Things not to do when writing an adventure

[hymer]

- The villains steal an important item from the PCs. The players will find a way to protect it that the villains can't bypass without GM fiat.

You could write a scenario based on that, but you should have the villain make the attempt to steal the item towards the end of the previous session. That way you can write the scenario knowing your premise holds, and you can let the PCs thwart the attempt if they're smart or lucky enough. If they do so, the next session will likely be about why the villain wants that particular item, so you'd have to write that.

Better still, detail the villain's lair early on. You're 90% likely to need it before the end of the campaign anyway, and you can place the item in the strongbox, the treasure vault, under the villain's bed, or whereever it would make the most sense. Then you can have the villain try to steal the item, and whether they fail or not is acceptable. The PCs may raid it (for any number of reasons, some of which you can rpovide them with in various hooks) before they can take the whole place. Or later in the campaign they'll roll in there guns blazing for the final showdown. All the better if they do both. Going back to a place you've been before is an all too rare pleasure.

[Lorsa]

No, I would say the best written adventures are the ones that still work even if the group acts differently than the writer's group. You have to write it in a way that leaves it up to the players what kind of people they want to play and how they react to things they encounter. This works much better with site-based adventures. These can be considered a success even when the players laid waste to everything and are the last ones standing on top of of a pile of smoking rubble. When the game can only continue when the players do certain things, the risk of the players feeling like they have to do something they don't really want to is much higher.

The site-based adventures of which you speak would probably fall under the "dungeon/location/setting" category that I mentioned. Those are much more likely to work for a large variety of groups, and can more easily be adapted by the GM than "follow this railroad" adventures that are far too common.

[Final Hyena]

You know that awesome idea you have for an NPC, the guy who's super cool and everyone loves? Give him a personality that makes him likeable instead of a blank slate with a superiority complex. Nothing is more frustrating than a boring **** that the entire rest of the world loves in spite of his complete lack of charisma.

[The Insanity]

Make the adventure with a specific PC party in mind.

[Alcibiades]

Every piece of advice in here.

[hymer]

Make the adventure with a specific PC party in mind.

Is that thing to do or a thing not to do?

[The Insanity]

Is that thing to do or a thing not to do?

What do you think? Context of the title and question in the OP points to "don't do".

[Yora]

An adventure wouldn't be really useable for me if my players can't play it because they don't have the right character.

(Which is also why I like the really old D&D editions which don't really care about how much power the party brings to the dungeon. They just have to be more careful and clever when they have little and can go full frontal assault if they have a lot.)

[The Insanity]

An adventure wouldn't be really useable for me if my players can't play it because they don't have the right character.

Can't play it, how?

[Sith_Happens]

Magic items or enchantments that prevent players from using their spells that would be most helpful in the situation.

This can be done well, but it can't be contrived and it absolutely has to be brief.

For the shining example of failing at both of the above, see Dragonlance's Key of Destiny adventure path, where the MacGuffin the party receives just before reaching 9th level, and that they're expected to have with them all the way through 20th level, is permanently Dimensional Anchored with no reason given for why that is. Because heaven forbid the writers have to stop padding the adventure with wilderness encounters. Don't worry though, the Dimensional Anchor does make a specific exception for the extraplanar dragon graveyard that the MacGuffin's entire purpose is to get you into (though it does have some other moderately-useful powers to use along the way).

This is a personal pet peeve, but sending the PC's off on some adventure with no chance of them actually achieving anything.
[...]
5) No Macguffin. HA, silly PC's, thinking that they would find the Macguffin at Castle Deathrock, just because the DM dangled a plot hook in front of them saying "Go to Castle Deathrock and get the Macguffin". This was all an ELABORATE PLOT by the VILLAINS who are SO MUCH SMARTER THAN YOU ARE!

