Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scott Christian" data-source="post: 8058166" data-attributes="member: 6901101">I am sorry you feel this way. I believe if you read most of my previous posts where I have "argued" with someone, you will see that I whole-heartedly concede and thank the person for educating me or I realize we are on opposite sides and can't cross the chasm. And when I do recognize either of those things, I state it directly without obfuscation. In fact, you can see me concede right in this very thread about chaotic neutral alignment.As for Reddit, I do not go there. I only visit it to look at the maps for the Inkarnate map maker design tool. And even then, it is infrequent.As for Hoard, I picked it because it is the most dissed AP D&D has for 5e. It was the first AP for 5e, so I assumed (possibly incorrectly) most on this forum have it. If not to run, at least to read and see how D&D is doing AP's with 5e. It has had so many negative reviews and comments I can't even keep track of them.I say this, not as a strawman, but as a matter of dynamics. I simply am referring to your words. In this text, you won't run something so bad, but how do you know if you haven't read it? Seems impossible. You might glance through it and think it is unimaginative. That's possible and maybe even probable for most here. But you don't know if something is bad unless you run it. It's the person who says they won't watch the terrible movie, but hasn't seen it. The person who disses a book without having read. The person who hates a sport, but never played it. It's all the same.It all goes back to what I stated earlier. There is no professional published AP from Pathfinder or D&D that can't be fun. And not in a sarcastic way, but fun. It all depends on the DM, the players and the chemistry between everyone. That's it. The material is professionally written, and it shows.Sorry to hear that. Sometimes a change of players, different DM or even a different setting can help with the chemistry.That is not what I was saying. I am saying to not always rely on improv, and to play the adventure as intended, there are a lot of things a DM needs to remember and prep for. If you wanna roll with improv, I can read a section of the AP and run it in twenty minutes, maybe fifteen. But I guarantee that is not how it was intended to be run. I feel like half the problem people have with AP's is due to lack of prep. Yes, I take notes. Yes, there are problems. Yes, I fix them. Which means more time. Are they so bad that they cause all the players to go, "This is stupid." Never seen it in thirty years. And yes, there is always an otyugh in the latrine.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> (PS - In Hoard it is a bunch of troglodytes.)One session, yes. Heck, the time to make the maps and print them or build the Dwarven Forge and find all the miniatures takes a few hours. And reading it thoroughly, so I am not always improving is running it as intended. You seem to equate with running it as intended as someone fretting over it. That is, and I mean this sincerely, ridiculous. Paying attention to minute details gives some people a sense of accomplishment. Some people enjoy it. If I am prepping for a game and I nail a NPC and practice them a little. Then I have the map perfect. Then I think of alternatives for the PC's and add those into the lines. And think of clever or well crafted scenery descriptions or unique things that add to the local color of the setting. That is not fretting. That is trying to do a good job and enjoying my job.And this is why I have the view that I do. A well prepped DM with players that play their characters that has chemistry can make any professionally written AP work.And running a module is second nature to me. I don't fumble or stutter when someone goes off the rails. It doesn't bother me, no matter the situation or crazy event or thought process. I can roll with it easily. I can do it improv. I can do it with stuff I have made. I can do it with an AP. The difference is the AP requires more linear paths; therefore, a DM needs to be more cautious with each scene.I am not sure if you have read my posts, but I insist that professionally written AP's can be fun, even the ones that people review as terrible. The vibe I give is consistent: professionally written AP's are very well done. They are good, if not great. I even compared them to Shakespeare. So where you get I don't like them, I have no idea. (Maybe a rant about ecosystems, but that seems to hold true for almost all of RPG-dome. I fix it for them.)As for running them:Two PF modules:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Mask of the Living God</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The Midnight Mirror</li> </ul>Both these are short, but fun. They do require quite a bit of work (for me) to get the setting details on point. They require little logic fixing.D&D 5e:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Curse of Strahd</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Tomb of Antihalation</li> </ul>DM'ed one, playing in the other. Both are a complete blast and very well done. I really can't imagine fitting more information into a book that size.D&D 4e:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Almost every single organized play AP. They only went to third or fourth level, but they were fun. They explored the different settings for 4e, and the plot hooks were well crafted.</li> </ul>My stuff:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Two adventures I wrote that worked into my friend's campaign. (I only include these as they were a railroad style adventures. But it was easy to railroad as the characters already had a vested interest in securing their keep and protecting the town. These went very well.)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">An AP that houses alternative paths for characters (play the hero or scoundrel). If they choose neither, then we play something else. They chose the hero path. It worked out nicely. Halfway through one character decided to suddenly be a scoundrel. I worked it in. He was on his secret mission. He enjoyed it. The other characters found out from his doing and killed him. It was a blast.</li> </ul>Of course all of these require player buy-in: be it backgrounds, hooks, and/or motives. Of course, if someone is just playing their character as a conduit of any whim the player may be feeling, then none of it works. Fortunately, the five different groups through these scenarios, had no such player.</blockquote>

Verification