Module-writing: the proper ingredients

[Azgulor]

The "Apparently, Modules DO sell" thread has been an interesting read and it got me thinking about the status of modules in the industry.

WotC's approach in 3e was, primarily, a limited run of modules. Towards the end of 3e, we got some super-module hardbacks & an introduction to the Delve format. They encouraged 3PPs to do the module writting publication heavy-lifting and by all accounts, it worked as most of the 3e "classics" are viewed to have come from the 3PP community (see below).

On the downside, however, 4e's modules have fared far worse in the realm of public opinion -- mixed opinions at best; deemed inferior at worst. The recent solicitation for input on how to make things better, while commendable, underscores that a problem -- or at least a perceived problem -- exists.

Goodman Games & Necromancer Games went for old-school feel. Necromancer focused on the more mature 1st Edition un-sanitized topics while Goodman strove to capture the nostalgia of the AD&D module presentation & style.

Paizo, building off their tenure on Dungeon, delivering story-driven adventures culminating with the creation of the Adventure Path. Now, 2 of the pillars of Paizo's business plan are APs and Gamemastery modules.


When I look through the modules I like/love, the following have to be there: interesting NPCs, plot lines & stories that I enjoy reading and that will entice my players to pursue the adventure, & maps & locales are the 3rd pillar. That 3rd pillar is often the weakest - but when it's as strong as the first pillars (as with Paizo's production values), they elevate the whole package. When an adventure has all 3 in equal measure, I'm a happy GM.


You know what I care very little about? Formatting. I don't care if all of the NPC and monster stats are collected in an Appendix or dispersed throughout the module. I don't think the Delve format revolutionized anything. In the 3e Ravenloft hardback, I felt it made for a complicated mess.


So what makes or breaks a module in your view? Plot, presentation, stat-block accuracy, Delve format, etc.?

Examples from my library:

Great: original Ravenloft, Escape from Old Korvosa
Good: Burnt Offerings, Grey Citadel, Crypt of the Everflame
Avg: 3e Ravenloft hardback, Forge of Fury
Poor: Keep on the Shadowfell

 

[the Jester]

Makes:

Cool locations. The crashed spaceship in S3, the Tomb of Horrors, the Desert of Desolation, the Trollhaunt Warrens and their Feywild mirror- these are cool places, with cool names. They each have a theme, they have internal logic and consistency. Contrast with some of the early "random monster in every room" dungeons that are just an excuse for a zoo, with no thought given to an ecology.

Empty space. Look at the 4e modules- every room is full. Compare to the original Ravenloft- lots of areas to explore, with clues, tricks and just plain empty space. Not every room needs an encounter. Ravenloft is one of the great classics for a host of reasons, but the creepy exploration of the castle is one of them.

Bad guys with agendas, that aren't there just to die on the swords of the pcs. Check out Red Hand of Doom, Return to the Tomb of Horrors or Dead Gods. The bad guys have an advancing agenda. The assumption is that they will succeed unless stopped. Contrast with those modules which seem set up with no consequences for failure.

Breaks:

Lack of creativity. I've done a simple dungeon delve a bazillion times before; a module that focuses on a dungeon better be creative. Lack of creativity, overreliance on cliches, etc. kill my appreciation of a module. Pyramid of Shadows, I'm looking at you. Contrast with Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan.

Contrived crap. I'm talking stuff like the mirror being excavated in Keep on the Shadowfell- it doesn't have any effect on the game one way or another, yet it pretends to. Blah. Stupid.

Boring BBEGs. I'm calling out the 4e module line again here, at least the H modules. Once you hit Trollhaunt Warrens you start to get much better adventures, with better villains that you have a chance to interact with before the showdown. You care about stopping them.

Poor organization and editing. Delve format, with your information on one locale split across two booklets or two sections of a book, I'm looking at you. I used to think it was ok, and it is ok, but it's only ok. Having everything in one spot is good and with talented writing and editing can be great.

Editing- things like rooms that are referenced by different numbers than they are on the map; tactical references to powers and abilities that the bad guy doesn't have (hi there Kalarel!), things like that.

