D&D 5E (2014) Which Would You Rather Buy/Use?

[The Grassy Gnoll]

C comprised of 1e style modules, yay (runs around in small happy circles, arms waving in the air)

 

[Lackhand]

I want "B", and I said as much in the survey. Sorta. I guess others are discussing it as F (Barantor, pming) , but honestly, that "F" feels pretty B-y to me.

I hate the formfactor of hardcover adventures.

I think we should be buying adventures in (small) boxes (a box the size of the current hardbacks, for instance, is fine -- I'm thinking screen/folio, here).

I think the adventures should have loose parts. You don't have a chapter on NPCs -- you have DM-side and player-side NPC cards. You don't have a picture of the engraving on the door -- you have the door engraving handout sheet. You don't have a map index -- you have a book of maps, separate from the book of adventure, and the DM-side map has useful writing right on it so you don't necessarily have to flip back and forth -- at least the room names, come-on!

I run my own campaign, and don't play in any organized play. I don't want a year-long arc; my attention span isn't that. I don't want a 1-15; I'll want to explore in different directions before too long. So...

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

A combo a A and C. I want the setting book, and a collection of loosely connected adventures that take place there.

 

[Bawylie]

It seems there's an undercurrent desire for replay value. Even though some story is appreciated.

 

[Li Shenron]

E.) none of that & you write your own stuff. Anyway what a weird questions. Plus it depends on the setting, doesn't it? Why are you even asking me this?

F.) I have a better idea.

I'd buy campaign settings, but at the moment not adventures. I have old ones I haven't played yet or would like to play again, so right now I'd rather convert old ones than buying even more.

 

[GM Lent]

It seems there's an undercurrent desire for replay value. Even though some story is appreciated.

That makes sense; if we didn't love stories we wouldn't be playing a game that allows us to make up and tell our own. And replay value is great too because (at least as a DM) I get to run through fun stories with multiple participants.

In terms of your poll: I would be fine with option A if there was even a remote chance they might produce a story I'm interested in set in a place I want to play. However, I find the odds of that happening to be negligible; I like very low-magic, sword-and-sorcery type settings, and very small parties. I have no difficulties in adjusting adventures on the fly to account for the latter, but if I'm having to replace 90% of creatures, equipment, rewards, and NPCs in an adventure to make it conform to the former I might as well just write my own stuff. Or use the massive amount of material I already own.

So I guess I'm going with option E.

 

[S'mon]

A collection of small-page-count site-based adventures is probably best, I'm getting great value from Dyson's Delve in my 5e game. Larger 32-64 page epics are also a possibility, but the material had better justify the page count.

I have more 360-page Paizo APs than I'll ever run, plus Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk from WoTC. I'm very very unlikely to be buying anything that size again, and in particular I don't want any more story-based adventures, I want sites I can create my own campaign around.

 

[Bacon Bits]

I say B and C about equal, with a small amount of A. While I think B modules are better for DMing and are more worthwhile purchases overall, I think it's the C modules (T1-4, A1-4, GDQ1-7) that were classically epic, and A/C modules like Rise of the Runelords that are more modern classics.

The thing is, modules are often crap. Or they don't work with your group. Or they don't work in your campaign setting. But even when the modules are crap, there's usually some gems in there. The map is cool, or there's one encounter that's got a good design, or the hook is really effective, or there's some good idea in there. And sometimes, the modules are just great! When they're bad, you can use them to hook a campaign, or bridge a campaign, or run a one shot, or a side dungeon, or whatever. When they're really good, they can set you up for a good time.

So much of what I learned DMing was just reading modules and deciding what I liked and what I didn't.

This is why I miss Dungeon magazine so much.

 

[Arcshot]

I prefer C with shorter gaming time required for each adventure and yet able to combine with a couple of modules into a series to create a wider plot. A is good but it takes a lot of dedication and free time to game through it with many sessions, and not really suitable if your group gathers only once in a while (which will then take a very long time to finish the entire campaign).