D&D 5E Waterdeep: Dragon Heist Post-Mortem (Spoilers)

[TheSword]

This is a very, very weak excuse. especially since actually the maps of DotMM are of way higher quality, although not in full color.



And a DM can re-run any other module completely with another group, he does not need a new configuration of the module. It actually makes more work for him, and risks confusing him for no real good reason.



Just because it's a new idea does not mean it's cool, but sometimes a bit of thinking saves a product from being really, really poor.



No, sorry, it's not. If it was really that way, I would have loved it. But rather than creating a sandboxy environment where the organisations are really played intelligently and react to the PC's actions and to each other, they have decided that it was way too complex (and indeed, that kind of situation requires an experienced DM), so they totally reversed the problem and decided that what the PCs do don't matter, they are only going to be the pawns of the DM playing the organisation. Not cool at all.



No, it's not, sorry, the heist plays almost no role at all in the module !

To be honest @Lyxen post Morten threads work when people acknowledge the flaws and try and come up with solutions for future users. It’s possible to critique a product while acknowledging its positives with practical experience having DMd the game.

It seems like you just want to come and d\€k on the product. Maybe consider the unrelenting negativity you're bringing to the topic, about something other people really enjoy. Its never nice to have someone you like shat on. I look forward to seeing the post mortem thread for the next product you personally publish.

 

[Burnside]

It seems like you just want to come and d\€k on the product.

Wait, we can't say "dunk"?

 

[TheSword]

I find this kind of intellectually disingenuous tbh. They do tend to say "feel free to change whatever you want." They don't say "You will absolutely need to change a lot of this in order to make it actually work. If you don't take the time to change and re-work substantial parts of our $50 hardcover adventure, then of course you should expect a bad experience."

It's a reasonable expectation on the part of the consumer to be able to run the adventure as written and have a good time. The fact that that's so often not the case isn't something to blame the purchaser for. The "a good DM will fix it" mentality is very widely accepted, but that doesn't mean the designers shouldn't be expected to deliver a playable, fun adventure.

If your point is, "Well, I though WD: DH was playable and fun" then fair enough - it's a subjective opinion. But I don't buy the take that "everyone who buys this should automatically assume they'll need to heavily re-work it, and if they run it straight and have a bad time, it's the DM's fault and not the designer's."

To be honest I think you need to get some perspective here. It’s not perfect but it has 4.8 out of 5 from two and half thousand Amazon reviews. Amazon reviews for comparative products may be a blunt tool but If it was the dumpster fire you claim it is, this wouldn’t be the case. And if you don’t trust the scoring then just look at the comments.

They delivered a playable, fun adventure. In fact, one that D&D had never provided before. How can you be surprised there were some flaws in the first ever city adventure of its scale and kind produced. Instead of just complaining can people who are interested actually make some suggestions. Like linking to map resources or suggestions to better link segments or rework chapter 4.

Amazon.co.uk:Customer reviews: Dungeons & Dragons Waterdeep: Dungeon of the Mad Mage

Find helpful customer reviews and review ratings for Dungeons & Dragons Waterdeep: Dungeon of the Mad Mage at Amazon.com. Read honest and unbiased product reviews from our users.

www.amazon.co.uk

 

[Lyxen]

To be honest @Lyxen post Morten threads work when people acknowledge the flaws and try and come up with solutions for future users. It’s possible to critique a product while acknowledging its positives with practical experience having DMd the game.

It seems like you just want to come and d\€k on the product. Maybe consider the unrelenting negativity you're bringing to the topic, about something other people really enjoy. Its never nice to have someone you like shat on. I look forward to seeing the post mortem thread for the next product you personally publish.

First, I'm not a professional publisher of modules, second, I don't do that for many products, including WotC products (I really liked Tomb of Annihilation and running Descent into Avernus is a fantastic experience, although I admit that I've modified it quite a bit) and finally, I'm entitled to my opinions about modules, god knows that I've read and written quite a few (if only not professionally).

Moreover, if you look at my first post, I just said, for future users, that they can reuse part of it, but it requires heavy rework, the Alexandrian being a good starting point. So what more do you need ? For me to agree with you that it's a good module ? Sorry, not going to happen, this is by far the worst published adventure that I've seen from WotC in a long time, and certainly in 5e. It's a very lazy writing and design, extremely cheap for such an expensive products and for only a few hours of play and level 1-5 (which are, by far, the easiest to design anyway), it's a deliberate railroad where players' choices are ignored (and this is where the OP rightly decided against cutting the chase in half, we could not when playing it and is was extremely frustrating), and it's very anticlimactic.

One adventure has to be at the bottom, and this is it for me. Deal with it, it's only my opinion, but it's not alone in this.

 

[Burnside]

To be honest I think you need to get some perspective here. It’s not perfect but it has 4.8 out of 5 from two and half thousand Amazon reviews. Amazon reviews for comparative products may be a blunt tool but If it was the dumpster fire you claim it is, this wouldn’t be the case. And if you don’t trust the scoring then just look at the comments.

They delivered a playable, fun adventure. In fact, one that D&D had never provided before. How can you be surprised there were some flaws in the first ever city adventure of its scale and kind produced.

