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

log in or register to remove this ad

I used to spend hours creating adventures. I was trying to mimick a D&D module. With experience I realized I only needed bullet points or diagram of the adventure and post-its in the Monster Manuel.

Whenever I buy an adventure I always end up changing it to my taste. Sometimes it's more work than making my own adventure.

My home adventures are often very skeletal. I find when you are running a game week to week and you know the group of players and their characters, and you know all your NPCs and your world, you can get a lot more information out of a single note on a map, a rough sketch of an NPC, etc. Whereas with a module, they are written with no knowledge of campaign context. I recently wrote up one of my campaign adventures to put on my blog and treated it with the same level of attention I would a published adventure. There were so many things I had to add just to make it functional for other people. It went from maybe 2,000 words of notes, to around 5,000 words. A lot of that was just stuff in my head that didn't need to be put down, some of it was explanation and guidance.
 


Yes, the homebrew won't have the adventure-specific maps
I have found that some modules/adventures that have maps, can sometimes be lacking, confusing or just wrong when referencing the text in the adventure that goes with it. This is regardless of which game I'm playing. I remember quite a few TSR modules where I spent a while scratching my head trying to make sense of some maps. One instance I came across recently was in Renegade Games G.I. Joe core rule book. It has a short introductory adventure where a good portion of it takes place in "the Pit" the G.I. Joe headquarters. It has about 25 locations detailed in the text of the adventure but doesn't have a map. That seems like a big oversight to me. Since the internet came along, when I needed a map, I'd search for one, but seemed I could never find one that was quite what I wanted. Map making software takes more time than I want to learn, so, now I just draw my own. Regardless of how crude or detailed it is, its accurate and takes me less time, and is more fun.
 

About effort level, folks are definitely talking past each other. What do you need to be ready to run a game? That answer is different for everyone. The folks that say "Running a pre-written module is more work" aren't claiming they can produce an equivalent to that pre-written module faster than buying and reading it.. They are saying they don't need something of that detail to be ready to run an RPG session.
Well, for me it depends what the RPG is. I have run sessions of some systems - eg Classic Traveller, Burning Wheel, In A Wicked Age - with no prep.

Other systems - eg 4e D&D, Torchbearer 2e - like maps; Torchbearer 2e also likes location descriptions; Prince Valiant likes scenario sketches ("episodes", in the system's own jargon). And for these, either I prep or I piggyback on someone else's prep. And the latter is often easier. Especially when it comes to maps! But sometimes someone else has also come up with a really nice scenario/situation that I like to borrow.
 

I used to spend hours creating adventures. I was trying to mimick a D&D module. With experience I realized I only needed bullet points or diagram of the adventure and post-its in the Monster Manuel.

Whenever I buy an adventure I always end up changing it to my taste. Sometimes it's more work than making my own adventure.
That's a bad habit I got myself into, as I wanted to work for TSR/WotC, so I tried to write like them and wrote out my adventures with the level of detail as if they were going to be published for others to consume. I struggle to just write down the notes I need to get an adventure put together for play.
 

My home adventures are often very skeletal. I find when you are running a game week to week and you know the group of players and their characters, and you know all your NPCs and your world, you can get a lot more information out of a single note on a map, a rough sketch of an NPC, etc. Whereas with a module, they are written with no knowledge of campaign context. I recently wrote up one of my campaign adventures to put on my blog and treated it with the same level of attention I would a published adventure. There were so many things I had to add just to make it functional for other people. It went from maybe 2,000 words of notes, to around 5,000 words. A lot of that was just stuff in my head that didn't need to be put down, some of it was explanation and guidance.

So you're saying the act of adventure writing has to add a lot of context?
Or are you saying DMs are better off buying campaign settings???

P.S. Please link said adventure so we can have an example work to praise/criticize???
 

P.S. Please link said adventure so we can have an example work to praise/criticize???
I'm not him, but I've posted some scenarios on this site, which will give you an idea of what I think prep looks like for different systems

These Torchbearer 2e ones have been played (by me): Torchbearer 2e - actual play of this AWESOME system! (+); Torchbearer 2e - actual play of this AWESOME system! (+)

So has this Agon 2e one: Not the Iron DM Tournament

These two - for Prince Valiant and Burning Wheel, respecitvely - have not been played (or, at least, not by me!), but I think they're both playable as written:


 

There's something to be said for reacting in real time to your players. I too write my adventures out as if they are to be published (and I publish them). The difference is stark. The biggest change is that what I plan for is not how things actually work out, and that has much to do with the crux of a publish adventure: the author doesn't know your players, and therefore tries to cover a broad swath of likely scenarios. When gaming with my players on the other hand, I almost instinctively make changes during the game to match what will work for them. I don't regret being over-prepared, but I often have content I don't use -- intentionally -- because it's not the right place/right time to use it.
 

During 4e, I stopped buying Adventures for some time after a player accused me of cheating because I changed parts of it. He purchased the module and read it after we played. Later, I didn't tell the players if I used a published adventure.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top