That's my addition; I hate it when a campaign has the heroes chasing a macguffin or trying to kill the villain and they repeatedly come within a hairs breadth of realising their goal only to be robbed of success by the story. I've run games like that and I think people only tolerated it because I made it a fun ride.

- Anything that hinges on the PCs failing. It's fine for PCs to fail at challenges (otherwise, they are not really challenges) but requiring them to fail to proceed is doomed to break the adventure. If the PCs find a clever way to succeed - and they likely will - you will have to either railroad them into failure or completely rewrite the adventure.

See: every last Cthulhutech adventure.

2. Don't tell people what their characters do or feel.
That includes boxed text that begins "As you enter the room"

Doesn't that just mean you wait for them to enter the room before reading that part?

[Tiktakkat]

Doesn't that just mean you wait for them to enter the room before reading that part?

Theoretically, sure.
Functionally, no.

If the boxed text does not come with a preamble that says directly:
"When the PCs enter the room, read the following."
Then some DMs will look at the room number, look at the shading (or whatever is used to indicate boxed text), and just read it verbatim.
Why?
"Because that is what the boxed text says. It says, "As you enter the room", therefore you enter the room. Period."

Do not assume anyone running or playing the adventure knows your intent in writing any particular passage.
Write precisely what you mean, with additional explanation as needed.

Aside from things that might seem obvious like this, it also helps avoid putting things like locks and traps after the boxed text, when the PCs have already taken actions past where such thing would affect them.

I would note this is an issue with the Delve Format of later WotC adventures, where the room description is JUST a raw description, then you need to flip 5-20 pages to get the encounter which has additional boxed describing what is trying to kill the PCs, leaving the players going "Shouldn't you have mentioned that first before going into details about the furnishings which aren't trying to eat our faces?"

[Honest Tiefling]

This thread has made me want to write an adventure called 'Descent into the Demon Temple' and make all of the NPCs some mortal race that worships a demon. Technically, the title is still accurate.

[2D8HP]

"You notice how the light from a multiple candle chandelier glimmers on the gold and silver threads in the tasteful tapestry's that line the walls of the room as the Minotaur clubs your head bloody".

"Shouldn't you have mentioned that first before going into details about the furnishings which aren't trying to eat our faces?"

[Tiktakkat]

"You notice how the light from a multiple candle chandelier glimmers on the gold and silver threads in the tasteful tapestry's that line the walls of the room as the Minotaur clubs your head bloody".

More like:

Spoiler: Map Location Boxed Text

Show

"The light filling this dingy chamber comes from two arrow slits along the far wall, a lantern hanging from the ceiling above a round table with four chairs near the center of the room, and low braziers filled with orange coals in each corner. Rough pallets stinking of sweat lie on the floor near each brazier, and a large chest rests against the back wall, between the two arrow slits."

Then, 11 pages later:

Spoiler: Tactical Encounter Boxed Text

Show

"Three ugly hyena-headed creatures and a human in a fine-looking breastplate sit around a table, gambling at dice. As the door swings open, they stare up in alarm, then fumble for their weapons as they rise from their seats."

Note that: 11 pages later.
So while the DM is flipping through the book, the players are already talking about wandering around the room, searching for treasure, when "SUDDENLY!" the inhabitants are mentioned.

[Kami2awa]

Descriptions should always be short - avoid "purple prose". It might be good to look at advice on describing places in written fiction.

Having said this, I have had players who didn't let me get beyond "it's a 10x10' room" before interrupting to announce what their PC would do.

[hymer]

What do you think? Context of the title and question in the OP points to "don't do".

I think both could make sense. If you're playing a West Marches-style shared sandbox, you shouldn't write areas with specific PCs in mind. That would be counter to the whole idea.
But if you're running an intrigue-heavy, plot-driven campaign, you should certainly tailor what you prepare things to the PCs with their huge backstories and peculiar goals.

