D&D 5E WotC Is Designing Adventures With Shorter Content Chunks

In a recent interview, WotC’s Jeremy Crawford talked about how WotC’s D&D design accommodates streaming and busier adult gamers by dividing adventures into shorter, bite-sized content.

D&D's Lead Rule Designer Explains Why Actual Play Has Influenced the Game

Dungeons & Dragons is undergoing a popularity boom unlike anything in its existence lately. More and more people are picking...

www.gizmodo.com.au

“So you’ll notice that around the time we came out with the Essentials Kit and then continued on with a lot of our adventure content — even when it’s a large, epic campaign, like last year’s Rime of the Frostmaiden —they’re much easier to divide up into digestible segments that where … if the DM wants to just read a part of this big book, or just run one of these little quests, we’re making that easier to do. Not only to make things less arduous for a brand new Dungeon Master, and with new groups of players coming to D&D for the first time, but also because of that format of play, also suits streamed games better.

“We know streamed games, with the exception of maybe Critical Role, tend to be shorter than a lot of [traditional] tabletop games. You know, in the old days and even today, a lot of people’s tabletop games [sessions] might range between three and four hours, although we’re seeing the average length go down — most streamed games are often sometimes as short as two hours, or even 90 minutes.”

 

[toucanbuzz]

Good philosophy. I liked it about 15 years ago when Pathfinder expanded D&D 3rd edition and modeled Adventure Paths. 6 modules. Link them together for one big adventure, or take one and plop it into your own campaign. It's not a novel concept, as mentioned by @pming, when this was done decades ago with smaller modules. Nothing wrong with taking lessons from the past of what worked, and what didn't.

 

[Dire Bare]

Why can't they just bring back Dragon and Dungeon Magazine? This was what Dungeon Magazine was for. Then you can fill the books with other material that normally wouldn't be there cause you're sticking in adventures mixed with it.

Personally, I would love a return to the montly magazines, Dragon, Dungeon, Polyhedron . . . .

But times, they are a changin! A monthly magazine format would be incredibly hard to pull off successfully today. For WotC, the DMsGuild takes up some of that space, and there's also OGL products to fill that need. There is a growing community of fan-creators putting out zines, bite-sized RPG content, but it isn't quite the same format as a regular monthly magazine.

The only successful RPG periodical I'm aware of is the Pathfinder Monthly, which is also a different beast from the classic Dragon Magazine (no ads, higher price point, focus on one game & setting).

 

[CharlesWallace]

Personally, I would love a return to the montly magazines, Dragon, Dungeon, Polyhedron . . . .

But times, they are a changin! A monthly magazine format would be incredibly hard to pull off successfully today. For WotC, the DMsGuild takes up some of that space, and there's also OGL products to fill that need. There is a growing community of fan-creators putting out zines, bite-sized RPG content, but it isn't quite the same format as a regular monthly magazine.

The only successful RPG periodical I'm aware of is the Pathfinder Monthly, which is also a different beast from the classic Dragon Magazine (no ads, higher price point, focus on one game & setting).

Definitely check out Arcadia from MCDM. You might really enjoy it.

 

[Reynard]

Yeah, I managed the transition okay in the run I'm currently DMing, but if I were to run it again I'd pick a selection of the quests in each of chapters 1 and 2 and string a plotline through them rather than using the plot hooks and rumours.

But why? Players will build their own arcs if you let them and encourage them to do so.

 

[Dire Bare]

Definitely check out Arcadia from MCDM. You might really enjoy it.

Good call, I had forgotten about Arcadia. I've got the first two issues and they were a lot of fun!

But it's still not Dragon Magazine. That's not a criticism of Arcadia, just the fact that the monthly periodical model isn't really valid anymore, or at least, it's a tough one to make work.

Arcadia, at the moment, isn't a regular periodical and is finding it's feet issue by issue (unless there's been new development since last I've tuned in). It's also fairly short, and isn't available in print. In short, it's a zine, not a magazine/periodical . . . at least, not yet.