Here's a final pet peeve. This, again, is aimed squarely at the 4e WotC modules. I hate the overreliance on dungeon tiles. An adventure writer should make good maps, tiles be damned, but I've seen a lot of things that imply that making your maps from the published tile sets improves your chance of selling an adventure to WotC. While I understand the profit motive here and don't condemn it, I feel that it's contrary to the goal of making the best maps for your adventure.

 

[Wicht]

As I am currently writing my first major module I am very interested in doing it right and so very interested in the answers this thread will recieve.

What I like personally is a compelling believable plot and intelligent use of monsters.

Basically, as a DM I want to believe in the game world I am running. Things need to make sense and if they can do that, I can run the adventure no problem and hoepfully make it fun. The better an adventure can draw in the players through the strength of its verisimilitude, the better I like it.

Also, the more intelligently the adventure is crafted, the more fun it is to read.

 

[Steel_Wind]

Keys to an Interesting Module?

1 . Solid Hook: this doesn’t have to be perfect, but I want something to hook me into reading it in the first few paragraphs. I may well end up ultimately using the adventure for something COMPLETELY different than the story the module is actually depicting. But there are virtually ZERO “classic” modules that don’t have a good hook – and there aren’t many adventures I bother to run “as the adventure” without one.

2. Solid Story: The story the module is trying to tell is the story your game session will be telling. If it’s nothing but a loosely connected hack and slash fest, that’s likely to be the only story the players will be experiencing too. Sometimes, that’s ok, but that’s a rare event. If a hack fest is all I need – then I’ll just pillage a module for a map and ignore the rest of it, frankly.

3. Memorable Villain: This is a exercise which is part artistic, part mechanical, and part fluff. Getting those magic elements in place in the right proportion to make it all work is not easy. If it was easy – movies, TV, video games, comics and RPG products would all be a lot better than most of them are. I don’t pretend to know that secret formula - but I do know the end result when I see it.

4. Great Map: It’s all about the maps really. You could have everything else right – get the maps wrong – and I’m not going to like the module, no matter what. A great map, on its own, cannot turn a bad module into a good one (though it CAN turn an otherwise bad module into a still useful product). The point to take away is that there are no great modules that do not have a great map. I’ve been trying to think of an exception to that rule and while there might be one – I can’t think of one.

In particular, a great map can rescue a module that is not very engagingly written, so as to encourage you as the DM to run it anyway. In that manner, you then discover how well the module actually plays and can then overlook the fact that the module is a dull read.

5. Strong Environmental theme: Sea adventures, Urban adventures, Ruins, Dungeon/Castle, Caves, Wilderness, Different Plane of existence. It doesn’t really matter what the theme is as long as the module uses the environment and theme to present the rest of the module's high points (Hook, Story, Villain, Map) as a coherent whole.

6. Engagingly Written: There are a few adventures which are actually very good modules in terms of how they play, which are not well written modules in terms of how they read. Skip William’s Raiders of Galath’s Roost is a module that comes to mind as a good example of this. Great map, good design -- but a dull and dry read. I’m sure there are other and better examples too.

Some of these modules are otherwise so exceptional that if you ever bother to actually play them, the quality of play is so good that you can overlook how the adventure reads. However, this tends to be the exception to the rule. Generally speaking, the module doesn’t just need to play well – it needs to read well, too. Otherwise, it's rare that I bother to ever run the thing to find out how it actually plays to discover how awesome it actually is.

The use of the passive voice, especially for exposition within the module, tends to be one of the main culprits in terms of writing style here.

 

[Allenchan]

One thing I value in modules is when they include multiple solutions to a single problem, and providing possible/likely ways to deal with the challenges, or side bars with information like "What if my PCs do X instead of Y?" Always helpful, gives the feeling of more forethought, and shows how to easily fit the module for your needs, and for the always-unpexpected twists your party will throw at you.

 

[KidSnide]

3. Memorable Villain: [/B]This is a exercise which is part artistic, part mechanical, and part fluff. Getting those magic elements in place in the right proportion to make it all work is not easy. If it was easy – movies, TV, video games, comics and RPG products would all be a lot better than most of them are. I don’t pretend to know that secret formula - but I do know the end result when I see it.

To me a memorable villain needs to have four elements:

* Engaging Personality - As a GM, I should be inspired to play a good villain to the hilt. A module writer needs to give the GM a good shtick to play with so your players remember the character.

