D&D 5E Princes of the Apocalypse or Hoard of the Dragon Queen

Glad to hear it. I found the errors in Hoard to be nowhere near as egregious as people have made them out to be. Most are actually issues with the maps, and I found them to be easy enough to suss out on my own. There is a compiled list of the known errors - and some fixes from the adventure's authors - floating around somewhere. I'll see if I can find the link.

EDIT: Here you go.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

While both are good, here's another vote for Princes of the Apocalypse. I found the adventures I've seen thus far to be a lot neater, and there's room for GM expansion, which is great. Plus, it actually details the starting area, which sort of bugs me with Dragon Queen.

Also, a good way to do small groups such as yours is to simply run the game as is, and give the single player a few companions. Were it me, I'd let your nephew make his own character, and then add a pseudodragon who can heal, a faithful hound, a blink dog, an angry guard lizard, a few silent guards.... whatever piques his interest.

NPCs that can't speak are best, because they let your nephew's character shine, and don't tempt you to get in on the playing (plus you never have that problem where the friendly NPCs and the rival NPCs have to talk to one another and you're now running a one man show!)

One player + 2 NPCs should be a good number... and then make sure you adjust encounters downwards a little bit. I'd suggest cutting numbers in half at first, and then slowly upping their numbers until you hit a good comfort spot.
 

Eh, Eryndel, you're not disagreeing with me - I didn't even think of the pregens. But I do think a one or two character campaign DOES really need a fighter. Anyway, I don't disagree with anything you've said. I almost suggested starting at L3, but I think in the long run the amount of learning that goes on in the first game makes using higher level starting characters too big a challenge.
 

That's very true, Fighter's are strong at all levels, but really shine early on. A fighter and cleric combo will help make up for a small group.

And like others have said as well, sprinkling in a few hirelings will help survivability.
 

FWIW, here's my list of all the known errors and discrepancies in Princes of the Apocalypse. Unfortunately, I have been unable to get anyone from WotC or Sasquatch to address any of them (unlike how Steve Winter from Kobold Press addressed some of the issues raised with Hoard).
 

I'd avoid Hoard of the Dragon Queen until after Princes.

Hoard was written before the rules were solidified, and there's a lot of things out of whack in it. As a player I've found some of the encounters are way overboard (and we are experienced, tactical thinking). It likes to punish players if you're not very careful, and also hands out basically nothing in the way of loot.

Basically it will require you to do a bit of work to fix the bugs, and have some experience with 5e under your belt to know what will or won't work for your group.

Princes works much better "out of the box" imo.
 

Princes starts at a higher level (3rd) so you can play through most of Phandelver and then go into that a little higher than expected.
And it's also cheaper to get the one PotA book than the two Tyranny books.
Tyranny is very old school, which might be less appealing for a new player, so Princes might work better.
 

Hello, this is my first post here -- or any RPG web site for that matter.

I played Dungeons and Dragons (Basic) a few times when I was a child and really enjoyed the experience. I ended up finally getting my own player's handbook and dungeon masters guide at Target with intentions of possibly running my own games. I got these on clearance at giveaway prices (due to them having demons / devils on them etc, lol).

Anyways they were the Advanced Dungeons & Dragons manuals and it was too much for me at the the time (I was around 12 then), and I ended up giving up the idea -- but I enjoyed reading them, the best I could anyways.

But I've always been into computers (since the Commodore 64) and always enjoyed playing fantasy "rpg" games on them, including the baldur's gate and Icewind Dale titles.. along with Everquest and then WoW. (I don't play MMORPG games anymore -- looking for some roleplaying and dynamic environments a computer can't begin to offer.)

Now I'm at the point again in my life (32 years later) having the idea I might run my own games, starting with my nephew (I guess we could both play 2 characters for the party -- a lot of work in addition to DM'ing I know especially the roleplaying lol).

We are going to start with Phandelver. But after that we will want to get another module.

Should that module be Hoard of the Dragon Queen (and then subsequently Rise of Tiamat), or should we just skip over them and go right to Princes of the Apocalypse?

I read that Hoard wasn't that great of an Adventure (that is was full of errata and was boring) -- but of course what I read could of been really biased.

I have read great things about Princes, especially that it is TOEE--like. (Read great things about TOEE including someone's conversion notes from AD&D 1E to 5e).

So after Phandelver, should we start with Hoard, Princes or a converted TOEE? Or perhaps something else? Maybe something free?

Thanks!

Jennifer

My players found Hoard rather linear, but hardly boring. It's patron-mission driven, and it's not a bad adventure... but the fanboys of hexcrawling cannot accept that linear can be good, and most of the denouncements of it have been by people advocating sandbox play and/or hex-crawls. And the errata is only 4 pages, in large friendly type. Most of which isn't that big an issue. (If you don't have it, a few things won't make sense as to why.

On the other hand, I've been told I can make even a library crawl a fun ride...

Princes has more hexcrawl elements - tho' it's balanced for linear mode. It is, however, not too hard to adjust.

I'm not having quite as much fun running Princes, but it's appearing to be as much fun for the players.
 

