Why do modules sell?
Modules sell because of people like me. "Sourcebooks" are not the most numerous books on my shelves, modules are. Why? This thread has helped me realize that my approach to creating campaigns is radically different from those that have posted here. When I create my campaign I look at the modules I have on my shelves. By deciding which modules to use and how to fit them all together I come up with my campaign. I have done this within the context of campaign worlds, such as Greyhawk, FR, Ravenloft, and Cascandia (my total homebrew).
I then fill in the blank spots with my own work, creating a cohesive campaign. Cohesive enough that they have lasted up to 2 years of playing every weekend, except most holidays. With 6 to 8 players.
So what I do works and we all have fun. Maybe modules would sell a lot better if everyone designed their campaigns like i do. I know that buying these modules and "fitting" them together has been a lot easier than putting my Cascandia homebrew together from scratch.
What makes a module worth buying? Many things. Before i go any further with this let me describe my buying habits. I own modules by everyone. Mystic Eye, Fiery Dragon, Atlas, Penumbra, Green Ronin, Kenzer, Sword and Sorcery, FFE, FFG, Troll Lords, WOTC, and Necromancer Games. Plus others I know I am forgetting. To give you an idea how my tastes run I shall list them in order of which publishers I buy from/like the most: 1. Necromancer 2. Kenzer 3. Green Ronin 4. Fiery Dragon 5. Sword and Sorcery 6. Mystic Eye 7. WOTC; the rest I like/buy more or less equally.
Why do I like Necromancer the best? Clark/Orcus said it all, including Eric Mona being very underrated. Plus I would like to add that Clark talks to us on his boards. I have come to feel like I know him. Plus his writers are also on the boards. Plus, none of them have an ego that shows. They have the whole package. All of the others, except Eric Mona and the Fiery Dragon people, keep a certain distance, whether it is because they don't socialize, or because they put this attitude (ego) between them and you, on the various message boards.
Green Ronin has also gotten better in this regard. WOTC, is the worst in this regard. Necromancer Games comes across the best as being in this for the game. The money doesn't hurt things, but first and foremost they want to put out product that makes the game fun and makes you try out new directions.
As for the modules not being generic enough, most of you sound like you are just too lazy to do much thinking. I have easily modified every module to fit my campaigns, and it has always been easier than writing up my own modules. These modules also do things I would never have thought of either. Modules will never be written exactly to your tastes. Maybe your tastes are just a bit too elitist, meaning maybe you should be willing to meet more towards the center instead of insisting they be completely the way you want them to be. I am not trying to flame or insult here. I am just throwing this out there to maybe make you consider if maybe the problem is with the consumer. Yes, there are "bad" modules out there, and I have bought a lot of them. But I have still used them because during my re-writing to make them fit my game, they became good modules.
For example, the poster who said he would be happier if he saw more underwater locations. I have run an underwater campaign. Once I was totally comfortable with the underwater environment and its effects on gameplay I used any module i wanted to and just replaced air with water and trees and bushes with kelp and coral reefs, birds and rabbits with fish, eels, and rays. Not that hard and it got easier every time I did it.
Some of you have commented that even in Dungeon magazine you get only one good adventure per issue. If I don't like it I change it to where I do and it only takes me a few minutes and a few notes in the margins. Hence, every adventure becomes useable for me. Only the question of whether or not I will actually get to use it in the course of my campaigns remains to be answered.
Besides, every single issue brought up in this thread was talked about way back in 1e as well. The 1e modules sucked in comparison to what we see now, especially in terms of presentation, ie art, color, etc... The stories themselves were very bare bones. Like Clark said, if you wanted more roleplay than hack n slash you had to come up with the motivations and background to make that happen. I still use Ravenloft (I6), Sabre River, Death's Ride, Tomb of Horror, Lich Lords, Lost Tomb of Tsojanth, expedition to Barrier Peaks. The Gauntlet, The Sentinal, and any other my current group of players have never seen or hadn't seen in years.
Now most of you are saying give me a great story, without too much detail so i can easily fit it in my campaign. That is a very unfair demand. Clark is telling the truth when he says that his company has found a very good balance between those who want a lot and those who want very little. I spend the least amount of time re-writing their modules. Grey Citadel is just plain great, and Rappan Athuk has plenty of role-playing opportunities, if the DM wants it to.
To be fair, I have found that a lot of the companies out there have improved a lot in the last year. Especially Mystic Eye and Troll Lords. i have been doing a lot less editor type corrections and less rewriting of the modules "story" as well.
The biggest problem I foresee is that everyone is getting good enough to buy and I won't have enough money to do so.
Once people realize that what really makes a campaign last and the game fun is the adventure, they will start buying more modules and fewer sourcebooks. I have already noticed that my sourcebooks gather the most dust on my shelves. Of course I actually use my modules. The only sourcebooks I have actually made use of are Dungeonworld and Necropolis. Of course, those are basically just as much module as source material. I do intend on using Oathbound in the near future. Modules are useful at any time in any game, sourcebooks aren't.
To summarize, or try to, I think that we are being too unreasonable in our demands that it be generic enough to "easily" fit into our respective games. I have found using the flavor in some of these modules has made my campaign a multicolored tapestry instead of one solid color/flavor. Maybe some of you should consider making your campaign fit the flavor and backgrounds of some of these modules. It will make your campaign more like a real world. When you go to Mexico, South America, Africa, or around the Middle East; you definitely know you aren't in Kansas anymore. Making yourself integrate these into your game will make it the same way and it enhances the adventure.
