19
votes
\$\begingroup\$

Does anyone know of some good premade campaigns for a small (not more than 5) players, all of whom are new to D&D? I want to start them at low level since they haven't played before. I'm finding lots of good single shot adventures, but want to have something that is tied together. I'm looking for something that I could probably get a good 5-10 sessions out of, then hopefully wraps itself up nicely.

EDIT: Thanks for the quick answers everyone. I've decided to try out "The Sunless Citadel".

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ Please answer this question following the site guidance on game-rec questions - "you could do this, I suppose" is wrong, "I have done this and here's what I did" is right. meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1070/… Expect to be downvoted if your answer does not include personal experience or a relevant reference. \$\endgroup\$
    – mxyzplk
    Commented May 8, 2012 at 20:15
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'm already getting flags on this Q - also consider narrowing your request using the guidance in that post; there's a lot of connected sets of low level modules out there - what specifically would you like them to be like/accomplish? Game world? Game type? \$\endgroup\$
    – mxyzplk
    Commented May 8, 2012 at 20:20

3 Answers 3

11
votes
\$\begingroup\$

Really an important question here is how much you expect to get through per session. I ran a group of new players through the Sunless Citadel a couple years ago. Technically, it's just one adventure and only one dungeon. In practice, in the four sessions that the game lasted, they explored less than half of it. If your beginners are about as fast as mine were, a single decent-sized module should fill 5-10 sessions no problem. If Sunless still turns out to be too short, it's only the first part of a whole series of linked adventures that you could run after, the second of which is Forge of Fury.

I'm not coming up with anything that fits the bill of a premade campaign in that range / number of sessions, though; most products billed that way tend to be much, much longer. For something of that form, I'd recommend any of the Pathfinder adventure paths or Lost City of Barakus. The individual modules making up the PF paths, for example, are each supposed to take ~4 sessions, and there are 6 of them per path. One workable approach for you might be to pick up the first two modules from a path and run them back-to-back; that would fall in about the right time range, and the modules do tend to be reasonably compartmentalized, at least at the beginning of the paths, so you could probably achieve closure after the second.

\$\endgroup\$
4
votes
\$\begingroup\$

I'm not sure about 5-10 sessions, but if you want to go a tad longer I suggest the Adventure Paths from Paizo back when they did Dungeon Magazine. They did Shackled City, which was later published as one hardcover book, and The Age Of Worms, and finally Savage Tide. These are all full campaigns designed to start at level one and go all the way through level 20.

The Shackled City hardback is well enough written that I felt comfortable handing it to my 19 year old son when he was starting out running games. It went well for him.

Good luck!

\$\endgroup\$
-1
votes
\$\begingroup\$

I can't be as specific as the other folks here, but I've run a couple of the attached modules when I just felt like playing but didn't want to plan out some huge campaign. There are a several options at various levels. Note: as you scroll down, it seems like the modules keep increasing in level, but that's not the case. There are many modules at may different levels throughout the document. Good luck with your game!

http://www.dungeonmastering.com/campaigns-adventures/83-free-dd-adventures

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • \$\begingroup\$ The majority of those adventures are for 4th edition (WotC), 1st edition (Dragonsfoot) or system-agnostic (the 5 room dungeons) \$\endgroup\$
    – Azeari
    Commented May 20, 2012 at 2:51
  • \$\begingroup\$ Ah, I didn't see the 3.5 tag when I read the post. Makes me wonder if it was there originally or added later. In any case, sorry for the confusion. Just trying to be helpful. \$\endgroup\$
    – Lechlerfan
    Commented Jun 3, 2012 at 18:30

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .