D&D 5E Tips for Tyranny of Dragons?

[ART!]

The climax of HOTDQ is a complete death trap, so really get your head around it and what you want your players' options to be.

 

[embee]

The climax of HOTDQ is a complete death trap, so really get your head around it and what you want your players' options to be.

I'm okay with death traps. The encounter with Venomfang is a death trap. An 30' cylinder with an open top just perfect for a green dragon to perch on top of and gas an entire party to death. That right there is a death trap. And when they meet her at the end, I'll play it as a death trap.

My party's "problem" is that they play fairly intelligently. Possibly too conservatively. They don't unsheathe their weapons too hastily and, quite often, will talk their way out of a combat encounter. Sometimes, the players' best option is to get the hell out of there. It's taken a few brushes with death and a couple of destroyed weapons to learn that running in and bopping things with a pointy stick without knowing the lay of the land isn't always the best option.

 

[Merifluous]

I'm okay with death traps. The encounter with Venomfang is a death trap. An 30' cylinder with an open top just perfect for a green dragon to perch on top of and gas an entire party to death. That right there is a death trap. And when they meet her at the end, I'll play it as a death trap.

My party's "problem" is that they play fairly intelligently. Possibly too conservatively. They don't unsheathe their weapons too hastily and, quite often, will talk their way out of a combat encounter. Sometimes, the players' best option is to get the hell out of there. It's taken a few brushes with death and a couple of destroyed weapons to learn that running in and bopping things with a pointy stick without knowing the lay of the land isn't always the best option.

As far as how deadly the adventure is, I knew going in there were some tough parts and probably adjusted some (I know I did in Greenest), but I don't remember it being that dangerous. My group has been playing together for 20 years, so they tend to make intelligent decisions and be conservative. I think I killed one or two PCs at the end of HotDQ but they got revivified...that's been a while though

 

[Merifluous]

I'm okay with death traps. The encounter with Venomfang is a death trap. An 30' cylinder with an open top just perfect for a green dragon to perch on top of and gas an entire party to death. That right there is a death trap. And when they meet her at the end, I'll play it as a death trap.

My party's "problem" is that they play fairly intelligently. Possibly too conservatively. They don't unsheathe their weapons too hastily and, quite often, will talk their way out of a combat encounter. Sometimes, the players' best option is to get the hell out of there. It's taken a few brushes with death and a couple of destroyed weapons to learn that running in and bopping things with a pointy stick without knowing the lay of the land isn't always the best option.

As far as how deadly the adventure is, I knew going in there were some tough parts and probably adjusted some (I know I did in Greenest), but I don't remember it being that dangerous. My group has been playing together for 20 years, so they tend to make intelligent decisions and be conservative. I think I killed one or two PCs at the end of HotDQ but they got revivified...that's been a while though

 

[Eltab]

If you are going to skip most of HotDQ, pull the "boss guys" NPCs' names and use them as Cult order-givers who stay in the background. After the heroes mess up Cult plans for a bit, add them to the assassination attempts, as the strike commander. I did this with the guy in the town where the flying castle docked (because he killed our cleric and stole her magic gear) and added that gear to the ambushers. One particular player took great satisfaction from challenging him to a duel - and winning ... and reclaiming her "childhood friend's" signature equipment.

 

[ART!]

Generally, I think ToD is pretty bad. It's considered one of the weakest of the big official adventures. That said, I generally dislike how all of them are written and put together, so YMMV.

 

[Merifluous]

I would agree its one of the weakest. I ran it when it was the only one out at the start of 5th. We still really enjoyed it. Personally I have ran or played all or parts of ToD, CoS, OotA, SKT and DotMM and enjoyed them all. They all have their issues, but I think there is plenty of material in each for a DM to make a good campaign out of, you just have to color outside the lines regularly.

 

[embee]

So this is different from what other were saying, but I would start with the caravan. I have ran the caravan twice (once around that level), and both groups absolutely loved it. I actually combined the caravan with the exploration chapter from Storm King's Thunder, and the two wove together easily and were additive (note I had ran both before). I would also probably cut or vastly simplify Castle Naerytar. Then you can go to the lodge/castle. Other bit of advice would be to see if you can introduce at least some of the NPCs from the council of waterdeep in RoT now so the PCs know them a little better. the council is the best part of RoT besides the final fight I think. I'd also go higher in the level range with stuff from HotDQ than RoT, I feel like the latter is the weaker of the two. You can scale any fight by just adding more enemies partway through if you want it to be tougher.

I reread the caravan section last night. I'm going to pass on it. As written, it's two game months of random encounters (some of them combat), with some rp mixed it. The book even describes the journey as being monotonous (best case scenario from the POV of a caravaneer). While I understand the psychology of that, I am not convinced that selling the notion of impending doom and a race against the Cult is best done by two months of trudging up a king's road by wagon on escort duty.

 

[jayoungr]

I reread the caravan section last night. I'm going to pass on it. As written, it's two game months of random encounters (some of them combat), with some rp mixed it.

I found that it plays better than it reads. However, that doesn't change what it basically is, and you know your group best, so if you don't think that's going to go over well with them, then by all means cut it out.

I am not convinced that selling the notion of impending doom and a race against the Cult is best done by two months of trudging up a king's road by wagon on escort duty.

I just have to point out that at this point in the adventure, there isn't any impending doom or race against the cult from the PCs' point of view. They only know that the cult is making trouble and collecting treasure for some unknown reason, and they're trying to figure out why.

Still, if you think your players would enjoy it more if they start out feeling time pressure and knowing that impending doom is coming, without the initial information-gathering phase, then definitely you should skip this part. It also saves you the bother of adjusting encounters mostly designed for a level 4 party to level 7.

 

[ART!]

I reread the caravan section last night. I'm going to pass on it. As written, it's two game months of random encounters (some of them combat), with some rp mixed it. The book even describes the journey as being monotonous (best case scenario from the POV of a caravaneer). While I understand the psychology of that, I am not convinced that selling the notion of impending doom and a race against the Cult is best done by two months of trudging up a king's road by wagon on escort duty.

It was running the PCs through the caravan section of the adventure that made em realize it is basically my favorite premise as a DM: PCs traveling through strange lands with a small mobile village of NPCs, encountering whatever weird thing I'm in the mood for that week.