This was initially going to be a blog post before I decided that it needed more feedback that was possible through the comment system.
Basically, I'm asking What is needed to make a great introduction adventure for brand new players?
Background
Keep on the Shadowfell has been kicked and abused for some time, for several reasons. Recently, WotC_Rodney put out a call for feedback wondering how they could make the official adventures better. Meanwhile, back at the forums, every time a new player arrives asking about 4e they tend to be directed by someone (occasionally even me) to the Test D&D page. But in a recent thread, someone asked how good KotS was as an introduction. I thought to myself: "no, it's actually a pretty terrible, illogical, and flawed dungeon slog with filler encounters and a complete absence of story and memorable PCs aside from a single goblin."
Why is KotS bad? Aside from what others say (links below), it also serves two masters, with all the well-known connotations of that. KotS serves as an introduction to 4e and was designed to: introduce the design elements of the edition, dispel preconceptions, and be playable without the core books. It was designed for players new to 4e but who likely had a background with D&D. It was the first big look at the new edition. That was its primary design function: be the adventure that launches the edition and product line to its anxious fans. But the adventure now serves as the introduction to the game to people who have never played before or haven't played since first of second edition. The two design goals aren't mutually exclusive, but they don't complement each other.
For example, KotS isn't easy. Irontooth, even after that encounter's nerfing, has had its fair share of TPKs. The first section has four fights: ELs 1, 2, 1 and then 6. First level players – at the end of their very first session – after two previous fights that day are going into a L+5 encounter. I'm not saying the Irontooth encounter is bad. It had a very good purpose at the time: showing the former 3e players that 4e wasn't going to be D&D on "easy mode". But is that really how you want to introduce brand new people to the game? Likewise, there are some other nasty fights that can reduce players who aren't used to the game or aren’t natural tacticians into a fine red paste. There are other people who have explained the problems of KotS better than I ever could. Premiere among them is the Eleven Foot Pole blog and this blog's entry.
Building a Better Playertrap
Here’s the idea and challenge. With the community we have on the forums, it’d be possible to build a better starter adventure. Something fun and interesting that really sells D&D and 4e. Something you can link to when a new player posts and say “run that!” Here’s where the blog format fails. I’d like some feedback on what makes a great 4e D&D adventure, and what makes a great starting adventure. What have you found lacking in past adventures? What worked for you? What did your DM do right, and what did they do wrong? What was your favourite adventure when you first started out?
Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say? Spoiler:Show
My Webcomic
Updated Tuesday and Thursday
Read my blog on the WotC Community Site (updated irregularly to avoid spamming the "Featured Blogger" list).
Whenever I've taught people to play, I've done it using the "learn by doing" method. Outside of explaining how to read their character sheets, I design the adventure to use all their relevant abilities as time goes on.
For example, one adventure I ran began with the players' hometown being raided by a group of bandits. Each player was in a different part of town, relevant to their character and abilities. For example, the ranger was sleeping in a tree near the entrance to the town (where the small army entered). He made a perception check to notice that a roof was high enough for him to pull himself up and try to escape the city. Then he had to make checks to scamper across the rooftops, and a stealth check to hide from enemies.
Likewise, other players found themselves in relevant situations that allowed them to get a feel for their character's skills. In addition, each player individually came across an appropriate number of minions who had broken off from the larger group, and had no choice but to fight.
They exited the town in the same area (a secret escape route in the wall), and had their first combat as a team against one of the smaller groups stationed around the town to pick off survivors.
That would be my preferred way to set up a starter adventure. Not my adventure, because I was a newbie DM when designing it, but the basic idea of how to approach it.
If I was going to attempt this, I'd have some of the following goals, some of which are, in my opinion, non-trivial.
1) There has to be a variable plot. Some groups want "good guy vs. bad guy" scenarios. Some people want intrigue and mystery. Some people want to just skip the plot. 2) There has to be variable danger. Some people want the risk of death and knowing that there are times to run away. Some people will never return to the game if their character dies. 3) There has to be variable difficulty. Some people will already know the ruleset. Some people will have never played an RPG before. Some people will know a different set of rules and may resist adjusting. Some people are strong tactically. Some people want simple easy combat. 4) There has to be different solutions. Some encounters should be designed so that they can be completed via RP, Skill Checks, combat, or combinations of the above. 5) There has to be varying amounts of fluff. Some people want pre-made fluff. Some people ignore the fluff. Some people will want to change the fluff.
