Modules and Suspension of Disbelief

[Kestrel]

Here's an excerpt from an email written to a player in my game. Does anyone else have this problem with player's in their games?

I've noticed a phenomenon with players in the past...I call it Module blinders. Once a player sees the module cover, they go into to "module-mode". It doesn’t matter how great the module is or how well the gm tries to run it. It’s a module and therefore it sucks. The players throw out all suspension of disbelief and begin looking for the cracks in the plot. Its like watching a first run movie and not paying attention to its story and simply looking for the flaws and the special effects guys. No story...original or otherwise stands up to that kind of scrutiny. If the players go into the session trying to pick it apart, then the gm might as well give up right then.

Im not saying that's the case with last night's module...it had plenty of flaws for sure. But it might have been more enjoyable had the players just went with it and played it for what it was, instead of kicking the walls and seeing if they are styrofoam.

 

[Mark]

I think that some players have had bad experiences not just with modules but with the DMs who may not spend as much time preparing to run them as they would their own material. Often modules are used by DMs when they do not have the time to prep, and it can reflect badly on even the best material. Nonetheless, there are enough bad modules out there to give them a generally bad reputation all on their own. Hopefully, that will never be the case with CMG Questus adventures...

 

[Liminal Syzygy]

As a DM I don't have that problem but admittedly when playing through as a player I sometimes find myself evaluating an adventure and a couple of times have let a comment slip out... "Sheesh what a flimsy and obvious plot device to keep us from going back to town" and the like.

Yeah I know it isn't good.

 

[TiQuinn]

I think sometimes DMs may try to shoehorn a module into an ongoing campaign, and may not do the best or cleanest job in doing so. That could cause some suspension of disbelief issues. Modules require a lot of work on the DM's part...probably moreso than if the DM created the adventure himself.

 

[herald]

I find that modules are a script and theat DM's are the director. Some times a DM needs to know when the script isn't going to work and either wing it, or re-write part of the adventure to make it work.

Bringing in NPC's that the characters know, bringing other motovations to keep the players interested. This is where the DM should "Metagame". Find the players desires and goals and make sure that the easiest way to get to those are through the module.

 

[Remathilis]

My group does something similar, but for a reversed end. We go into module mode and begin to meta-game the module to beat it quickly and painlessly, usually via the stereotypical route. If we know that there is a dungeon between X and Y, we auto prep for dungeon, whether or not our characters do. It kinda becomes like playing a videogame until the module is over.

There is one major exception, our 2e planescape game where we went from Modron March to Dead Gods. They are so good that we forget to meta-game and role-play as normal.

 

[ThoughtBubble]

"Sheesh what a flimsy and obvious plot device to keep us from going back to town"

You know, I always used to hear that... Module or not.


But I have to agree, my players do get into a sort of module mindset, where it does turn into a sort of "Beat the game" syndrome.

 

[Shadow64]

I think it depends on the DM. I've been in one group where the DM could run modules well and the players didn't have a problem with it. He added his own bits and worked into his world fairly well, and if there was a hiccup he was able to smooth it over fairly quickly.

I have also been in a group where as soon as the DM mentions the he wants to run a module the players don't want to play - period. They (including me) will almost go out of there way to not play because we know that the module will just be dropped into the world, not changed, will not add to the story and will generally be run very poorly.

::gets up on soap box ::
I am hesitant to run most modules because I know that at least one player out of the group has checked it out at some point. I trust them enough that I know I don't have to worry about them using their knowledge of the module to work through it, but I want the "wow factor"to hit them. By "wow factor" I mean that what they are seeing, doing or fighting isn't something that they have read about on a message board, heard about from someone else that has played the same scenario or anything else that could give away the surprise.

I like it when something happens that makes their collective jaws hit the floor, or their eyes light up or some other reaction (sometime involving a hand gesture indicating I am indeed #1), it is what makes the game worth it for me. And i haven't seen that to often in modules.
:: gets off of soap box so the next person can use it ::

 

[Savage Wombat]

There was actually a recent Knights of the Dinner Table on this subject - B.A. was trying desperately to keep his players from realizing he was using a pre-packaged city setting. He knew that, if they found out, they would begin (a) complaining and (b) trying to kill innocent bystanders.

 

[Ao the Overkitty]

I haven't experienced any, "It's a mod, therefore it must suck" attitude, but some (but certainly not all) of my players definately take a different approach to an adventure if they know its a module.

For example, they go out of their way to find and kill everything in a mod, for fear of leaving xp behind. They seem to adopt the mentality that, if you don't kill it, you don't receive anything for it. They make sure they get every last bit of treasure and xp they can get, sometimes ignoring the objective of the module. They've all played Living Greyhawk (usually year 1 mods which were reputtedly stingy) so I think this stems from that.

Anyone other DMs experience this?