Worlds of Design: Why Buy Adventures?

How many adventure modules (including adventure paths) do you purchase a year on average?


Why do people buy commercial modules when early RPGs assumed the GM would make up the adventures?

cube-616738_960_720.jpg

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.

Why Bother?​

Of course, it’s much easier to use a module than to make up your own adventures. But there’s more to it than that.

Simply put, game mastering takes time and effort. Game masters who use multiple sources requires significant demands on their time, something that is increasingly challenged by the diversification of other forms of easy entertainment. I discussed this in two different articles: Worlds of Design: The Chain of Imagination and World of Design: The Lost Art of Making Things Up

But it’s also certainly because adventures make game companies money. In many ways, making a game world out of whole cloth can be daunting to new gamers. It's just easier (and more lucrative) to buy adventures set in an established game world. This has the added bonus of causing a lot more commonality among the customer base (who can share tips and tricks with each other on how to play an adventure), and also happens to make those same game masters repeat customers as their players advance in level.

It wasn’t always like this.

The Hoi Poloi​

In the early days of Dungeons & Dragons, lack of a single campaign setting (we had both Greyhawk and Blackmoor), ever changing rules and editions, and the general inability to share them (no Internet back then!) meant games were messy affairs. Game masters made things up as they went along, customized rules as they saw fit, and largely played what could only be interpreted as a variant of D&D. And for some time, this wasn’t just the norm, it was encouraged by then parent company TSR, who wasn’t in the business of publishing adventures.

But that all changed over time. D&D became more solidified as the rules went from Original D&D to Basic/Advanced, to just one version. Along with the codification of rules came established adventures, many of them now legendary in gamers’ experience who played through them (e.g., Expedition to the Barrier Peaks, Ravenloft).

Of course, not all adventures were fully fleshed out either. Some had large gaps (both in the maps and text) where game masters were meant to customize to their liking, or roll randomly to determine what came next so players wouldn’t be able to metagame the adventure. Over time, this became much less common, to the point now that we get completely mini settings. For an example of how much has changed, see Beth’s review of Quests from the Infinite Staircase, which takes sandbox-style adventures from Basic and Advanced D&D and fleshes them out in detail.

The Art of the Module​

There’s also something to be said for the art of adventure creation. That is, there are definitely some adventures that are better than others, and those who figure out the magical mix are more likely to be bought by game masters who appreciate the effort. Or to put it another way, people who create published modules will, on average, likely be better at adventure writing than a novice, so you might choose to buy a few to learn from the best.

This trend is exemplified by Paizo, how pioneered the art of the Adventure Path. D&D’s level system ensures games take a lot of time and effort for player characters to level, which requires a lot of adventures strung together. A GM in the old days had to buy different modules and justify stitching their plots together, but with an Adventure Path the entire throughline seamlessly integrates from end to end, from the very first to the very last (usually 20th but not always) level. It's a lucrative model, as it requires significant investment from customers not just for one adventure, but for several.

A Question of Experience​

Whether or not you buy published adventures likely pivots on several factors: your prep time, your players’ interest in a campaign setting, and your experience. Game mastering is a significant investment, so if you don’t have the time, published adventures are the way to go. Your players might be deeply committed to a setting (like Greyhawk) and thus be only interested in playing in published adventures in that campaign world; conversely, they may like your homebrew so much they could be turned off playing anywhere else.

And finally, as you get more experienced, adventure writing becomes a lot easier. There’s nothing like playing a terrible adventure to motivate you to write your own. I doubt that there are many veteran GMs who have never used a commercial adventure module – I certainly have used them, for convenience (lack of time) or when one was especially useful or even famous (e.g. Against the Giants). I haven’t bought one for a long time, because I already have so many, and because there are so many free ones available. But it appears from Wizard’s catalog, and from the publications of many other publishers, that lots of people buy them.

Your Turn: Take the poll and let us know!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lewis Pulsipher

Lewis Pulsipher

Dragon, White Dwarf, Fiend Folio
The few times I’ve tried to run modules, they’ve inevitably gone completely off-book by session 2. The more linear they are, the quicker I end up breaking them.

Th only “modules” I’ve had success with are ones that are pure sandbox, such as the Dark of Hot Springs Island.
This is my experience as well. The looser the adventure, the more useful it is at the table. (Buried in the Bahamas, which I'm running play by post here now, has been one of my biggest successes with modules in the past, since it is so loose within a very simple structure.)

This is obviously not universally true, of course, as I see lots of complaints that these sorts of modules don't give some DMs enough information to know what to do, as their groups don't seem to be the sandboxy types.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

The few times I’ve tried to run modules, they’ve inevitably gone completely off-book by session 2. The more linear they are, the quicker I end up breaking them.
By the second session? How long are your sessions? (Or were you just using a bit of hyperbole to demonstrate your table's playstyle.)
It takes you SIX MONTHS to edit a module to your taste? :oops: ? I can usually edit a module in a few hours and then it's good for the group play. I guess if your focus is more Story® than rpg, I could imagine it taking more time to add all the literary elements associated with storytelling ;)
Maybe they mean that they edit as they play the adventure. I know our DM does that; editing as we go and incorporating NPCs we grew attached to or loathe into the later sessions, along with incorporating PC backgrounds when it seems appropriate. Perhaps that's what they meant.
 

