D&D 5E One of the biggest problems with WoTC's vision of published adventures

[Ralif Redhammer]

I would say that, except for the collected megamodules like Queen of the Spiders and Against the Giants, they were indeed shorter. And it was much easier to mix and match. Heck, in my recent throwback 1e campaign, we hit both the Village of Hommlet and Ravenloft, and each of those took about two adventures.

When we finish our current Out of the Abyss campaign, yes, that will probably be it for those PCs. But I’m not a big fan of high level play, so regardless, at that level I probably would be looking at an end-game for the campaign, even were we not playing the module.

On the converse, with Adventurers League play, we have used the same PCs across different seasons, albeit while also creating new ones.

I never really played the old adventures, but were they really that much shorter than what's out now? Is it the case that older adventures were shorter, so you could mix and match several over the course of a few levels? Or is it the case that they were just as long, but gave relatively little experience for all of that?

 

[JonnyP71]

I would say that, except for the collected megamodules like Queen of the Spiders

Even the mighty Queen of Spiders campaign though, was designed for PCs who were already very powerful. And they would probably gain about 2-3 levels completing it - in the year or so it would take to play. Great stuff

 

[Yaarel]

Right up front, I want to say that this could very well be a generational problem.

However, here is my problem. Probably the biggest problem. All of those published adventures go to level 10 or 15. When you're done with them, your PCs are pretty much done. Time for retirement.

I played TSR D&D as my main edition from 1981 to 2012. One thing about TSR D&D is that the level ranges 4-10 took a long time. You could go on several adventure modules and still be within that level range.

Just multiply the xp requirement in the Level Advancement table, by x10.

And done. Seriously. Problem solved.

This creates the old school feel where extremely high levels are possible, but rare − and unlikely, at least not any time soon.

I am under the impression, the 5e Advancement table is carefully calibrated so players will see all 20 levels in roughly a years worth of regular play.

But if you want to play characters across many years (as in old school), just inflate the xp requirements.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Just multiply the xp requirement in the Level Advancement table, by x10.

And done. Seriously. Problem solved.

No, not solved. The campaigns are designed based on the assumption PCs are leveling as expected. If you super slow down the level rate in any of the existing campaigns, you'd have TPKs left and right before you ever got very far. Think about it, how well do you think a party of 5th level PCs would do in Tiamat's temple, assuming that they could even make it that far?

So yeah, I could slow down the level advancement, but then that would render all of the existing adventures unplayable. Which sort of defeats the point.

 

[lkj]

I also loved those shorter modules from bygone days. Have a stack of them in my garage. However, I have a feeling they consider the DM's Guild the solution for this particular problem. They release all their AL adventures there, which I understand are shorter more contained bits. And there are 3rd parties producing them as well. From time to time they highlight particular ones as part of the UA column.

In other words, I suspect they feel they'll have trouble making their money back by publishing print adventures that are short. They recognize the need. And they are trying to fill it with DMsG.

AD

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Yeah, I get the reasoning based on the things you listed, but my biggest beef is that the adventures are all one big campaign. And you can't really do the things like those I mentioned in my OP. I'm not really asking for high level campaigns, or something odd. I'm asking for shorter unrelated adventures, so you can do the things with your PCs that we did in TSR D&D.

That isnt a problem of WOTC's adventures, that's the point of them - to give a self-contained campaign. Wanting a short adventure doesnt mean the campaign offering is a flawed model or execution. And WOTC has said they arent interested in publishing short adventures - in their eyes, that's what the DM's Guild is for. Or convert some AD&D/Pathfinder/whatever ones. Its super easy to do on the fly I've found.

 

[Miladoon]

Yeah, I was wondering if DMsG could handle that itch.


EDIT: Ok, you want "official" adventures. DMsG does release official supplements.

 

[Sacrosanct]

That isnt a problem of WOTC's adventures, that's the point of them - to give a self-contained campaign. Wanting a short adventure doesnt mean the campaign offering is a flawed model or execution. And WOTC has said they arent interested in publishing short adventures - in their eyes, that's what the DM's Guild is for. Or convert some AD&D/Pathfinder/whatever ones. Its super easy to do on the fly I've found.

Look at the thread title. I said the "vision' is a problem. And it is for me. And others apparently. Not being able to find shorter adventures at my FLGS, or being able to play official adventures in the way we played for the first 30 years of D&D's lifespan, is something I consider a problem.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Look at the thread title. I said the "vision' is a problem. And it is for me. And others apparently. Not being able to find shorter adventures at my FLGS, or being able to play official adventures in the way we played for the first 30 years of D&D's lifespan, is something I consider a problem.

That's like saying "the problem with Jeep is that they want to make jeeps, but I want a truck". They don't OWE you official short adventures, since they dont meet their financial model, and there are tons out there.

Heres a link to the DM guild - over 400 adventure products, surpassing TSR's output significantly

http://www.dmsguild.com/browse.php?filters=45469_0_45393_0_0_0_0_0

 

[Yaarel]

Consider using magnitudes for the Advancement requirements. The progression will be slower. The possible epic levels are easy to calculate if endless.

[FONT=Courier New]
[B]Level     XP[/B]

 1          -
 2       (320)
 3     (1,000)
 4     (3,200)

 5     10,000
 6     16,000
 7     25,000
 8     40,000
 9     63,000

10    100,000
11    160,000
12    250,000
13    400,000
14    630,000

15  1,000,000
16  1,600,000
17  2,500,000
18  4,000,000
19  6,300,000

20 10,000,000
          ...

[/FONT]

This way, you will be roughly comparable to standard leveling up to about level 10. But afterward, you will still be about level 12, when standard players reach level 20.