run published adventures. If everything goes according to plan, some of them are absolutely amazing. If you end up with one well-played PC who just happens to have a good reason not to pursue goal X, even if that reason is a built-in goal Y in the other direction, you're now off-script for the duration (probably). I know too many players (and may even be one) who immediately think "it's a trap!", if the neon sign above "door number 3" is too obvious. It's not always intentional; it's the same part of their brain that knows the flat black "portal" in Tomb of Horrors isn't a good thing.

If I have the time, I always prefer to run adventures created whole-cloth. That way, I'm familiar with the intent of the author and can ad-lib at will. Adventure paths, especially those published in pieces, often have hidden dependencies that ad-libbing breaks. When I do run published adventures, I talk to the players ahead of time and let them know that they'll have to make characters that are more "compliant" and they may have to elevate their suspension of disbelief. That's the price of the easy path.

This is also why DMing is an art that has actual skill behind it. Sometimes, you have to make stuff up -- quickly. The best DMs can read their players. The best players know better than to push their DM too far.

Personally, I have no problem with the scenario in the module, in theory. It might be wrong for certain groups (players or PCs). I've done stuff like that before and will again, but I've also had groups that would have lynched me. The module writers did their best. There's plenty of nits to pick with these modules (I've got some big concerns). IMO, this is one of the lesser.

 

[Jester David]

This is exactly why I don't typically run published adventures. If everything goes according to plan, some of them are absolutely amazing. If you end up with one well-played PC who just happens to have a good reason not to pursue goal X, even if that reason is a built-in goal Y in the other direction, you're now off-script for the duration (probably). I know too many players (and may even be one) who immediately think "it's a trap!", if the neon sign above "door number 3" is too obvious. It's not always intentional; it's the same part of their brain that knows the flat black "portal" in Tomb of Horrors isn't a good thing.

If I have the time, I always prefer to run adventures created whole-cloth. That way, I'm familiar with the intent of the author and can ad-lib at will. Adventure paths, especially those published in pieces, often have hidden dependencies that ad-libbing breaks. When I do run published adventures, I talk to the players ahead of time and let them know that they'll have to make characters that are more "compliant" and they may have to elevate their suspension of disbelief. That's the price of the easy path.

This is also why DMing is an art that has actual skill behind it. Sometimes, you have to make stuff up -- quickly. The best DMs can read their players. The best players know better than to push their DM too far.

Personally, I have no problem with the scenario in the module, in theory. It might be wrong for certain groups (players or PCs). I've done stuff like that before and will again, but I've also had groups that would have lynched me. The module writers did their best. There's plenty of nits to pick with these modules (I've got some big concerns). IMO, this is one of the lesser.

I've moved from running my own adventures to published modules. Partially because of the solid quality of Paizo's products, but mostly due to less free time. The time required to prep a session is time I could be playing with my son or doing some video games or snuggling with my wife.
And I lack the long commutes of my high school and college years where I had nothing to do but plan the next session.

Railroads are tricky things. Having played with my group for a few years, I need to lay down some tracks. They're not the sort of group that takes to open wandering and are quite happy to head in the obvious direction. Too many options and they freeze and argue and debate and nothing gets done that session.
They take the hook because they know that way leads adventure. They know following the tracks will lead to the most excitement. But they get creative in the how or the exact method of following the rails: they know the tracks are there and they're following along, but they're walking alongside the tracks instead of overtop. They know I'll work with them if they decide to sneak in the back way of the dungeon and do it in reverse or come up with a cunning plan.

 

[Tommy Brownell]

That's not many reviews for a WotC book.

Darn... I might have to buy a copy and write a review.

My own review: http://mostunreadblogever.blogspot.com/2014/08/tommys-take-on-hoard-of-dragon-queen.html

 

[Sacrosanct]

at this point I'm betting that the issues aren't because the DM is in high school or is experienced.

 

[Sacrosanct]

That's not many reviews for a WotC book.

Darn... I might have to buy a copy and write a review.

24 reviews as of now on amazon, averaging 4 stars

I guess the point is, is that pointing to 3 or 4 reviews that support your position doesn't mean much

 

[KarinsDad]

24 reviews as of now on amazon, averaging 4 stars

I guess the point is, is that pointing to 3 or 4 reviews that support your position doesn't mean much

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.

 

[Cyberen]

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... 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.
(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 !)
Personnally, I think I get a good enough grasp of thedragon and HD motivations from the module that I can run them smoothly. And to my taste, I like when unwinnable fights and killing 1st level are clearly on the table. Your mileage does vary, of course.
Editing issues in this product are well documented, and you should tell your DM to go and read about 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). And you mentioned that your DM is basically offering you auto surprise with her not-so-clever setups.