Adventures and Modularity

Oni · Feb 9, 2012

Something that I've sort of been wondering about since I heard that the next edition was going to take a modular approach is how that might influence published Adventures. How much modularity can you allow in a game and still make adventures that don't require a lot of fine tuning on the part of the DM? How much extra information will they have to include to accommodate all the modules. I'm assuming that they will have to include all the tactical bits on the assumption that you can ignore them if you're not planning on using them.

On the flipside of that, how will monsters and rules have to be designed to take into account a wide variety of styles. I'm guessing well see a fair amount of spells and monster powers that will have movements listed on the assumption if you're not using the tactical module you'll pretty much ignore them beyond this spell/power pushes people, note it if it's important (beyond narration anyway).

Quickleaf · Feb 9, 2012

[MENTION=380]Oni[/MENTION]
I'm guessing there will be distinct module lines which will emphasize certain playstyles, in addition to broad-reaching modules. I think Mike or Monte mentioned something to that effect, referring to the adventure path vs sandbox distinction, but it seemed to reach further than just that. It would be interesting to see each challenge presented in terms of combat/exploration/role-play. For example, Encounter B1: Fight the gnolls, B2: Give the gnolls Vecna's Clavicle, B3: Talk with the gnolls over a glass of cognac.

Jan van Leyden · Feb 9, 2012

What about the Online Dungeon where you can sort of configure what you want? You would go to your Settings page to define which modules to use and either are presented with fitting adventures (very lame) or any adventure is custom build to your preferences.

In printed adventures they could take the easy way and just reference the full entries of, say, stat blocks or they construct the information in a really additive way: a monster's stat block i always the same, but the basic game uses only the first line, the Fiddly Parameters module the first 20, and the Tactical System the whole shebang.

Printed material has the added difficulty of module published later on. When buying the first adventure "Shadows of Fell Keep" you'll surely don't get data for the rules module "Curriculum of the Vance University" published two years later.

So I really hope for a dynamic electronic publishing model.

Dannager · Feb 9, 2012

Jan van Leyden said:
So I really hope for a dynamic electronic publishing model.

This strikes me as a tremendous nightmare of programming and adventure designer hours. Imagine having to revisit every encounter of every adventure you've ever published whenever you release a new, universally-applicable module!

tlantl · Feb 9, 2012

Why would any published adventure need to have anything more than the information you'd need to play it?

The modular part of the game is in the basic usage of the rules. How you build characters, what combat systen are you going to use, what races and classes do you include in your games, you know stuff that has nothing to do with finding the source of evil plaguing the hamlet you wound up passing through.

There shouldn't need to be anything directly relating to those rules in an adventure.

Just because I want to use the less cumbersome combat rules and some beefy exploration rules in my game, shouldn't mean that if someone wrote an adventure they should have to have explicit instructions as to how to play that way since those considerations should already be taken care of by the players rules and how the DM uses them.

It's not like there are going to be entirely different rules sets for every edition style in the game, only the way the different styles feel using the different modules. Everything important like skill checks and attack rolls and spell effects are going to be the same no matter what subsystem you prefer.

If it isn't, then writing dungeons for yourself is going to be a real nut buster.

Dannager · Feb 9, 2012

tlantl said:
Why would any published adventure need to have anything more than the information you'd need to play it?

The modular part of the game is in the basic usage of the rules. How you build characters, what combat systen are you going to use, what races and classes do you include in your games, you know stuff that has nothing to do with finding the source of evil plaguing the hamlet you wound up passing through.

There shouldn't need to be anything directly relating to those rules in an adventure.

Well, by way of example, the information a DM needs from an encounter write-up if he's running his campaign with the tactical-rules-and-battle-mat module is different from the information a DM needs from an encounter write-up if he's not using that tactical module. Presumably, the same could hold true of any number of additional modules.

What's the solution, then? Include information for every possible module and kill your development team in the process? Publish adventures with nothing except core information, and leave DMs using optional (but nonetheless popular) modules to fend for themselves in a mire of half-supported rules?

Connorsrpg · Feb 9, 2012

I really don't think there needs to be a nod to each of the modules either. Just play the encounter out using the ruleset you are using.??

I am however, fine with mentioning combat tactics (but no need for actual power/rule specifics - just where they position, how they use terrain, who they go after etc).

When I read about the emphasis on the three 'pillars' I was wrapped and my immediate thought was "That is what is needed for encounter design".

Have a section for Combat (if things turn to a fight, and whether they are expected to), Exploration (lighting, treasure, terrain powers, etc) and RP (how will the encounter interact with the PCs)?

I don't expect these to be in equal measures for every encounter. Some encounters are simply meant to be fights or discoveries, etc, BUT something could be mentioned in the RP. What if the players capture and enemy, etc.

Mattachine · Feb 9, 2012

Dannager said:
Well, by way of example, the information a DM needs from an encounter write-up if he's running his campaign with the tactical-rules-and-battle-mat module is different from the information a DM needs from an encounter write-up if he's not using that tactical module. Presumably, the same could hold true of any number of additional modules.

On these boards, there is a growing assumption that there will be a tactical-rules-and-battle-mat module. That may or may not be true.

Just sayin

tlantl · Feb 9, 2012

I guess if you are using one of the more detailed skills or combat modules the adventure might need to include all of the information at it's highest detail. but I could imagine that only NPCs would need any real detailed descriptions. I would assume that the monsters in the monster manual and other sources would be fully detailed.

I can only speculate about these things but I don't see the need to write everything two or three times for every encounter. Guidelines would do as much as getting into specifics. The rules being used should cover the situation without the need for detailed outlines for everything.

Then again there is the odd chance that a designer might feel the need to spell everything out. I imagine there will be guidelines for writing adventures, maybe even in our DMG's. That would be nice.

Jan van Leyden · Feb 9, 2012

Dannager said:
This strikes me as a tremendous nightmare of programming and adventure designer hours. Imagine having to revisit every encounter of every adventure you've ever published whenever you release a new, universally-applicable module!

Why should it be such a nightmare? The adventure writer decides to include a Poison Needle Trap and a pair of Shrewed Kobolds. He describes the trap (position, position of trigger) and the kobold's tactics in plain text.

Both elements would reside in a database with the game data for the different rules modules: Poison Needle Trap (Basic Game, Character Design module, ...) or Shrewed Kobold (Basic Game, Tactical Options, ...).

The actual file delivered is not already a PDF, but contains sets of links to those rules elements in the database. When the user sets his preferred options and opens the adventure, the system pulls the according game data from the database and inserts the information into the adventure without having to change the prose. Finally a PDF or a different format is created and delivered to the reader.

For a quick and dirty solution you might print the game data on separate pages - think Appendix - and insert just page references in the main body of text, thus saving you all the layout headaches.

If the guys are really confident in their project management capabilities, they might even include empty modules in the database ready to be referenced by the adventure even though no data is present. So when a new modules is available, the empty fields in the database are filled and presto! the additional information is available in old modules as well.

I don't say it's easy, but with the right procedures it would be far from a nightmare.