Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
GM Prep Time - Cognitive Dissonance in Encounter Design?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 5187794" data-attributes="member: 29398"><p>For clarity, while I presented what is being called the "four-times approach" in its most labour-intensive form (actually writing the module four times) I really don't expect any writers to do it that way...though props to 'em if they do. But I sure as shootin' expect them to *think* that way and to have that thinking reflected in the finished product.This might be a non-issue, depending how the writer gets paid. Page count can stay the same, just with more words, less pictures and white space, and less slavish adherence to the delve format...no extra cost there. I don't know how writers get paid, but if the writer's on contract to produce a module the pay will be the same no matter what gets written as long as it passes inspection; so no extra cost there either.</p><p>No idea of the mechanics involved, but page counts divisible by 8 seem to be the norm. That said, you can increase the page count by one or two or three provided the extras are on loose sheets (cough *maps* cough) and not increase the cost very much.</p><p>The paths do *not* have to be the same difficulty!!! Why not have a module where there's an easy way to solve it, a hard way to solve it, and a way that won't solve it at all? And the pacing is entirely up to the DM and group at the table and probably won't ever be the same twice.</p><p></p><p>But you're quite right that it still needs to be easy to read and understand.</p><p>Good. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>And, please don't get into an idea of the four-times writing idea producing four different paths through a module. The intent is to merely account for four (or more) ways a group might logically try to play through it, rather than just one. The best of modules would see the most successful groups use all kinds of different modes of play during the adventure, at those points where each made sense.</p><p></p><p>The concept of a monster vendomatic is giving me all kinds of evil ideas right now.</p><p></p><p>Scribble, please prepare for my players not to like you very much... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>Lan-"but does it give back change?"-efan</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 5187794, member: 29398"] For clarity, while I presented what is being called the "four-times approach" in its most labour-intensive form (actually writing the module four times) I really don't expect any writers to do it that way...though props to 'em if they do. But I sure as shootin' expect them to *think* that way and to have that thinking reflected in the finished product.This might be a non-issue, depending how the writer gets paid. Page count can stay the same, just with more words, less pictures and white space, and less slavish adherence to the delve format...no extra cost there. I don't know how writers get paid, but if the writer's on contract to produce a module the pay will be the same no matter what gets written as long as it passes inspection; so no extra cost there either. No idea of the mechanics involved, but page counts divisible by 8 seem to be the norm. That said, you can increase the page count by one or two or three provided the extras are on loose sheets (cough *maps* cough) and not increase the cost very much. The paths do *not* have to be the same difficulty!!! Why not have a module where there's an easy way to solve it, a hard way to solve it, and a way that won't solve it at all? And the pacing is entirely up to the DM and group at the table and probably won't ever be the same twice. But you're quite right that it still needs to be easy to read and understand. Good. :) And, please don't get into an idea of the four-times writing idea producing four different paths through a module. The intent is to merely account for four (or more) ways a group might logically try to play through it, rather than just one. The best of modules would see the most successful groups use all kinds of different modes of play during the adventure, at those points where each made sense. The concept of a monster vendomatic is giving me all kinds of evil ideas right now. Scribble, please prepare for my players not to like you very much... :) Lan-"but does it give back change?"-efan [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
GM Prep Time - Cognitive Dissonance in Encounter Design?
Top