The reason for this insane set of goals is that all of the above people play 4th ed and post on this forum. If we're introducing people to D&D, we need the module to allow them to introduce people to their version of D&D, not someone else's version of D&D.
I think it could be done. Heck, I might even get crazy and want to try to do it. But making a module that complex and making it simple to run seems to call for a fractal design, easy to look at, but very hard to create from nothing (at least for me).
As an introductory run, I will often start players in a public place (market place, tavern, docks, etc...) where they can overhear several rumours, news, or gossip. That or possibly spot a crime taking place. I will clue players into making skill rolls by giving them an incentive based on their passive skills, and class choice.
Once the players choose an incentive hook, I start telling the next part of the story they are following. The second step can often lead to a chase. Either the PCs being chased (followed), or visa verca. The second step may also lead to exploration, or leaving the community to search for some placed romoured to be in the wilds nearby. (Either of these could end in a short skirmish, or oppurtunity to use bluff, diplomacy, or intimidate. I usually leave it wide open to player choice, but once a weapon is drawn talking is usually over and done in most cases.)
Thirdly the resolution to the second step always leaves a lead to further adventure, or the PCs can choose to ignore following this trail, and go investigate another hook. Again letting options remain open.
Should the PCs choose to follow the clues, and stay on the first hook. They will then be contacted in one way or another by minions of the boss they are trying to sniff out. Depending on the boss and his/her objectives this could be a roleplay, or combat adventure. Even seen what was intended to just be a roleplay encounter turn sour, and become a combat encounter.
The resolution of this third step will leave them with enough clues to try and seek their first boss. Along the way to the boss, I will set up a few encounters. These could be monsters, an ambush, traps, another attempt at parley, whatever fits with the objectives of the boss.
The finale of the introductory will be with the boss, who will be at least be a challenging fight in and of himself. I often throw one or two main henchmen in there, and some rabble, or minions. I say fight, but depending upon PCs actions up to this point. The fight could be a skills encounter of the PCs trying to join the local thieve's guild, and the boss is the guildmaster who they have to convince.
Overall I just try and tell a story, and let the PCs assist in that telling.
Well, bons, I think you may be considering serving too many masters there, lol. I mean all of what you say definitely has merit, but maybe its best to pare it down to a shorter list of goals. I'm thinking what would be good would be an adventure that is pretty heavily focused on a specific target audience, say players that are new, new to 4e at least, or inexperienced. I think it would be good if it also catered to a less than experienced DM, probably one that hasn't run 4e before and MAY even be a new player herself.
I think maybe the elements should:
1) Provide situations that allow the players to exercise most of the basic 4e subsystems. 2) Gives them a pretty clear set of adventuring goals but allows for a couple of alternate paths. 3) Is fairly easy to survive but can allow for some more difficult to achieve goals. 4) Leaves a decent number of hooks lying around so the DM will have somewhere to go with the story afterwards if they want (these can always be easily left out).
I would set it in Nentir Vale, though obviously it should be generic enough to be fairly easy to drop into another setting. This should be pretty easy with a level 1 adventure.
To elaborate a bit more on the above points if anyone is interested...
Point 1 is pretty obvious. As others have said you want there to be plenty of situations with skill checks, some skill challenges, obviously some combat, maybe also a chance to cast a ritual, etc. There should be a couple of page 42 type situations with a terrain power or two, etc. The trick of course is to lay it out carefully enough that a starting DM should be able to run all of that. I think its possible but it may prove to be a bit more wordy than your average module.
Point 2 I think is a key. Most new starting players aren't really exactly sure what they are supposed to do. They have a whole game system to get used to. No adventure should lead you around by the nose but the whole point of an intro adventure is to get something going. That something could be RP or dropping the party right into a fight or whatever but they should be clearly provided with a sign that says "Hey, here's something you can dive right into." They may ignore it and do something else, but scene 1 probably shouldn't be everyone meets in a bar.