[Alcibiades]

I think both could make sense. If you're playing a West Marches-style shared sandbox, you shouldn't write areas with specific PCs in mind. That would be counter to the whole idea.
But if you're running an intrigue-heavy, plot-driven campaign, you should certainly tailor what you prepare things to the PCs with their huge backstories and peculiar goals.

What we're talking about here are adventures written for publication or sharing, i.e. adventures intended for various other GMs to run themselves. In that context, writing with a specific party composition in mind is a bad idea.

Admittedly the title and OP aren't completely clear on that.

[hymer]

What we're talking about here are adventures written for publication or sharing, i.e. adventures intended for various other GMs to run themselves. In that context, writing with a specific party composition in mind is a bad idea.

Admittedly the title and OP aren't completely clear on that.

I think someone on page one started talking about something you should do. Made me even more confused.

[Cealocanth]

Underwater adventures.

These can be done well. The issue is that most people are not familiar with all that the ocean has to offer, and thus they end up being bland and boring. If you build an intricate, in-depth alien world that mirrors coral reefs or the twilight abyss in our world, the adventure can be just as entertaining as a trip to the elemental planes, or the Hells.

[Sith_Happens]

These can be done well. The issue is that most people are not familiar with all that the ocean has to offer, and thus they end up being bland and boring. If you build an intricate, in-depth alien world that mirrors coral reefs or the twilight abyss in our world, the adventure can be just as entertaining as a trip to the elemental planes, or the Hells.

The other key thing is you need to ensure the PCs will be fully prepared for any and all of the difficulties that normally come with being underwater.

[mikeejimbo]

I like published adventures to be broad strokes rather than a lot of detail, with suggestions and advice given for customizing it to the particular party, or fitting it in to a wider framework. Or even, since I play a lot of GURPS, switching the genre.

Let's say I'm writing an encounter about a bank heist. I'd write it in a modern setting from the point of view that the players are the investigators trying to stop it. I'd detail the layout of the bank and the general plan that the bank robbers have that the PCs are trying to thwart. Then I'd write about what happens if they don't stop it, and suggestions for various ways that it could be stopped, such as by discovering it beforehand and apprehending the criminals before it even happens, to protecting the bank in a high-stakes action-packed shootout. I'd mention that the details should be altered by the party makeup. If they're "action cops" like out of a Die Hard movie, then the robbers come packing more heat. If they're super sleuths, the bad guys leave more of a paper trail. There are niche roles even in modern action - if one of the PCs is a computer genius, then the bad guys leave a digital paper trail in their planning. Or if it comes to the shootout, the computer specialist has to go keyboard-to-keyboard with the bad guys' hacker, protecting the bank's security system from them.

I'd then provide a few general notes for adapting all this to sci-fi, western, and possibly even fantasy genres.

Presuming I haven't hit my word count (I wouldn't want to go too much over 4000 for where this would be published) I might even turn the tables and suggest some incentives for why the PCs might instead be the robbers.

I also really like adventures that introduce optional new rules or stats. Going back to my earlier example, I might write up a more involved (and highly cinematic) hacking/counterhacking system to run, and provide a box of stats on the robbers' sweet arsenal. This way, GMs can get use out of the adventure even if they aren't running it straight up. Maybe someone picked up the magazine it was published in for an adventure about drug lords, but is browsing through when the box detailing the guns catches his eye and he says "oh man, my gangsters must have those" and he continues reading it and sees the hacking subsystem and says "ooh our hacker would love running through this to find the details of the gangs' distribution." Bam, added value. He subscribes to the magazine.

[Yora]

Don't assume that the players will find secret door because there's something big or important behind it. While finding optional content is great and exciting, putting 60% of the content behind a single secret door isn't such a smart move.

[Cluedrew]

Never plan plot.

This is a mindset thing but never plan a plot. Plan events if you have to but those are not plot. Plot is what the players leave behind them (not to be confused with destruction) not what is waiting for them. The events you plan are not, and have no guaranty of ever being plot. And even if they do happen the players will probably put a spin on it that you were not expecting. Let the plot unfold, and if you are writing an adventure you can create plans that the plot will unfold from, but those are not the plot nor can you know what the plot will be.

