How will published adventure modules look?

[Melkor]

With the modular approach to D&DNext, I was just curious:

How will published adventure modules look?

Will we see a baseline of simple core?

Will we see several different stats lines depending on the detail of the modules that are available?

If this question has been asked before, please point me in the right direction.
Thanks!

 

[pauljathome]

How will published adventure modules look?

I don't think anybody has a clue at this point. Including WOTC.

I think that there is a huge danger that the modular approach will make writing adventures very, very hard. It will likely depend on how much the feel of the game changes with modules.

For example, if the number of encounters a party can reasonably expect to handle without serious rest is affected by the modules then the writers job just became a lot harder.

As another example, huge set piece battles with all sorts of interesting terrain features are likely a lot more fun with the tactical modules in play.

 

[Janaxstrus]

Based on the last 10 years of WotC history...they will likely look mediocre

Beyond that sad reality, I'm hoping they don't try to pack everything into each adventure. I'd rather see either core only adventures or ones planned with certain features expected.

 

[renau1g]

Based on the last 10 years of WotC history...they will likely look mediocre

Beyond that sad reality, I'm hoping they don't try to pack everything into each adventure. I'd rather see either core only adventures or ones planned with certain features expected.

Maybe they can get Paizo to write for them oh wait they had that and effed it up. I love 4e, but man that drive's me up the effing wall reading the Paizo modules/AP's and then reading the Scales of War I get so frustrated how one can be so much better than the other. Ah well.

I really think the modularity will make it a challenge.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

I can imagine them having just a very basic format with no expectations of any modules. However, the hidden exception will be map art which will most likely have some sort of standardized grid as a nod towards those who prefer to play with battlemat and figures. Monster and NPCs are going to reference the Monster Manual or possibly an appendix. The appendix may be split into a bare bones statblock and a full featured statblock.

Then an adventure might have sidebars covering off some of the more popular module options. Obviously, those modules are going to have their own suggestions as to how to be included with the standard core. Then most importantly, you have a sub-forum devoted to that adventure only where everyone chips in with their own mods and ideas, issues and solutions for the adventure. This helps to build community spirit, "buzz" around an adventure, as well as a whole heap of support material at next to no cost. I think Paizo's Kingmaker forum (amongst their many AP sub-forums) is an excellent example of how to make this work well.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[AeroDm]

I think that's a great question. I wasn't active on the internet pre-3e so it was around then I started seeing the crunch/fluff dichotomy really be bantered around. As I recall it, people usually wanted 50% or more 'crunch' with some folks calling for more like 90/10. D&DN is really well positioned to deliver 'fluff' heavy products that appeal to a wide range of consumers, but producing useable new 'crunch' will either chew up all their space or require some genius innovation. I'm hoping they get the genius innovation.

 

[Stormonu]

All I hope is that they ditch the Delve format.

 

[delericho]

I don't think anybody has a clue at this point. Including WOTC.

I think that there is a huge danger that the modular approach will make writing adventures very, very hard. It will likely depend on how much the feel of the game changes with modules.

This. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if WotC basically abandoned published adventures. Or, possibly, presented a single (necessarily short) adventure with each new rules module, showcasing the rules for that module - sort of like the mini-adventures in the SWSE splatbooks.

Based on the last 10 years of WotC history...they will likely look mediocre

And, yeah, this too I'm afraid. I would love to see good adventures from WotC, but their record doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

All I hope is that they ditch the Delve format.

As I understand it, they already have. I believe eDungeon adopted a new format almost a year ago.

 

[Minigiant]

Perhaps the books would have a base adventure in half the book and additional encounters and info in the end. All in chapters.

Act 1

1. Entering the City
2. Surprise attack by goblins
3. Talking to City NPCs

Act 2

1. Traveling through forest
2. The insane Dryad and the captured Ranger
3. The Dragon Ruin and the wild animals

Act 3

1. Dungeon Exploration
2. Dungeon Social Interactions
3. Dungeon Combats

Additional Combat Encounters

1. City Severs
2. Another goblin raid
3. Wild animals in the forests
4. More dungeon fights
5. Condensed fights for Single combats (for novaing PCs)

Additional Exploration Encounters

1. More Background Effects
2. More info on the town
3. More Wilderness checks
4. More Traps

Additional Social Encounters

1. More Trait Effect
2. Deeper into the Mayor and the Lords
3. More City NPCs
4. The Dryad
5. The Ranger
6. The long dead Wizard
7. The BBEG

 

[Kaodi]

If WotC does not publish much in the way of adventures in the next edition, does that necessarily mean that there will have to be some fairly robust 3PP in that department? Or that everyone is going to be expected to just homebrew?