'New Classics' Module Survey

[Rechan]

I'm not familiar with that, but if my guess is correct, then no. I don't care so much about the origin design of the work, but instead care to transform it into something far more useful. If the Open Design Project also includes this stuff, then I guess it would be okay.

The Open Design Project is where an adventure designer gets a bunch of people to pay an amount before writing the adventure, sort of like an entry fee. Then, the amount the person paid gives them a certain degree of "voice" in what goes in the adventure. Each step of the adventure writing process is vetted by the various people.

It's a big community project where everyone gets involved, suggesting ideas, looking over the stats, etc as it comes out.

It's also an immediate conversion project - at least the one I looked at was. The larger group wanted 3e, but a subset were converting every bit to 4e as it came down the pike.

 

[Pour]

I'm actually involved in the Dark Roads and Golden Hells project over there, and it does share similarities with Infiniti2000's experience, namely in the various boards and everyone pitching ideas and reviewing material, which the lead designer Dan Voyce and patron voting decides what eventually gets into the book. I'm certainly enjoying the process, everyone is very cordial and filled with good ideas, and in a primarily setting/planes book, I think mechanics come second to interesting and weird concepts, so the consorting between PF and 4e is quite successful... but if they were to ever do an adventure meant for PF and 4e, I think a lot of 3e assumptions would creep into brainstorming sessions and the result would be similar to Dark Mistress's warnings in the Catering thread- namely an adventure that lacks luster in both editions. I mean it's only natural when putting together a book to think about the system you're designing it for. I don't think it'll affect the 4e conversion of DR&GH any, though, and in fact Wolfgang stated there will be a separate 4e version for print and PDF, which is a real boon when compared to a PDF supplement as originally intended.

Still, I'm much more interested in designing modules for 4e specifically and utilizing all the untapped design potential. I suppose the patronage model could be replicated in the future, though initial attempts would likely draw many more people if they were free and open, though voting has potential, or maybe we take a head count of interested parties and divide into different design teams. Then we could rotate our drafts around however many teams until it comes back to the original designers, and they finish it off? Maybe I'm getting ahead of myself here...

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Yeah, I'm not all concerned about process. Open Design's methodology is good, but I think you're right, it isn't something you can just go and replicate easily.

Maybe the goal should be to start small and just design one or two mini-adventures, figure out what works for process, and the results can be put out as free adventures. Beyond that I'm not sure how you would even approach doing a truly commercial/professional product with a group of volunteers.

 

[jodyjohnson]

I've run/played only 2 modules 3 times - Keep on the Borderlands and Keep on the Shadowfell.

Some of the 1e classics we didn't even run in 1e but ran in late 2e or 3e.

Between Dungeon, eDungeon, Paizo, and all the old 2e and 3e stuff we never got to play, I don't don't expect to really replay anything (maybe only recycle pieces).

 

[Pour]

Beyond that I'm not sure how you would even approach doing a truly commercial/professional product with a group of volunteers.

With heart, faith and steel...

Honestly, I recognize its another hurtle, but your suggestion of starting small and building up adventure-wise should probably hold true for the whole effort. Ideally, it would gain momentum as it went, and as our small successes started to add up, they would kind of remind people that 3rd party is still possible, not unlike what 4thcore did for me. 3rd party still has a place in 4e, basically providing or supplementing everything and anything WotC is unable to themselves.

I think we, as an internet community, have a lot of assets at our disposal toward achieving that end, various online tools, constant communication via these forums, a varied and extensive knowledge of the game, a ton of different voices and experiences, strengths and talents. We could open play test and offer a window for feedback. We could poll the community at large. If we can generate a sense of creativity and collaboration, tap into the system's potential just enough to ignite some imagination and stoke some buzz, cultivate a sort of collective ownership, I think we'll be better off as a fan base, designers and certainly the game will be better off too.

Things like lay out, art, cartography, that sort of professional stuff is secondary to me at this point in time. Get the design down, and I think we can figure something out for the rest.

 

[Pour]

I've run/played only 2 modules 3 times - Keep on the Borderlands and Keep on the Shadowfell.

Some of the 1e classics we didn't even run in 1e but ran in late 2e or 3e.

Between Dungeon, eDungeon, Paizo, and all the old 2e and 3e stuff we never got to play, I don't expect to really replay anything (maybe only recycle pieces).

A fair point. Replaying aside, there were reasons you chose the classics you ran once, and there were reasons they rose to the top amidst other adventures among the community. I think that's what I'm striving for, on the one hand more adventures- so you might have chosen one of them over playing Keep on the Shadowfell 3 times- and more quality adventures- potentially exciting your imagination enough to want to run again, or, alternatively, possessing something worth recycling elsewhere.

I don't deny there are a LOT of modules out there, but not nearly enough 4e by my estimation. Of those, the majority don't really meet my qualifications for a classic listed earlier in the thread- of which, admittedly, re-playability is one of four. The edition being around for as long as it has been, and the recent showings from WotC, give me hope they're going to be improving. Never the less, more quality modules can never be a bad thing.

