Bruce Nesmith Interview: 1 month, 1 32 page module

According to James Jacobs, a 32-page module should be approx 20k words, and 2k of workable writing per day is considered an average day's work. So, 10 days to write, then 20 days for the editing and other work to turn it from raw text into a product? That doesn't actually sound so bad.

However, being expected to write an adventure from just a title and with no further guidance is considerably more problematic.

(And, of course, being asked to do it over and over, every single month, may well also have become an issue quite quickly. I'm just not sure the required word/page output is unreasonable.)

 

[Hussar]

Or, since we're on the idea of "stand alone" modules, would you pay 40 bucks for A4, on its own, without A1-3? The PC's start out captured, stripped of equipment and thrown in a dungeon? Yeah, that would go over well and wouldn't see tons of cries of "railroad" if it were released today. Or how about D2, without D1, where you start out in the middle of the Underdark, pursuing Drow raiders? Many of the classic modules weren't standalone - they were series, or "adventure paths" with pretty strong story lines and fairly linear plots.

I mean, even in A1 Slave Pits of the Undercity, you start out in front of the secret door, proceed through a pretty linear dungeon crawl until you meet the final boss. That was the pattern for most AD&D modules. The idea that the old modules were these bastions of sandbox play, wide open with virtually endless choices is pretty easily dispelled. There are a few modules like that and those are the ones that stick out in people's minds, but, jeez, there is a mountain of crap underneath.

 

[TerraDave]

I agree with your overall point, and I am not personally familiar with any modules pre-4E: but Ruins of Undermountain, City of Skulls, Night Below have made it to top module lists at least. Heard good things about the Al-Quadim modules, too.

And you got one: city of skulls. By Carl Sargent, who also did the Night Below box set (5 months), and a number of the other better received products of that time. Ruins of Undermountain is a classic, though if you compare it to 32 page modules of the previous era...you might find about the same amount of detail, even if Undermountian had a lot more text and art. And of course they had 5 months to do it (if not more, as it was probably scene as a premier product,) Crucially, it was supposedly based on Greenwood's extensive campaign notes.

Al-Qadim stuff was great. Though often again longer, and hence getting more time.

There are some other examples. But again out of hundreds of publications.

 

[Jester David]

No, it's not nostalgia. It's personal preference in DM'ing style and, IMHO, a superior way to write "adventures for D&D". I'd rather pay $40 for a pristine copy of, say, I1: Dwellers of the Forbidden City... than pay $40 for a band new copy of "Hoard of the Dragon Queen". Why? I feel that I1 is a *much* better adventure module in virtually every way. I've DM'ed I1 at least a half dozen times, easy. All of those with many of the same players. You know what? Every single time that I've DM'ed it, we've had a vastly different story, feeling, outcome and overall play experience. One time involved Horan the Wizard, and a huge aerial battle involving flying carpets, fly spells, tasloi on giant wasps and summoned air elementals. Another time was very conan-esqe, with giant apes, huge snakes and savage cannibals stalking the shadow-cloaked ruined streets of the city...all while the PC's searched for the Chief's son in order to rescue him. Another time had the bullywug's on a holy crusade throughout the city..."converting or cleansing" the non-believers and sacrificing them to the Great Lake God (the Pan Lung); and the 'good guys' were the yuan-ti, trying to stop this desecration of their ancient city. I could go on and on.

Devil's advocate: if you ran Tyranny of Dragons 4-6 times, wouldn't you also expect some variation and fond memories of how the PCs did different things? The one group that used deception and pretended to be cultists, the group that used stealth and snuck through the ruins, and the group that just charged in screaming YOLO!

