D&D 4E Is it me or are 4E modules just not...exciting?

[Kzach]

I don't think it's just 4e. I've never found modules interesting, no matter what system or producer made them. I find Pathfinder modules just as dull as 1e modules and 4e modules. I was never an avid reader of Dungeon, despite collecting them for about ten years.

Part of that is that I think I can do better, but it's also to do with not being willing to engage in someone else's creation. I always find that there is something missing and I believe that comes from the limitations of text. No matter how good the writer, putting the concepts in ones head onto a page lose a lot in translation. What makes it a great adventure to one person will be lack-luster to another because of those gaps.

But then again, part of the duty of the DM is to fill those gaps. Taking a module verbatim and running it from the page without any creative interpretation or the inclusion of one's own twists and creative license, is absolutely a recipe for dullness. It's up to the DM to bring the module to life; the module should never be more to a gaming session than inspiration and raw material.

I hope that when ZEITGEIST comes out, it will be something that appeals to you.

War of the Burning Sky was, at least to me (and at least for the first four instalments since I never got to run past that), the exception to my statements above. Reading through modules for me is usually a massive chore that I resent and loathe. I'm not sure exactly how you did it, but with WotBS, it caught my imagination right from the start so that reading through it, and most importantly playing through it and running it as a GM, wasn't ever a chore. The game and the world 'came alive' for me as soon as I started reading and it did so for the players I ran it for as well.

If you can manage to pull off the same effect with ZEITGEIST, it might even interest me. And I'm not a fan of the genre

 

[Kzach]

EDIT: Crap, meant to put this into my post above but made a new post by accident.

 

[aurance]

I've only run the Scales of War path, and my players seem to enjoy it a great deal. But I do a lot of prep work and changes before hand to make sure each PC fits into the plot, and the module fits into my game world.

 

[Aegeri]

If there was something I felt 4E never got right it was adventures. At the same time, there are a few that I think are great like the OP asks for: Reavers of Harkenfold and Cairn of the Winter King are both good in my opinion. Then there are some (precious and rare sadly) great Dungeon Adventures: Beneath the Sands, Force of Nature and Lord of the White Fields. Unfortunately, they are very short and I think the OP means the longer adventures that Paizo produced (as an example). I have to admit that Wizards longer efforts haven't been great: Most of the H-E series for example (the later P and E modules suffer IMMENSELY from the poor original Monster Math).

Tomb of Horrors was okay and I would recommend checking that out. Revenge of the Giants I didn't feel was overly great.

 

[catsclaw227]

I'm actually converting the Pathfinder mini-campaign by the ol' Necromancer guys called Slumbering Tsar.

Very sandboxy, very flavorful. I am finding the conversion easy, though we are only 2 sessions of playing in and I've only done 4 sessions or so of converting. Converting a sandbox can be tricky.

And I have sorta revamped the magic item system, using some of the common/uncommon/rare paradigms melded with a pseudo-legendary item mentality. We are viewing items as malleable, with the magic contained within being almost alive. If a critical event occurs, like the Invoker scores a major critical or timely death blow with his divine power on a semi-boss or key encounter, then maybe his implement will get better. Go up a plus or get some special item property. Likewise for martial guys. If that blade eviscerates an acid creature, maybe the blade becomes an acid blade or a bane weapon of sorts, or goes up a plus.

This way, players keep their weapons, there's no need for magic item shops, and treasure they gain can be more like old time sword and sorcery stuff like wondrous items or mystic jewels and gems, or pots of gold, or cool components.

I don't have rules yet, but the players trust me to keep them relatively balanced in relation to where they "should be" by 4e standards.

I may blog about it, along with my conversions and such as well.

 

[S'mon]

Most of the 4e adventures Goodman Games put out are decent; WoTC's longer 4e ones suffer hugely from inappropriate, mindless use of the Delve format. The Delve format only works for 1-session Delves. That said, they had 3e stinkers too - Forge of Fury is good, but Bastion of Broken Souls stinks, as do others.

 

[Argyle King]

It's not just you.

Though, to be honest, I kind of liked the earlier one which took place inside of the pyramid. I can't remember the name of it. I just remember there was possibility of getting stuck inside the pyramid forever, and there being a guy who was split into several different personalities or something like that.

 

[Dice4Hire]

I have not seen many good modules in a long time form WOTC or anyone, really.

I owuld like to see mroe epic adventures, or large-scale ones and I have high hopes for the Gardmore Abbey one coming out this fall.
]

 

[KidSnide]

Slavish devotion to the 4e encounter guidelines for level appropriate encounters and skill challenges may also be part of the problem with WotC's 4e modules.

In his article about converting "The Lich-Queen’s Beloved", Rodney Thompson discusses how breaking from the 4e DMG advice generated a more exciting game. Specifically, he avoided re-balancing the encounters to the 4e encounter guidelines or providing easy (i.e. skill check/challenge) ways around obstacles. That forced his players to be creative and cautions instead of assuming that each obstacle would be a level appropriate challenge.

I think the DMG guidelines are very helpful, because GMs need to know how to create a fun and level-appropriate challenge. However, I have no reason to believe that "mostly level-appropriate" is the best way to design a module. Maybe 35% easy, 50% level-appropriate and 15% extremely dangerous (but with ways to mitigate or bypass) is better? A mixture of imbalanced challenges lets the players feel like powerful heroes exploring a legitimately dangerous environment instead of like magical office workers churning through a sequence of well managed projects.

-KS

 

[catsclaw227]

Slavish devotion to the 4e encounter guidelines for level appropriate encounters and skill challenges may also be part of the problem with WotC's 4e modules.

In his article about converting "The Lich-Queen’s Beloved", Rodney Thompson discusses how breaking from the 4e DMG advice generated a more exciting game. Specifically, he avoided re-balancing the encounters to the 4e encounter guidelines or providing easy (i.e. skill check/challenge) ways around obstacles. That forced his players to be creative and cautions instead of assuming that each obstacle would be a level appropriate challenge.

This is the attitude I am taking with Slumbering Tsar. Since it is a sandbox, many of the possible encounters aren't level appropriate. I had to repeat this to my players over and over, though, as 2 yrs of 4e (and most 3.x prepublished adventures) had conditioned the players that most everything they encounter could be killed by the party.

Not so, jacko.

They are starting to like this idea...