'New Classics' Module Survey

[Rechan]

Thanks.

 

[Riastlin]

The Scales of War path really takes off with the Temple Between (last heroic tier module) and Haven of the Bitter Glass is particularly good (plus PCat wrote it!).

As for what makes a great 4ed module? Well, that's the sort of thing that really varies from group to group. The things I would look for though are ways to really maximize the importance of all parts of the character sheets. In other words, look for good ways to introduce skills into the game. Make interesting NPCs or combat outs, etc. Make it so that the players can definitely tackle the challenges in a variety of ways.

I think one of the things that 4ed can do really well given the Minor, Move, Standard format is terrain effects. Interesting terrain and hazards can really turn a decent to good encounter into a great one. Be careful with how you make the players overcome the obstacles though. In my mind, a lot of adventures suffer from requiring standard action skill checks to overcome the effects of a hazard or obstacle. Most players when presented with "you can either attack the dragon or fiddle with the doohickey, but not both" will choose attack almost every time. Make the skill check a move or even a minor action though and suddenly your players will become as curious as a pack of cats.

Concentrate on making your battles be more than just a fight to the death and you will go a long way. 4ed does the fantastical settings well, but as the DM, you have to be prepared to give your players the opportunity.

Note: This isn't to say that other editions don't do this well, just that 4ed can do it very well and that I think the most entertaining 4ed encounters are the ones where there are a number of things going on.

 

[Infiniti2000]

what might it have to include

What I'd like to see happen, but no company does this, is truly active support. Not just errata or a very brief FAQ, but active support with "official" updates or recommendations to newer material. A case in point is Trollhaunt. I'd like to see WotC provide an update to suggest monsters from newer-than-MM books that might apply to existing encounters. The additional material they provided is great, but I that stuff wasn't supposed to replace the current material. For example, would different supporting cast from newer books be a cool suggestion for the BBEG?

At least with RttToEE we had a dedicated forum and built a detailed errata thread, a FAQ, and best of all the Best of the Boards. I haven't seen that for other WotC modules as hosted on their site. There are several threads here and there, but it's really difficult to search. If there were a location, I'd be happy to start these threads (as I did for Banewarrens).

Regarding the 4E uniqueness, I think I understand what you mean. As anyone who has done converting can tell you, it's not so simple as plugging in new monsters. Frequently you have to rework part, if not most or all, of an encounter. Simply going from 3 to 3.5 was difficult as the spacing of Large upright monsters changed drastically. Thus, any 4E unique module will necessarily take into account 4E rules. A single monster of equal CR in 4E is a solo, for example. You can actively plan for skill challenges.

Another nice thing I'd like to see in modules would be some references to houserules. It's obvious that a lot of people use them and sometimes these things affect the module design. The first thing that comes to mind here is the skill challenge. Present a SC in the module first using the core rules, and then perhaps present an alternate approach using, say, Obsidian. That would definitely be a nice touch.

 

[Pour]

Regarding the 4E uniqueness, I think I understand what you mean. As anyone who has done converting can tell you, it's not so simple as plugging in new monsters. Frequently you have to rework part, if not most or all, of an encounter. Simply going from 3 to 3.5 was difficult as the spacing of Large upright monsters changed drastically. Thus, any 4E unique module will necessarily take into account 4E rules. A single monster of equal CR in 4E is a solo, for example. You can actively plan for skill challenges.

Yeah, that is perhaps the third aspect of "original and unique 4e modules", the inherent design philosophies and paradigms that really sing when playing the intended edition.

If you want to know my ultimate ambition, I'd like for these modules to not only utilize 4e's strengths, but also turn the RAW on its head at points, make adventures a place where new rules, rule variants and new approaches can be introduced and pushed well before supplements and official articles. I guess my ideal situation would be a T series, for traditional, working within the confines of the rules to create the modular identity I'm looking for, and an E or X series for experimental, where gamers wouldn't consider anything 'bad design' or 'backward errata' but instead an interesting and desirable feature, a selling point even. Oh did you hear about 'The Prison Moon of Amophet', they've combined creatures and traps into something wild, or 'The House of Whispers' has a new way of resolving stealth, and made single-skill skill challenges work!

It kind of harkens to addressing house rules, but it also squares modules as being on the forefront of 4e design. I understand this is kind of a risky venture, though, and it could be these features do end up bad design or 'quirky, but not worth pursuing' and I'm fine with that too. The only way any of it works, though, is if these things are constantly being produced by a wide array of designers.

 

[Rechan]

What I'd like to see happen, but no company does this, is truly active support. Not just errata or a very brief FAQ, but active support with "official" updates or recommendations to newer material. A case in point is Trollhaunt. I'd like to see WotC provide an update to suggest monsters from newer-than-MM books that might apply to existing encounters. The additional material they provided is great, but I that stuff wasn't supposed to replace the current material. For example, would different supporting cast from newer books be a cool suggestion for the BBEG?

At least with RttToEE we had a dedicated forum and built a detailed errata thread, a FAQ, and best of all the Best of the Boards. I haven't seen that for other WotC modules as hosted on their site. There are several threads here and there, but it's really difficult to search. If there were a location, I'd be happy to start these threads (as I did for Banewarrens).

