[Poll]-DM's Guild Adventure Preferences

[ruy343]

I'm thinking about writing out an adventure or two on the DM's Guild, largely with the intent of doing so for fun, and not for profit. However, I'm curious to know: what do DMs look for in such adventures?

As such, we're going to play a game of Would you Rather. Would you rather:


Have a collection of short adventures or a longer campaign?
Have lots of non-story detail, or a more generic story with hints on how to tie the adventure into an existing campaign?
Have a focus on lower levels or higher levels?
Have lots of maps and pictures and pay a higher price, or fewer maps and pictures for cheaper?
Have a storyline that centers around a central villain, or a storyline that's not based on a villain?
Have a more linear, choice-driven story (run along a flowchart, meaning less DM preparation), or a sandbox adventure (like what Wizards has been producing, meaning more DM preparation)?
Have mostly custom-created monsters, or monsters that come from established sources and save on text and cost by referencing those?
Have a high or low magic setting?


Here's a poll (https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScySiiDxFsU7cVERiZYcx2QolrPRRov5BHI8pQN_K-WHNHUAg/viewform) if you wish to contribute to science!

[Zanthy1]

I got you fam

[Gastronomie]

-Collection of short campaigns.
-Non-story detail (assuming it's not over-eccentric). It's possible - and really easy - to fit the adventures into existing campaigns either way if someone wants, even without written aid.
-Levels 7 to 12 seem like a good idea to me.
-Sell the pictures and maps as a separate product to allow the customers to decide for themselves. Everybody becomes happy.
-If it revolves around one villain, there's always the risk that he gets defeated earlier than expected, or the players don't find him interesting as a villain. Better go with multiple villains, unless you're REALLY sure your singular villain is memorable and exciting.
-Choice-driven, to provide a new option for DMs (creating something akin to WotC is not a good idea, since they're the professionals at it).
-Either works for monsters. Use custom if you think it's more mechanically fun. Otherwise, no reason to do so at all.
-Either works; that hardly has to do with how much the players get entertained. What's important is not whether the setting is high-magic or not, but rather, what you do with it (exploring floating relics like Laputa, etc.)

[Eladain]

-Collection of short campaigns.
-Non-story detail (assuming it's not over-eccentric). It's possible - and really easy - to fit the adventures into existing campaigns either way if someone wants, even without written aid.
-Levels 7 to 12 seem like a good idea to me.
-Sell the pictures and maps as a separate product to allow the customers to decide for themselves. Everybody becomes happy.
-If it revolves around one villain, there's always the risk that he gets defeated earlier than expected, or the players don't find him interesting as a villain. Better go with multiple villains, unless you're REALLY sure your singular villain is memorable and exciting.
-Choice-driven, to provide a new option for DMs (creating something akin to WotC is not a good idea, since they're the professionals at it).
-Either works for monsters. Use custom if you think it's more mechanically fun. Otherwise, no reason to do so at all.
-Either works; that hardly has to do with how much the players get entertained. What's important is not whether the setting is high-magic or not, but rather, what you do with it (exploring floating relics like Laputa, etc.)

Mostly agree with all of these. My only change or addition would maybe be a possible discount if someone purchased all of the adventures +maps instead of one or the other. That being said I am 100% clueless on how listing/pricing works for content creators on the DM's Guild and wouldn't want you to create a headache for yourself.

[ruy343]

I've received some awesome feedback so far, so thanks!

Thus far, the consensus has been to create adventures appropriate for the mid-levels. Why do you think that is?

[Gastronomie]

I've received some awesome feedback so far, so thanks!

Thus far, the consensus has been to create adventures appropriate for the mid-levels. Why do you think that is?Low levels are often over-played. High levels have a lot of abilities, meaning it's overcomplex for a lot of players. Mid-levels are not played as often, and have enough abilities to be versatile but yet not enough to be confusing.

[MrStabby]

I don't know if it counts, but I would go for locations. I never need anyone else's adventure but sometimes you can get caught out unprepared or the PCs decide to go somewhere random. Having a whole bunch of locations to pick from that can be quickly reskinned and worked into the plot/world might be useful.