For your original question, I'd advise Princes. It's written by the same author as Phandelver, is set in the same area (the SE edge of the Phandelver map overlaps w/ the NW of the Princes map), starts at a more comparable level, and has explicit advice on what to skip if coming from Phandelver. It's almost like it was designed to be a continuation.

I have a fairly low opinion of Tyranny of Dragons, though. I know some folks liked it, but I can't fathom why. I'm not including that as a knock, just full disclosure that I'm very biased.

I have another question, regarding Phandelver--our first adventure. Since it is going to be just the two of us at the start, should we just run two characters (instead of the two each I was thinking of)? -- four seems kind of overwhelming.
As others have, I would strongly caution against having a "PC" while you're acting as DM. I definitely encourage you to run an NPC (or two) while you DM for your nephew. It sounds like a silly distinction, but it's an important one, in my experience. You can't ever really get the "full player experience" with a DMPC; you always know where the secret doors are, where the best treasure is, etc., so you're robbed of the exploration pillar. Also, the role playing aspect gets really weird unless you reduce everything to dice, anyway. Combat isn't horrible, but I wouldn't play D&D for just the combat.

The other problem, especially as a new DM, is that it's very hard to strike the right balance of actually being a PC and wanting to succeed on your own vs. overshadowing any other players. Considering that you're already (by virtue of birth) in a position of respect/authority to your nephew, I wouldn't push it.

The difference between a DMPC and an NPC is where the emphasis for spotlight is. The DMPC is expected to share the spotlight with the other PCs. That's kind of the point. The NPC is supporting cast for the PCs. They can come and go, be a peer or a sidekick, whatever is needed for the story. An NPC party member contributes to the exploration, social, and decision-making process only as much as necessary. If your nephew is about to vaporize himself, the NPC can say, "I have a bad feeling about that." As you get comfortable with NPCs, though, they can sometimes be wrong about things and will have their own goals and motivations.

When I was in high school, I ran a solo game for my best friend, in addition to the regular group game. It was a blast. IIRC, I was running six NPC party members, at one point. It took a while to build up to that because they weren't added until there was a need. It also only worked because the NPCs were there to facilitate the game for the player. In the process, though, we both had tons of fun. I ran two substantive campaigns that way, and he ran a few short-run games, as well.

Perhaps I could let him play fighter, and I would play a wizard, both using the healing surge option? Then I'd just cut the number of monsters in half and/or cut the large monster's hit points in half?
I'd definitely steer him towards a martial character. The Champion Fighter is the quintessential "training wheels" for a new player. Depending on age and/or tactical ability, he might be fine with any Fighter build, though. Personally, I always preferred Ranger or Rogue for solo characters, but that's a mindset thing. I could even see Warlock being workable.

A wizard might be good, but I think a bard might work. It lacks blasting, but has a bit of other arcane stuff, as well as healing. It's generally viewed as a "fifth slot" character, but it also makes a good safety net when you can't cover all the bases well.

Are we going to need a thief for Phandelver? If so, I guess in those cases I could create an NPC thief that is wandering the dungeon and offering his (or her services) at a price.
Thanks!
I don't think there're are locks to pick -- there definitely aren't any that can't be overcome another way. With the background system in 5E, thief skills aren't hard to come by. Our traditional Rogue player was actually a bit irritated by how easy it was for others to dip into "his toys", until he played for a bit and saw how the Rogue really played out.
 

My players found Hoard rather linear, but hardly boring. It's patron-mission driven, and it's not a bad adventure... but the fanboys of hexcrawling cannot accept that linear can be good, and most of the denouncements of it have been by people advocating sandbox play and/or hex-crawls. And the errata is only 4 pages, in large friendly type. Most of which isn't that big an issue. (If you don't have it, a few things won't make sense as to why.

As a player, it's not the linear "railroad" nature of the storyline that's an issue. It's an AP, so you have to go into an AP with a certain amount of "buy in".

There have been three points that have disappointed me greatly with this module (from a players PoV).

1. At times the story just completely breaks down to the point of ruining the suspension of disbelief. The whole caravan part of the adventure borderlines on absurd.
2. We've been railroaded into encounters that have been very difficult, with no foreshadowing, warning, or choice. The DC's to spot things have been way too high for low level characters, the encounters well beyond deadly, or traps that have been impossible to find. Our DM is new, he's learnt and adjusted things now, but for a while there where a few "Surprise!" encounters that were less than pleasant.
3. I'm all for tough challenges provided there is some sort of accomplishment at the end of it. D&D is about slaying monsters, getting treasure, and leveling up. HoTDQ certainly throws enough monsters at you to slay, but it kind of forgets about the last two points - if you run it as written. The hatchery was ridiculous, it was a grinding hard slog to get through that, and our reward? Nothing. You can't level because the module says so, and the best they do is throw a couple of coppers your way.

Our DM has rolled up his sleeve and started slicing and dicing the module, changing it to fit our group, which is great. My enjoyment of it has improved dramatically because of that. But as written I think it's a trap for new DM's and players.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top