D&D 5E Why does WotC put obviously bad or illogical elements in their adventures?

[LordEntrails]

Yeah, I'm glad that works for you but it's too much of a reach for me to convincingly sell my players. And that's the bit that bugs me. I've got to roleplay these damned NPCs and if I don't buy their motivations (or I'm not given them) then how can I possibly do a decent job at the table - without doing even more prep than I already have to!. And that's where weird encounter setups start being annoying.

I mean this is the most constructive way possible, truly. What published adventures do you find to have met or exceeded your expectations? If we had a tangible example of what you do feel is a well done adventure, it might help me (and others?) understand a bit more your perspective.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Ok, been out of this thread for a while, but I'm stunned that a pair of unexpected Hill Giant guards is so upsetting to some people. How hard can it be to handle?

DM: "Ok, you see a pair of giants guarding the doors. They don't look like the other giants you've seen around here; more like the ones you fought at the Steading."
Player: "Oh, so Hill Giants."
DM: shrugs
Player: "WTF are Hill Giants doing here?"
DM (who has no clue what WotC was thinking, raises an eyebrow mysteriously): "Wouldn't you like to know..."
Player: "Oh. Hmm...maybe it's..."
DM: listens to player's hypotheses, trying to decide which one to adopt

 

[robus]

I mean this is the most constructive way possible, truly. What published adventures do you find to have met or exceeded your expectations? If we had a tangible example of what you do feel is a well done adventure, it might help me (and others?) understand a bit more your perspective.

I've been DMing for a couple of years now so I don't have the experience many on this site do. While I've yet to run it I think OotA is the most thematically coherent adenture so far. I don't remember anything leaping out as wildly out of place. Running an adventure of course reveals issue that were missed during a read through. While CoS appeared good the shambling mound in the Death House was an early WTF?! for me and there were others too (like zombie houses littering Barovia). Caveat I've not run that one either.

 

[Hussar]

[MENTION=6804070]LordEntrails[/MENTION] - of course it's possible to come up with a convoluted set of circumstances to "explain" the presence of the Hill Giants, but that doesn't make it logical. It just makes it possible.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Yeah, I'm glad that works for you but it's too much of a reach for me to convincingly sell my players. And that's the bit that bugs me. I've got to roleplay these damned NPCs and if I don't buy their motivations (or I'm not given them) then how can I possibly do a decent job at the table - without doing even more prep than I already have to!. And that's where weird encounter setups start being annoying.

But, at that point, it's YOUR problem. Since other people can run it without issue, why would WotC cater to you? It's annoying to you. At some point, you have to accept that you are the source of your problems.

I've been DMing for a couple of years now so I don't have the experience many on this site do. While I've yet to run it I think OotA is the most thematically coherent adenture so far. I don't remember anything leaping out as wildly out of place. Running an adventure of course reveals issue that were missed during a read through. While CoS appeared good the shambling mound in the Death House was an early WTF?! for me and there were others too (like zombie houses littering Barovia). Caveat I've not run that one either.

Whereas our group thought those were FANTASTIC. Evil plant creatures in a haunted house trying to eat us? Cool. Shades of Evil Dead right there. Good grief, evil trees eating people is a staple of horror. It's all over the bloody place. Why on earth would you have any problem with this?

Zombie houses - or rather houses of evil - in a Hammer Horror inspired landscape? Again, straight out of genre. Good grief, it's almost cliche. How many evil houses are there in the horror genre? I take it you've never played Silent Hill or any of those genre games, huh?

Hrm, two stupid guards... yeah, that's totally immersion breaking. We'd never, ever see stupid people be put on guard duty would we? It's completely outside of genre... oh, wait, no it's not. It's again, darn near a cliche of the genre.

Look, at the end of the day, no module will EVER be 100% usable at the table without changes. It just can't be. Every single one will have to be tailored to your DMing style and your group's playstyle. That's just the nature of the beast. Always has been and always will be. If you want to run modules, and you don't want to feel frustrated, simply accept that you are going to have to do some work tailoring that module to your group. It's a fact of life.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Hrm, two stupid guards... yeah, that's totally immersion breaking. We'd never, ever see stupid people be put on guard duty would we? It's completely outside of genre... oh, wait, no it's not. It's again, darn near a cliche of the genre.

