What are some well designed and challenging adventures?

[v1rus]

For a beginner party. Not that it matters too much, since the party is compromised of vidya veterans.

It has to be a prewritten material, and the actual game design has to be good, engaging and challenging. Setting doesnt matter, system does not matter, only thing that matters the actual game is p good. Bonus points if I dont have to read the whole 300p+ book for just the first session.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

How low-level does it need to be for a "beginner party"?

BECMI adventure module B10 Night's Dark Terror (1986) is intended for a party of 5 to 8 adventurers levels 2 to 4, and differs from the earlier Basic modules in having an extensive wilderness exploration component. It's also a classic of module design and provided many details about the Grand Duchy of Karameikos that were incorporated into its Known World Gazetteer the following year.

B/X adventure module B4 The Lost City (1982) is intended for 6 to 10 player-characters levels 1 to 3, but probably should have had 2 as its lower level limit. It is inspired by classic pulp fantasy fiction (e.g. Robert E. Howard's "Xuthal of the Dusk" and "Red Nails") and can be expanded from a dungeon crawl into a mini-campaign.

AD&D adventure module T1-4 The Temple of Elemental Evil (1985) was intended as a relatively fast means for taking a beginning party of 1st-level characters to at least 8th level, at which point they would be prepared for the sort of adventures that Gary Gygax preferred. It also happens to have a computer game based on it.

 

[v1rus]

How low-level does it need to be for a "beginner party"?

Not sure - willing to listen to recommendations. Level 2 shouldnt be much different than lvl 1, right?

While complex stuff (as in, hard to grasp) is no problem, loads of stuff (as in, a lot of material to go through) is to be avoided. The less of a lecture my players have to go through on the first run, before (if?) they get hooked, higher the chance they will be engaged in the actual game.

Now, I have almost no knowledge about pre AD&D systems, so when you say BECMI, i should use this book, right?

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

How low-level does it need to be for a "beginner party"?

Not sure - willing to listen to recommendations. Level 2 shouldnt be much different than lvl 1, right?

In D&D/AD&D, level 2 characters average twice the hit points of level 1, and there are significant gains for spellcasters, so it isn't really just a minor difference that 1 level would imply in many other game systems.

While complex stuff (as in, hard to grasp) is no problem, loads of stuff (as in, a lot of material to go through) is to be avoided. The less of a lecture my players have to go through on the first run, before (if?) they get hooked, higher the chance they will be engaged in the actual game.

If your players are novices to RPGs in general, you might try an adventure module designed to be explicitly introductory, such as N4 Treasure Hunt which even has the option of having characters start at level 0 and gain a class only after leveling up.

Now, I have almost no knowledge about pre AD&D systems, so when you say BECMI, i should use this book, right?

Right, BECMI is the 5 box set series beginning with the "Red Box" Basic set in 1983 and continuing with the "Blue Box" Expert set later that year (followed by Green Companion, Black Master, and Gold Immortals). It was based on the 1981 B/X version of D&D, with a Red Basic Rulebook and a Blue Expert Rulebook, and there isn't much difference between the two at lower levels, so B10 can easily can be integrated into the earlier system and B4 can easily be integrated into the later system. Since T1-4 relied on AD&D (1st edition), there's more of a rules gap, but it isn't too difficult to play an AD&D module with B/X or BECMI rules, or to play a B/X or BECMI module with AD&D rules.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

The Traveller Adventure

 

[v1rus]

You are a gentleman and a scholar Zed Duke of Banville. Ty.

I'd stay off ToEE for now, and choose either B4 or B10. Think I'm leaning towards the Lost City for now, even if, from little I know, I lean towards BECMI, instead of B/X - and I'd def avoid any converting, or any such complications for the very first run.

I'd let them take it on level 1, even better if they get their assess handed to them. We actually respond quite well to that stuff. I really dislike the 6 player count tho. I can find 6 players easy, but more the people - more the chaos. Adding more people once some of them know the ropes, and are actually into it would be a lot easier - the greatest challenge right now is to make the fuckers take the game seriously, and realize that tabletop RPGs arent "just for noobs who like to larp".

