Worlds of Design: Why Buy Adventures?

Why do people buy commercial modules when early RPGs assumed the GM would make up the adventures?

How many adventure modules (including adventure paths) do you purchase a year on average?


Why do people buy commercial modules when early RPGs assumed the GM would make up the adventures?

cube-616738_960_720.jpg

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.

Why Bother?​

Of course, it’s much easier to use a module than to make up your own adventures. But there’s more to it than that.

Simply put, game mastering takes time and effort. Game masters who use multiple sources requires significant demands on their time, something that is increasingly challenged by the diversification of other forms of easy entertainment. I discussed this in two different articles: Worlds of Design: The Chain of Imagination and World of Design: The Lost Art of Making Things Up

But it’s also certainly because adventures make game companies money. In many ways, making a game world out of whole cloth can be daunting to new gamers. It's just easier (and more lucrative) to buy adventures set in an established game world. This has the added bonus of causing a lot more commonality among the customer base (who can share tips and tricks with each other on how to play an adventure), and also happens to make those same game masters repeat customers as their players advance in level.

It wasn’t always like this.

The Hoi Poloi​

In the early days of Dungeons & Dragons, lack of a single campaign setting (we had both Greyhawk and Blackmoor), ever changing rules and editions, and the general inability to share them (no Internet back then!) meant games were messy affairs. Game masters made things up as they went along, customized rules as they saw fit, and largely played what could only be interpreted as a variant of D&D. And for some time, this wasn’t just the norm, it was encouraged by then parent company TSR, who wasn’t in the business of publishing adventures.

But that all changed over time. D&D became more solidified as the rules went from Original D&D to Basic/Advanced, to just one version. Along with the codification of rules came established adventures, many of them now legendary in gamers’ experience who played through them (e.g., Expedition to the Barrier Peaks, Ravenloft).

Of course, not all adventures were fully fleshed out either. Some had large gaps (both in the maps and text) where game masters were meant to customize to their liking, or roll randomly to determine what came next so players wouldn’t be able to metagame the adventure. Over time, this became much less common, to the point now that we get completely mini settings. For an example of how much has changed, see Beth’s review of Quests from the Infinite Staircase, which takes sandbox-style adventures from Basic and Advanced D&D and fleshes them out in detail.

The Art of the Module​

There’s also something to be said for the art of adventure creation. That is, there are definitely some adventures that are better than others, and those who figure out the magical mix are more likely to be bought by game masters who appreciate the effort. Or to put it another way, people who create published modules will, on average, likely be better at adventure writing than a novice, so you might choose to buy a few to learn from the best.

This trend is exemplified by Paizo, how pioneered the art of the Adventure Path. D&D’s level system ensures games take a lot of time and effort for player characters to level, which requires a lot of adventures strung together. A GM in the old days had to buy different modules and justify stitching their plots together, but with an Adventure Path the entire throughline seamlessly integrates from end to end, from the very first to the very last (usually 20th but not always) level. It's a lucrative model, as it requires significant investment from customers not just for one adventure, but for several.

A Question of Experience​

Whether or not you buy published adventures likely pivots on several factors: your prep time, your players’ interest in a campaign setting, and your experience. Game mastering is a significant investment, so if you don’t have the time, published adventures are the way to go. Your players might be deeply committed to a setting (like Greyhawk) and thus be only interested in playing in published adventures in that campaign world; conversely, they may like your homebrew so much they could be turned off playing anywhere else.

And finally, as you get more experienced, adventure writing becomes a lot easier. There’s nothing like playing a terrible adventure to motivate you to write your own. I doubt that there are many veteran GMs who have never used a commercial adventure module – I certainly have used them, for convenience (lack of time) or when one was especially useful or even famous (e.g. Against the Giants). I haven’t bought one for a long time, because I already have so many, and because there are so many free ones available. But it appears from Wizard’s catalog, and from the publications of many other publishers, that lots of people buy them.

Your Turn: Take the poll and let us know!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lewis Pulsipher

Lewis Pulsipher

Dragon, White Dwarf, Fiend Folio

Starmaster

Explorer
I'm only playing D&D right now and WotC only publishes 1-5 adventure books per year. If they produced more, I'd buy more. I don't generally use 3rd party adventures since the quality can vary so much and it's hard to tell which are the good ones before buying them. A short preview and possible ratings on Dungeon Masters Guild is not enough to make that determination. That's certainly not to say everything from WotC is good, but at least your chances are generally better that the adventure will be good (or at least salvageable). I miss the days of Dungeon magazine where we got 3-6 small adventures every month at a reasonable price, culled by an editor. One could just pick from that large selection which ones were good or which had the appropriate themes or levels that were desired.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Wangalade

