D&D General Matt Colville on adventure length

[MerricB]

At one point he says “six weeks.” Given his oft-stated preference for playing weekly, to me that means six sessions to complete. Assuming 4 to 5 hour sessions that is 24 to 30 hours of game play.

My recollection of the 32-page AD&D adventures is that they tended to last 4-6 weeks, perhaps a little less, some more (but rarely).

Cheers,
Merric

 

[LesserThan]

So, Matt Colville posted a video on adventures,

If your summary is correct, I did not watch the video so taking your word, he did not say much.

Giants and drow was an "epic" campaign, but done exactly as you say. They used to be designed to drop in anywhere.

Pathfinder ones and the World Largest products were the first that tried to pull out all the stops, literally. You had no place to stop for a diversion, or side quest, etc really.

Who came up with that terrible idea of making everything into a multi-year game, then expected people to buy more than one a year?

That is a terrible business model!

Company: Buy our new book that will last 1000 hours of play time!
Consumer:
5 months later...
Company: Buy our new book that will last 1000 hours of play time!
Consumer:

It may give options, but it does not give people time to finish.

It is like Kanye West is running the marketing department.
Kanye: Imma let you finish Phandelver Mine, but buy Storm Kings Thunder first!

Is it too soon for the Kayne/Swift reference?

 

[overgeeked]

I think I agree with Matt here, at least partially. The Epic has a certain allure. Being able to say that you finished Tyranny of Dragons, or Princes of the Apocalypse, or Strength of Thousands sounds really cool, and it's very appealing to the DM to be able to buy a book (or a set of books in the case of a Pathfinder AP) and say "Well, this is going to be really cool, and now I'm set for a year or two of gaming." But realistically, it's rare for things to work out that way. I have lost count of the number of campaigns we have started, full of new excitement, and never finished...

I completely agree with Matt on this one. And you reiterate one of his reasons why modules are better than APs. Life happens and people don't finish the AP so they feel let down by the experience. It's easier to keep a campaign going when you're playing in a more episodic format. Things like small, self-contained adventures. Either modules or home brew by the referee.

The problem is that, as a business proposal, modules suck.

Not really. Several companies in the OSR space are making it work. Goodman Games is one example.

The number of people who want to start a campaign and would be open to, say, going to explore the frozen north and maybe lift a curse in Rime of the Frostmaiden is probably a lot higher than the number of people in the market for a 6th level adventure where you need to figure out a whodunnit in a small town.

That's a lot of ifs and maybes. The number of people who've been disappointed by starting an epic AP only to not finish it likely far exceeds the total number of people who've ever played in an episodic module format. That's partially the point of Matt's video. Newer players are completely unaware that episodic module play is even an option because the epic AP is the default they came into the hobby with.

In addition, modules want to be self-contained. You want a minimum of dependencies on things outside the adventure itself. And you know what's really easy to make self-contained? A dungeon. So there's a big incentive to make a module into a dungeon (not that Epics are really short on those either). They will also generally be designed to be very generic, because specific means you're excluding potential customers, and modules can't really afford to do that.

Not really. You can have very detailed and very specific modules just like you have very specific and very detailed epic APs. The only difference between them is the length. It's the difference between a short story and a novel. An episode of a show vs a several seasons-long arc.

Towns, castles, forests, etc can all be self-contained. It's not only dungeons.

And yes, generic is a benefit. Because it increases your potential customers. If you make a generic town, castle, forest, dungeon, etc can be dropped anywhere in any setting. But that doesn't prevent specificity. Almost every setting will have logging towns. Almost every setting will have mining towns. Etc.

I really don't know how to solve this problem, other than by making sure adventure writers (and other people involved in creating adventures) don't need to worry about putting food on the table or keeping a roof over their heads. But I think there's an interesting discussion to be had here.

Yes, capitalism is always the problem. But I think you're overstating just how difficult, no good, and terrible modules are.

 

[el-remmen]

The one thing he didn’t mention (that ties into what @tetrasodium said above) is that old modules are short enough to complete quickly but capacious enough to develop how you want and spend even more time with it if that is your group’s preference.

 

[Lanefan]

How about putting a half dozen or so mods into one book?

Ya know; the method WOTC uses to deal with this issue for years now...

Problem is, you then get stuck buying a whole book just to get the one module you want.

Also, hardcover book format is awful in actual use. Smaller stapled modules that lie flat when put down opened, with detachable or detached maps on cardboard that can also serve as a DM screen, are better in practice by a factor of [very big].

 

[MichaelSomething]

It's not the same as getting a single 32 page book that interests you. You're still buying a 200+ page book that you likely won't finish.

You can have that if you dont mind paying $20 bucks for each one. That's about the price point they have to be to make printing worth while for WOTC (or most publishers).

Unless you know someone making them for a lower price???

Edit: I just remembered. Goodman Games prints molecules sized adventures. Go buy those!!!

 

[dave2008]

I think there is a happy medium. I could see 10 adventure modules covering 2+/- levels each that can be linked together into one coherent campaign, but don't have to be. However, I bet that would end up being a lot more expensive than buying them all together in one book.

 

[LesserThan]

You can have that if you dont mind paying $20 bucks for each one. That's about the price point they have to be to make printing worth while for WOTC (or most publishers).

Unless you know someone making them for a lower price???

If you can find anyone that does saddlestitch printing these days. Most printers have moved away from it.

 

[EthanSental]

Paizo used to produce a line of stand-alone adventures.

In the past four and a bit years of 2E, they've made 7 of them, as far as I can see.

Even with their subscriptions, they couldn't keep them going.

I agree with this. I LIKE the idea or modules but if Paizo can’t make it work or see the profit in it, it might have razor thin margins difficult to gauge what will sell or not. These in pdf and PoD on drive thru or something might work for some publishers.

 

[LesserThan]

I think there is a happy medium. I could see 10 adventure modules covering 2+/- levels each that can be linked together into one coherent campaign, but don't have to be. However, I bet that would end up being a lot more expensive than buying them all together in one book.

This, find a cheap way to make an adventuer, maybe PIY, or POD. The make the big book a compilation like those collectors versions.

How well was that Yawning Portal book recieved? That was all reprints as a collection right?