Encounter-based vs Area-based modules

Last Faalor game session, I tried a new approach to module creation in which I created several areas in which a specific encounter occurred. In one, I had an old man. The old man had specific characteristics I wanted to convey to the party. I wanted to move the story forward, while still leaving the players wanting more information. In another, I had a village full of rabid "witch-hunters" who were about to burn a Gypsy girl. In that encounter, I wanted to impress upon the party the seriousness of the situation: those caught using magic would be put to death. This encounter dovetailed into the next, where the party could actually ask someone in the know about what they should do. This should give the party pretty specific ideas and goals associated with the campaign's finale'. I didn't have any area transitions; the party had to tell me (the DM) when they wanted to move on. This also allowed the party to have more control and could mitigate the running-off-alone syndrome. This is what I call an encounter-based adventure.

In some ways, it's much easier to create and run as a Dungeon Master but may create a situation where the players feel confined to a set pattern. On the other hand, when I create areas and let the players go where they want (Area-based adventures), the players could easily miss important points in the module and can feel like they can scatter about without the group, exploring at their own pace, in their own way.

It was a good experiment and it appeared that the players enjoyed the session, so I may incorporate more of this type of adventures in the future.