Module Layout: what's important to you?

[Freakohollik]

The one thing I can't believe that module writes still haven't picked up on is separating out the room information under different headings. The typical room block has one or more paragraphs containing all the information, and does not lend itself to easy searching. I'd like to see something like

12. [Room name]

[Boxed text]

Monsters:

Traps:

Treasure:

History:

Typically all this information is merged together. What this is happens to me when enter a room, I read the text. Player: "I look at-". DM: "Wait hold on, reading text." (Time elapses). DM: "There are 5 ogres here."

The delve format does a good job of avoiding this, but that has other issues. It's always there in older adventures. I'm not sure if 3rd party publishers still do it. It was definitely a problem for me when I ran the first Age of Worms adventure though. I do not know if Paizo has changed their ways in their more recent products.


On another note, I like to have the boxed text mention the monsters. It just makes sense to me to add that in. If you don't the DM has to add his own flavor text.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Personally I like to have everything I need to run an encounter on one place in front of me. I also like a reasonably detailed synopsis at the beginning and a good overall map on its own where I can photocopy or scan it easily.

 

[Nebulous]

** Don't worry about keeping encounters to a single page or page spread. It's annoying when there's obvious filler to make it fit, and even more annoying when useful information has obviously been left out (e.g. the final encounter in Keep on the Shadowfell) in order to make it fit. Write what needs to be written...and then edit really harshly. Point form is often more useful than full sentences.

Lanefan

The WotC modules are terrible about this. Everything has to fit on two pages whether it deserves 1 page or 3 pages. There was an especially confusing trap in Pyramid of Shadows that doesn't even have the courtesy of a cut-away picture to show the DM how it works. I had to draw it myself so i could explain it to the players.

 

[roguerouge]

For mid-level and higher NPCs, if you have them casting prep spells in their tactics section, I want stats with and without those additions.

If you have NPCs reacting "if they hear" combat or motion outside, please put the distance modifier in. I don't want to spend precious time counting squares to figure out the distance penalty. Bonus points awarded for listing the DC to hear combat or talking and the penalties doors and walls impose. I hate looking that up.

Light sources and radiuses on the maps if you're going to play funky with the lighting rather than have an even wash of darkness or light.

If you're going to have an NPC with significant RP potential, give role-playing tips that are both motivations (what the NPC wants) and acting tips (quirks in how they speak or act). Detailed back-stories are great to read, but without those two things highlighted in the text, it's hard to play.

No !@#$!@# large swaths of black on the map to indicate rock areas, as they only make it impossible to print out the map from the .pdf without a prohibitive toner cost.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Things I like:

Don't be afraid to include handouts/maps/etc that are not designed to be a part of a book. I find that this is very helpful for:

A. Area map. As a DM, I should have one of these to refer to at every point of an adventure. It lets me know where the PCs are and where they are going to next.

B. A flow chart. This is primarily applicable in event rather than location driven adventures, but it serves the same purpose for them as the overview map does for location driven adventures. (Note: some event driven adventures such as Red Hand of Doom will also have area maps so these are not mutually exclusive).

C. Encounter worksheets. One or two sheets with all of the stats for all of the monsters in each encounter. If a monster appears in two encounters, it appears on each of the encounter worksheets. (Note, I do not want anything other than stats on this page; I want to be able to keep track of monster hp, abilities used, etc on this sheet and also be able to see at a glance what their abilities actually are).

Some people seem to like their monster stats in the location entries or encounter descriptions in the mod as well. For my part, I don't like that since (a. with the descriptions of the area and read aloud text, etc the monsters stats may not all fit on a single two-page spread, b. it tends to be cramped and even if it does fit, I have to search the page for where the monster stats are). You might be able to satisfy both groups of people if your format allows you to do some kind of radio button or checkbox option for "monster stats in text." That way, those who like that kind of thing can check that option, but I still get my monster stats in a free-standing section in the back.

D. Player handouts. Well done player handouts can add a lot to a game. A map that players can look at helps them place the game in the world and track their progress far more concretely than listening to descriptions from the DM. And while the DM can probably redact DM maps to serve this purpose, he shouldn't have to.

 

[Beginning of the End]

Modules should not read like short stories. If you've got long passages of pseudo-narrative describing the "likely" course of events, your structure is flawed:

(1) I can rarely predict what my PCs are "likely" to do, and I play with them every other week. There's no way you're predicting it.

(2) Material presented in narrative-like paragraphs is difficult to parse and use rapidly at the gaming table.

What you want to identify are the basic, discrete elements that make up your adventure. Then you need to communicate those discrete elements in a format that makes it easy to quickly find, read, process, and use it.

