RPGA Scenarios Strengths & Weakness

[charonsg]

So to those that keep saying that the adventures are railroads, I'd suggest you talk to your DM and adjust as needed. The adventures can be a lot of fun, when the DM just lets the events happen in response to the player's actions instead of in spite of their actions.

i wish you were the gm at the recent PHB2 gamesday game at my table.
One of the players wanted to stealth into town to investigate why the town was deserted but the gm pushed us into the first combat by not letting the player stealth. Another situation was when it came to the skill challenge, the gm just said you can use these skills in the skill challenge, roll to see if you succeed, he never asked the players to describe what they were doing actually in the skill challenge. It was very gamist. my player tried to use ghost sound before entering the mill to lure the monsters out but the gm said the monsters were not tricked and when i tried to set fire to the mill on noticing the flammable dust, the gm disallowed it. He only later set fire to the mill himself when he rolled a 1 on his fire attack. He also neglected to describe the grinding mill stone else we would have bullrush the brutes/soldiers into it. I didnt want to offend the gm so i kept my opinions regarding how the game was run to myself.

 

[Stormtower]

i wish you were the gm at the recent PHB2 gamesday game at my table.
One of the players wanted to stealth into town to investigate why the town was deserted but the gm pushed us into the first combat by not letting the player stealth. Another situation was when it came to the skill challenge, the gm just said you can use these skills in the skill challenge, roll to see if you succeed, he never asked the players to describe what they were doing actually in the skill challenge. It was very gamist. my player tried to use ghost sound before entering the mill to lure the monsters out but the gm said the monsters were not tricked and when i tried to set fire to the mill on noticing the flammable dust, the gm disallowed it. He only later set fire to the mill himself when he rolled a 1 on his fire attack. He also neglected to describe the grinding mill stone else we would have bullrush the brutes/soldiers into it. I didnt want to offend the gm so i kept my opinions regarding how the game was run to myself.

I didn't run the PHB2 gameday scenario, so I'm unfamiliar with the specifics of the encounters you're describing, but it sounds like you ran across a weak or unprepared DM who was ignoring the spirit and intent of the 4E rules. Using page 42's guidelines (yes, with errata) is a no-brainer for something like setting the flammable sawdust on fire. Furthermore, it sounds like your DM needs to go back to the drawing board in his approach to skill challenges, or perhaps just spend more time preparing adventures in advance.

I also concur with D'Karr's opinion upthread that communicating your group's or your individual desires and playstyles to the DM is a good way to get more out of your RPGA experience. Most DMs, whether in the RPGA or not, are open to this sort of communication. The 4E DMG (and the 3.5 DMG2 before it, as well as the hard-to-find Robin's Laws of Good Gamemastering) has great advice on player psychology and what motivates different kinds of gamers at the table. That advice is not just for DMs! Players can identify their own playstyle and bring that self-knowledge to the DM's attention.

 

[D'karr]

This is very true, and the type of advice that should appear in the adventures. A good DM can run a great adventure with a few stats and some scribbles but a less experienced DM running an event that just receives an adventure in the mail composed of: Intro-statblocks-link-statblocks-link-statblocks- The end, may not be aware of all the options available with that adventure outline.

If the adventures were written as a series of challenges with an overall end goal, and provided multiple examples of how to approach the challenges with some different success/fail consequences it could help newer DM's with less time to playtest/tweak the adventures run things with a little more variety.

I'm of two minds on this one. I agree that some additional information would be good, but start taking every single encounter and add several ways to accomplish it and all of a sudden you have a "messy" adventure that is difficult to run with little preparation.

The adventures already provide a detailed background of what is happening, and a plot synopsis on how the adventure "could" go. Each adventure also comes with a section detailing DM Empowerment and what things a DM should look at to keep the adventure interesting for the table that he is running. With this information almost any DM can, with some work and imagination, change to adjust to the actions of the players. But with this information any DM can easily run the adventure as it was meant to play.

More information is a worthy goal, but at some point it becomes more restrictive, because the DM is now following a lengthier and more convoluted script, rather than adjusting naturally to what the players are doing. YMMV of course.

 

[kitsune9]

i play RPGA scenarios once in a blue moon at gamesday at conventions and at the local gaming store

is it just me? or do the rest of you feel that RPGA modules are heavily railroady?
Their strength is that the GM doesnt need to prep but i normally prefer sandbox settings where my characters can explore their goals, motivations.

Do the rest of you feel the same or otherwise?

i dont mind RPGA games once in a while all things considered.

Yep, the mods could be railroading at times, but it was necessary to finish in 4 hours. In the Living City days, because of the lack of really railroading, we blow through 4 hours just to get to the first encounter. In the Living Greyhawk days, we'd be able to finish most mods. So....it's a tradeoff.

 

[amysrevenge]

is it just me? or do the rest of you feel that RPGA modules are heavily railroady?
Their strength is that the GM doesnt need to prep but i normally prefer sandbox settings where my characters can explore their goals, motivations.

To me these are the strengths and weaknesses of RPGA adventures (I find that there are other advantages to RPGA gaming in general, but I'll try to stick to just the factors related to the adventures themselves).

Strengths

1) The ease of preparation and levelness of the playing field make the RPGA games accessible to us old fogies with jobs and families and no time for regular home games. [This is the only way I am playing D&D right now, and for the last 10 years or so.]

2) Prep time can be small or zero, and yet the group can still have a very nice time (of course the adventure plays out better with more prep time, but even with zero there is still a lot of fun to be had).

3) The adventures are easy for new DMs to run in a way that is fun for the group. I've played under two DMs now who never played an RPG before 4th edition. Barely a hiccup in the delivery for both.