The point is: older modules were written to be used by any DM and plopped into their own campaigns, fitting into their own stories. The modules were designed to be *used as a DM aid in creating a memorable game*. Nowadays, modules have done a 180; with only lip service paid to the DM 'plopping it into his own campaign'. Today's "adventure modules" should be renamed to something like "story-line books"; they expect that the DM will run it as it is, with only minor changes to the set dressing (if that). The main story has been meticulously planned out, with all the tropes of a "good story or novel". Great! ...if we were reading a story or novel. However, we are trying to play a game based on our own choices and imagination. Can a superior DM re-write major sections of, say, Hoard of the Dragon Queen, and have it all play out well? Certainly! My point is that the older modules made this a MUCH easier thing to do...for all DM's, not just those with oodles and oodles of experience.

It's about option and choice.

If you have a modular adventure (an, *ahem* module) then you have to either run it without much story or adapt it into an existing campaign. If you're busy and don't have time to write a campaign or aren't imaginative enough or are still learning how to plan a story then you are out of luck. A good DM can turn a story-lite module into an interesting, interactive campaign but a poor DM will just turn it into a hack-and-slash affair with no NPCs and plot.

If you have an adventure with a storyline then you can just pull out the encounter areas or statblocks and turn it into something else. Episode 6: Castle Naerytar in Hoard of the Dragon Queen could easily have been a small stand-alone 20-page adventure. And if you're running a homegame it doesn't take much to tweak that area and make it something that fits your personal campaign. Pretty much the exact same amount of work as if it were a generic stand-alone product.
Storyline adventures give you a choice: you can run the product straight, you can use it as a starting point and let your group go where they want, you can modify the crap out of it and do your own thing, or you can rip it apart and use it for encounters and smaller adventures.

There's also the "reading" factor. Not everyone who buys an adventure will be able to run it. People buy expecting to play but can't find a group, or groups fall apart, or another module catches their eye, or the company releases products faster than people can play them. A story-lite module is okay to read but a little dry and boring. A story rich adventure is much more fun to sit down and read, consuming the product that way. This lets you "play" an adventure twice: once when reading it, and once at the table.


And frankly, the market has spoken.
Paizo is still doing APs and modules, but their module line is their redheaded stepchild. New and upcoming modules seldom get mentioned at convention panels and never receive big announcements or publicity. Most just appear on their product page with no fanfare. They changed them from 32-pages to 64-pages to see if more content would help, but apart from the first one no one really cared, and the number released each year is dwindling. And the module forums on Paizo are a ghost town.
If not for RPG Superstar - where a winner gets to write a module - I wonder if they'd just cancel the line.
In contrast, their Adventure Path storylines are hugely popular and pretty much drive the company forward.

 

[pming]

Hiya.

Devil's advocate: if you ran Tyranny of Dragons 4-6 times, wouldn't you also expect some variation and fond memories of how the PCs did different things? The one group that used deception and pretended to be cultists, the group that used stealth and snuck through the ruins, and the group that just charged in screaming YOLO!


It's about option and choice.
***snip***

I get all of what you are saying. I don't necessarily disagree with it, but I don't find it very compelling either. Having different things happen in the same adventure when run at different times (with or without different players) is the beauty of RPG's. It's all a matter of how adaptable a module is to something different. And when I say "different" I mean different in a lot of ways...not just how they handled some encounter. Like, how easy would it be for Hoard to handle a gorup of PC's who decide to help the cultists? Go full on black-cloak? How many 'encounters' would need to be changed, and by how much? If they get found out, how would the NPC's they know react? I think there's a part in the second book (Rise of Tiamat) where the PC's get "deputized" or something from some high-level NPC's and their factions. Would this be instant death for the PC's then? Or will they simply never 'encounter' the NPC's? How does this affect stuff that happens later? Does not having these NPC groups at their back really mess things up? Yes, that is quite drastic a 'change'...but what if they give the Blue Dragon Mask to one of the high-level NPC's that "deputize" them in the second adventure (Rise of Tiamat)? Without all the masks, the ritual would never even get off the ground. Worse, what if the PC's just up and destroy the mask when they get it? Or what if they figure out it's so important...so they just turn around 180 degrees and say "Well, as long as we have this, they can't succeed. Lets find a way to destroy this suckka!".

