Mearls says adventures are hard to sell [merged]

[Mark CMG]

Like shoes, adventures aren't a hard sell so much as a tough fit. Everyone needs them, whether they make them themselves (even on the fly) or buy them. Some companies find a way to make them inexpensively enough and generic enough to appeal to a large enough base to sustain them, provided they have a stock room full of options. Other companies (or authors) have enough of a draw or marketing power that even those customers who can't get their exact fit will still snap them up and make adjustments on their own.

That's a good way to put it, and it ties back into the thoughts inspired by Wright's keynote. A DM knows his players and campaigns better than a designer. The DM can design a better adventure for his game.

I think it might explain why campaign adventures, like the Adventure Paths, do so well. If you're going to give a DM some content to make running easier, you might as well go ahead and give an entire campaign. In this case, the designer knows what's going on in the campaign, the NPCs the PCs have met, the interesting plot twists, and so on.

I think that if Wright is correct then 32 - 64 page adventures are better served with a site-based design a la the classic early 80s, late 70s adventures. A DM and a group can bring whatever story and plot they want to a site. The DM can pick and choose stuff to use, with the site serving as a stage that hosts the action.

(. . .)

The best adventures speak directly to the group playing them. A DM is far better equipped to design such an adventure than a designer who has never met your group and knows nothing about your campaign.

I think this is absolutely true of story modules.

It is not true at all of site-based adventures, which are more enjoyable because the decisions being made are those of the players, and not an author.

The best-selling D&D adventures of all time were site-based.

Goodman Games's adventures are site-based.

When Dungeon shifted focus to site-based adventures, our circulation started growing and hasn't stopped.

This seems to sum things up pretty clearly. Perhaps Mister Mearls and Mister Mona would give their top ten tips for putting together successful site-based adventures?

 

[Alnag]

Well, I am living in a pretty small country, where is probably not more than 1,000 D&D players. On the other hand I know most of them, or at least most of the DMs of these groups. So I can tell you, what we think about WotC adventures and why we don't buy them.

Erik Mona writes correctly, that Sunless Citadel was great success (in sell numbers). Because for us it was first DnD adventure ever. (You know, there were not many players of ADnD). It was so horrible, that it also was the last adventure. It is as simple as that - WotC made themselves bad reputation as adventure producer. And so far I haven't seen a single adventure I would like completely. Sometimes there are nic bits but there is always something disgusting as well.

I don't know if it might be a difference in culture or what, but why the hell can't some adventure be real puzzle for the brain rather than muscle contest? Actually it is pretty simple for any DM around to produce stats/fight encounter. The idea we are willing to pay for is something creative, new and exciting. Fight is not new, it is usually not creative and the excitation has disappeared eons ago.

The point actually is...

the adventures are probably hard to sell, if you make a bad reputation at first (whatever you do than).
The adventures are probably hard to sell, if you have nothing to offer, or at least nothing new to offer. If you just offer something for busy (or lazy) people, you will definitely end with lower sales.

So this is my 2 cents.

 

[prosfilaes]

How many people really like War and Peace? The Illiad? Heck, Shakespeare? Yet, I'd be willing to argue the quality of those works and authors.

Quite a few people really like those works.

Sign me up to Rounser's club. I like his idea.

If it's objective, then there's some way of measuring it that doesn't depend on the measurer. Everything I've seen says that if you tell us how to objectively measure the quality of an adventure, there will be half a dozen people popping up to correct you.

 

[prosfilaes]

If you're looking to match PHB numbers, yeah, that's not going to happen. Compare to something like Complete Scoundrel though. Our group will buy one copy of that at most
.

For my group, at least two people already have the Complete Scoundrel, and there's a couple more that might get it. Whereas for any random WotC adventure, I think the odds are against anyone in the group having a copy.