[Telok]

This can be done well, but it can't be contrived and it absolutely has to be brief.

For the shining example of failing at both of the above, see Dragonlance's Key of Destiny adventure path, where the MacGuffin the party receives just before reaching 9th level, and that they're expected to have with them all the way through 20th level, is permanently Dimensional Anchored with no reason given for why that is. Because heaven forbid the writers have to stop padding the adventure with wilderness encounters. Don't worry though, the Dimensional Anchor does make a specific exception for the extraplanar dragon graveyard that the MacGuffin's entire purpose is to get you into (though it does have some other moderately-useful powers to use along the way).

Ug, yeah. I ran across that with a newish DM and the D&D 5e adventure Out of the Abyss. Party starts off in an anti-magic jail cell at level 1. Wouldn't be to much of a problem except that nothing in the adventure told the DM to mention the anti-magic, there's no way to detect it beyond wasting spells and figuring out yourself why there's no effect, and it's the only anti-magic space in the whole adventure which is for some reason located in some podunk backwater unimportant minor outpost. The jails in major cities don't have anti-magic cells in the adventure, just this one litte unimportant outpost.

When you're playing it's sort of "Wait, what? That doesn't make any sense." moment.

[Solaris]

One of my worst-received adventure arcs involved the players being trapped in a gladiatorial arena and having to fight various weird monsters. The sin was twofold: Firstly, that they were trapped as slaves (although it was better than a TPK when a raiding mission went bad and they got overwhelmed by mooks), and secondly that it was boring. I hadn't taken much time or put much research into making the arena fights much more interesting than running them through a local bestiary, and I hadn't designed any contingencies beyond "and then they broke out".

Don't forget contingency plans when you're writing adventures.

Don't skimp out on researching historical counterparts when you're mining for ideas.

Don't have more than a couple of fights that go along similar lines; change things up and provide varying situations for encounters that require players to interact rather than just roll dice.

And somewhat unrelated, but on a similar note, random encounters shouldn't be. Nobody likes running into a couple of randomly-generated mooks out in the wilderness when there's something more interesting at the destination. If you must have random encounters, then put as much effort into designing those as you would any of the 'real' encounters in a dungeon. Whatever you do, don't be boring.

[Cealocanth]

Don't keep what's cool about the setting secret from the players. Some secrets are okay for big reveals, but for the love of the gods let players in a pirate game play pirates.

[Thrudd]

One of my worst-received adventure arcs involved the players being trapped in a gladiatorial arena and having to fight various weird monsters. The sin was twofold: Firstly, that they were trapped as slaves (although it was better than a TPK when a raiding mission went bad and they got overwhelmed by mooks), and secondly that it was boring. I hadn't taken much time or put much research into making the arena fights much more interesting than running them through a local bestiary, and I hadn't designed any contingencies beyond "and then they broke out".

Don't forget contingency plans when you're writing adventures.

Don't skimp out on researching historical counterparts when you're mining for ideas.

Don't have more than a couple of fights that go along similar lines; change things up and provide varying situations for encounters that require players to interact rather than just roll dice.

And somewhat unrelated, but on a similar note, random encounters shouldn't be. Nobody likes running into a couple of randomly-generated mooks out in the wilderness when there's something more interesting at the destination. If you must have random encounters, then put as much effort into designing those as you would any of the 'real' encounters in a dungeon. Whatever you do, don't be boring.

"Being boring" is less about designing your encounters and more about how you present them. Random encounters are great for making your world feel like a real, living place. What needs to be designed properly are your encounter tables and your system for randomly determining if and when encounters take place. Then you let the dice help you simulate a believable environment where the players experience what it is like to live and travel through this fantasy world. Whether the encounter is boring or not depends on how well you know your world and how you improvise according to the environment and the results of the dice. Every encounter is a "real" encounter. They may be random, but they should all belong and be appropriate for the place and time where they occur, because you put thought into the design of your world.