I'm saying I find the older 1e style "old skool" adventure modules a far superior format for running a game of D&D. For something like Warhammer Fantasy Role-Play, a more "adventure path" style works better. But we're talking 5e here... so, IMHO, "old skool style 32-page with detachable cover map" is much better.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Hussar]

Like, how easy would it be for Hoard to handle a gorup of PC's who decide to help the cultists? Go full on black-cloak? How many 'encounters' would need to be changed, and by how much? If they get found out, how would the NPC's they know react?

Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...-1-month-1-32-page-module/page4#ixzz3d4tzsqe0

Show me three modules where that isn't true. In any era. If the PC's join the Giants in the G series, they get put to death on sight by the good guys. What happens if the PC's join the slavers? How much can you sell a slave for? The module certainly isn't going to help you one whit. Is it even possible, and how would they do it, to join the evil priest in the Keep in Keep of the Borderlands? The module certainly gives you no guidance here.

There are extremely few modules that would help you do what you're trying to do.

 

[mouselim]

Perfectly doable. If the person is fully dedicated to writing that module. Without overtime, that a total of 40*20 (used to be 40 hours work week for 5 days) = 800 hours.

A 32 page module, interspaced with images, NPC stats, table content, maps and references will mean approximately 10k to 15k words. That will mean roughly 18.75 words per hour...it's not a tall order.

By the way, I used to write adventures too. The planning takes longer time than the writing and a short adventure will normally take me 1 week to complete. This is of course without the imageries, proof-reading and such (which I assume wasn't done by Bruce Nesmith too).

As for TSR adventures, I think they're fabulous! I agree with some posters here - the current crop of 5e adventures left a bad taste in my mouth. Yes, its hardcover, high quality premium paper and well bound but the quality of content is definitely not up to that standard. It doesn't need to fall apart because I would not bother to use it but sell it off at the first opportunity.

 

[Mercurius]

[MENTION=6776981]Morlock[/MENTION] - Imagine you had to write a 32 page essay, complete, front to back, in a month. That's insanely fast. Can it be done? Sure. But, the quality you get is going to suffer a whole pile.

If writing said essay (or module) is your full-time job, then no, it is not insanely fast. It is quite easy to manage that sort of word-count. If I were doing it I'd probably spend the first week brainstorming ideas, outlining the module, etc. The second week would be writing the first draft, the third week would be editing the draft, and the fourth week would be polishing it up.

What is more difficult is playtesting it to work out the kinks. I think that's the larger problem that TSR must have run into in terms of quality control.

As for this discussion of AD&D vs. 5E modules, what seems to be missing is the fact that in The Good Old Days there were a ton of options to choose from. Even if two out of three modules were bad, that still left you with many options a year. A shotgun approach has its positives. The problem now is we only have the story arc du jour (or bi-annually). There's no choice, no options. Even though Paizo has a similar pattern of two story arcs a year (or so), they also publish one-shot adventures for those wanting something different.

It just seems odd that WotC isn't offering at least two or three one-shot adventures a year, alongside the story arcs. Yeah, I know I can write my own or go on dndclassics or dust off old modules. But if I'm running D&D I'm wanting to provide at least a few options for people, give them some choice. This doesn't mean a deluge of product, but it does mean, well, something.

But yeah, this has been said before. I know, I know. All that said, we're only a year into the edition and already saw significant improvement from the first to second story arc. I'm guessing (or hoping) at some point WotC decides to expand things a bit.

 

[mouselim]

I did...

Would you pay 40 bucks for Quagmire? Or how about 40 bucks for The Bane of Llywelyn (I actually owned that one once upon a time) or The Lost Island of Castanamir? Or any of a dozen completely forgettable modules that were produced?

