Post/Author/DateTime	Post
smerwin29 07-09-07, 02:31 PM	A few people reading this thread's title might think, "Oh boy, now we are going to get a lecture not to change the adventures we DM." That is not the case. In fact, I am going to suggest that DMs DO alter adventures when it is reasonable and productive to do so. I have created a new thread for this because it has come up in more than one other thread in this forum, as well as on other forums. I am speaking only for myself and not for August, Greg or Brian here, although I have a suspicion that they might agree with me. I write adventures or edit adventures for many reasons, but the main reason is because I want players and DMs to be able to have a good time. I want to give them a challenge, whether that challenge be role-playing, tactical combat, a puzzle, or a dilemma. I do not write adventures with the expectation that all tables follow a plot that cannot be altered. If there is something in an adventure that is causing problems, please change it. For the sake of continuity, it is best to change it as little as possible, but DMs should feel free to change things. Different players and groups get fun and satisfaction in different ways. The same thing that delights one table or player may deeply upset another. The author can only set up a framework for the game: It is up to the DM to turn that framework into the actual play experience. It might be something as small as changing the personality, age, or other attributes of an NPC. It might be something as large as adding encounters to the adventure to account for unanticipated PC decisions. This is not to say that adventure authors should not be held accountable for the work they do. They, we, and I certainly should. But please understand that is hard enough to account for all player actions and choices in character; it is impossible to account for all the personalities/ages/beliefs of the players who come to the table. That falls into the realm of the DM. Thanks, Shawn
Skerrit 07-09-07, 05:25 PM	I have said this since LGR, and in fact SRM started adding it to the blurb in MOH: adventures are meant to be tailored to the players. If you have a table where everyone is a heavy role-player with particularly non-effective combat abilities, considering altering a combat to have a RP solution that was forgotten by the author isn't cheating. If your table is walking every fight and you feel a caster should have had a different spell selection to make things challenging, go ahead and change it. You should make things fun for the players without overwhelming or boring or offending them. The judge is there to make sure everyone has the best time they can. Please feel free to make minor adjustments to a story in order to increase your players fun. I am planning on adding a section to the XECS covering this very thing.
JJeff 07-09-07, 08:46 PM	Yes, oh great Factionmasters. We hear and obey. Screwe.. I mean, Challenged will be our players and more entertained they will be. That would mean more research and planning on our part since we would need to figure out if the enemy spell selection is good against our players. Sigh... need to do spell/power/etc research...
Harliquinn 07-09-07, 09:29 PM	I don't anticipate it should take much if any pre-preparation if you are at least familiar with D&D spells in general. I have modified modules slightly in the past on the fly, but always to make it more interesting or exciting for the players.
kiddoc 07-09-07, 10:22 PM	I could not agree more--and I thank Shawn heartily for making the point so eloquently. In fact, I regularly, and pompously assume that Blackwheel DM's are top notch, and therefore I can write with gusto and flare, giving a heated storyline and dynamic tension, and let them adjust as necessary. I realize, of course, that this is not always the case. Nevertheless, I strongly encourage DM's to do what they feel is just and proper to enhance the play value of these modules. We're not writing to you, we're writing for you. And just like any gift, you must use it as you see fit.
echoota 07-10-07, 10:18 AM	I'm glad to hear this encouragment. I've had the chance now to play through all six Cabal missions and I've enjoyed them all, but I'm rather baffled as to how any of them could be played in a four hour time slot. Encouraging DM editing would be wonderful, as it normally takes us about seven hours to get through these mods. When it's 3am, and you expected to be finished by midnight, despite the fun it gets aggrivating. Our group has gone through 20+ Living Greyhawk mods in a normal four hour time frame, but Xen'drik is proving to be extra long each time. In particular, the last three Cabal mods seemed to have an excess of encounters, particularly #5, with lots of small encounters which chew up a huge amount of time. Number six started out strong, but then we once again had a lot of smaller encounters which seemed like they could have been trimmed without any impact on the overall arc of the story. We all really enjoy Xen'drik, much more than LG, but the length of the mods is starting to wear on our group. The more our regular DM can be encouraged to trim the fat from the mods the better!