I really like these recommendations - but, folks, keep 'em coming in! I'll def offer the fuckers a multitude of options, so they can choose at least something.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

the greatest challenge right now is to make the fuckers take the game seriously, and realize that tabletop RPGs arent "just for noobs who like to larp".

have you considered playing a more rules-heavy RPG than D&D?

 

[v1rus]

the greatest challenge right now is to make the fuckers take the game seriously, and realize that tabletop RPGs arent "just for noobs who like to larp".

have you considered playing a more rules-heavy RPG than D&D?

I have - as I said above, any system, any setting, as long as its well designed and challenging.

Huge points for the game introducing mechanics and systems gradually - both for my sake (think ill off somebody if I have to read a 350p rulebook, and we do one session, and thats it) and for their sake. Mind you, its difficult to explain what i mean by this - take some heavy board games for example. They have difficult to grasp and complicated systems, but those are explained over a 30p-40p rulebook, and thats perfectly fine as opposed to something like DnD 3.5 - which explains the "basics" over 350 pages, and has way too many options for a first time play. Its not that stuff is bad, or hard to grasp - its that its hard get into, and harder to get fuckers into it.

 

[v1rus]

Did a bit more research onto B/X and BECMI. Curious stuff. And ye, ofc, you were right, converting between BX and BECMI seems like a trifling matter. I'd really like to read all those adventures one day. I take it there is no sense in reading both rulebooks tho? Most people on the internet seem to prefer Moldvay B, with running the solo scenario from Mentzer.

And as usual, Im starting to deviate and expand my plans. Now I'm thinking, if my players agree to old school DnD of doing a B2 -> B4 -> X2 run. This has always been the bane of me.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

The Mentzer 'Red Box' Basic Rules are considerably longer than the Moldvay Basic Rulebook, with most of the extra pages devoted to an explanation of the basics of D&D, via a solo linear narrative followed by a solo CYOA-style adventure. Functionally, there isn't much difference between those two, or between the two Expert rule sets, but the bulk of D&D material (most adventure modules and all Known World / Mystara setting books) was created for the Mentzer D&D rules starting in 1983, though not either B2 The Keep of the Borderlands (originally published in 1980 for Holmes 'Blue Book' D&D and revised in 1981 to be included with the new Moldvay basic rules) or B4 The Lost City (published in 1982 for the Moldvay rules). The Keep on the Borderlands has the reputation of being deadly for newbies, but perhaps that's a bonus if you want to alter a mindset about tabletop RPGs being for LARPers.

Of course, it's the Mentzer BECMI rules that have the beautiful artwork by Elmore and Easley.

Spoiler

Though we also have a few avatars from Moldvay/Cook B/X D&D, courtesy of Erol Otus and Jeff Dee

Spoiler

And a few avatars from B4 The Lost City, courtesy of Jim Holloway

 

[v1rus]

The Keep on the Borderlands has the reputation of being deadly for newbies, but perhaps that's a bonus if you want to alter a mindset about tabletop RPGs being for LARPers.

Excellent. Excellent. I really wanna do this run now. Mind you, not in a next month or two prolly, especially since I want to run it for 6 now, but if I learned something from previous failed attempts, its that its better to have it prepared a month in advance, than hour in advance.

What do you think about the suggested path of B2->B4->X2?

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

All three are classic modules, the level progression should work out so that the PCs are sufficiently powerful by the start of X2, and all three modules are all written for a party of 6-10 characters (or 6-9 for B2). Should be a solid adventure series!

 

[DavidBVal]

Was this ever played v1rus ? I am interested, as I am myself discovering and running some of these old modules now.

 

[v1rus]

Was this ever played v1rus ? I am interested, as I am myself discovering and running some of these old modules now.

Sadly, not yet - I took my sweet time planning and preparing it, then RL shit came my way, and just when I got over that, Corona bullshit started ramping up.

I'm not giving up on it yet tho. Situation should be back to normal in 2-3 weeks, and I'm hoping to run it then.

 

[DavidBVal]

Good, don't give up!