But again, not really a criticism, Arcadia is awesome and worth the $7 price per issue (up to five issues now?) . . . . and I'll add somewhat off-topic here, y'all need to pick up MCDM's "Illrigger" class book, based loosely off the illrigger alternate paladin from Dragon Magazine!!!

 

[Hussar]

But why? Players will build their own arcs if you let them and encourage them to do so.

I imagine it's down to how much does a given DM add/change a module. If the DM runs it straight from the book, then, sure, no problems. Me? I tend to add quite a bit even though I buy modules on Fantasy Grounds where all the work like setting up encounters, lines of sight and lighting and all that is already done. Problem is, it's done with the maps that WotC includes in its modules, and, as much as I respect @Dyson Logos for the creative genius that he is, the line art, hand drawn, black and white maps look very sad on a Virtual Tabletop when there are things like Inkarnate and whatnot around.

I would actually probably pay more money for the modules on Fantasy Grounds, if they would actually use more colorful maps. Instead, I have to redo all the maps for every adventure, which means a fair bit of prep work for me.

 

[Reynard]

I imagine it's down to how much does a given DM add/change a module. If the DM runs it straight from the book, then, sure, no problems. Me? I tend to add quite a bit even though I buy modules on Fantasy Grounds where all the work like setting up encounters, lines of sight and lighting and all that is already done. Problem is, it's done with the maps that WotC includes in its modules, and, as much as I respect @Dyson Logos for the creative genius that he is, the line art, hand drawn, black and white maps look very sad on a Virtual Tabletop when there are things like Inkarnate and whatnot around.

I would actually probably pay more money for the modules on Fantasy Grounds, if they would actually use more colorful maps. Instead, I have to redo all the maps for every adventure, which means a fair bit of prep work for me.

As someone who runs almost exclusively on FG now, I agree. Dyson's maps are great but they lack a certain quality on FG. Luckily, there are always plenty of options available on the DMsGuild and Rime in particular has some really good maps.

 

[BrassDragon]

This is probably for the best. I've found the overall narrative design of their big 5E campaign books severely lacking... the individual setpieces / encounters / dungeons are great but the overarching plots are often inconsistent, convoluted, invisible to players or poorly structured requiring remixes, DMG material or a lot of prep to make workable or even coherent.

It's baffling how much WotC seems to struggle with this but I suppose scoping down / narrowing the focus is one way to deal with the problem.

 

[CleverNickName]

Myself, I prefer larger, longer adventures. But I don't mind this change in direction at all. It's easier to add extra stuff to a published adventure and pad it out, than it is to remove things and slim it down.

 

[delericho]

Yeah, this is a good thing - I found some years ago that the published campaigns just didn't fit with the sessions I was running at the time, so found I had no choice to go to homebrew. The 5e adventures are definitely better structured for my needs... or, at least, the needs I had those years ago.

 

[Zardnaar]

Yeah, this is a good thing - I found some years ago that the published campaigns just didn't fit with the sessions I was running at the time, so found I had no choice to go to homebrew. The 5e adventures are definitely better structured for my needs... or, at least, the needs I had those years ago.

Think I prefer things like Candlekeep Mysteries and Yawning Portal.

Never completed on of the larger APs.

 

[Hussar]

As someone who runs almost exclusively on FG now, I agree. Dyson's maps are great but they lack a certain quality on FG. Luckily, there are always plenty of options available on the DMsGuild and Rime in particular has some really good maps.

I totally get why they do it. Why bother having these full color maps in the module where only the DM will ever see them? I think most tabletop games have some sort of dry erase mat and a marker - sketch the outlines, easy enough to copy from the module, and you're good to go. The maps are pure reference, not meant to be part of play. So, sure, it makes sense to have these very clear, sharply defined maps that are super easy to read.

However, since we're on VTT's, they don't exactly work as well since maps in a VTT are often meant to be a significant part of the play experience. Particularly when you have things like dynamic lighting and line of sight. Adds a great deal to an adventure when you actually have to pay attention to how big your light sources are and what you can actually see. I do love how Fantasy Grounds now has characters with dark vision only see the map in greyscale. An effect that is largely lost when the map is monochrome.

