Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ReshiIRE" data-source="post: 9178066" data-attributes="member: 7031231">It's not about being easily to please or the quality of the adventure. It's about upfront complexity, how to handle player character involvement, and the length of the adventure.First, what you have mentioned are, from my understanding, adventure collections and shorter adventures. Those are the ones I'd be most likely to adapt and run via the book, and my understanding is that Ghosts of Saltmarsh and Candlekeep Mysteries can link into each other if you want them to.But compare those to adventures that are ran and intended to be run as one singular adventure - like Tyranny of Dragons or Curse of Strahd; adventures that to my understanding have a strong focal point and one main plot-line. If I miss important information and make a mistake relating to the story or events of the adventure, later parts of the adventure or book may not make sense. Or if my group ends up in a situation where players decide to do something that the adventure may not consider, now I am relying less on the book's adventure material and more on it's setting and background information. For Candlekeep - which is a collection of adventures - that's probably fine, as the adventures may not directly connect to each other. But it gets messier the more and more an adventure is tied together on a whole - especially if I haven't read the book in its entirety.It is, essentially, upfront complexity - to handle these situations, I need a good grasp of the adventure.That's not an insurmountable problem*, but sometimes it can be more work than say, if I make a mistake in my own adventure, based on my own setting or previous setting material; then in a way, it's not a mistake - it's canon, and I simply plan around that, adding it as a new twist that emerged from the table. Ditto if the players decide to do something completely different.There is also the case of how player characters tie into events. How much should a character's background inform what happens in a game? An adventure module that doesn't make assumptions of what the players are playing is fine and can often be preferable - more adaptable - but that does mean that if those aspects are important to your group, you're going to have to start to do some extra work to tie characters into an adventure or introduce new elements. I find that easier to do with general setting information, especially stuff I've provided to my players, rather than then working with an adventure and seeing how I can change it to make it more relevant to the characters. Again, not necessary and can be done with adventures, but it's again something that, from my limited experience, seems much easier to tie in when I'm the one making the adventure.It's very much a style and information processing preference. I don't want to seem like I'm criticising people for running adventures, especially running them almost straight from the book - with the right adventures for you and your group, that'll lead to a great time. I am just personally not sure it would be good for me or my group - though I am considering using adventures in the future to run a second game, as another creative outlet for myself.** I also acknowledge it may not even be a problem with work to change around it, or taking cues from the players on their expectations and playing into them, as a way of delighting them.</blockquote>

Verification