Regarding the 4E uniqueness, I think I understand what you mean. As anyone who has done converting can tell you, it's not so simple as plugging in new monsters. Frequently you have to rework part, if not most or all, of an encounter. Simply going from 3 to 3.5 was difficult as the spacing of Large upright monsters changed drastically. Thus, any 4E unique module will necessarily take into account 4E rules. A single monster of equal CR in 4E is a solo, for example. You can actively plan for skill challenges.

So like the Open Design Project that Wulfgang does?

 

[ahayford]

The OGL brought so much goodness in the way of Third Party Modules. I will never understand why WoTC decided to hamstring something that did so much good for RPGs in general and made D20, and by extension DnD so popular.

 

[Pour]

The OGL brought so much goodness in the way of Third Party Modules. I will never understand why WoTC decided to hamstring something that did so much good for RPGs in general and made D20, and by extension DnD so popular.

Admittedly the OGL is much more open than the GSL, and we may have to ask certain 3rd party developers of 4e material to weigh in, but as it stands now with the current iteration of the license, is the GSL really the reason 3rd party 4e support is so sparse? I don't believe it is.

See, initially the leading 3rd party providers were waiting for the GSL, and waiting and waiting, and then the first version was very restricting to established companies with employees and had no real guarantees (maybe this current version, too, not sure), and ultimately they all jumped ship, developed their own stuff, and are currently riding some very successful waves. I think the main reason we don't have 3rd party 4e support has less to do with the current GSL, though, and more to do with the lack of developers and design teams not dedicated to some other game.

The next generation of D&D 3rd party designers needs to emerge. That's not to say there aren't some very fine freelancers and third party developers, there are, but there has to be, in my opinion (and my ardent hope) a lot more. I figure here is as good a place as any to find them, just another reason for the survey.

There should be more serious discussion on fan-made and grassroots third party support, and actual projects and collaborations. Modules are a good place to start. I know the talent is out there, we just have to find the willingness, and work together to make what 4e gamers want and need, original content, unique content, providing new efforts to add to the works of WotC, EnWorld, Kobold Quarterly, Deus Ex Machina, Save Versus Death, etc. I welcome that sort of discussion, that sort of effort, and want to be part of it. I never experienced the freedoms of designing under the OGL, I'm not concerned about what was lost between, but I am interested in providing content, and I don't think the current GSL is so nightmarish that it is impossible, if the list above says anything, but I'm not any sort of licensing expert. I don't feel overly deterred by the GSL, though.

 

[ahayford]

See, initially the leading 3rd party providers were waiting for the GSL, and waiting and waiting, and then the first version was very restricting to established companies with employees and had no real guarantees, and ultimately they all jumped ship, developed their own stuff, and are currently riding some very successful waves. I think the main reason we don't have 3rd party 4e support has less to do with the current GSL, though, and more to do with the lack of developers and design teams not dedicated to some other game.

And a lot of the reason for this was due to WoTC dragging their feet and then finally pushing out the unpopular 4E GSL. The 3rd party companies had to make a hard decision. And now, WoTC has created their own greatest competitor who had previously been their biggest feeder (Paizo). Some people might blame the OGL for Paizo, but we have to remember, Paizo used to get people to buy 3e's splat and crunch books. And now....Pandora's box is open. These companies have proven they don't need WotC anymore. They have an established fanbase. Why make stuff for 4e when a 3rd party can just make their stuff for Pathfinder under the old OGL. It makes more financial sense.

Another 3rd Party 4E Rennaisance is certainly possible, but I just don't see it as very likely given that OGL still exists and has a lot of support by other 3rd parties and fans. I hope I'm wrong....I really enjoy 4E. I really feel like WoTC shot themselves in the foot with how they handled 3rd parties this gen.

 

[ahayford]

And just as a little aside. I have to wonder about the adoption rate of 4E if WoTC had done a better job bringing in the 3rd parties and really including them in the design process. I wonder if 4E would have had some changes to make it more palatable to those that dislike it but still maintained the goodness it contains.

 

[Pour]

And a lot of the reason for this was due to WoTC dragging their feet and then finally pushing out the unpopular 4E GSL. The 3rd party companies had to make a hard decision. And now, WoTC has created their own greatest competitor who had previously been their biggest feeder (Paizo). Some people might blame the OGL for Paizo, but we have to remember, Paizo used to get people to buy 3e's splat and crunch books. And now....Pandora's box is open. These companies have proven they don't need WotC anymore. They have an established fanbase. Why make stuff for 4e when a 3rd party can just make their stuff for Pathfinder under the old OGL. It makes more financial sense.

Another 3rd Party 4E Rennaisance is certainly possible, but I just don't see it as very likely given that OGL still exists and has a lot of support by other 3rd parties and fans. I hope I'm wrong....I really enjoy 4E. I really feel like WoTC shot themselves in the foot with how they handled 3rd parties this gen.

Yeah, I can't really deny any of that history, I mean we all lived through that fiasco hehe. That said, I'd make stuff for 4e because that is what I play, enjoy and quite honestly understand. How profitable it will be, well, I'm not sure, and 4thcore doesn't even charge for their stuff. That's a personal choice, I guess, and I support either model, but I think there is a need for a modular identity and more rules experimentation/evolution and, thus, some sort of audience or market.

Should these efforts prove successful, I can guarantee some sort of increase of the adoption rate, though I couldn't say how big or small. Any increase is a pretty successful endeavor in my book hehe.