A focus on maps and interactive parts that are harder for a DM to just make up on the fly.

[ruy343]

I don't know if it counts, but I would go for locations. I never need anyone else's adventure but sometimes you can get caught out unprepared or the PCs decide to go somewhere random. Having a whole bunch of locations to pick from that can be quickly reskinned and worked into the plot/world might be useful.

A focus on maps and interactive parts that are harder for a DM to just make up on the fly.

Let me see if I can understand exactly what you're asking for here:

You'd like to see a reference document with a dozen or so locations, each with a map and a few "Roll on this Table"-s to generate names encounters and information about the locale to be made up on the fly?

If I've got it about right with that one, then the follow-up question is: Would you rather the locales be of safe places for roleplaying, or areas in which to cast a combat encounter?

EDIT: For those who are DMs, please take the survey above to help!

[MrStabby]

Let me see if I can understand exactly what you're asking for here:

You'd like to see a reference document with a dozen or so locations, each with a map and a few "Roll on this Table"-s to generate names encounters and information about the locale to be made up on the fly?

If I've got it about right with that one, then the follow-up question is: Would you rather the locales be of safe places for roleplaying, or areas in which to cast a combat encounter?

First of all - let me say to not weight my answer too highly as it is unlikely to be typical of everyone. I am happy to put forward views on the basis that something is better than nothing...


As to your question: both ideally.

Now for roleplay, most will be related to the campaign the players are in rather than location specific but a few self contained PR encounters as part of a map could work well.

Combat is easier. I suppose I see something like a map with a problem structure as part of it - so some special features and synergy/tales between different parts of the map. Say if there are a lot of undead, then there is also a reason why the dead are up and about, texts in place that give some history, loot that pertains to the history and possibly some cool characters from that history.

Its easy to create encounters on the fly, so to provide value to a buyer you would need encounters that benefited from being able to take the time to plan. More than "there are X zombies in the room, they attack". More like - there are ghouls in the room you can sneak past - but they might smell you. Previously opening the doors to let the smell of the midden overwhelm the area will give advantage or if you secured the key from the steward you can just blockade yourself up on the balcony and use ranged attacks - themes that tie together the whole map.

For encounters it might be nice if you could scale some of them up - using the same map/personalities and very similar history you can swap out one creature type for another. Zombies at low level become ghouls are medium level which become mummies at higher levels still going up to vampire spawn at levels above that...


This would mean I could buy a handful of locations and when the PCs go somewhere unexpected or when I have not prepared properly I have a location the PCs can blunder in to that can be tied in with the plot, and I can use it whatever level the PCs are. I can buy it in advance and it will get used sometime.






There is one other thing that I think might work/could be fun occasionally. Going for the Tomb of Horrors effect. Build a lethal, but well defined campaign. Build a campaign or adventure path that players want to beat. Not being about role playing but a gauntlet for optimisers and those who want to use every tactic/skill they can to survive. If they fail, they die. There can be fun in throwing your body at an encounter till you survive as long as you know it is "fair" - in the sense that it is a pre-defined challenge rather than a DM not letting you get an advantage from your actions as any success will be countered by corresponding extra difficulty elsewhere. This should be short as it will lack the longevity of a more RP heavy campaign with the freedom it offers - something like a one shot you can run over a weekend. It is a very different style. Do a bunch, rate them by difficulty and let people's competitiveness demand that they keep getting the next one up in difficulty.

[Zanthy1]

I really like the idea of pre-made areas. A city that is drawn out and has either a preset list of people, or a "roll to determine" option if you want to spice things up. So DMs could literally go to their little booklet and find a city that matches the area their players are heading.

I also like the idea of encounter zones, but really thats much easier to do on ones own, city crafting is very hard to do on the fly, and even with prep is difficult.

[2D8HP]

The way to get me to buy Guild material is to be able to get a physical copy (not a PDF), and a way to purchase things without typing in my bank/credit Info "online" (I bought a textbook "online" once, but my card info went overseas!).