I did...for good copies of what they are selling now on eBay or Amazon although these modules didn't sell at that price when it was out originally (I know cos I bought them then and lost the whole lot when I moved house)

Would I pay $40 for Hoard of the Dragon Queen now if I had read the content? No.

Would I pay $40 for Rise of Tiamat now if I had read the content? No.

Would I pay $40 for Prince of Apocalypse now if I had read the content? Maybe.

 

[Hussar]

Sure the shotgun approach might be good for consumers but not so great for the publisher.

It's funny but TSR had about a 10% hit rate with good modules and that's considered great. WOtC withe the same rate has a terrible reputation.

Perception is a funny thing.

 

[pming]

Hiya.

Show me three modules where that isn't true. In any era. If the PC's join the Giants in the G series, they get put to death on sight by the good guys. What happens if the PC's join the slavers? How much can you sell a slave for? The module certainly isn't going to help you one whit. Is it even possible, and how would they do it, to join the evil priest in the Keep in Keep of the Borderlands? The module certainly gives you no guidance here.

There are extremely few modules that would help you do what you're trying to do.

Umm...it's the lack of guidance that is the point. To put it another way, newer adventures hold the PC's and the DM's hands *far* too much for my liking. If the PC's join the Giants in the G series...I can still use it quite easily. The Good Guys would/may hear of their betrayal. Then, fearing "insider knowledge" about the Good Guys defenses, leaders, magical capabilities, etc, make a hasty decision and gather a small army and hire mercenaries in order to assult the Steading of the Hill Giant. I could use that entire module as-is for the PC's. They could shore up defenses, make plans for defence and offence, try and infiltrate the Good Guys army for recon, etc. I then grab ye' old War Machine (my go-to D&D mass combat system; the one from basic D&D...works fine with 1e/2e) and stat up some of the good guys forces. Then we play out a large Siege of the Steading, with the PC's as the 'leaders'...or at least significant generals.

It's *because* there is a "lack of guidance" throughout the entire module that allows it so much freedom. The "story" of G1? : "Giants are up to something in the nearby hills. Check it out". In a nutshell. What exactly are they up to? That's 'semi-spelled out', but easily ignored. Nothing in the module hinges upon something that happened before it. Could it be important that the PC's did something (or didn't do something)? Sure, but that's up to the DM to decide. He doesn't have to "ignore" something later on or otherwise "rewrite" an entire 'chapter' of the adventure because the PC's did something unexpected. At most he makes a few notes about likely outcomes and then rolls with it.

That is why I feel older style adventure modules are superior. Plain and simple. They fit my preferred DM'ing style, and I think they fit the "purpose" of D&D much better. Looking back at OLD D&D, like really early 1e, or 0e, the point of the game was basically "Heres a deadly underground dungeon filled with traps, treasure and monsters! See if you can live long enough to gain power and prestige, and enough riches to retire on! Ready? GO!". All the "extra stuff" (story, campaign time line, character development, etc), all came about *through play*. It wasn't presented as "Here's the dungeon, and here is a 4 page story script to try and stick to".

By *not* having all that extra, in-depth story stuff it made the "story" that came about through play unique. It made each campaign and each individual DM's running of the module different and interesting. As I said...I've ran Dwellers of the Forbidden City a half dozen times or more. Each different, some radically so. I didn't have to "ignore" much of anything, nor did I have to re-write anything. I just used it as is, filled in the blanks throughout play, and bingo-bongo-bango... it's like a "new adventure path" each time.

Newer adventures are just too much work for too little gain if the PC's do something unusual... or if the DM wants to use the module differently. Bare-bones skeleton upon which I can hang my own dressing...easy. Fully fleshed out story-structure which I have to strip, dismantle, reassign and then hang my own dressing on? Much more work intensive.

Sorry, Hussar, I think our preferred play styles are just too different for us to really come to any sort of middle ground on this. That's not a bad thing, just a different one. As long as we both have fun playing what we like, all's good, right?

^_^

Paul L. Ming