Adventures don't Sell? Do you agree? Redman Article

[der_kluge]

I agree with his points, though didn't read his article. (thanks for that executive-level summary)

For d20 publishers, it's a double-edged sword. If a d20 publisher has a campaign setting, they want to provide source material for it so that it doesn't fade away and die. They key way to do that is by creating modules. AU and Dragonstar are both great examples of campaign settings that licensed out their world IP to other publishers to create modules for them. These modules obviously won't sell to people who don't use those campaign settings, but they help ensure the success of a campaign setting in the long run.

That said, I would also agree that I fall into the camp of not buying any world-specific modules. I would never think to purchase a KoK module, or a Scarred Lands module (or any Scarred Lands product, for that matter), because those things don't fit with my campaign world. I do enjoy a good generic module that I can plug into my own campaign, but those are few and far between.

But, creating a module to be generic is difficult. Let me explain. Once upon a time when I was asked to write for a new d20 company called Thunderhead Games, they said "write a module", and I said "I'll see what I can do." So, I had this idea of having the PCs meet each other on a caravan ride from one outpost city to another larger city. "I need a city", I said, "oh, btw, I need some gods, too". "We have neither", was the reply from on high, "make them up". So, I slapped a couple of city-stat blocks together "Perten" and "Bluffside", and I made a couple generic gods.

Thus, Bluffside was born. So, you see, it's almost a natural evolution to go from a module to a campaign setting. Even generic modules are almost always set in some kind of specific place, but generic in this sense can really only mean "standard D&D fantasy", and that's about as close as you're gonna get.

 

[BiggusGeekus@Work]

For better or for worse I think we've entered an era where modules are largely promotional material or "mega-modules" that are in actuality campaigns.

I don't think this is either good or bad, it's just the way things are right now.

 

[babomb]

I agree with the point that when 3e first came out there was something of a flood of adventures and source materials, which magnified the problems with producing profitable adventures, especially since a lot of the adventures were mediocre. When 3e first came out, I could go into the FLGS, look through a big stack of adventures, and end up only buying dice. I wound up converting a couple of interesting modules from 2e and buying <i>Death in Freeport</i> from Green Ronin. I would've bought the rest of the Freeport series and a small number of others (e.g. <i>Of Sound Mind</i>), were I still GMing. I might buy them anyway, before they go OOP. Now that the competition has thinned a bit, I think the overall level of quality has risen.

Another thing to note is that while publishing adventures might not be profitable for WotC, it can be profitable for smaller publishers with less overhead.

 

[Wraith Form]

I have a large stack of Dungeons, and I've never failed to get a module out when I need one. I just go thru my stack of mags, and there's always one I can use.

But don't you see why that's frustrating? They're Dungeon mags you've collected over time...in other words, they're "old". Where is the current d20 adventures for DMs?

I've got every TSR adventure (and I mean that literally) published between 1995-1998, as well as every Dungeon mag from 1997 - today. In order to get adventure ideas, I need to sift through the "old stuff" to find an adventure germ that I can cultivate in my own mind into a full-scale, full-blown adventure. Or, I have to convert every stat into a D20 version. Why is that? Why do I need to do that? Why isn't there d20 support for DMs?

I personally don't give a rat's sphincter WHY adventures/modules don't sell (from the economic perspective), I just know I'd pay for some that are intelligent (BBEG plots that *make sense*), well-written, low-to-mid-level, generic enough to slot into a *majority* of the campaign settings, and don't feature a lot of half-this/half-that humanoids or demons as opponents. I appreciate the flexibility of the rules to make diverse monsters, but this half-dragon/half-golem/half-kraken/half-vampire 30th level Librarian/2nd level Blackguard junk has GOT to go. (Give me a simple human bad guy any day...like Iago from Othello, for example; what a BASTARD he was.)

Occasionally I find those plots in Dungeon, one of the only d20 products from WotC (err, Paizo, whatever) that I will (reluctantly) continue to support. But did anyone else find an adventure like "Life's Bazaar" to be *TOO* over-the-top?
*****************SPOILER WARNING BEGINS (just for you--you know who you are)********************************




****LAST CHANCE****







* I MEAN IT THIS TIME *


*REALLY*


(A beholder secretly running a town? Whaaat? A town that's developed inside a dormant volcano? You crazy or somethin'? With a bunch of invisible, "shackleborn" birthmarks showing up on kids?? hunh??? And whose insane idea was it to have a half-dwarf/half-TROLL slaver? I understand about rape and all that, but....yeeeech, are they even compatible?) I'll buy adventures with plots that *work*, not this half-baked monster-fest they've been feeding us.

Ahem.

OK, enough coffee for one afternoon. Sorry.

 

[Umbran]

I think the price range for adventures could probably be more expensive with the number of entertainment hours they provide for the number of individuals. Think about it - 5 people go to see a movie and pay ~$7 to $9 a piece for 2 hours of hit-or-miss entertainment. That's a combined price of $35-$45 dollars. Even if the movie is Oscar-winning material or even just a fanboy's wetdream it's still much more expensive than the going module and provides a very finite amount of enjoyment.

