Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ThirdWizard" data-source="post: 2453820" data-attributes="member: 12037">Basically, if a DM would be lost even if the PCs follow the path that the writer expects, then that would be a failure on the part of ease of use. This could be done many ways: a simple layout of a dungeon, by explaining motivations and reactions on the part of NPCs, or something else entirely.General writing skill of the author, to me, is part of the design. You can be the best adventure designer in the world, but if you don't have the capability of expressing those thoughts to others, your module will be poor.Sadly, no, that's not what I mean. I can't really go into a lot of detail, as I'm not a literary expert. There's a big difference between Poe and gothboy117 on deadjournal. One is critically acclaimed, and one would make English teachers gouge out their eyes. This isn't to say gothgirl298 doesn't love gothboy117's poetry and if she does, that's perfectly fine. But, it does mean that it isn't literarily sound. I am speaking from an academic stance, as I said earlier.In essence, there is such a thing as bad writing. In literature and in module writing.But, I think that discussion goes way beyond the relevance of this thread, and I'd hate to get off on a tangent, because I care much more about playability of a module than the literary acceptance of the module. Fantasy is built on things that don't go over in the literary world, especially in this frantically postmodern one that abounds. It's built on archetypes, cliches, and good versus evil, so in a critical sense what makes good writing could very well make a bad module. (That last point being the most important thing in this rambling, by the way.)I hope I make at least some sense...</blockquote>

Verification