Point 3 I think really the adventure shouldn't be inordinately difficult. I think that is a pretty obvious issue with KotS in a couple places as we all know. Not that the adventure should be just a cakewalk but a TPK should be pretty much out. If more experienced people want to play it, they can up the difficulty themselves. Instead I'd structure it so that the basic goals of the adventure can be achieved by most any party but if they are more than averagely clever they can do more than just that. The DM can specifically reward extraordinary play in some fashion and that can be an element of the adventure.
Point 4 well, I think most starting DMs can always use a leg up. Not only should the adventure be a good intro for players, it should be a good intro for a new DM and showing the DM a few story telling tricks can't hurt. If the hooks don't mesh with what a DM wants then they are easy enough to just leave out and won't hurt the adventure any.
Well, I could go on for a month, lol. Got plenty of ideas in my idea file.
Well, bons, I think you may be considering serving too many masters there, lol.
I know I am, but, in many respects, those are the complaints I hear about KoTS. I'm worried that if I don't serve that many masters, it's just going to become KoTS all over again.
I like your four goals, but I don't understand off the top of my head where KoTS fails to meet those goals. If I knew that, I might have a better idea of what you want out of the module.
Well, bons, I think you may be considering serving too many masters there, lol.
I know I am, but, in many respects, those are the complaints I hear about KoTS. I'm worried that if I don't serve that many masters, it's just going to become KoTS all over again.
I like your four goals, but I don't understand off the top of my head where KoTS fails to meet those goals. If I knew that, I might have a better idea of what you want out of the module.
Hehe, yeah, I don't personally think KotS is so much lacking in concept, though its a bit droll, but mostly in its execution. The dungeon is rather forgettable overall. There's really very little mystery involved in the whole thing, or more rather the mystery of the Keep is certainly not all that deep and the mystery of what happened to the archeologist is both irrelevant to the overall plot and easily solved. Skill challenges are pretty much non-existent. The bad guys exist for nothing but hacking up. There are a few opportunities to do minor cinematic stuff but they don't have a big impact on the adventure. I think overall it just needs to be taken to another level and begs to be a bit less linear. In the hands of a good DM there is material there that can be worked into a better story, but then the Keep itself is sort of a boat anchor on the whole thing. Maybe I should reread it, but it seemed like many of the encounters were fairly superfluous. It should be pretty easy to improve on that.
Personally I think the best approach to the OP's main goal of an introductory adventure for new players will succeed best if that is laser-like the focus of the module. All the stuff you brought up in your first post should be kept in mind for sure, but where there is a choice I'd make it in the direction of serving that main goal.
Just a few very general ideas of elements that could go into it might be:
The module could start with a vignette that would illustrate some kind of ancient history that will relate to the adventure later. It should be pretty straightforward to run, might involve ancestors of the PCs, etc. This can set the stage for the adventure itself and create a real sense of drama in the players. They're new, lets wow them a bit and blow away any preconcieved notions of what an RPG is.
There should definitely be a cast of NPCs that are sharply drawn. KotS NPCs were a bit forgettable mostly. They weren't bad, but I imagine some more distinctive ones. They should have some history and a bit of flair. Instead of a cranky woman that is just described as being a traitor (one of the KotS NPCS I recall) make her a descendant of a historical plot related bad guy determined to oppose the party for her own goals. It doesn't have to be too elaborate, just less thin than KotS's "she's a demon cultist" and a bit more concrete than "maybe she slips off now and then to report to the enemy".
So I guess I'd see an opening vignette that casts the story as more of a drama, then perhaps a scene where the PCs come together with perhaps a small fight, then the characters are faced with a simple choice of immediate direction to go in, pursue the thief or help put out the fire kind of thing. Each choice could lead to one unique skill challenge. After that the main crisis manifests, something bad is happening, heroes are required! From there the PCs can start to drive forward to solve problems with maybe a branch that gives some chance to do some investigation and another branch that just involves charging straight forward into danger.
Well, bons, I think you may be considering serving too many masters there, lol. I mean all of what you say definitely has merit, but maybe its best to pare it down to a shorter list of goals. I'm thinking what would be good would be an adventure that is pretty heavily focused on a specific target audience, say players that are new, new to 4e at least, or inexperienced. I think it would be good if it also catered to a less than experienced DM, probably one that hasn't run 4e before and MAY even be a new player herself.
