Why do 3e/3.5e modules suck?
- Thread starter Snoweel
- Start date
RangerWickett
Legend
cleaverthepit said:Ranger Wickett, PLease contact troll lord games
It's hard to tell online with the lack of intonation and inflection, so, are you serious, or just messin' with me? *grin*
cybertalus
First Post
For me it's not just the modules that are dry and flavorless, it's all the supplements as well. It's one of those weird quirks of life that in 2E where the rules were kind of bleh that the focus in modules and supplements wasn't on the rules, but on the flavor instead, but now in 3E where the rules are so strong that the rules have become the focus of things instead.
I'll agree that 3E products in general do play better than their 2E counterparts, but that has actually reduced the amount of purchases I make, because the vast majority of gaming products I've bought over the years have been purchased to read rather than to actually use in a game. 3E stat blocks may be functionally superior to 2E ones, but they could also be sold in the vitamin stores as the ultimate cure for insomnia. And worse, since 3E stat block are so much more space intensive than 2E ones, they tend to come at the expense of notes about the character's history, personality, tactics, etc.
Worse, this rules focus seems to have bled over into player mentality, especially my own. I used to be a pretty strong role player, used to enjoy crafting complex character backgrounds and playing out interaction in character. Nowadays I seldom bother with a background that's much longer than a paragraph (if that), and while I used to loathe hack and slash style dungeon crawls, now I actually prefer them.
I'll agree that 3E products in general do play better than their 2E counterparts, but that has actually reduced the amount of purchases I make, because the vast majority of gaming products I've bought over the years have been purchased to read rather than to actually use in a game. 3E stat blocks may be functionally superior to 2E ones, but they could also be sold in the vitamin stores as the ultimate cure for insomnia. And worse, since 3E stat block are so much more space intensive than 2E ones, they tend to come at the expense of notes about the character's history, personality, tactics, etc.
Worse, this rules focus seems to have bled over into player mentality, especially my own. I used to be a pretty strong role player, used to enjoy crafting complex character backgrounds and playing out interaction in character. Nowadays I seldom bother with a background that's much longer than a paragraph (if that), and while I used to loathe hack and slash style dungeon crawls, now I actually prefer them.
Melan
Explorer
Some of it may have to do with the ingrained ideas and D&Disms. In "the old days", adventures had to venture into uncharted terrain and were written with a wide-eyed enthusiasm. Today, it is a lot more professional, but also - the road is so well trod, it is harder to go off it. Many adventure writers fall back on tried solutions and ideas instead of making their own.
I, personally, have quit reading contemporary fantasy literature a few years ago, because it was killing the good ideas in my mind and replacing them with monotone drivel. It is the same with many game books. To be fair, though, this is not a 3e phenomenon. After a while, I actively avoided 2e supplements/modules because they were killing my enjoyment of gaming. I guess it is the same with some of 3e. Fortunately, d20 allows niche publishers to operate, and some of them cater to my tastes, so all is well in the end.
I, personally, have quit reading contemporary fantasy literature a few years ago, because it was killing the good ideas in my mind and replacing them with monotone drivel. It is the same with many game books. To be fair, though, this is not a 3e phenomenon. After a while, I actively avoided 2e supplements/modules because they were killing my enjoyment of gaming. I guess it is the same with some of 3e. Fortunately, d20 allows niche publishers to operate, and some of them cater to my tastes, so all is well in the end.
Part of the problem with 3e/d20 adventures is that there's too much competition in the marketplace.
Let me explain: I really, REALLY, like the adventures I run to have strong links to the setting. My favorite adventure is Dragon's Crown for Dark Sun, which showcases many features of the setting: man-eating halflings, thri-kreen, psionics, sorcerer-kings, the history with the proto-sorcerer-kings wiping out large groups of preservers, the Sea of Silt, and so on.
However, to give an adventures strong ties to the setting, you need to LIMIT it to that setting. Running Dragon's Crown in Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk would require so much rewriting that it would be easier to make a new adventure from scratch. In today's crowded marketplace, and with the competition from Dungeon in the adventure bit, most publishers can't afford to limit the potential audience for their adventures. So, instead the adventures become generic and dull.
Let me explain: I really, REALLY, like the adventures I run to have strong links to the setting. My favorite adventure is Dragon's Crown for Dark Sun, which showcases many features of the setting: man-eating halflings, thri-kreen, psionics, sorcerer-kings, the history with the proto-sorcerer-kings wiping out large groups of preservers, the Sea of Silt, and so on.
However, to give an adventures strong ties to the setting, you need to LIMIT it to that setting. Running Dragon's Crown in Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk would require so much rewriting that it would be easier to make a new adventure from scratch. In today's crowded marketplace, and with the competition from Dungeon in the adventure bit, most publishers can't afford to limit the potential audience for their adventures. So, instead the adventures become generic and dull.
I suscribed breifly and I wasn't that impressed with the quality. Being able to custimize the adventure to a certain level was nice but I wasn't that impressed with the stories and such.tmaaas said:
The real problem is that for the last say half a year new cotent have come at a snail's pace if at all so until that is cleared up I wouldn't recommend sucsribing. Of course things might have changed since I last checked.