Despite the abundance of D&D adventures throughout the game's existence, Paizo's adventure path model, by my estimations, seems to be as strong as its ever been. I know I always clamor for the next super-adventure, especially one tailored to my edition of choice. I've already preordered Gardmore Abbey, and will preorder that Temple of Elemental Evil prequel when I can (I swear I heard that somewhere and I'm not making it up). There is much to admire in the past modules, but I'm a sucker for a new product, new ground, new design. It's exciting to play and experience something in its own time.

 

[Colmarr]

If you're looking for a 4e adventure path that has story, roleplaying, and an overarching plot, this site's publishing arm, E.N. Publishing, is releasing ZEITGEIST.

You could be forgiven for taking rangerwickett's recommendation with a grain of salt given that he's writing the AP, so let me give a less biased opinion:

Zeitgeist has one of the most interesting and compelling plots that I've seen in a 4e product. The first adventure, Island at the Axis of the World, is of such scope that I couldn't believe what I was reading.

Given that it's free to download, everyone really should take a look at it (and the accompanying campaign guide if youre thinking of DMing the AP).

 

[Infiniti2000]

It's a big community project where everyone gets involved, suggesting ideas, looking over the stats, etc as it comes out.

Thanks for the info, but that turns out to be the opposite of what I would be looking for. IMO/E such a community product doesn't turn out well. You get a hodgepodge of incompatible ideas that turns the product into an incomprehensible mess. Too many cooks in the kitchen and all that. We tried such an endeavor way back in the late 80s with a project called the Ultimate Dungeon. Any really oldtimers on here ever hear of that? I actually still have some of those files I think. In any case, it wasn't working out that well and it essentially caused huge delays and eventually a lack of interest. Is Wolfgang's project pumping out adventures (finished products) on a regular basis?

 

[Pour]

Thanks for the info, but that turns out to be the opposite of what I would be looking for. IMO/E such a community product doesn't turn out well. You get a hodgepodge of incompatible ideas that turns the product into an incomprehensible mess. Too many cooks in the kitchen and all that. We tried such an endeavor way back in the late 80s with a project called the Ultimate Dungeon. Any really oldtimers on here ever hear of that? I actually still have some of those files I think. In any case, it wasn't working out that well and it essentially caused huge delays and eventually a lack of interest. Is Wolfgang's project pumping out adventures (finished products) on a regular basis?

The Kobold patronage model, by tell of just about every review and my own experience, is a complete success. I think there are a few differences between community effort and the patronage projects that make it so. Firstly, given there is a set product pitch for each project, say the Northlands or Planes, I think that helps focus contributions a little. There are large brainstorming threads where everyone piles ideas into, spin off threads that build off one another, and then I believe they go through rounds of weeding until there is a general consensus enough for the lead designer to make his final, informed picks that see further development.

Having a lead designer is also crucial, as he kind of observes, contributes and makes important judgement calls (in conjunction with patron voting) along with Wolfgang. To a lesser extent, I think having to pay a patron fee welcomes people serious about design, and the page count also keeps things from getting too unruly per project (though there is PDF and article support for extra bits cut from print but worth producing).

Pumping out regular adventures? No, I think they mostly focus on supplements and setting stuff, largely tailored for the Midgard campaign setting at this point, but every one has been of outstanding quality. I think where a hodgepodge breakdown would occur, however, is if they tried to produce a single adventure meant for more than one edition.

These are good elements to think about for community projects. I'm still kind of partial to dividing willing persons into different design teams, then rotating their work amongst all teams so it has the maximum number of eyes and brains (and hopefully play tests) before it gets back to them for a sort of finalizing. Then maybe a lead designer could be designated to gel whatever editing and organization had to come next.

Pitches could be made by anyone willing to work on said project, made to the larger pool of designers, during an open window period, and after the deadline this design pool could vote on all the projects they'd be interested in working on. The one with the most votes becomes the next community design project.

EDIT: I did indeed see the first Zeitgeist adventure, and it is an excellent model to base further efforts. I also happened to catch M1: Hateblossom from 4thcore and was thoroughly impressed. 4e 3rd party may be small, but it is quality. Definitely looking to contribute to that high standard.

 

[Drammattex]

This is an interesting thread.
What makes a classic? What's the enduring element? It seems like the modules that do something really different (Ravenloft, Expedition to the Barrier Peaks, Tomb of Horrors) are remembered, but as time goes by and more and more adventures are produced, which ones really stick, and why?

This week I've been unloading a lot of old 1e and 2e stuff on Ebay. Sorting through it all, it makes me sad to see so many--I want to say "forgotten"--products. Modules and supplements that sort of drifted on by. On the other hand, one of our most memorable adventures from high school came from an obscure module nobody ever talks about. The module was "Fighter's Challenge," and we loooooved it. I can't remember if it was the module itself or what we brought to it, but awesome times were had. When I sorted out the stuff I was getting rid of, I put Waterdeep and the North in the "sell" pile--even though that had been our essential campaign setting--and kept Fighter's Challenge because I just couldn't part with it.

On the other hand, the last time I did a purge, The Shattered Gates of Slaughtergarde ended up on the sell pile. We had a really good time playing it, but for that adventure it was the stuff we had added to the module that had made it especially memorable for our group, so in the end I kept the DM notes, sold the module.

So what makes a module a classic? I'm sure I don't know.