4) The adventures are reasonably easy to finish in a single sitting. Some DMs who are more accustomed to freeform home games have a lot of trouble finishing in a timely fashion, but there are some of us out there who can go in well under time, and yet still have a group of people enjoy themselves from start to finish.

5) Although they are combat-intensive and roleply-lite, they don't have to be roleplay-zero. For many players, RPGA adventures offer enough opportunity for roleplay that they are satisfied.


Weaknesses

1) Little time or place for extensive in-character roleplaying. With the exception of RPGA games played in a home environment, there is usually only a small amount of time available (if any) for truly immersive roleplaying, and the standard RPGA adventure format often has little or no opportunity available for even minimal roleplaying other than during the introduction (and often but not always in skill challenges).

2) There is little wiggle room for truly clever ideas to take these linear adventures off the track. An experienced DM might be able to roll with the punches (and with the new 4E RPGA he even has the authority to do so), but you can't count on having an experienced DM - many DMs will resist departing from the presented plot.

3) The adventures themselves are usually formulaic and predictable. Introduction-Combat-Skill Challenge-Combat-Combat-Conclusion. Sometimes the order is switched, sometimes the number of each element is changed, but that's the gist of most adventures.


Conclusion

Strength #1 trumps all the weaknesses for me. That doesn't mean that it does for everyone out there. A player who really likes immersive roleplaying, doesn't enjoy an evening of hack-and-slash, and is playing in a regular home game that fits his style will probably have a terrible time playing a typical RPGA adventure. But have that player move to a new town and not play at all for a couple of years, and he might just find that the RPGA adventures are fun and worthwhile, and certainly a whole lot better than not playing at all.

In addition, I know of many people who enjoy both styles of play, and have a regular (immersive roleplaying) home game and enjoy regular hack-and-slash RPGA adventures.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I'm of two minds on this one. I agree that some additional information would be good, but start taking every single encounter and add several ways to accomplish it and all of a sudden you have a "messy" adventure that is difficult to run with little preparation.

The adventures already provide a detailed background of what is happening, and a plot synopsis on how the adventure "could" go. Each adventure also comes with a section detailing DM Empowerment and what things a DM should look at to keep the adventure interesting for the table that he is running. With this information almost any DM can, with some work and imagination, change to adjust to the actions of the players. But with this information any DM can easily run the adventure as it was meant to play.

More information is a worthy goal, but at some point it becomes more restrictive, because the DM is now following a lengthier and more convoluted script, rather than adjusting naturally to what the players are doing. YMMV of course.

I can see that too. My perspective comes from playing the adventure only. I haven't run or read any recent RPGA adventures.

 

[Solodan]

i wish you were the gm at the recent PHB2 gamesday game at my table.
One of the players wanted to stealth into town to investigate why the town was deserted but the gm pushed us into the first combat by not letting the player stealth. Another situation was when it came to the skill challenge, the gm just said you can use these skills in the skill challenge, roll to see if you succeed, he never asked the players to describe what they were doing actually in the skill challenge. It was very gamist. my player tried to use ghost sound before entering the mill to lure the monsters out but the gm said the monsters were not tricked and when i tried to set fire to the mill on noticing the flammable dust, the gm disallowed it. He only later set fire to the mill himself when he rolled a 1 on his fire attack. He also neglected to describe the grinding mill stone else we would have bullrush the brutes/soldiers into it. I didnt want to offend the gm so i kept my opinions regarding how the game was run to myself.

That's probably the worst of all worlds. You had a relatively inflexible DM, in probably the worst timeframe (A 4-5 hour adventure in a 3 hour timeslot usually) and enought new stuff that it makes it hard to adjust, since everyone

Weaknesses with RPGA:


You can get an inexperienced DM (Though honestly, DM's have been very strong and it actually a strength in general, but compared to a home game it is an unknown quantity).

Adventures are designed to be finished in a timeframe. Sometimes this requires a little bit of railroading, sometimes it requires a lot.

All rules are in - so you can't have a simplified D&D. This is much less an issue now since there aren't a lot of books and combos and borderline stuff, but it could be in the future.

My experience, however, has been quite the opposite of what you've run into.

First, I run and play LFR. A LOT of the adventures allow a relatively freeform way to get from point A to point B. It isn't completely a sandbox, but basically you get your adventure in the first encounter or two, and generally move steps closer. Some adventures have you complete a list of things in the order you choose, some allow you to skip sections, and one adventure actually has a fork in the road and you'll only do half of the printed adventure each time.

Overall, pretty impressive accomplishment for a 4 hour timeslot.

Additionally, as my players get more comfortable with the system, and I get more comfortable winging it, there is more time allowed for roleplay in the encounters that require it.

 

[Ariosto]

How much flexibility is the DM really allowed?

If players resolve a situation without the fight the scenario expects, then that would leave more breathing room. If they respond in a really unanticipated way, then the consequences could greatly change the larger scheme.

My experience so far has always been that the DM (presumably following the module) effectively dictates that encounter A is a fight, encounter B a skill challenge, encounter C a fight plus a skill challenge, etc.. Once, there was an actual puzzle for players (not dice-rolls) to solve, which seemed to rattle the DM.

 

[charonsg]

i guess from reading everyone views, it boils down to one thing
"dont blame the tools, blame the worksman"

i had the bad luck to run into an inexperienced, inflexible Gm who was very gamist and more interested in roll playing rather than roleplaying.

 

[Ariosto]

In one scenario, there was a point at which it was clear that we were supposed to try to get some information. We knew of a building with documents in it, and we proposed to case and burglarize it. I don't recall the details, but it seemed like a pretty good plan.

Instead, the DM would not even allow the attempt and insisted on running a long, long skill challenge supposedly about something I can't remember -- except that it had nothing to do with what the players wanted to do.