I think maybe the elements should:
1) Provide situations that allow the players to exercise most of the basic 4e subsystems. 2) Gives them a pretty clear set of adventuring goals but allows for a couple of alternate paths. 3) Is fairly easy to survive but can allow for some more difficult to achieve goals. 4) Leaves a decent number of hooks lying around so the DM will have somewhere to go with the story afterwards if they want (these can always be easily left out).
I would set it in Nentir Vale, though obviously it should be generic enough to be fairly easy to drop into another setting. This should be pretty easy with a level 1 adventure.
To elaborate a bit more on the above points if anyone is interested...
Point 1 is pretty obvious. As others have said you want there to be plenty of situations with skill checks, some skill challenges, obviously some combat, maybe also a chance to cast a ritual, etc. There should be a couple of page 42 type situations with a terrain power or two, etc. The trick of course is to lay it out carefully enough that a starting DM should be able to run all of that. I think its possible but it may prove to be a bit more wordy than your average module.
Point 2 I think is a key. Most new starting players aren't really exactly sure what they are supposed to do. They have a whole game system to get used to. No adventure should lead you around by the nose but the whole point of an intro adventure is to get something going. That something could be RP or dropping the party right into a fight or whatever but they should be clearly provided with a sign that says "Hey, here's something you can dive right into." They may ignore it and do something else, but scene 1 probably shouldn't be everyone meets in a bar.
Point 3 I think really the adventure shouldn't be inordinately difficult. I think that is a pretty obvious issue with KotS in a couple places as we all know. Not that the adventure should be just a cakewalk but a TPK should be pretty much out. If more experienced people want to play it, they can up the difficulty themselves. Instead I'd structure it so that the basic goals of the adventure can be achieved by most any party but if they are more than averagely clever they can do more than just that. The DM can specifically reward extraordinary play in some fashion and that can be an element of the adventure.
Point 4 well, I think most starting DMs can always use a leg up. Not only should the adventure be a good intro for players, it should be a good intro for a new DM and showing the DM a few story telling tricks can't hurt. If the hooks don't mesh with what a DM wants then they are easy enough to just leave out and won't hurt the adventure any.
Well, I could go on for a month, lol. Got plenty of ideas in my idea file.
I agree heartily with everything written here.
Also, I think that one of the reason that KotS and the other 4e adventure modules are bland is because they are designed to be dropped into any campaign. Because of this they can't have any of the specifics that make real stories so interesting. Any module that tries to be all things to all people will suffer from this problem.
It's also my observation that new players like clear, obvious goals. "Go here, kill this" seems like a rookie move to a lot of experienced players, but new players really seem to appreciate it. They don't really know the possibilities of the game world yet and they need to be eased into it. Dropping them into a complex, open-ended sandbox situation will only confuse or (worse) bore them.
So I think it's quite okay if the first adventure is 'on rails'. They just need to be interesting rails that allow for some player choice at certain points.
One thing that a few people have pointed out already is that a good intro adventure needs more variety. It really is startling that after extensive development and hyping up of elements like traps and skill challenges, KotS and the other early modules include almost none of these. And that's to say nothing of the tons of cool ideas in the DMG2 and elsewhere that are nowhere to be found in published adventures. You would think the designers would put their money where their mouth is on some of this stuff.
Finally, having some really strong characters would help. People remember good characters. They talk about them for months afterwards and get excited when they show up later in a campaign. Building a couple unique characters into the module could give even a relatively vanilla dungeon crawl a boost.
Overall, I think a good intro adventure should be simple, yet also have a lot of variety and allow for new players and DMs to explore more aspects of the 4e game. It should also have a story and characters that actually interest players in the world. Don't be afraid to gear it specifically towards new players and DMs.
If WotC does these things they'll have taken a major step towards coming up with an engaging intro adventure.
So, who's up for a KoTS replacement write-off? Who's willing to put their graph paper where their mouth is?
Proposed rules: 1) You want to judge, you've gotta enter. 2) Not restricted to Dungeon Tiles. 3) Handles 4-6 Level 1 characters.
(Note: if you choose to restrict your to dungeon tiles or you set yours up so it can be played by 1-6 characters, judges may look favorably on it for those reasons, but we're not saying everyone has to do those things.)
Any other rules? Any suggestion on a deadline? Any takers?
