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

[overgeeked]

The [+] is to keep things positive and prevent the already tired arguments about preferences and this style of module. This thread is for people who like this style of information design and want to talk about it. There are plenty of other threads to hate on things you don’t like.

Branching off of this thread.

Several modules were talked about in the other thread, many OSR modules were mentioned. So it's worth reading some of the posts there for modules to check out.

But, moving ahead to talking about actual module design, what are some ways modules can use information design, layout, presentation, etc to make modules both easier-to-read and easier-to-run at the table?

For me walls of text are a nightmare. I need bullet points and important text bolded. The actual scheme or plot to be explicitly stated somewhere up in the front of the module. Tips, tricks, advice on how the villains will react when the PCs inevitably foil some aspect of the bad guy's plan. Maps, or fragments thereof, to be repeated in the same page or spread as the rooms being described.

Anything and everything that will make the module easier for the referee to actually run at the table while minimizing any prep time required to re-write the module into something useful.

Any ideas?

 

[Reynard]

One thing I make for myself that I am not sure I have ever seen in a published module are relationship webs: just a bunch of pictures of NPCs in the situation (I steal headshots from the internet) with a name and basic description, connected to the other NPCs with various kinds of lines and arrows that give an indication of the relationship. A line with a heart means romantic ties, a line with a lightning bolt means contentious, etc... That way, with a glance I can see who feels what about whom, so when the PCs get involved I can have NPCs respond according to their relationships without having to try and keep all that stuff in my head.

 

[aco175]

I like having the monster stats in with the encounter to prevent flipping back and forth or worse, bringing more books to the game. I could be fine with monsters in the back of the adventure that I can print out to use as a sideboard. This would save space if they are reused several times.

I really do not like cutting the statblocks down even more and just shorthanding them. I think it is terrible to just say goblins- go look them up someplace since you should have the other books.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I really like NPCs following a standard format (for that adventure) with a couple of key features per entry. E.g:

Appearance: purple robes, van-dyke beard
Behaviors: scratches his butt crack, says "ummm...."
Secret: in love with the otyugh in Area 12
Goal: get the mcguffin from the drider in Area 6

...or whatever the categories are.

Even if the author is imagining more detail ("wait...what about the wart on his nose?!?!?") I don't actually need more than that. I'll flesh it out with my own details, if needed.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I really do not like cutting the statblocks down even more and just shorthanding them. I think it is terrible to just say goblins- go look them up someplace since you should have the other books.

This is where I think the two-page per area format I suggested upthread...ideally in a spiral bounding book that lays flat...would rock. In my opinion. With that much space you could easily include description, stat blocks, NPC strategies, random tables, etc. on one side and the map of just that area, large enough for additional notes, on the right.

 

[zakael19]

I really like NPCs following a standard format (for that adventure) with a couple of key features per entry. E.g:

Appearance: purple robes, van-dyke beard
Behaviors: scratches his butt crack, says "ummm...."
Secret: in love with the otyugh in Area 12
Goal: get the mcguffin from the drider in Area 6

...or whatever the categories are.

Even if the author is imagining more detail ("wait...what about the wart on his nose?!?!?") I don't actually need more than that. I'll flesh it out with my own details, if needed.

Yeah, something simple and consistent is nice. For a more narrative side, I like how Carved from Brindlewood stuff tends to format the NPCs connected to various situations. One thing they do is a single "quote" that a) hits at what relevance the NPC has to the situation but also b) gives you a tenor of how they talk to grab and run with. I've been trying out that format for my mystery/investigation focused Daggerheart game, because you tend to have a large cast that may not stick around and so something succinct and grabby is nice

Eg:
Scarlett, faery (??? Aged).
Flowing red evening gown that hides her feet. Glamour wavers around slowly pulsing moth wings. Arresting eyes you want to tip into like a deep black pool. Quote: Oh aren’t you all just ADORABLE children.

I also like how refined down BITD's NPCs are. Just a name and a couple of tags and a blurb. Further relevance comes from the faction or location they're tied to and its situation. That gives you the space to either flesh out if you want, or leave a gap to pull on player establishing questions.

Eg:

Flint. A spirit trafficker who trades out of a condemned manor house. (Weird, Calculating, Suspicious).

 

[Bagpuss]

4th Ed which was mainly two page spread for encounters was really designed to make things easier for the DM. There were complaints at the time that it was dull to read, but I found in play it was much more manageble. Also because from the ground up 4th Ed was designed to be very playable, easier to manage, and fill at least a single page if not two, every encounter tended to have more going on than than just the creatures, in a room. Fights would take place in interesting locations, with environmental objects that could be interacted with for effects in play. But while it was great for running encounters as a DM, it was dry to read, more like a Haynes Manual than a fantasy story, so it is clear while it didn't land well with some folks.

Still there is plenty that can be learned from it, picking the key information for an encounter on a single, or double page spread (even if the scenario isn't originally like that) can really speed up play, and keep you organised.

 

[zakael19]

Another little thing: if the author wants to convey their idea of a situation (a room, an environment, a moment), give us 3 senses of descriptions. Tell us an interesting sound, a compelling scent, maybe even a touch. “You see…blah blah blah” only goes so far. Plus the more sense cues you give the GM, the more interesting details they can provide as players investigate the environment.

 

[Cergorach]

It kind of depends... We've currently been playing mostly in (Foundry) VTT, and that allows me a LOT more room to quickly access the right information in just a link (or two). I can even spawn encounters because I made the extra effort in prep.

What I've found is that having different stylistic 'boxes' for different types of content really helps. One for read aloud text, another for treasure, and e separate section for the encounter. It's still not perfect and a LOT could be improved still, but I didn't want to spend even more time on Undermountain, rewriting it completely.

If we're talking about in person, without the benefit of a VTT... I would split up sections of an adventure in easily usable sections in separate booklets. One booklet per level of a dungeon for example. Monster statblocks on separate cards that I can easly access. Streamlined, short form, and condensed writing. Where (bullet) lists where they are appropriate. Separate (poster) maps for encounters.

 

[Reynard]

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?