When using published adventures...

[DarrenGMiller]

My experience with this sentiment is that it usually comes from a)someone who's not married with no kids and/or; b)still in high school or college and/or; c)someone who doesn't have a full-time job. Published modules are just fine as long as the DM knows how to manipulate them for the group. And yes, The Witchfire Trilogy books definitely let my players know who the evil protag was after 2 seconds. grrrr

In my game, that is exactly who it came from.

I alter published modules quite heavily, so they often don't know. I am also occasionally prone to mapping and statting out a novel that isn't so linear and using the town/world as a setting (ie. Robert McCammon's "Speaks the Nightbird") or bare bones for an adventure. Sometimes, I do go overboard and use too much of it though.

DM

 

[Mixmaster]

Never.

Maybe afterwards if they enjoyed it greatly, so they can buy a copy to run for their friends, and so on, and so on.....

 

[Keeper of Secrets]

Whereas I don't keep it a big secret, I don't advertise it either. Mostly because the name of the adventure can often give things away. Also, I like to bleed my adventures into my campaign really smoothly and they never feel like they are being forced into it. Also, since I always change the adventures around to better suit the campaign I end up changing lots of details.

 

[MonsterMash]

I need to as I'm not the only DM in the group so I need to warn them not to read module x before we start to play it.

 

[S'mon]

Like MonsterMash, if it's something relatively recent I tell my players so they can tell me if they've already read it, or avoid reading it if they haven't. If I'm running a converted White Dwarf scenario from 1984 I usually won't bother, though.