[Yora]

I would say stay away from random encounters if you don't fully understand how they work and what purpose they have. Random encounters as padding to stretch out the play time of the adventures is certainly something not to do.

Random encounters work when the party can take efforts to avoid them and gains very little benefit from fighting them. Patrolling guards in a dungeon who carry no valuable treasure on them and who will be encountered when the party stays around too long or makes loud noise are the default for what random encounters are for.
Random encounters during wilderness travel work best if they are optional mini-quests. I think those in the first Dragon Age game are a pretty good example of how those could look. But "2 ogres are attacking, roll initiative" is certainly not.

[AMFV]

I would say stay away from random encounters if you don't fully understand how they work and what purpose they have. Random encounters as padding to stretch out the play time of the adventures is certainly something not to do.

I disagree almost completely. Sometimes it's important to have non-plot elements or things that are not tightly tied back into the plot. Otherwise it all starts to feel forced. Random encounters also give you time to focus on plot elements while your players are dealing with the encounter. Sometimes they can help with pacing.

Random encounters work when the party can take efforts to avoid them and gains very little benefit from fighting them. Patrolling guards in a dungeon who carry no valuable treasure on them and who will be encountered when the party stays around too long or makes loud noise are the default for what random encounters are for.
Random encounters during wilderness travel work best if they are optional mini-quests. I think those in the first Dragon Age game are a pretty good example of how those could look. But "2 ogres are attacking, roll initiative" is certainly not.

It's a pacing thing. In Dragon Age, you can meander around all the time and sit and pause, or I can save and quit. You can't really in a group setting. The whole point of a random encounter is to decrease the plot density, which can get overwhelming if a DM rushes things. I did that a lot when I was just starting out before I realized that it was good to put some not so significant padding in there. That's what random encounters are, they're just easy fun that can go in the middle of plot relevant stuff. Also part of the huge advantage of them is that you can do some stuff that's tonally slightly different. If your PCs are involved in messy intrigue all the time, a bandit attack can break up the monotony.

Edit:

Actually...

I disagree with literally all of these:

Most adventures that people are writing seem to be pretty bad and not really helping GMs to run a game but rather making it more difficult. What things do you keep seeing in adventures that just seem like bad ideas and a general nuisance?

The monster attacks on sight and fights to the death.

That makes perfect sense for Undead Guards, constructs, and a large category of monsters. Anybody who is cornered that doesn't believe they'll get a fair shake if they surrender. There are a lot of reasons why somebody might do that. Mind-control, for example would also illicit that.

Magic items or enchantments that prevent players from using their spells that would be most helpful in the situation.

It's not doing this that's the problem, it's overusing it. When you do it sparingly it can show the players that A.) The stakes are higher, and B.) Their opponents are capable of thought and planning. If I just play the enemies as robots that never respond or counter my players strategies, then it's not very believable, and it's less fun for me.

Magic items that become unusable when their current owner dies.

Again, it depends, in some cases it makes sense. Or it could start a side-quest to make the items usable or what-not.

Box text.

Can be just fine, it's just a formalized description. It also can put some flowery prose in there and what-not. Yeah, if it's overused it's awful, but occasionally it's just fine.

High level NPCs who appear to save the day when the players are unable to win.

Having this happen on occasion isn't a problem. It's just when it's not believable or when it happens frequently enough to be irritating to the players. Sometimes getting rescued can be fun, just so long as it's not a constant thing.

Underwater adventures.

There's not really any issue with underwater adventures.

[Pugwampy]

The monster attacks on sight and fights to the death.

Huh ? I am sorry did you not want loot and XP ?

Underwater adventures.

I wanna to visit Mermaid town .