Maybe it's similar to watching a movie and it doesn't hit you right. The problem with D&D adventures is that you're unlikely to come back and re-experience it (unlike watching a movie again or re-listening to an album). So once you've had that bad experience, that's it.Wow. Like, I'm totally with you on Dragon Heist. It is an absolute hot mess and is by far the worst of the 5e adventures. But SKT is one of my top 5, for sure.
Maybe. Although I have played/run some adventures more than once. But yeah, if I don't enjoy something the first time, I'm unlikely to want to use it again. (Dragon Heist is a possible exception, as its a great resource of urban set pieces and NPCs. It just fails miserably as an actual adventure.)Maybe it's similar to watching a movie and it doesn't hit you right. The problem with D&D adventures is that you're unlikely to come back and re-experience it (unlike watching a movie again or re-listening to an album). So once you've had that bad experience, that's it.
I can certainly go back through my hard copy of the adventure to analyze it in a little more detail.
Exactly. If I were going to run an adventure again and commit to 6+ months of play, I'm not going to pick a campaign I didn't like the first time.Maybe. Although I have played/run some adventures more than once. But yeah, if I don't enjoy something the first time, I'm unlikely to want to use it again. (Dragon Heist is a possible exception, as its a great resource of urban set pieces and NPCs. It just fails miserably as an actual adventure.)
It seems like with all the WoTC campaign hardbacks, you basically have to either build your own campaign using the book as a resource, or resign yourself to running a pretty crappy campaign. To a lesser extent this applies even to the boxed starter sets.
I ran Princes of the Apocalypse more or less as written and was pretty disappointed. Ironically when I started Odyssey of the Dragonlords last year, I did not realise Arcanum Press had actually put in the structural work (at least for the core, non-stretch-goal, campaign) and I initially had issues from not trusting the material, from not realising that what looked like throwaway comments were actually tightly integrated foreshadowing. It's been a learning experience running a 'plotted' campaign that actually works!
After that, it's clearly about table preferences, but calling "pretty crappy campaigns" all the millions of people out there playing the modules mostly as written and enjoying them is not a nice way to call out your preferences.
I tried running Odyssey of the Dragonlords more or less as written and was pretty disappointed. We found it railroady and half-baked. The “sailing around the islands” section was the worst. We gave up on it just as the group was poised to face Lutheria.I ran Princes of the Apocalypse more or less as written and was pretty disappointed. Ironically when I started Odyssey of the Dragonlords last year, I did not realise Arcanum Press had actually put in the structural work (at least for the core, non-stretch-goal, campaign) and I initially had issues from not trusting the material, from not realising that what looked like throwaway comments were actually tightly integrated foreshadowing. It's been a learning experience running a 'plotted' campaign that actually works!
I tried running Odyssey of the Dragonlords more or less as written and was pretty disappointed. We found it railroady and half-baked. The “sailing around the islands” section was the worst. We gave up on it just as the group was poised to face Lutheria.

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.