Amazon.co.uk:Customer reviews: Dungeons & Dragons Waterdeep: Dungeon of the Mad Mage

Find helpful customer reviews and review ratings for Dungeons & Dragons Waterdeep: Dungeon of the Mad Mage at Amazon.com. Read honest and unbiased product reviews from our users.

www.amazon.co.uk

I'm not objecting to anybody's opinion that it's a fun adventure. That's their opinion and they are entitled to it.

I'm objecting to the general notion that we need to take it as read that pre-written adventures MUST BE heavily re-worked by the DM in order to make it good, and if the DM doesn't (or can't) do that, then they are a bad DM and the designers are blameless.

Incidentally, Storm King's Thunder has 86% 5-star ratings on Amazon - better than WD: DH - and I know that you know that that one is hot garbage.

 

[Retreater]

To be honest @Lyxen post Morten threads work when people acknowledge the flaws and try and come up with solutions for future users. It’s possible to critique a product while acknowledging its positives with practical experience having DMd the game.

That's the whole point of this series of threads I'm doing. I don't think any adventure is beyond saving, and in hindsight there's a lot of things I could've done differently to have presented a better game. Maybe my experience will help other people. If not, at least I enjoy looking back on the experience and record what I learned from the experience so I can apply that knowledge to future campaigns.

 

[Lyxen]

I'm not objecting to anybody's opinion that it's a fun adventure. That's their opinion and they are entitled to it.

I'm objecting to the general notion that we need to take it as read that pre-written adventures MUST BE heavily re-worked by the DM in order to make it good, and if the DM doesn't (or can't) do that, then they are a bad DM and the designers are blameless.

This is a very good point, actually. The thing is that my friend who ran it for us is a very good DM, only one with not that much time on his hands. He ran us through multiple Adventure Paths from Pathfinder, for example, and we always enjoyed them. But that one, we did NOT enjoy at all. So he did not suddenly become a bad DM, it's just that the adventure's design is lazy and wrong, at least for our group.

 

[TheSword]

First, I'm not a professional publisher of modules, second, I don't do that for many products, including WotC products (I really liked Tomb of Annihilation and running Descent into Avernus is a fantastic experience, although I admit that I've modified it quite a bit) and finally, I'm entitled to my opinions about modules, god knows that I've read and written quite a few (if only not professionally).

Moreover, if you look at my first post, I just said, for future users, that they can reuse part of it, but it requires heavy rework, the Alexandrian being a good starting point. So what more do you need ? For me to agree with you that it's a good module ? Sorry, not going to happen, this is by far the worst published adventure that I've seen from WotC in a long time, and certainly in 5e. It's a very lazy writing and design, extremely cheap for such an expensive products and for only a few hours of play and level 1-5 (which are, by far, the easiest to design anyway), it's a deliberate railroad where players' choices are ignored (and this is where the OP rightly decided against cutting the chase in half, we could not when playing it and is was extremely frustrating), and it's very anticlimactic.

One adventure has to be at the bottom, and this is it for me. Deal with it, it's only my opinion, but it's not alone in this.

Yeah, you’ve made your point, several times over. You post a concern, other posters suggest work around, then you go back to the flaw again as if the work around is an insult. Nobody is saying you aren’t entitled to your opinion. Just that I don’t really care about the politics of it all… what WOC should or shouldn’t do… how outrageous it is that maps are Dyson Logos… how terrible you think the product is. None of that is really interesting.

Post flaws and problems you’ve had sure, but then either talk about how you overcame them or let someone else do it, without spoiling for a fight. If you want to pile on a “I hate dragonheist” thread, create a new thread.

Back to the topic. @Retreater did you run Dungeon of the Mad Mage with the same group and characters and if so, how did you find the transition?

 

[Lyxen]

Yeah, you’ve made your point, several times over. You post a concern, other posters suggest work around. Nobody is saying you aren’t entitled to your opinion. Just that I don’t really care about the politics of it all… what WOC should or shouldn’t do… how outrageous it is that maps are Dyson Logos… how terrible you think the product is. None of that is really interesting.

So only praise is interesting ? My point is that, the more you dig into it, the more fault I find in this module, whatever angle you look at. Not that parts of it are not reusable, but honestly, there have been way more interesting elements posted about Waterdeep in the past...

Post flaws and problems you’ve had sure, but then either talk about how you overcame them or let someone else do it, without spoiling for a fight. If you want to pile on a “I hate dragonheist” thread, create a new thread.

Well, it seems that the OP also did not like the module at all, so what exactly are YOU doing here ?

Back to the topic. @Retreater did you run Dungeon of the Mad Mage with the same group and characters and if so, how did you find the transition?

And this is not about DotMM, since you seem to be a stickler for rules. It's about WDH.

 

[Yaarel]

I think a large part of my problem is that about half the group had zero interest in the inn or any of the factions or, frankly, anything to do with the setting at all.

Yeah.

In my experience, the only setting that the players care about is the one that they help create themselves. Their backstories, their choices, their explanation for how their party knows each other, who they choose to interact with, where they choose to go.

Giving them someone elses detailed setting is a "whatever". Giving them a gift with a dangerous vulnerability, is a, "you must be joking".

When creating an urban setting, it is so important to get a sense of the desires of the players.