This is my experience as well. The looser the adventure, the more useful it is at the table. (Buried in the Bahamas, which I'm running play by post here now, has been one of my biggest successes with modules in the past, since it is so loose within a very simple structure.)

This is obviously not universally true, of course, as I see lots of complaints that these sorts of modules don't give some DMs enough information to know what to do, as their groups don't seem to be the sandboxy types.
Some players have a hard time being proactive and sometimes GMs are not that instructive. I've come to view things from a simplified 4X view. GMs who prepare content specifically to be encountered, and GMs that go improv based on what the players feed them.

Proactive/Reactive Players
Prepared/Spontaneous GMs


There are pairs that work really well, such as, prepared GMs with reactive players. Also, as you imagine, bad pairings like spontaneous GMs with reactive players. Obviously, this framework is a generalization of the complexities of a gaming group, but its something that goes through my mind every time im engaging a group with published material. I want the right fit for the right group.

I think a lot of headbutting happens because folks are of the mind that there is a right and wrong way to publish adventure material. For example, a spontaneous GM is going to want "looser" material that allows them to flex as the situation calls for it. Which is why I think tis a good idea for publishers to highlight how their material is intended to be used. Often, no such clue is provided and the results are unsurprisingly mixed. YMMV.
 

I buy adventures occasionally because they are usually something easy too pick up, read and run when I need something. Or they are great sources for ideas or maps that I can use in my own games. These days I don't have a lot of time to write my own things and a published adventure or campaign solves that problem.
 

Which is why I think tis a good idea for publishers to highlight how their material is intended to be used. Often, no such clue is provided and the results are unsurprisingly mixed. YMMV.
Almost all adventures from WotC have a section titled, "Running the Adventure." They also have flow charts, a section on how to use the maps, and how to tailor it to your table. Can you give an example of what is missing? (Thanks in advance for your answer. I am genuinely curious as to what else they need.)
 

Almost all adventures from WotC have a section titled, "Running the Adventure." They also have flow charts, a section on how to use the maps, and how to tailor it to your table. Can you give an example of what is missing? (Thanks in advance for your answer. I am genuinely curious as to what else they need.)
Not the OP but I have an example: Running Rime of Frostmaiden. That adventure is in desperate need of a page/table: clues, where PCs can find them, and what they mean. Also the story needs tightening of three elements so they’re more interconnected.

Similar experience when I ran Tomb of Annihilation, but there it was simply a paucity of clues - so not even just a presentation issue.

The stuff you’re talking about in WotC adventures is like the absolute bare minimum… and even then they don’t stick the landing, omit essential info, or mess up the details (eg. flight times of the dragon in Frostmaiden don’t work).
 

I'm curious about the OP's comment that early rpgs expected DMs to make their own adventures. Which early rpgs? Because with BECMI & AD&D making your own setting was encouraged, but starting in the late 70's TSR cranked out a ton of adventure modules (B-series was huge).

200w.gif
 

I'm curious about the OP's comment that early rpgs expected DMs to make their own adventures. Which early rpgs? Because with BECMI & AD&D making your own setting was encouraged, but starting in the late 70's TSR cranked out a ton of adventure modules (B-series was huge).

200w.gif
There were no adventures / modules when I started D&D (summer 1974). No settings either. You made your own. Later adventures and settings were produced. Judges Guild was prolific and there were others. EPT came with a built in setting in 1975. That was unusual, but then the game was quite different (not in mechanics) from the western medieval vibe. By the time of BECMI and AD&D there were growing numbers available. The original Traveller (1977) didn't have a setting although the Third Imperium developed as the default setting over time. Runequest had a setting derived from a board game (White Bear Red Moon) when it dropped (1978).
 

There were no adventures / modules when I started D&D (summer 1974). No settings either. You made your own. Later adventures and settings were produced. Judges Guild was prolific and there were others. EPT came with a built in setting in 1975. That was unusual, but then the game was quite different (not in mechanics) from the western medieval vibe. By the time of BECMI and AD&D there were growing numbers available. The original Traveller (1977) didn't have a setting although the Third Imperium developed as the default setting over time. Runequest had a setting derived from a board game (White Bear Red Moon) when it dropped.
Yeah and that makes sense: the designers were busy learning the game themselves, then eventually they started creating adventurers based on their experiences. This why IME introductory adventures are so important, especially if they come with the core rules.
 

I voted before I read, but, I consider the freebies I pick up here and there, or bundles I've gotten from time to time, as part of my yearly "module purchases". I'm an inveterate module runner. I use them as a starting point and then flesh them out. It just saves far too much time to no do it.

This is me, too. I am a veritable Victor Frankenstein when it comes to plundering adventures. I've taken narrative frameworks, dungeons, rooms, encounters, NPCs, etc.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top