D&D 5E (2024) Is WOTC done publishing campaigns?

[Charlaquin]

Is Tyranny as bad as some folks say? That's a good price for a big fat module.

There are two different problems with Tyranny. One is that when it was originally released, the combat balance was all out of whack, because it had been written while 5e was still in development, and some of the monster stat blocks changed between the writing and the release, which threw off a bunch of CR calculations. This issue was fixed in the later re-release.

The other problem is that it’s incredibly railroady, particularly in the first half. A group who is ok with just going along for the ride might not notice, but the structure really can’t handle the players going off-script.

The set pieces really aren’t bad at all, especially now that the balance issues have been addressed, so you could re-purpose the material in the book and build a better adventure out of it. But, in theory you buy a pre-written adventure path to save yourself that work. Tyranny is unfortunately really inflexible when run straight out of the book.

 

[DEFCON 1]

The other problem is that it’s incredibly railroady, particularly in the first half. A group who is ok with just going along for the ride might not notice, but the structure really can’t handle the players going off-script.

Yup. Unless (like you said) the DM is fine with creating their own encounters that run alongside the adventure and is good at "re-introducing" plot hooks in those side encounters that get the players to choose to return to the story arcs the adventure has. Even if it's like several levels down the road.

So any particular DM has to decide whether having a full multi-level "campaign-wide" adventure as an over-arching throughline is worth it to them to have... and how do they feel about creating side material that runs in parallel to that throughline if the players deviate from the path (while continually presenting on-ramps to the story that the players can choose to take if they want.)

Some like it, some don't. Which is why I suspect it has such a diverse opinion amongst everyone.

 

[Zardnaar]

We had two grouos faceplate the start of HotDQ. Changed to rules and not being clear how many encounters to use.

A third grouo got past the start but quit out of the boring rail loaded nature. Looks ok later on has sone decent chapters.

Personally I think its crap, But Out the Abuss might be worse. Tyranny at least can be recycled easier and ive used some chapters refluffed elsewhere.

Can't speak to the redo.

 

[ECMO3]

The other problem is that it’s incredibly railroady, particularly in the first half.

This is probably true, although I will say that most groups I play with generally seem to enjoy "railroads" more than "sandboxes". Many of the players say they don't like railroads, but then seem to lose interest in adventures when there is not an obvious thing to do next or get angry when they miss out on one thing because they did another.

In general though I loved this adventure, both as a player and as a DM. One of the groups I play with played this as our first 5E adventure and the DM in that game has said his most memorable PCs and scenes come from that adventure. That group has played a bunch since then including POTA, OOTA, TOA, DIA, Saltmarsh and we would still rate this as the best WOTC campaign we have played.

 

[Zardnaar]

This is probably true, although I will say that most groups I play with generally seem to enjoy "railroads" more than "sandboxes". Many of the players say they don't like railroads, but then seem to lose interest in adventures when there is not an obvious thing to do next or get angry when they miss out on one thing because they did another.

In general though I loved this adventure, both as a player and as a DM. One of the groups I play with played this as our first 5E adventure and the DM in that game has said his most memorable PCs and scenes come from that adventure. That group has played a bunch since then including POTA, OOTA, TOA, DIA, Saltmarsh and we would still rate this as the best WOTC campaign we have played.

Lightly railroaded in a sandbox works. HotDQ was very railroaded.

Once around the Realm type adventures don't tend to be very good.

 

[Charlaquin]

This is probably true, although I will say that most groups I play with generally seem to enjoy "railroads" more than "sandboxes". Many of the players say they don't like railroads, but then seem to lose interest in adventures when there is not an obvious thing to do next or get angry when they miss out on one thing because they did another.

Tastes vary of course, but in my experience, disengaged players prefer railroads, because it requires minimal effort from them. Engaged players get bored of railroads because the effort they put into it doesn’t get rewarded enough, which can often lead to them becoming disengaged, and resigning themselves to just riding the plot train wherever it’s going to take them. The result is that a railroad will be “good enough” for an average group, but it is unlikely to be as engaging or memorable as a campaign that asks them to make decisions about what to do.

That also doesn’t have to mean a sandbox. True sandboxes are a bit of an acquired taste, and they’re also easy to do badly. But a little structured nonlinearity can go a long way towards making a campaign engaging and rewarding.

In general though I loved this adventure, both as a player and as a DM. One of the groups I play with played this as our first 5E adventure and the DM in that game has said his most memorable PCs and scenes come from that adventure. That group has played a bunch since then including POTA, OOTA, TOA, DIA, Saltmarsh and we would still rate this as the best WOTC campaign we have played.

That’s cool, I’m glad you guys enjoyed it! Personally, I like the premise, but the work I would have to do to, from my perspective, “fix” it, probably wouldn’t be worth the effort.

 

[TheSword]

Tastes vary of course, but in my experience, disengaged players prefer railroads, because it requires minimal effort from them. Engaged players get bored of railroads because the effort they put into it doesn’t get rewarded enough, which can often lead to them becoming disengaged, and resigning themselves to just riding the plot train wherever it’s going to take them. The result is that a railroad will be “good enough” for an average group, but it is unlikely to be as engaging or memorable as a campaign that asks them to make decisions about what to do.

That also doesn’t have to mean a sandbox. True sandboxes are a bit of an acquired taste, and they’re also easy to do badly. But a little structured nonlinearity can go a long way towards making a campaign engaging and rewarding.

That’s cool, I’m glad you guys enjoyed it! Personally, I like the premise, but the work I would have to do to, from my perspective, “fix” it, probably wouldn’t be worth the effort.

Different players find different things enjoyable. Splitting them between enhanced and disengaged feels pretty dismissive to be honest.

 

[Charlaquin]

Different players find different things enjoyable.

Absolutely, which is why I started that post with “tastes vary, of course.”

Splitting them between enhanced and disengaged feels pretty dismissive to be honest.

That’s not my intent. I was speaking of my personal experience. The people I have played with typically gravitate towards railroads if they are disengaged, and enjoy more nonlinear structures when they are engaged. I have not played with every player in the world, or even anywhere near a significant fraction of such. Perhaps your experience has been different, and if so, that would probably be a valuable counter-example to my experience for you to share.