 

[John R Davis]

I quite like the " get an adventure chunk done in one session with good start and end point" in 2-3 hours. Means a player who can't make it won't be missing midway through something. Fits my 12-room.dungeon mentality nicely as well.

 

[Li Shenron]

Great idea.

While I am growing more and more detached from the direction taken by crunch books in 5e, I think adventure design is getting better.

My ideal as a DM would be to have adventures I don't even have to read in advance but could sort of "read along" while running the game itself, and discover the plot together with my players. Impossible? Maybe with traditional printed books, but the future might bring new innovative adventures formats.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Agree with all the people saying this is a good thing. Certainly if I look back through all the pre-gen material I've used through the years, and that I and the group have enjoyed, an awful lot of it fits this model, either by being a long adventure which was broken up into sensible-length bits, or being a short adventure. I've liked this sort of thing for decades really. Adventures which are like eight hours+ long to play out without a real stopping point have a certain charm but haven't work as well.

 

[Marc_C]

A good decision.

For the last 5 years we've played for about 3-4 hours (7-11pm). I feel like we are more focused with only 10 minutes of chitchat before and after the game. There are jokes of course but no major non-game discussions that last too long. This duration did not change with the use of VTT.

At 90 minutes I wouldn't bother and reschedule.

 

[TheSword]

Let’s be clear. Ghosts of Saltmarsh is aboslutely not split up into 2-3 hours chunks. We’ve been playing for about 6 hours and are still on the first mansion. Breaking larger campaigns down into modules though is a great idea that Paizo have been running with since Shackled City.

I get the impression that 2-3 hour chunks is more like the early parts of Rime… smaller locations with 1-3 encounters in them. Much much smaller than what we would typically consider a module. I’m not sure how I feel about that. In some cases sure it’s great. But I would still want a decent amount of variety. Some large, some small.

As long as it doesn’t end up like Paizo’s adventurers league. Very sparse units of adventure, shallow and only loosely connected.

 

[Yenrak]

Back when we were playing in my parents basement, mostly AD&D (first edition although second edition came out while we were playing; we just ignored it), four hours was considered extremely short. Frequently played 6 to 8 hours, often staying up all night, sometime napping and then coming back.

I think we played for two days straight at the end of Temple of Elemental Evil.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

Personally, I would love a return to the montly magazines, Dragon, Dungeon, Polyhedron . . . .

But times, they are a changin! A monthly magazine format would be incredibly hard to pull off successfully today. For WotC, the DMsGuild takes up some of that space, and there's also OGL products to fill that need. There is a growing community of fan-creators putting out zines, bite-sized RPG content, but it isn't quite the same format as a regular monthly magazine.

The only successful RPG periodical I'm aware of is the Pathfinder Monthly, which is also a different beast from the classic Dragon Magazine (no ads, higher price point, focus on one game & setting).

At minimum, it would be nice to have one Dragon/Dungeon Magazine style adventure in new issues of Dragon+. Gives me a much better reason to actually look at that.

Right now it's just a product catalog, sometimes with a good interview (usually around when they announced a new product). Extremely big stepdown from the first magazines.

I'm not holding out for anything print though, economically almost no one can do that anymore.

 

[Reynard]

Great idea.

While I am growing more and more detached from the direction taken by crunch books in 5e, I think adventure design is getting better.

My ideal as a DM would be to have adventures I don't even have to read in advance but could sort of "read along" while running the game itself, and discover the plot together with my players. Impossible? Maybe with traditional printed books, but the future might bring new innovative adventures formats.

I don't think it is impossible at all and it is a design goal i have for my own work. It just takes the view that words are not as important as graphic design in adventure formatting. Pretty much since the end of the 70s adventure designers became writers instead and suddenly walls of text started obscuring the actual adventure. And getting paid per word didn't help.

All that text is fine for the back story and the setting fluff, but in the actual adventure it is a detriment. The GM shouldn't have to comb through it to find the important details for running the thing. Annotated maps,informative icons, info graphics and other tools can do that job better.