Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="collin" data-source="post: 1118269" data-attributes="member: 6757">Redman is rightAfter reading Rich Redman's article and the responses in this discussion group, I can only conclude that he is 100% correct.You say adventure modules published today are no good?&nbsp; So you create your own.&nbsp; Well then, there is the vicious circle right there.&nbsp; But don't you suppose that not ALL of the modules published by the ump-teen mom-and-pop companies out there are bad?&nbsp; Who do you think is writing all of that stuff?&nbsp; This &quot;them&quot; vs. &quot;us&quot; mentality just irritates me to no end.&nbsp; &quot;They&quot; are people just like &quot;you&quot;, and they are writing things that they find fasinating and enjoy.&nbsp; But there are far more &quot;us&quot; as consumers and players than actual published writers or even GMs.&nbsp;&nbsp; So, now we're left with &quot;those modules are no good&quot;, ergo &quot;I'm not buying any; I'll make my own, even if I have to piecemeal stuff together from Dungeon magazine.&quot;&nbsp; And what's the result?&nbsp; No sales.&nbsp; No sales, no business.&nbsp; No business, no incentive for WotC/Hasbro to spend money, because return on investment is just not there.So why all of the &quot;boy, modules were so much better back in the day.&nbsp; The A, D, G, XYZ series were SO good when men-were-men and giants walked the earth&quot;.&nbsp;&nbsp; Do we sound like a bunch of old-timers here or what?&nbsp; Were they really that good?&nbsp; Come on!&nbsp; Keep on the Borderlands was a nice little adventure to intro players to D&amp;D but as an adventure module, it sucked.&nbsp; And Tomb of Horrors, although a classic dungeon crawl and challenging, was basically a linear dungeon with no real story in it at all.&nbsp; &quot;Hey dummies, bore through the outside and bypass that one-way tunnel!&quot;We thought they were great back then, and we needed them, because D&amp;D and role-playing were still so new.&nbsp; &quot;What!&nbsp; No board, no playing pieces?&nbsp; I was robbed!&nbsp; This box only has some rules in it!&quot;&nbsp; Once the game and role-playing evolved over time, we found we understood where this combination of story-telling and game-playing could take us.&nbsp; Tools for the imagination.&nbsp; After 30 years, we've finally caught on to how to make a game story/module ourselves.&nbsp; It took years of practice, but we finally figured it out.&nbsp; Most of us have years of experience as GMs, not only in D&amp;D, either.&nbsp; Back 20-25 years ago, we didn't have that experience to draw from to create adventures like we do today or to really know what good vs. bad module was.So really, we don't need modules that someone else has written.&nbsp; Most of them won't fit our individual tastes and sensibilities.&nbsp; I'm happy enough with just piece-mealing something together from various sources, and maybe I will use a premade module sometime - that I like.&nbsp; But I don't expect most modules that come out will be something that fits my world or be something that floats my boat.-Collin</blockquote>

[QUOTE="collin, post: 1118269, member: 6757"] [b]Redman is right[/b] After reading Rich Redman's article and the responses in this discussion group, I can only conclude that he is 100% correct. You say adventure modules published today are no good? So you create your own. Well then, there is the vicious circle right there. But don't you suppose that not ALL of the modules published by the ump-teen mom-and-pop companies out there are bad? Who do you think is writing all of that stuff? This "them" vs. "us" mentality just irritates me to no end. "They" are people just like "you", and they are writing things that they find fasinating and enjoy. But there are far more "us" as consumers and players than actual published writers or even GMs. So, now we're left with "those modules are no good", ergo "I'm not buying any; I'll make my own, even if I have to piecemeal stuff together from Dungeon magazine." And what's the result? No sales. No sales, no business. No business, no incentive for WotC/Hasbro to spend money, because return on investment is just not there. So why all of the "boy, modules were so much better back in the day. The A, D, G, XYZ series were SO good when men-were-men and giants walked the earth". Do we sound like a bunch of old-timers here or what? Were they really that good? Come on! Keep on the Borderlands was a nice little adventure to intro players to D&D but as an adventure module, it sucked. And Tomb of Horrors, although a classic dungeon crawl and challenging, was basically a linear dungeon with no real story in it at all. "Hey dummies, bore through the outside and bypass that one-way tunnel!" We thought they were great back then, and we needed them, because D&D and role-playing were still so new. "What! No board, no playing pieces? I was robbed! This box only has some rules in it!" Once the game and role-playing evolved over time, we found we understood where this combination of story-telling and game-playing could take us. Tools for the imagination. After 30 years, we've finally caught on to how to make a game story/module ourselves. It took years of practice, but we finally figured it out. Most of us have years of experience as GMs, not only in D&D, either. Back 20-25 years ago, we didn't have that experience to draw from to create adventures like we do today or to really know what good vs. bad module was. So really, we don't need modules that someone else has written. Most of them won't fit our individual tastes and sensibilities. I'm happy enough with just piece-mealing something together from various sources, and maybe I will use a premade module sometime - that I like. But I don't expect most modules that come out will be something that fits my world or be something that floats my boat. -Collin [/QUOTE]

Verification