"Run as Written" or "Adapt as Desired"

[Glyfair]

I have two different variations. When I'm running an adventure, I'm usually running it pretty closely to how it was written. However, I also use adventures as inspiration just using the bare bones for concept.

For example, the first 3E adventure I ran was Necromancer's The Wizard's Amulet. The second 3E adventure I ran was a lose adaption of the classic Runequest Apple Lane (specifically "Gringle's Pawnshop"). I have placed Tegel Manor in my Eberron game and will use the maps and basic concept when they get there.

 

[Psion]

Almost no adventure gets run by me as written. At the very least, premises rarely survive intact.

At worst, I strip adventures for parts. I have dozens of issues of dungeon, third party adventures, and so forth, many which are totally unsuitable for my campaign or setting, too long, or don't work for some other reason. I'll steal maps, stat block, and other ideas.

 

[Treebore]

My method is to read the module (that word right there should give you an idea of what's coming next), take the maps pretty much as is, take the core idea, and then change everything to be nearly unrecognizable.

That sums it up for me, if I don't like how its written.

Morrick Mansion, Grey Citadel, and a handful of others I have used "as written". Most however I rewrite to fit how I like to do things. How much varies, but its usually around 50%.

 

[Lanefan]

Depends on the adventure, but I'm more than willing to adapt/chop/swipe as necessary. The reason for getting the party in to the adventure is categorically never the same as the module designer intends. Once they're in, it's highly variable whether I'll keep things as written or not.

Lanefan

 

[Kheti sa-Menik]

Depends on the campaign.
Currently I'm running a campaign in a non standard, low magic, low treasure setting so I definitely have to edit most modules to fit thw world and flavor.

If I were running a more generic game in Greyhawk for example, I would probably use the module as written if it wasn't too out of hand.

 

[T. Foster]

When reading a module I keep a mental (and sometimes physical) list of things I'd want to change if I were going to run it, and if the list gets too long I won't run the module. Ideally I'd like to run modules 100% as-written, but I often end up changing a few minor things.

 

[VirgilCaine]

I have in the past run modules 100% as written, or as close as I can get. This includes both Call of Cthulhu and D&D. D&D 1e modules aren't too hard to convert, but converting the BRP modules to GURPS was very annoying.

Add this to the fact that I simply don't like the attitude of the designers or fans of CoC or the BRP system, and the fact that the adventures I chose to run just aren't that well-designed...
I'm getting rid of the book ASAP.

The D&D modules I use aren't too outlandish, I have to think quickly with some of the magical obstacles and the stuff my PCs want to do to them that isn't quite addressed by the description. Also, removing the "instant super-tetanus" from White Plume Mountain.

However, in the future I will definitely be changing things much more often in my not-quite-Delta Green campaign.

 

[diaglo]

I am fundamentally, categorically unable to run a module as written. I have more fun adapting it and removing bits I'd like to do differently.

qft.

plus i have to convert everything to OD&D(1974)

 

[GQuail]

The most common change I make to an adventure is to increase the difficulty: I've got a gorup that has varried from 6 to 8 players, and often I'll see a nice advneture but my players will take forever to get to the right part of the world to take part in it. Sometimes this just means increasing group encoutner, other times NPCs need to be rebuilt from scratch.

Also, I make the obvious plot changes to fit my campaign world: switch out core gods as required, sometimes change the motivations of groups to tie into bigger stuff. (So an Iuz cultist may become a member of the demonic cult harranging my players in earlier adventures; a spellcaster NPC in one adventure may get adopted as a recurring NPC) While I make no secret of using DUngeon adventures and other premade quests from time to time, I try to make the joins relatively seamless.

However, the basic gist of the adventure is rarely messed about with. If I'm running it, it's because the plot setup or encounters appeal to me - so I want changes to be mostly appearance & balance issues. I don't break adventures apart or cannibalise for parts, for the most part - it either does it for me or doesn't. (The exception is monsters and magic items mentioned in adventures: the first thing I read in Dungeon was the monster appendix to every adventure.)

 

[Plane Sailing]

I always adapt - for location in my campaign world, for character level and sometimes for internal logic.

Three of the best modules that I've run have been Speaker in Dreams, Standing Stone and Whispers of the Vampires Blade - mostly because they have lovely set-piece situations or setups which I've been able to adapt and use in a way that makes sense for my game.

Most of these had excessively rail-road set ups as written, but changing those things (and especially changing all instances of "will not negotiate, will always attack to kill at every opportunity" into something where negotiation *is* actually possible) made them into wonderful, flavourful adventures.

I think the only adventure I've ever used "as written" was "Of Sound Mind" by Piratecat.