Madfox11 07-10-07, 10:39 AM	Showing how different group interaction can be since around here people have a problem keeping the LG adventures within the 4 hour slot, while the Xen'drik rarely if ever runs late.
Diablo05 07-11-07, 08:28 AM	Our group has gone through 20+ Living Greyhawk mods in a normal four hour time frame, but Xen'drik is proving to be extra long each time. This is largely because Xendrick mods promote role play, investigation, and even *gasp* thinking outside the box text, as opposed to LG where the answer is always kill it. However, if your strapped for time, it is usually quite easy for the GM to push the pace in these mods. My group has gotten through a couple of them in as little as two hours, though we generally prefer to take our time when possible. In particular, the last three Cabal mods seemed to have an excess of encounters, particularly #5, with lots of small encounters which chew up a huge amount of time. Well really, that totally depended on how you went about it (in CoS 5 anyhow). A huge chunk of those encounters couldve been skipped. In fact, I think my group did skip most of them (didn't read the mod, so I can't say for sure how many we hit and how many we didn't) and made up our own (or rather, forced the GM to). We were totally off the map on that mod, but it came together great all the same.
Madfox11 07-11-07, 12:43 PM	This is largely because Xendrick mods promote role play, investigation, and even *gasp* thinking outside the box text, as opposed to LG where the answer is always kill it. O come on, either you live in a region with a very limited scope of adventure types or your group just goes into combat mode when playing LG or you have only played a very limited set of Xen'drik adventures. The only ones to blame when you are not thinking outside of the box is the DM and/or yourself. In LG a DM should not follow an adventure as a holy scripture to the letter either. Authors are people and they cannot take every possible action into account. A good DM realizes what the intent is of an adventure and hence make the necessary adjustments without destroying the plot based on PC action. I have played many of the Xen'drik adventures, and their quality and style is really not different from the majority of LG adventures.
Marcia_S 07-11-07, 10:25 PM	Are there any plans in the works for toning down the items in the new Magic Item Compendium? Some of them are pretty over the top and WAY more powerful than their low gp cost would justify. I'm asking my players to refrain themselves from abusing these items, but would prefer an actual campaign ruling, so I don't have to figure out a way to up the challenge of the mods to account for multiple huge giant vermin in every combat. Marcia
Madfox11 07-12-07, 04:59 AM	Most of those items have been priced that low on pupose by the designers. There are a couple that are silly, the most important one is the huge scorpion summoning one. That is so bad we politely asked a player not to use it. Due to the expension slot rules most others are hardly that gamebreaking... (and many of the items people consider gamebreaking really are not in my opinion).
Skerrit 07-12-07, 09:52 AM	A few of the items, the scorpian summoning stone in particular, will become restricted in the next version of the XECS. Use 'em while you can!
Diablo05 07-12-07, 10:23 AM	O come on, either you live in a region with a very limited scope of adventure types or your group just goes into combat mode when playing LG or you have only played a very limited set of Xen'drik adventures. The only ones to blame when you are not thinking outside of the box is the DM and/or yourself. In LG a DM should not follow an adventure as a holy scripture to the letter either. Authors are people and they cannot take every possible action into account. A good DM realizes what the intent is of an adventure and hence make the necessary adjustments without destroying the plot based on PC action. I have played many of the Xen'drik adventures, and their quality and style is really not different from the majority of LG adventures. Its true, a DM SHOULD be ready to go off road with a mod, but, I dont know, it seems a lot more common in XE than in LG. A big problem with finding alternate solutions to problems in other living games, is that it can end up screwing you in the end. You know that orc boss you stealthed past instead of killing? Too bad you're going to miss out on claiming his +5 flaming vorpal adamantian greatsword. *shrug* I like XE's way of doing things better.