Here's an example how not to do it (from The Serpent Amphora trilogy):

As the party moves down this hallway, assuming they have a light source that extends at least 5 feet, they notice gaping pits that bar their progress down the passage. Each is about 7 feet across and 20 feet deep, with scant inches of clearance between the edge of each pit and the stone walls around it. The tiny slivers of stone to either side (they’re not really big enough to be called ledges) can be crossed only with a Balance check (30), due to the fact that the closeness of the walls prevents one from balancing properly. A Balance check failed by 10 or more results in the character falling, although the character may fall to safety on the far side of the pit with a Reflex save (DC 13); if the save fails, the character falls into the pit for 2d6 points of damage. The pits may also be circumvented with rope, by climbing along the walls (Climb check DC 20; chance of falling as for Balance checks, above), by jumping (but beware smacking into the 8-foot ceiling), or by magic.

Marilvaz was a tricky one, though. Characters who simply bypass the pits and move on won’t be able to progress much farther into the Tomb. In the first pit, marked A on the map, a secret door is built into the south wall at the bottom of the pit. This door requires a Search check (DC 13) to find, but can only be located if one searches at the bottom of the pit. This door leads into a tunnel that runs below the corridor leading from area 2 to area 6, eventually ending in a spiral staircase that leads up into area 8.

The door at pit B is even trickier. It’s not down in the pit; rather, it’s in the wall just b e h the edge of the pit, on the north wall. Thus, a searcher would have to be levitating, hanging by a rope, clinging to the wall or standing on something tall inside the pit in order to look for it. It too requires a Search check (DC 13) to find, but anyone attempting to search while also climbing or clinging to the wall without magic suffers a 4 circumstance penalty to the Search check. Fortunately, since the top of this door is roughly at floor level, an elf or half-elf crossing or leaping the pit does have her chance for automatic detection.

Because the pits are obvious, easily noticed and avoided, they are considered no real danger, and therefore have no assigned Challenge Rating. The trick here is to find the secret doors, not to “overcome” the pits. If some unlucky character does fall, however, the damage is 2d6 as the pits are each 20 feet deep.

And here's how that same information should be presented:

PITS: There are two open pits in this hallway. They are 7 feet deep and 20 feet across (2d6 falling damage). PCs can circumvent them by working their way along the narrow, sliver-like ledges of stone to either side with a Balance check (DC 30) or Climb check (DC 20).

SECRET DOOR A: This secret door is located the bottom of the pit. It can be discovered with a Search check (DC 13), but a character must actually be standing at the bottom of the pit in order to detect it.

SECRET DOOR B: This secret door is located along the south wall of the pit, just below the edge of the pit itself. It can be discovered with a Search check (DC 13), but a character would need to be climbing along the ledge of the pit or levitating along the wall in order to find it. (Note: An elf jumping over the pit would come close enough for their racial ability to potentially detect the door.)

Note that the information is not only concise, it's organized into "headlines". A quick scan of these headlines will tell me what every important component of the encounter is. That way I don't end up missing the reference to "5 ogres" in the third paragraph or the "if things go badly, they go to get help from the other ogres in the next room" stuck towards the end of the eighth paragraph.

In short: Don't write for someone reading the adventure. Write for someone running the adventure.

I recommend looking at In the Belly of the Beast and Maiden Voyage from Atlas Games' Penumbra line for examples of how to present NPCs for roleplaying-intensive scenarios.

I suggest that encounter keys should not be split across multiple pages if at all possible. If they have to be on multiple pages, make them facing pages.

Nine times out of ten, my players never see the maps in the module, unless its meant to be a handout. I'd much rather a map be useful and functional me as the DM, than have them be beautiful but useless (or confusing because they're pretty).

Maps can be functional and pretty, but if you have to choose one or the other, choose functionality.

And if you do get pretty maps, there's very little reason in the modern era NOT to provide a version of those pretty maps that can serve as a battlemap.

Don't railroad the players. Follow the Three Clue Rule.

If you include boxed text, try to make as few assumptions as possible about the situation. DO NOT describe the actions or reactions of the PCs. My players tell me what their characters do; not some anonymous module writer.

 

[Pbartender]

In short: Don't write for someone reading the adventure. Write for someone running the adventure.

Allow me to emphasize this.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I think the layout should largely be determined by the genre of the RPG and the type of adventure. With many fantasy modules, I basically expect something pretty linear, where one page naturally leads to the other. But if it is a city based adventure with lots of room for intrigue, then I prefer the story, NPCs, locations, etc to be organized a little differently. In this sort of module, I like to have a front section containing story info, then a section with a lay of the land (points of interest in the location), then NPCs. The problem for me here, is where the encounters go. Some people put them in the locations they are most likely to be. Others put them in their own section. As a GM, both have their problems. If I am breathing life into the NPCs, and decide an encounter will take place in a different location or time, then it is a little awkward to search the location section for it; it would be easier to have an encounter section. If I am not, and the players arrive at the location where the encounter should be, then it is a pain if I have to go to an encounter section and find it. There will be some back and forth no matter what. I think the job of the publisher is to figure out how the majority of people will use the module, and structure it for the least amount of page searching.