My D&D session is in 4 hours and I just realized I don't

>>49201270
What setting, and have your players rolled their characters already?
If you haven't got a setting why are they making Characters?

>>49201299
No no, this is our second session. I just realized I didn't like my original plan of having a manorial estate that had become sentient and forced the inhabitants to keep a perpetual party going (and not talking about it) lest it would kill everyone.
Lots of animated object enemies.

But I think it would be boring, specially for the cavalier and rogue

>>49201270
>I just realized I didn't like my original plan of having a manorial estate that had become sentient and forced the inhabitants to keep a perpetual party going (and not talking about it) lest it would kill everyone.
I WAS going to suggest you just go with whatever you had, but...

>>49201320
>rogue

How? Doesn't your party ever scout ahead? Presumably you can have locked doors too (with some sentient locks that try to bite lockpickers maybe...)

>cavalier

They can still fight anyway, right?

>>49201320
why don't you add elements they may like, for the rogue there could be a sequence where they can attempt to disarm traps leading to some mcguffin, for the cavalier there could be a jousting contest going on in the garden, and maybe he'll need to charge through a hedge maze as fast as he can for something? idk

>>49201320
Lotus Eater cult. Trapping inhabitants and draining them of their skills and life force the longer they stay in the manir grounds. Kill the cult leader and shatter the crystal powering the ritual. What they don't know is that the shard is sealing a part of the BBEG and by shattering it, will bring the Apocalypse sooner

>>49201372
>How?
no sneak attacks

>>49201404

So let me get this straight: for you, the only interessting aspect of the Rogue experience is being able to do sneak attacks in the combat scenes.

You giant fucking pleb.

>>49201437
nah, I cant just be bothered to write so much

>>49201320
Have them sneak attackable. Duh.

Also just thow together some setpieces like a giant turning room that moves the players but not the objects and we're done.

>>49201556
This. Make them mechanical rather than magically animated. Now you have vulnerable spots for the Rogue to disable with a well-placed hit, and you have a villain - whoever made this insane mechanical house. Better yet, you might potentially have a plot if the villain isn't present.

>>49201320
Have the house be female and try to seduce the cavalier.

Instant base and waifu love interest.

>>49201270
The answer to this is set where the party is on fire and kidnap some one too scarifice for power ups.

>>49201270
>>49201437
>>49201480
Ignoring the obvious faggot OP
>No time to prepare what's the best published adventure?
The god that crawls for LOTFP is really cool but i hate how hard it is to make it happen, one of the party members has to sneak or force their way into the back of a church filled with nice people.

what do the rest of you think?

>>49201270
The players are hired as security for the wedding of the local lord's daughter

>>49202662
When I ran it, possibly the first thing the players did was despatch half their number to keep Father Bacon occupied with a paintings and tombstone tour while the rest snuck into the back.

If your players don't want to go rooting around in the basement of a slightly-too-nice-priest-guy-with-creepy-paintings, then what do they do all session? Their tax returns?

Seriously, if you can make the priest just a bit too enthusiastic to get them gone and act thoroughly nice despite any transgressions alarm bells WILL be set off. Particularly if you mention the paintings and the overly-vivd cross. Intrigue them and they will walk into the dungeon of their own accord.

Stop planning shit then? Any single idea is going to break down from some angle or other that's just how the creative process is. Perfection doesn't exist , and with game design you can only really perfect an idea by playing it lots but this is unfeasible with an TRPG as you can't really force your group to replay the same scenario over and over again.

You are not responsible for your players having fun you are responisble for facilitating that fun. You are a referee to the game you are not playing the game. You are not telling a story.

Present multiple interesting hooks to them and let them explore whichever ones they choose within a sandbox enviroment that comes with some random encounters to add variety. Further let them choose their own goals to pursue as well in order to enable player agency as much as possible. Then just improv lots but make it real. If they're searching for the Caves of Chaos make it a specific place in the game with a specific way to access it. Give them clues on how to do that but if they don't work it out they don't find it. Don't quantum ogre it to be wherever they look.

(As an aside self doubt is normal and usually misplaced, from experience players will enjoy games that seem terrible from a GM perspective because the GM has complete knowledge of everything and the players do not so for them it remains exciting.)

>>49201270
Just wing it. Like for real just go in, recap the last session you did and just make it up from there. Ask what the players want to do, and then just go from there

>>49201270
>you start in generic village one
>"Egads! Bandits/wolves/rats/unruly children have been stealing our potatoes!"
>kill nasties
>get some loot
>proceed onward