What kind of adventures do you run?

[sblock]
For instance, that paragraph could read "If I took a Ravenloft module and changed it to use fluffy little bunnies and keeeeeeyute little kitty cats, would it still work?"

I think the answer will always be a resounding NO.[/sblock]

Actually...I pretty well understand what Jhaelen is getting at here. It goes straight to the roots of whether the plot or whatever story for the module can support itself. All sarcasm aside, if you can't put fluffy bunnies and cute kitty cats in the Ravenloft module and still recognize an intricate and playable plot, then you probably have something that completely hinges on Ravenloft mechanics. The module is most likely devoid of value without those mechanics so it's more of a "gimmick" than a "story".
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I use a mix of published and hand crafted adventures. I typically customize the published ones a fair bit. One of the reasons behind using published ones for me is that they often can provide a different style of adventure design than I would do on my own. This keeps my players on their toes - they can't tailor their expectations solely to what they think I'd put there.
 

I don't use any published adventures. We had a bad experience a while ago and didn't really go back to it, and when I started DMing I saw no reason to look elsewhere whe I knew I had what I needed already.

I really don't think in terms of 'adventures'. I prepare sessions, and sometimes I string them together into an intricate plot I call a campaign, but the middle category doesn't describe my story structure well. Certainly, creating my own material is what the game experience is about for me.
 

I use a mixture.

I find that published modules should really be considered just outlines, especially if you are using old school modules. They require a lot of work and some expansion to make play in the most enjoyable manner. But even a new school module benefits heavily from tweaking to your style, your setting, and expanding on the idea in ways that the designer simply couldn't fit in to 32 pages. Don't let the publisher's reasonable economic concerns drive you to play in a bare bones fashion. I generally completely reskin a module, even if it is basically well done in my opinion.

For example, the module 'Of Sound Mind' got reskinned from a psionic focus to a necromancy focus, the dragon turned from a sapphire dragon to a green dragon, the true villain was made into the product of a spoiled ritual to create a phylactory, the goblins were transformed into allies of my BBEG and their purpose was made to connect to his nefarious plot, it was through the help of the BBEG that the goblins overcame the trogs and evidence of this was added to the dungeon, the map was redone from 2 full to 4 full levels, with an additional area of natural caves, and the unmapped and undescribed trog warrens made part of the adventure, the original slayers of the dragon were linked to existing NPCs in the campaign, and finally breadcrumbs added to length the module to the hunt for the BBEG and the adventure hinted at in the unpublished sequel was fully fleshed out as the next stage in tracking down the BBEG. The result was still somewhat recognizably the original adventure, but seamless with my own invented ideas.

In short, I consider it perfectly acceptable to mine good modules for plots and ideas, but don't be a slave to them. Integrate them into your world and into your player's stories for the best results.
 

In my current campaign I have only used my own stuff, However, I am not adverse to using modules and enjoy them quite a bit. The reason I only use my own stuff currently is that I have added quite a bit of politics to the campaign and that makes it tougher to wedge a module into it. I enjoy reading modules and frequently steal plot and encounters to insert in my adventures.

Sometimes it comes down to time constraints. If I am intimately familiar with a system I am much more likely to create my own material.

I think I killed off my group's interest in 4e partly because I used the WOTC modules without any changes. It just was not our style.
 

I use a mix. Typically I'll pull a few modules before a campaign starts and think about how I might use them. Sometimes I just steal an encounter, NPC, or item and ditch the rest.

Some older modules (In my case B2 and B4) are so useful I feel I'm shorting people if I don't use them. At the very least I make a place for them on the map.

I was an off and on Dungeon Magazine reader for a long time. Here are a few older ones I draw from frequently:

Issue #38: "Things That Go Bump in the Night" - Elves and centaurs think an abandoned hobgoblin fort is haunted. The ghosts are actually firbolgs tearing the fort down but there are still undead. One of the best "fey" forests I've seen.

Issue #40: "Aerie Borne" - A good NPC party is blackmailed into stealing giant eagle eggs and the PCs have to sort it out. Used the hook quite a bit and the small wilderness area.

Issue #47: "Quelkin's Quandry" - A good mage whom everyone thinks is evil gets attacked by a real evil mage and needs help. Great NPCs and a cool house.

Issue #51: "Nbod's Room"- A teleporter trap in a dead pirate's bedroom sends the PCs to an atol with headhunters, harpies, and a sea hag. Really one of the best "drop anywhere" adventures I've read.

All of these just need a small community and a wilderness nearby. I tend to dislike modules that make huge assumptions about the campaign world. What if I don't have a huge nation of drow 50 feet under the street?

As an example from Age of Worms: I really liked "Whispering Cairn" and "Three Faces of Evil" but after that, just from reading beforehand, I could tell it was going to too railroady. So I took what I could from the first two for my campaign at the time and ignored the rest.
 

Remove ads

Top