Treebore
First Post
I think i may have figured out one reason for our differences in opinion, Ie I like 3e modules just as much as i liked anything that has come along in Old D&D, 1e and 2e. I like modules that offer up a basic plot line but leave plenty of opportunities/room for me to add in whatever other plot elements I want to.
Let me try to illustrate this with an example. rappan Athuk has been called by many a dungeon that makes no sense. That is because no strong conhnection or reasoning is given for why a lot of the monster, etc... are there. However, when i read all the various monsters and NPC's in the module an idea of how/why all these creatures are here in this vast dungeon. I also integrated the little story ideas bill and clark put into the module and just ran with it. now i have a dungeon site with half a dozen main ideas/events going on inside of it and dozens more ideas waiting to be used depending on what PC's do when they go in.
So now Rappan Athuk is MY module loosely based on what Bill and Clark originally wrote. Of course the dungeon itself is still constructed the same way, but the environment of the dungeon is mostly mine.
Then there are other modules, such as Morrick Mansion, which I am currently running. I like it the way it is written. It has changed from how it was written only to thte degree necessary to fit in what has come before for the PC's and as a reaction to what the PC's have done there could not possibly be accounted for by the author. Which is cool, this is what makes modules great.
So it appears to me, based on this thread and others similiar, that there are a lot of people out there who want modules that take next to nothing to use it, want a plot-line that is totally original, yet fits seemlessly into your on-going campaign or home brew world. Plus the ecology and the politics of the module most be completely fleshed out and explained, and still fit into with what you have going in your on-going campaign or homebrew, or it must be perfectly written to whatever your tastes are, despite the fact the author doesn't know you and can't read your mind.
I, on the other hand, am happy if it has good maps, good NPC's/monsters that are fully and correctly statted out, and a handful of good ideas that i can use for inspiration. I do everything else i need to do to make it fit my campaign.
That is why I like Necromancer and the others i have mentioned. They say here, this is a neat setting I have come up with, here are a bunch of NPC's, locations, Magic item recomendations, treasure recommendations, and plot arc ideas, etc... Use what you will and add/modify to your hearts content.
They literally ask you to add/modify to your hearts content. they tell you to make the module your own. That is what i do and that is the kind of module I like to see.
So apparently, as far as i can figure it, these are the fine lines of why people like or dislike modules in general, let alone in what editon they were written.
Anyone think i am missing the mark? Or can think of other reasons I am missing and haven't been mentioned here? I am honestly mystified why modules aren't the best sellers out there. I think they are the best way to build a campaign or a homebrew world. These source books are usually a big dissappointment. The only exceptions i have seen lately are the Arduin book, the Conan book, and the Wilderlands book.
Unearthed Arcana just screams to me the same warnings that the optional books in 2e did. Anyway, that is my take.
Let me try to illustrate this with an example. rappan Athuk has been called by many a dungeon that makes no sense. That is because no strong conhnection or reasoning is given for why a lot of the monster, etc... are there. However, when i read all the various monsters and NPC's in the module an idea of how/why all these creatures are here in this vast dungeon. I also integrated the little story ideas bill and clark put into the module and just ran with it. now i have a dungeon site with half a dozen main ideas/events going on inside of it and dozens more ideas waiting to be used depending on what PC's do when they go in.
So now Rappan Athuk is MY module loosely based on what Bill and Clark originally wrote. Of course the dungeon itself is still constructed the same way, but the environment of the dungeon is mostly mine.
Then there are other modules, such as Morrick Mansion, which I am currently running. I like it the way it is written. It has changed from how it was written only to thte degree necessary to fit in what has come before for the PC's and as a reaction to what the PC's have done there could not possibly be accounted for by the author. Which is cool, this is what makes modules great.
So it appears to me, based on this thread and others similiar, that there are a lot of people out there who want modules that take next to nothing to use it, want a plot-line that is totally original, yet fits seemlessly into your on-going campaign or home brew world. Plus the ecology and the politics of the module most be completely fleshed out and explained, and still fit into with what you have going in your on-going campaign or homebrew, or it must be perfectly written to whatever your tastes are, despite the fact the author doesn't know you and can't read your mind.
I, on the other hand, am happy if it has good maps, good NPC's/monsters that are fully and correctly statted out, and a handful of good ideas that i can use for inspiration. I do everything else i need to do to make it fit my campaign.
That is why I like Necromancer and the others i have mentioned. They say here, this is a neat setting I have come up with, here are a bunch of NPC's, locations, Magic item recomendations, treasure recommendations, and plot arc ideas, etc... Use what you will and add/modify to your hearts content.
They literally ask you to add/modify to your hearts content. they tell you to make the module your own. That is what i do and that is the kind of module I like to see.
So apparently, as far as i can figure it, these are the fine lines of why people like or dislike modules in general, let alone in what editon they were written.
Anyone think i am missing the mark? Or can think of other reasons I am missing and haven't been mentioned here? I am honestly mystified why modules aren't the best sellers out there. I think they are the best way to build a campaign or a homebrew world. These source books are usually a big dissappointment. The only exceptions i have seen lately are the Arduin book, the Conan book, and the Wilderlands book.
Unearthed Arcana just screams to me the same warnings that the optional books in 2e did. Anyway, that is my take.
Similar Threads
