Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mengu" data-source="post: 5984492" data-attributes="member: 65726">I've never really liked published adventures, I can never fit them into my vision of a campaign, though I've found neat little things in them that I could use in my own adventures. Red Hand of Doom is probably one exception, where I enjoyed playing through that campaign immensely, but part of that is probably the way our DM converted it to 4e, and molded it around our characters.I want to see a few published adventures early on, to get a sense of how to design encounters and adventuring days (I wouldn't necessarily run said adventures). But beyond that, once I get the hang of the system, I don't really care what adventures they publish, how many they publish, etc. But I'm probably not the target audience for published adventures anyway. For me, it's too much work to learn an adventure to the point where I feel I own it, so I can run it without hiccups. I'd rather take the agile approach, and make stuff up as I go, based on the actions of the PC's, so the adventure is the result of a collaborative effort between DM and players. And I have the home field advantage of knowing my campaign world and my adventures better than a world/adventure someone else (or multiple someones) wrote.</blockquote>