Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Quickleaf" data-source="post: 6232750" data-attributes="member: 20323">That's a great one. There's a reason the old adventures were called &quot;modules&quot;; the idea was, I believe, that the DM would kit bash them together to make a campaign, cutting and adding stuff as needed.Haha, yes it is, thanks.I totally disagree. Yes tastes differ. However, there are still common things most of us want in an adventure module that are &quot;good.&quot;For example, you describe characteristics we all agree are bad in an adventure. Thus, a good adventure has cohesive logic and minimizes the assumptions it makes. So a good adventure is, broadly speaking, thoughtfully designed.Also you touch on the usability issue. I think that's an area that needs to be explored, the presentation and graphic design. Nothing kills the mounting tension and energy of a game like the DM having to shuffle thru the module to find info they need, and all the players start chatting in the interim.Of course there is a word/page limit. However, if node-based design is used, then there is a much lower chance of content being skipped, as everything interconnects. Basically, a non-linear adventure needs a really strong framing scenario, and then lots of options about how to handle it. What it does not need is numerous diverse settings to account for every possible area the PCs might explore.&nbsp;Saying an adventure is non-linear is not the same as saying &quot;it's about whatever the players want.&quot; There are bounds to a non-linear adventure outside of which the players have jumped ship and are no longer pursuing the same scenario. That's fine, and I would say that's how it should be. But you cannot blame an adventure for a group of players saying &quot;That's cool and all, but we've decided to do something completely different.&quot;I've heard that sentiment before, but I'm not sure where it comes from. Certainly Paizo would disagree with that statement. From what I've heard anecdotally, core books rake in the most money, but adventures sell just fine.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Quickleaf, post: 6232750, member: 20323"] That's a great one. There's a reason the old adventures were called "modules"; the idea was, I believe, that the DM would kit bash them together to make a campaign, cutting and adding stuff as needed. Haha, yes it is, thanks. I totally disagree. Yes tastes differ. However, there are still common things most of us want in an adventure module that are "good." For example, you describe characteristics we all agree are bad in an adventure. Thus, a good adventure has cohesive logic and minimizes the assumptions it makes. So a good adventure is, broadly speaking, [b]thoughtfully designed[/b]. Also you touch on the [b]usability[/b] issue. I think that's an area that needs to be explored, the presentation and graphic design. Nothing kills the mounting tension and energy of a game like the DM having to shuffle thru the module to find info they need, and all the players start chatting in the interim. Of course there is a word/page limit. However, if node-based design is used, then there is a much lower chance of content being skipped, as everything interconnects. Basically, a non-linear adventure needs a really strong framing scenario, and then lots of options about how to handle it. What it does not need is numerous diverse settings to account for every possible area the PCs might explore. Saying an adventure is non-linear is not the same as saying "it's about whatever the players want." There are bounds to a non-linear adventure outside of which the players have jumped ship and are no longer pursuing the same scenario. That's fine, and I would say that's how it should be. But you cannot blame an adventure for a group of players saying "That's cool and all, but we've decided to do something completely different." I've heard that sentiment before, but I'm not sure where it comes from. Certainly Paizo would disagree with that statement. From what I've heard anecdotally, core books rake in the most money, but adventures sell just fine. [/QUOTE]

Verification