* Plan - A good villain needs to have a plan, and that plan needs to be relevant to the module. A well thought out nemesis doesn't just sit there in his tower waiting for adventurers to come face him - they should be active pursuing a scheme. Even if the PCs aren't there to disrupt this particular scheme, they should be able to see the evidence of the villians dynamism as they track him down or explore his layer. (OK - exceptions for certain undead beings better left undisturbed... but even those should come after the PCs once disturbed.)

* PC Interactions - A good villain interacts with the PCs before the final battle. Closely related to the above point, the PCs need to know the villain before they kill them. This doesn't mean that a villain needs to fight the PCs and escape several times (although that's OK). The PCs can interact with the villain through well thought-out lackeys, magical communications, or just by seeing what the villain does.

* Mechanics - If the module is intended to end with a big fight against the BBG, then it's important that the fight not suck. You don't need a huge set of special rules (although they can be nice), but the fight against the BBG should be distinct and different -- not just the hardest example of a bunch otherwise similar fights. Of course, if the villain does use special rules, it's really important that they be well playtested.

-KS

 

[GlassJaw]

Keys to an Interesting Module?

1 . Solid Hook:

2. Solid Story:

3. Memorable Villain:

4. Great Map:

5. Strong Environmental theme:

6. Engagingly Written:

I like Steel's list quite a bit.

When I look at a module, it's usually in this order:

1. Maps/cartography/locations/environments
2. Major villain(s)/BBEG(s).
3. Adventure synopsis.
4. Adventure hooks.
5. Plot development.

For me, 1-4 are by far the most important because those are the things that are most easily salvaged and adapted to an ongoing campaign or if the plot sucks.

A good example is Pathfinder's The Hook Mountain Massacre from the Rise of the Runelords Adventure Path. The inbred ogre village and ogre fort sections have memorable locations, cool maps, and great villains. Even if my campaign has nothing to do with the RotRL, I can easily adapt those sections to any campaign.

Plus, the more intricate and complex the plot it, the more difficult it is to run, the more prepared you have to be, and the easier it is to get off-track because the players did something unexpected.

That's one of the reasons why I like sandbox modules so much (especially the Necromancer stuff). Even if you don't run the module as-is, there is usually more than enough content that you can use.

 

[bagger245]

Here's a final pet peeve. This, again, is aimed squarely at the 4e WotC modules. I hate the overreliance on dungeon tiles. An adventure writer should make good maps, tiles be damned, but I've seen a lot of things that imply that making your maps from the published tile sets improves your chance of selling an adventure to WotC. While I understand the profit motive here and don't condemn it, I feel that it's contrary to the goal of making the best maps for your adventure.

I like 3e's maps, especially the interior ones. The map-a-week archives has nice maps and very inspiring compared to dungeon tiles map. Hopefully they could go back to beautiful cartography again rather then just using a dungeon tile images to form a map.

 

[James Jacobs]

Maps are a HUGE key to a good adventure. So is art. An adventure with boring maps or bad art is worse than an adventure with no maps and no art, I think.

But maps, in particular, are important. I've seen thousands of maps in my time at Paizo, and a well-made or interesting map that looks like a fun place to visit or is just plain interesting is always a good thing to have, especially since a first glance at an adventure, be it a proposal or a finished manuscript or a published adventure, you're not going to be able to make a judgment on the words. But the maps... they're instant. If a map is dull or boring, that's going to color your perception of the entire adventure.

MAPS!!!!!!!!

 

[Aberzanzorax]

For "good" this is not necessary, but it CAN help a module be "great"...

Something special.


To elaborate, I mean a unique gimmick/character/trap/puzzle that players will remember for a long time, and hence remember the module for a long time.


Sometimes modules begin with this "something special". For instance, I'm currently watching cartoons with my son. In the cartoon, some vines were rapidly growing, and the heroes were shooting them as fast as they were growing.

I could imagine this as a bit of inspiration for the "something special" in a module. It could be oncoming (1st lvl) orcs with lvl 7 player characters. It could be onrushing water that players are trying to use sandbags to stop. It could indeed be hordes of tendriculoses (tendriculi?) that need to be killed before the room is flooded with plant life and the players are crushed.

But it needn't be a special battle. It need only be something that sets that module apart, a small thing that serves as a focus for players and dms alike to remember and share with other veterans of the module.