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


log in or register to remove this ad




We managed Ravenloft in a single session of about 9 hours play... I say 'managed', Strahd got them.
:eek:

I've been dm'ing Out of the Abyss for a year now.

We've been playing for perhaps 30 Sundays, 8 hours a pop. And now are the characters 13th level and sheet is about to go down.
 

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.

Ah. Along with old school style, I was assuming an experienced DM who would calibrate the monster levels on the fly.

Also, mix up all the encounter challenges, so some are cakewalks and some are impossible (and so require noncombat solutions).

Also, it is unnecessary to go thru the entire arc linearly. The DM can do the first part. Then mix in other level appropriate adventures. Then get back to recontinue the earlier arc. Sorta like big side-quests. Or have two quests splicing together. That might even be interesting.

Also, the magnitude Advancement table that I created above, really only starts slowing down significantly after level 10. Until then, standard stuff is moreorless within reach. Especially, if the DM normally varies the challenges.
 

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


Boy, I sure am glad I have you around to tell me what I find problematic or not. And to be belittling about it as well. Also, what do you know is their financial model? Do you work for Hasbro and never told anyone?


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


Code:
[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 still be about level 12, when standard players reach level 20.

I thought I was clear in my last post. Apparently not. In what way does any of this help a person play the official campaigns? If you don't follow the level expectations in those campaigns, it will be bad for the PCs. Repeating your "solution" doesn't make it any more of a solution when it doesn't actually address the problem I posted in the OP.
 

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 :)

Not quoting you specifically to critique, only that it spurred my thoughts...

In the 1E AD&D days, and Queen of Spiders, for example, yes, you may have only raised 2 to 3 levels over the course of a year of play. But, IMHO, the magic item count (vis a vis the "christmas tree") was an indirect leveling system. In other words, in 1E a level 12 fighter with 0 magic items is much weaker than a level 9 fighter loaded down with magic.

I think its easy to forget that. In my memory, we didn't play to level, we played for loot.
 


The problem is that all of those are Adventurer's League.

And AL just doesn't do it for me. It isn't just a single point either - for me AL falls short in just about every possible way, compared to previous-edition (and by that I mean 2E and 3E) modules.

I want an attractive module, in full color, with professional maps. And I want first-party products. Official WotC content.

I understand that WotC has realized that can never earn them any money, so they have stopped.

I just wish they hadn't.
 

Ah. Along with old school style, I was assuming an experienced DM who would calibrate the monster levels on the fly..

I've been DMing for 35 years. I would like to consider myself experienced. This is not a simple "re-calibrate on the fly". I'd have to rewrite everything in order to make something like HotDQ/RoT playable for a narrowed level range, and that's a LOT of WORK. For one, it doesn't make any sense to be reaching the culmination of that campaign when you're still only level 7ish or so, which is the pace I'm happiest with when factoring in the amount of time actually playing vs. how often you level up. Fighting dragon lords, dragons, and possibly Tiamat herself at level 7? That's a lot more than just modifying on the fly.

No, what I'd have to do is what I'm doing with SKT. I.e., I've inserted B5 Horror on the Hill to replace the dripping caves because I feel the level advancement in chapter 1 is WAY too fast. I'd have to do that with every chapter to get the slowed level of advancement I'm talking about here. At that point, you're really not playing the published official campaign anymore, but this giant rewrite.
 

Remove ads

Top