[video=youtube;OdKa9bXVinE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdKa9bXVinE&sns=em[/video]

 

[Charles Rampant]

At this point, you've spent more time worrying about these two guards than I spent reading that entire chapter

 

[robus]

At this point, you've spent more time worrying about these two guards than I spent reading that entire chapter

Yeah - but the thing most people seemed to miss was it was an example rather than the question. Was it the best example? Probably not. It was just the one I had in front of me at the moment I posted.

Howver it does seem like most people don't think it an issue, though I appreciate the fact that I'm at least not all alone in my woe

 

[Hussar]

Yeah - but the thing most people seemed to miss was it was an example rather than the question. Was it the best example? Probably not. It was just the one I had in front of me at the moment I posted.

Howver it does seem like most people don't think it an issue, though I appreciate the fact that I'm at least not all alone in my woe

Hee hee. I totally get the frustration. I remember running Scarred Lands and realizing that the "Hub of Commerce" for the continent was actually in the worst geographic location and was virtually inaccessible. I had to rewrite large chunks of the setting just to come close to making it actually approximate being functional. So, yeah, I hear ya. It's a huge PITA when the writers of supplements and modules don't even bother asking what seem to be at least to ourselves, perfectly reasonable questions.

 

[JeffB]

I've been DMing for a couple of years now so I don't have the experience many on this site do.

I've been doing it since 1978 taking a few years off here and there for raging hormones, fwmily, and work. I still am "meh". But people here are giving you sound advice. Some of the first things I learned, and still need reminding of from time to time

"you have to roll with things, make changes as needed,and improvise"
"You are not beholden to anything in any book"
"Only your table matters"

Don't get so hung up on what Perkins, or Moldvay, or Jacquays, or Gygax writes. Make adjustments.

 

[robus]

But, at that point, it's YOUR problem. Since other people can run it without issue, why would WotC cater to you? It's annoying to you. At some point, you have to accept that you are the source of your problems.

Are you really saying that you think WotC has no fault at all? That there's not something they could do to smooth out the running of their adventures (for new DMs especially?)

Whereas our group thought those were FANTASTIC. Evil plant creatures in a haunted house trying to eat us? Cool. Shades of Evil Dead right there. Good grief, evil trees eating people is a staple of horror. It's all over the bloody place. Why on earth would you have any problem with this?

Because trees don't live in subterranean basements and it has not connection to the cult or the house. Now a flesh golem animated by the spirit of the dead baby? That's thematic and is the perfect and logical "boss" for the end of that dungeon, IMHO. Not some random shrub Same XP (if my memory serves) yet utterly different thematic feel and strongly ties the whole thing together.

Zombie houses - or rather houses of evil - in a Hammer Horror inspired landscape? Again, straight out of genre. Good grief, it's almost cliche. How many evil houses are there in the horror genre? I take it you've never played Silent Hill or any of those genre games, huh?

The problem is with the poor population living next to these zombies. We're really supposed to buy that people continued living next door to houses of zombies filled with their former neighbors?! No - every time a zombie house appeared the remaining humans would burn it to the ground with the zombies inside, thus keeping the village safe. A village filled with burned out husks next to homes with people still living in them would be an interesting setting.

Hrm, two stupid guards... yeah, that's totally immersion breaking. We'd never, ever see stupid people be put on guard duty would we? It's completely outside of genre... oh, wait, no it's not. It's again, darn near a cliche of the genre.

I'm tired of arguing this one. We'll agree to disagree

Look, at the end of the day, no module will EVER be 100% usable at the table without changes. It just can't be. Every single one will have to be tailored to your DMing style and your group's playstyle. That's just the nature of the beast. Always has been and always will be. If you want to run modules, and you don't want to feel frustrated, simply accept that you are going to have to do some work tailoring that module to your group. It's a fact of life.

Yeah but also at the end of the day I'd like WotC to put a bit more effort into building their worlds in a coherent manner so I don't have to

Will I get what I want? Probably not. Will I start homebrewing adventures? Probably yes. But I think that's unfortunate because I'm not asking for that much really. Just a little more thoughtfulness, but that's apparently an outrageous imposition!