Yes, but there's a point that's going unmentioned here...

With a movie you're getting entertainment that you cannot reasonably create yourself. Meanwhile, it's quite possible for a GM to create their own adventures. Many GMs (myself included) actually find the process enjoyable, and count it into our own entertainment of the game.

Even for those who don't find it fun, there's the issue of time. The GM has to review the adventure and edit it for his own campaign, and doing that properly takes a while. That reduces the value of the adventure. The GM cand spend money and time on the published work, or just spend time and create his own...

Thus, the main competition the adventure writers face is from the DMs themselves.

 

[Snipehunt]

I can't comment on the economics of it all, but I remember the AD&D modules, and (besides being generic) they were all good - they still stand up today, in our more RP-oriented games. I took my group through White Plume Mountain, and the slaver campaign, and those just plain rocked! And the original Ravenloft, or the D--series? Too cool. The players always knew why the were there, what the goal was, and everything led clearly to the goal.

The main problem I see, and I don't mean to insult anybody, but, is that most of the modules and adventures are just bad compared to these. Hard to figure out, hard to follow, lots of inexplicable actions, plots that just plain don't make sense. Worse, most adventures don't even come with good hooks to get PC's into them - and that's the hardest part! Once I can give my PC's motivation, the adventure's easy.

I bought a lot - more than a dozen, maybe 20 - of non-WotC adventures when 3E first came out, and never played them. RttTOEE was great, the WotC adventures were pretty good, but the others? If you want them, they're still sitting on the bookshelf.

 

[Desdichado]

I personally don't give a rat's sphincter WHY adventures/modules don't sell (from the economic perspective), I just know I'd pay for some that are intelligent (BBEG plots that *make sense*), well-written, low-to-mid-level, generic enough to slot into a *majority* of the campaign settings, and don't feature a lot of half-this/half-that humanoids or demons as opponents

If you happen to have a rat's sphincter handy, you should probably reconsider that position. If the economic incentive isn't there for publishers, you ain't gettin' no adventures no matter how much you personally would want them. That's why it matters.

 

[Wombat]

Hmm. Well let's see where I stand.

I am a GM. Have been pretty much my whole time.

I don't buy adventures.

Why?

First because they tend to be campaign-specific. It takes a lot fo rework a pre-published adventure so that it fits the particulars of my own campaign. I do not like Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, Scarred Lands or any of the other "House" settings that I have run across. Oh, I might steal an idea or two, but they are not my worlds, so not my interest; the adventures are set in these places and are hard then to jury-rig into my worlds because there are far too many suppositions as to availability of magic, types of monsters running around, acceptable levels of treasure, background information, and the like.

Equally important, however, is that very few of them match the style of play that my players and I work with. We hate "logic puzzles" that feel like they fit in the 20th century rather than in a fantasy setting. We dislike "impossible traps" (thinks like Grimtooth that do not fit the physics and mechanics of the time). We tend to be character-driven and story-driven, rather than treasure-driven or killing-driven in our games.

Generic encounters, as some people have suggested, might be of more use, but even then they would have to be re-tailored to fit the specifics of my own campaign(s).

In the end it is not really economical to buy an adventure. I would rather purchase a splat book or other bit of crunch to pull out the small bits that are useful than an adventure where, at most, I might take away a village or a single NPC.

Just personal takes, YMMV, usw.

 

[Wraith Form]

If you happen to have a rat's sphincter handy, you should probably reconsider that position. If the economic incentive isn't there for publishers, you ain't gettin' no adventures no matter how much you personally would want them. That's why it matters.

Ahh, but you see, I'm like Storminator. I have *YEARS* worth of modules, adventures, Dungeon mags, and--gasp!--my own creativity and imagination to fall back on.

If publishers never produced another adventure again, I'd be sad but not crushed. (In my mind, in essence, that's already happened--*if and when* an adventure is published, often it's useless to me.) I have enough material sitting in my "library" to last for--seriously--many years, and if I need to resort to pulling from my "oldies" I will.

Oh, and here's your sphincter. [Hands you a sphincter.]

 

[Desdichado]

Ahh, but you see, I'm like Storminator. I have *YEARS* worth of modules, adventures, Dungeon mags, and--gasp!--my own creativity and imagination to fall back on.

If publishers never produced another adventure again, I'd be sad but not crushed. (In my mind, in essence, that's already happened--*if and when* an adventure is published, often it's useless to me.) I have enough material sitting in my "library" to last for--seriously--many years, and if I need to resort to pulling from my "oldies" I will.

Oh, and here's your sphincter. [Hands you a sphincter.]

Hey, thanks. I can always use a spare rat's ass. Anyway, if all this is true, then I don't understand your post -- you seem to be saying you don't need any more modules, but your earlier post was saying you wanted them desperately (I agree, I'm paraphrasing) and you didn't care why they weren't being made. Anyhoo, color me confused.