Best practices for easy-to-run modules [+]

[Bill Zebub]

Another thing you can do is integrate that background into actual information the PCs can learn and/or access otherwise. it could be as simple as Knowledge check charts: roll X, and you learn this much. Etc. But all that background is mostly wasted if the PCs never engage with it, so a good module should find a way to let the PCs learn and use that info without being infodumps.

If I am going to tie lore into the adventure without it being necessary for the adventure, then I want it to be an easter egg. E.g., the PCs learn something about the lore, and then when they find the easter egg it has some meaning (if the realize the connection). I think that moment of realization, of having put figured something out themselves, is more important than spoon feeding the players lore that I've made up.

 

[Truename]

I love this topic so much that I rewrote the adventure I'm running next week. I thought it might make a good example to discuss. I've attached it for y'all to critique.

Quick backstory: I'm running The Grande Temple of Jing, an anthology megadungeon by Hammerdog Games. It's... pretty hit and miss, to be honest, but my group is enjoying its beer-and-pretzels silliness. The editing and layout leaves a lot to be desired, and these two threads inspired me to try rewriting level 2.3, "Twinklestar Caverns."

I've attached the original, redacted in the name of fair use for this example (and it's only 4 pages out of an enormous 524 page PDF), and then the first four pages of my six-page rewrite. (I figure that's small enough to serve as a good example without being a chore to read or angering the copyright gods.) I've also attached my raw text in case someone wants to try their hand at making a better version.

I mostly restricted my rewrite to formatting and organization. I had to fill in some gaps and correct some inconsistencies, and I couldn't resist adding some underwater tunnels, but I didn't make major changes to the adventure itself. Does my rewrite make the module easier to run? What would make it better?

PS: There's a few things like "roll 1dFM" and "Jing statues" from the megadungeon that I didn't bother describing. I also didn't include the map. Hopefully it still works without them.

 

[Reynard]

If I am going to tie lore into the adventure without it being necessary for the adventure, then I want it to be an easter egg. E.g., the PCs learn something about the lore, and then when they find the easter egg it has some meaning (if the realize the connection). I think that moment of realization, of having put figured something out themselves, is more important than spoon feeding the players lore that I've made up.

If the background of your BBEG does not actually impact play, it might as well not exist at all. It's just self indulgent would be storycrafting. Adventures aren't novels.

So the PCs should have access to the lore and world building. But infodumps are dry. That means integrating this stuff is important.

 

[Bill Zebub]

If the background of your BBEG does not actually impact play, it might as well not exist at all. It's just self indulgent would be storycrafting. Adventures aren't novels.

So the PCs should have access to the lore and world building. But infodumps are dry. That means integrating this stuff is important.

I think this is a point that would be disputed in the other thread, because some people enjoy reading all that stuff.

But I agree 100%.

 

[Bagpuss]

If the background of your BBEG does not actually impact play, it might as well not exist at all.

Stuff like that is hard to tell if it is going to impact play. I find as a GM while there might be a set plan for the BBEG, having his background and understanding his motivations, means that if that plan needs to change you are better prepared to improvise.

 

[Jasperak]

I think a really interesting exercise might be to "rewrite" a WotC adventure in the accessibility style we are talking about here. What does that look like? Where is the balance?

I was thinking in the other thread that rewriting S1 Tomb of Horrors, B1 In Search of the Unknown, or B2 The Keep on the Borderlands would highlight both the advantages and disadvantages of using newer layout designs. I think one of the concerns is that the newer designs almost lead to making every area interesting instead of having a fair portion of areas 'empty'.

T1 The Village of Hommlett would be really interesting to see because of the conflict between followers of the Druid and St. Cuthbert. A relationship web just might be the thing to help bring the village more to life.

 

[Jasperak]

Now that I think of it, any module from the early days that had an accompanying illustration booklet would be a great idea as an test example of layout designs and experiments; the competition modules like C1 Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan spring to mind.

 

[aco175]

Quick backstory: I'm running The Grande Temple of Jing, an anthology megadungeon by Hammerdog Games. It's... pretty hit and miss, to be honest, but my group is enjoying its beer-and-pretzels silliness. The editing and layout leaves a lot to be desired, and these two threads inspired me to try rewriting level 2.3, "Twinklestar Caverns."

I looked at both options and found that I followed along with the original better. Some had to do with the call-out boxes that highlight key features. This seems to separate the need to know stuff from the room description stuff. I like that the troll riddle is blocked out and bolded in the original to highlight that it is important. The rewrite is better to print and can give a more concise amount of information. Neither give statblocks for the monsters. I also found that the original listed the monster at the end of each room with a larger font that made me think it was connected to the next room at first.