Also, as for rules, you may want to check 1991's Rules Cyclopedia, which compiles in one book all the Basic/Expert relevant stuff in a clear and nice layout. I'd rather use that than the separate Basic and Expert books -except for the art, which of course is better in the 1983 boxed sets-

 

[DavidBVal]

And a few avatars from B4 The Lost City, courtesy of Jim Holloway

I couldn't stop laughing when I turned the page and found that "dwarf selfie".

 

[Kliwer]

All pre-generated RPG adventures suck. All of them.

A good PnP adventure is tailored to the preferences of the players and their specific characters. It's impossible to write and run a good RPG adventure without knowing the team.

A good adventure doesn't even have to have a good plot. History has to react to the players' actions - that's all.

And what's the point of being a Game Master if you don't come up with your own adventures?

 

[DavidBVal]

A good PnP adventure is tailored to the preferences of the players and their specific characters. It's impossible to write and run a good RPG adventure without knowing the team.

Just no. Tell your snowflake players to suck it up and shove them down a dungeon. For the half that survives? you may start putting some work on interwining their stories with your stuff, *if* it serves the common enjoyment.

My current, personal view of the game is, you develop your character 90% as you play, 10% when you create the concept. It is OK to start with very little and build up as the adventure advances. It is teamwork. For instance, one of the players may surface some phobia at a time that makes sense for the adventure. Maybe he came up with it on the spot. The DM picks up from there -or not, depending on what's best.

Back in the day, as kids, we slowly tended to the opposite, with two-page backstories and a DM that became the cheap bitch, servicing six different backgrounds full with solo-sessions, personal nemesis, ancestors and whatnot. It was particularly painful when the game fell apart, which happened pretty often given each of the six players felt motivated by very different goals. D'oh!

Now? At least for me, time and opportunities to play are too limited to waste them on all that. Look, I'm not against some of that attention paid to players, but "personal" stuff must be a very small part of what happens in a game table. If having a complex backstory helps the player to RP better, that's fine. Just don't expect the whole world to be related to who killed your parents.

That in regards to backstories. If your problem is mechanics/balance, for instance, "my 5 players want to be an all-thief party, these encounters/challenges are not appropiate!" well, that's extremely easy to adjust and fix, even on the spot.

Finally, it's true that most published modules are shit, but certainly not all are. A game run "as written" of Shadows Over Bogenhafen or Horror on the Orient Express will probably be better than anything 99.9999% of DMs may tailor for their groups.

 

[Kliwer]

I understand this point of view. This style can be fun. Sometimes I choose it for completely new or less experienced players. For advanced players it can also be interesting - although for me such a game is too much like a board game.

Adapting encounters to the team is not that easy. For example, I am currently running a session for two people - a bard and a cleric. No standard D&D adventure can be enjoyed with such a team.

A lot also depends on the preferences of the players. In my sessions there is usually no more than 2-3 fights per a typical 8-12 hour session, so most of the standard adventures are too loaded with battles.

 

[DavidBVal]

I understand this point of view. This style can be fun. Sometimes I choose it for completely new or less experienced players. For advanced players it can also be interesting - although for me such a game is too much like a board game.

Adapting encounters to the team is not that easy. For example, I am currently running a session for two people - a bard and a cleric. No standard D&D adventure can be enjoyed with such a team.

A lot also depends on the preferences of the players. In my sessions there is usually no more than 2-3 fights per a typical 8-12 hour session, so most of the standard adventures are too loaded with battles.

Indeed there's no black or white on this matter, and with a party of two you can pay more attention to the players and personalize the adventure more than with five or six players.

Bard+Cleric can beat anything, really. Just reintroduce an aspect from old D&D that is rarely used nowadays: henchmen.

I once ran a game in which low-mid level characters were (due to plot) leading a squad of 20 mercenary archers. They faced strong monsters, encounters that normally would be impossible for their levels, and it was a pretty memorable adventure.

Back in the olden days it was more typical for players to recruit 2-3 fighters before heading into a dungeon. This offers excellent roleplaying opportunities too, and if they survive you can flesh them out. Your bard player may shine in the recruiting area, or the cleric may find some support from the temple.

