A word of caution to the " put it all in a module" arguments

[El Mahdi]

Only problems I see are more work for the DM and whiny players.

The DM has more work to do in order to decide the tone of the game - because modules are certainly going to do that. They're going to determine the speed of play, the difficulty to moderate, the complexity, and the overall "feel". A stripped-down core rules game is going to have a completely different feel than a more anything-goes game. A DM with a job and family is going to have trouble finding the time to do all the necessary prep work to get the dials just right, to stick with the metaphor. If they run published adventures, it's also going to be difficult as the modules themselves will run slightly differently, probably with lots of sidebars making notes, "If you use gridded combat..."

Whiny players, on the other hand...reading around on these boards, I think I'm the only DM with this problem. But the group I play with, what I know will happen is someone will have an idea in their head about what they want to play and if I try to exclude a module for tone or story or pacing reasons, they'll throw a passive-aggressive hissy fit. For example, in my current Pathfinder game I'm running a Greyhawk-set campaign with multiple plot threads that was originally written assuming a good or at least good-ish group and ended up with a bunch of evil and CN characters and had to throw out a ninja, a gunslinger, and a drow. And they whined and bitched and whined and bitched until I finally went with a group that had a monk and a Neutral-to-Evil group. Had to re-write half the friggin' campaign and redo everything from black-and-white morality to black-and-grey. Annoying.

Now say I leave out some of the modules. Next thing I'm going to have is one player whining about me leaving out Module A, another about Module B, and so on until I either put my foot down and they throw a fit or act all sullen, or I give up just to shut them up.

You can take solace that you're not the only DM that has or has had these kind of problems with their group. But I don't think any rules system or module is ever going to be easy or be able to fix this for you because of these factors. The disfunctionality you just described reminds me of my family...and I hardly talk to them anymore! I have no idea how you successfully game with them and have fun...but as long as you are having fun, maybe you all can work it out someday.

 

[Li Shenron]

The main example is adventures, which will be tremendously difficult to balance in a complex module system.

Understandable concern...

But then, this very forum is full of DMs who used the wackiest house rules, mixed editions, allowed/disallowed anything, and bumped the PCs to no end with the excused of wanting a "powered up campaign", and still managed to play the game.

I think the adventure designers will need only to balance an adventure against itself, and then say what "level" it is for standard characters.

Then the core rules need only have some guidelines for adjusting encounters, just like they always had in case of adventuring parties with less than or more than 4 PCs.

 

[Incenjucar]

Understandable concern...

But then, this very forum is full of DMs who used the wackiest house rules, mixed editions, allowed/disallowed anything, and bumped the PCs to no end with the excused of wanting a "powered up campaign", and still managed to play the game.

I think the adventure designers will need only to balance an adventure against itself, and then say what "level" it is for standard characters.

Then the core rules need only have some guidelines for adjusting encounters, just like they always had in case of adventuring parties with less than or more than 4 PCs.

This very forum is filled with very experienced, learned DMs who have absorbed the advice of hundreds of other DMs. Do not expect everyone in the game to be an expert.

 

[Li Shenron]

This very forum is filled with very experienced, learned DMs who have absorbed the advice of hundreds of other DMs. Do not expect everyone in the game to be an expert.

Yes but the non-experts will probably start playing without modules.

Or if they use modules, they will get slightly more powerful PCs therefore the adventure may be somewhat easier, which is better than the other way around.

Or they will have problems, and they'll learn to deal with them just like the expert did when they weren't expert yet.

All in all, I mean that the designers should consider the issue and provide some guidelines, but I wouldn't certainly worry about published adventures to be a nightmare to balance.

 

[Incenjucar]

Yes but the non-experts will probably start playing without modules.

Or if they use modules, they will get slightly more powerful PCs therefore the adventure may be somewhat easier, which is better than the other way around.

Or they will have problems, and they'll learn to deal with them just like the expert did when they weren't expert yet.

All in all, I mean that the designers should consider the issue and provide some guidelines, but I wouldn't certainly worry about published adventures to be a nightmare to balance.

Or it will lead them to reject the game, which is the concern.

 

[MichaelSomething]

This very forum is filled with very experienced, learned DMs who have absorbed the advice of hundreds of other DMs. Do not expect everyone in the game to be an expert.

This won't be a problem if WOTC takes the effort to understand their modules so that they can fully explain the effects it will have on a game. Sadly, I don't think they will...

 

[Greg K]

I put between 2 to 10 hours a week in prep for an adventure. I'm writing all the plots and stories. I have to run the entire game. I can understand them not liking a plot and following something else or going off the rails every once in a while, but then there's doing the exact opposite of what I wanted to do. And because I'm running a game that isn't what I wanted to run, I'm getting burned out more frequently and thoroughly.

The easiest thing would be not to run for them if it is not the style of game you want to run. There is no rule stating you must play with these people (even if they should happen to be your closest friends).

 

[Agamon]

This won't be a problem if WOTC takes the effort to understand their modules so that they can fully explain the effects it will have on a game. Sadly, I don't think they will...

Why do you think that? They are going into this with exactly that mindset concerning the modularity of the game. I would be surprised if they were suddenly silent and mysterious in explaining them in the actual books themselves.

 

[Abstruse]

The easiest thing would be not to run for them if it is not the style of game you want to run. There is no rule stating you must play with these people (even if they should happen to be your closest friends).

Actually, there are rules, but not in the game system. It's the sort of social rules you have to deal with when real people and emotions get involved. Player A is a good friend and great player, but Player B has been a childhood friend of Player A and he's one of the problem players. Kicking out Player B may cause problems for Player A who would either have to quit as well. Player C owns the house we play at and is also friends with Player B and Player D and blah blah blah.

Also, small town and there's a pool of only about 20-30 players to choose from with all the assorted drama that goes with it and the scheduling nightmares that are everyone's day jobs and family obligations. And some of those players are even worse than the ones I have.

 

[Greg K]

See, my philosophy is completely the opposite. As far as I am concerned, one does not run a game for or play with problem players simply, because one is friends. If the they are a problem with a system (even after talking to them), try running another system or do something else other than gaming. If that means not gaming, so be it-"No gaming is better than badgaming". If one wants to ignore the above, they have no reason to complain, because they made the choice to deal with them and their behavior or style despite it ruining one's own fun.

Actually, there are rules, but not in the game system. It's the sort of social rules you have to deal with when real people and emotions get involved. Player A is a good friend and great player, but Player B has been a childhood friend of Player A and he's one of the problem players. Kicking out Player B may cause problems for Player A who would either have to quit as well. Player C owns the house we play at and is also friends with Player B and Player D and blah blah blah.

Also, small town and there's a pool of only about 20-30 players to choose from with all the assorted drama that goes with it and the scheduling nightmares that are everyone's day jobs and family obligations. And some of those players are even worse than the ones I have.