Published Adventures and You

[Bendris Noulg]

If you don't, why do you find yourself creating your own adventures as opposed to using pre-made ones?

A few things. First, modules tend to be written with presumed world conditions (i.e., "default") which may or may not be true (and, for me, usually aren't).

Second, I've found that the "usual suspects" party (tank, spells, healer, stealth) have never made an appearance at my table in the past decade. We usually have parties like 1 Fighter and 1 Druid, or 3 Fighters and 1 Psychic Warrior, or a single Wizard as a solo PC. As such, I need adventures that are actually playable with the group I'm GMing, and published adventures never fit the bill.

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

I have not used many pre-published adventures. I subscribed to Dungeon for a couple of years, but rarely used the adventures in that magazine, not because they weren't good, simply because they didn't suit me or my players. I did mine a whole lot of ideas from these adventures though.

In general, I have a lot of fun building my own adventures. That's the main reason why I won't use someone else's adventures. I AM nevertheless running Sunless Citadel ( et al.) because I wanted (and the players too) try "something different".

AR

 

[DragonLancer]

I like pre-written modules, but only (so far) those by WotC and Necromancer Games. All others so far have left me quite cold.

I use them because with a little work they can be dropped in anywhere. And when I haven't had the time to fully work out a scenario, a little tweaking and I have a fully playable adventure.

 

[pogre]

Published modules are the reason I came back to D&D. I do not have time to completely prepare an adventure for my weekly game, every week, month after month, year after year, etc. I really like to be prepared for a gaming session and modules are a great crutch for me.

During Track & Football seasons (I coach) I used to say "we're on hiatus until the end of the season" - now I use published modules and it just requires me reading it and thinking about the encounters. That's a boon for me and my players during the season. For example, I am leaning on the City of Barakus adventure this Spring - great mega module with zero railroading - lots of options and tons of adventures.

Published modules are the only thing I buy consistently. Alas, there are a lot of bad ones, but Necromancer seems pretty reliable.

Once the season is over I will return to writing my own stuff.

 

[Gizzard]

I run pre-made modules, but modify them for my group. (Primary changes: increase foe difficulty for 6 high-point buy characters instead of 4 standard characters. And/or modify 3E foes to be 3.5E.)

What I like: Even though I have to mod everything it still saves me a huge amount of prep time; the skeleton of everything I need is there and (if worst comes to worst) I can just run it as is and hope for the best.

What I dont like: When I make my own stuff from scratch its much easier to ad-lib or deal with off-the-wall actions by the players. If I play from a module I have to filter each zany action and try and remember whether I saw any plan from the module designer to deal with this contingency. It's a lot harder (and more annoying) as DM to try and hold the threads of someone elses world together.

 

[Crothian]

I do also modify the modules heavily when needed. I rarely use the treasure they have proivided as my party doesn't really care for looting. I try to keep the feel and theme of the module the same, I'll use the maps, but most of the rest is gutted and replaced.

 

[Arbiter of Wyrms]

Banewarrens

I've got to say that I think that the Banewarrens from Malhavoc is the best module I've ever run. The mix of intrigue and action made it compelling and fun. The fact that the organizations are all worked out for the DM aead of time means that it actually saves work instead of just making more work. The setting, the NPCs, everything worked pretty much out of the book, but with enough flexibility to account for those players with that damnable free will.

That said, I find that just about everything I run, I "write" myself, usually more-or-less on-the-spot. Published adventures just too rarely speak to my player's PC's motivations and interests. If I run one module, I've got a whole campaign's worth of spin-off interests that the players are determined to pursue.

 

[Arbiter of Wyrms]

One-player modules

What I would like to see more of are one-character modules. I would like to play much more often than I get to, and my wife and I always have a hard time finding players in our area whose company and play-style we enjoy.

If anyone here knows of any good single-player modules, please let me know.

The one cleric, one fighter, one rogue, one wizard presumptive mods have never reflected a group I have run or in which I've played. Adventures designed with the iconic party in mind frequently just don't work. "Turn Undead? sorry, nobody here does that. Does the skeleton have pockets I can pick?"

 

[Neo]

Havent run any published adventures outside of those I and my group have playtested in a very long time. As for why.. well I'll try and explain my view of them.

Published adventures in the past have almost always taken the following form.
1. you are all in this location because...<enter explanation>
2. while there some need of adventurers arises or someone approaches your group and asks you to help.
3. Group moves from encounter to encounter picking up (hopefully) info along the way that leads towards some locale and plot.
4. Group moves to locale and goes from room to room to room fighting the nasties and looting... occasionally getting a little hint more at the plot.
5. Group finally has enough of plot to get the gist of what is occuring and has a showdown with the main villain in order to put things right.
6. Providing group survives returns to town, gets rewarxd,heals up, etc..

The above 6 steps are without fail the essential rout 95% of published adventures take if not more... its just too linear and its not overly exciting anymore. Encounters are almost ALWAYS combat oriented, little if any effort is put in to include the skills of any other class beyond the occasional open lock and disarm traps..

Myself and my group just like something a bit more open ended, involved, plot oriented and not written in stone.
for a great many years many adventures in my campaigns have taken the form of a basic plot idea, expanded upon with a few encounters i'd like to include of varying types, the major NPC statted for quick use, the odd map scribbled down and any obvious handouts provided ahead of schedule. The rest of it is ad libbed and developed as the adventure progresses and that works heaps better than a published adventure for us.

I probably would buy published adventures if they took the form as say an Adventure toolkit, which could include.
Basic Story theme, nothing written in stone just something to set the scene.
Regional map and maps and info on important locations (towns, inn, shops, caves etc.. provided without specific encounters being put forward).
Few handouts (old map fragment, blank journal entry that can be photocopied and filled in etc..)
A Bunch of Story Hooks suggesting on adventures that could be done based off the Basic Story Theme.
Odd new monster, magic item or prestige to include that is "themed".

And thats it, with the above id have enough useful material to make use of and enough freedom to build upon the story premise to suit.

 

[Crothian]

If anyone here knows of any good single-player modules, please let me know.

I don't have or nor have i readit but here's one


http://www.enworld.org/reviews/index.php?sub=yes&where=currentprod&which=Leda