Past month ran a magnificent classic module, "The Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh", U1 (1981). In the second part of the adventure the level 2 party confronts a whole ship with about 15 pirates, including a level 6 captain and a level 4 wizard! It's supposed to be a stealth mission, but still at some point there's gonna be an ugly battle. Thus when the party is assigned the mission, a couple "Royal Excisemen" are assigned to their service as henchmen. As the party was small, I made it four; it brought pretty fun interactions and roleplaying when some of them tried to play hero or stuff their pockets with treasure. Also, there's another classic element to reinforce what the small party lacks: the "rescued prisoner" found in the dungeon. In U1 you release an enslaved Sea Elf which joins the party as a badass warrior.

 

[hello friend]

My current, personal view of the game is, you develop your character 90% as you play, 10% when you create the concept. It is OK to start with very little and build up as the adventure advances. It is teamwork.

A lot more fun that way. Always fun to see how your character develops into something completely different than the 5 minute brainstorm skeleton of a concept you had in mind at first. It's good to have some context for why you're engaged in the incredibly risky and deadly dungeoneering trade, especially in that lovely hobo stage when you're barely keeping up with expenses. Normal people would just stay on the farm, collect those taxes, or do whatever it is they used to do. But ultimately it's just there to give you a reason. Nobody wants to around and hear your anguished soliloquys about your complicated past breaking up the flow of the game. A little is flavour. Too much, and there's not much game left. When P&P RP devolves into something akin to pure theatre, it's like those games that are just a succession of boring cutscenes. I feel a lot of systems go too far in giving players power over the narrative. Ideally, in a session you're constantly balancing risk, reward, fucking around and having a blast, and genuine RP.

 

[Darth Roxor]

All pre-generated RPG adventures suck. All of them.

What nonsense. My group is about to finish the Enemy Within campaign for WFRP (though we are stopping after the 4th part out of 6 because 5 is glorified dlc and 6 is kind of tardo), and I can only say that the Power Behind the Throne blows anything I've ever done completely out of the water when it comes to complexity and depth; Shadows over Bogenhafen and Death on the Reik are excellent as well.

The Enemy Within is also the first premade adventure/campaign I've ever run, up until now I've always been making my own scenarios, and I can't say it's any less fun or difficult to run compared to the stuff I made, because players will always step off the rails somehow no matter how detailed the scenario is. If anything, if these are things you haven't figured out yourself from start to finish first, it's sometimes harder to fill in the gaps yourself when you get blindsided. The only easier thing for you as the GM is to get the general flow established, but after that you still have tons of work to do to make it right.

Adapting encounters to the team is not that easy.

It's banal as long as you know the system well.

 

[Grunker]

All pre-generated RPG adventures suck. All of them.

If someone pointed a gun at my head and said "ALL PRE-GENS SUCK OR ALL NON-PRE-GENS SUCK, YOU MUST CHOOSE", I'd choose the latter in a heartbeat. For every mediocre pre-generated adventure I've played, I've played 10 incredibly sucky adventures made by a DM with delusions about his own ability to exert the work ethics needed to craft everything himself.

 

[DavidBVal]

All pre-generated RPG adventures suck. All of them.

What nonsense. My group is about to finish the Enemy Within campaign for WFRP (though we are stopping after the 4th part out of 6 because 5 is glorified dlc and 6 is kind of tardo), and I can only say that the Power Behind the Throne blows anything I've ever done completely out of the water when it comes to complexity and depth; Shadows over Bogenhafen and Death on the Reik are excellent as well.

To be fair: that's probably the best fantasy campaign ever published. It's not easy to find *anything* comparable, or at least I don't know of anything.

 

[Falksi]

Been a good 25 years since I played it, but I remember having a good time with Warhammer' s Enemy Within Campaign being great fun. Starts you out as fresh beginners and takes you all the way through to taking on some of the most powerful monsters in the realm.

• The Enemy Within / Mistaken Identity
• Shadows Over Bögenhafen
• Death on the Reik
• Power Behind the Throne
• Something Rotten in Kislev
• Empire in Flames

Sure there's other posters on here who can give you a better lowdown on it from a more adult perspective, but most tabletop RPG's descended into a teenage farse of bumming elves and throwing dwarves', whilst we actually managed to see that whole campaign through (granted it did include elf buggary & dwarf sports at intervals too though)