Explorer
I think that is debatable depending on who you ask. Myself, I find creating my own adventures is far easier and less time consuming than reading, memorizing, creating reference notes to use at the table, for a pre-published module. Have I bought and ran pre-made adventures, sure, but I can say the ones I've bought and never used far outnumber the ones I have actually run. These days I find a simple outline with a few NPC/monster stats and some random tables is far superior to a meticulously written adventure. It just allows more flexibility to improvise when the players go off the expected path, and feels more organic for both the players and the GM. Whether it's a pre-made adventure or one I've created they never go quite as planned.
Totally agree with this. I think the reason a lot of people think running modules is easier is for two reasons. They've never run a game without some sort of aid. Or they just run crappy games. You can certainly run a module without doing the prep of making it your own, but it won't be as good as if you do the prep, hence bad games where dms don't know how parts of the module interact with each other, and it's a slog of random rooms with random monsters. Prepping a module well will always take more time than prepping your own adventure because there is always the added step of reading/memorization, all the other prep work should be the same whether it's a published adventure or your own. All you need to make and run your own adventures is an active imagination. Don't depend on someone else to do your imagining for you!
 

This trend is exemplified by Paizo, how pioneered the art of the Adventure Path

Dragon Lance modules were huge in popularity as a adventure path. But lots of TSR era modules were connected the GDQ series being a early example. The Enemy Within campaign for Warhammer FRP is probably closest to a Pazio adventure path as it starts at 1st level. The TSR connected series all start at higher level. I guess Village of Homlet and Temple of EE starts at one, but I've never liked it. Lots of great adventure paths for CoC as well.

Paizio embraced it, but it definitely existed before.

Whether or not you buy published adventures likely pivots on several factors: your prep time, your players’ interest in a campaign setting, and your experience. Game mastering is a significant investment, so if you don’t have the time, published adventures are the way to go.

I buy a lot of published adventures, but never run them. Inspiration and ideas to get the juices flowing. I run sandbox campaigns and shoehorning a module in is more work that creating one.
 

Distracted DM

Distracted DM
Supporter
I buy adventures for inspiration and for rough outlines to jump off from. The most useful adventures have been OSR ones which leave a lot to the GM but have very inspirational ideas, and Red Hand of Doom. Michael Prescott's Trilemma adventure locations were each a piece of gold.

That said, I buy many, many OSR adventures (especially if you include DCC in OSR).
 

Steampunkette

A5e 3rd Party Publisher!
Supporter
Merciless theft, obviously.

Like, don't get me wrong. I write my own material, I run adventure modules, it's all gonna depend on my DAVE's willingness to allow me to do what I need and want to do.

But even when I'm not running a pre-packaged adventure they've got a ton of pre-balanced encounters I can lift and drop into a session. Or interesting character and narrative conceits that I hadn't thought of that I can apply to characters or stories that I, later, write.

Even if I never run a given adventure, there's a lot of utility I can get out of it!
 

R_J_K75

Legend
Prepping a module well will always take more time than prepping your own adventure because there is always the added step of reading/memorization
ICR exactly which module it was but I think it may have been Stardock, or one of the Undermountain Dungeon Crawls from the later 90s. There was one room, a wizard's chamber, that was loaded with all kinds of minute details, so much so that the one major detail, a canopy bed with a magical sword that was extremely imperative that the PCs find it to move the adventure forward, got lost in all the worthless window dressings. Well because I forgot it was a canopy bed and never described it as such, they never bothered to search the bed or find the swords. OOPS. I remember those three adventures, (and most of the FR modules at the time) being overly wordy and filled with unnecessary details.

There was a few 1E & 2E AD&D compilations that had 1-2 page outline style mini-adventures. Two I recall were called the Book of Lairs and another was called Treasure Chest, or something thereof. Those were far more useful to me than any full pre-written modules.
 

Over the years, I’ve often seen this kind of dichotomy posited between “published adventure user” versus "homebrewer always.” Typically a post or video will describe the “published adventure user” in terms of lack: lacking time, lacking energy, lacking experience, or lacking imagination. And the homebrewer is lauded as someone who has some, or all, of these (although usually there isn’t pride in having time, because that makes one seem like all they’re doing is making adventures...and nobody wants to admit to that).

But I think the comments reveal a less dichotomous reality: even people using published adventures are using them tweaked to whatever is going on in their particular story. As one poster described it—probably few people are running adventures “straight.”

I’d add that I’m mostly a published adventure user but don’t think of myself lacking anything but time. In fact, “I” am not at the center of making the campaign, the players are, and the published adventure is only the framework for getting things started, having touch points, anchoring story plots as we shape them. I’m fine with that. I’ve played in homebrewed campaigns, some good, some bad, but none have been totally original—this is not a criticism, there are no truly original novels either, they’re all similar tropes.
 

FitzTheRuke

Legend
I run published adventures for the "shared experience" - so that my players can say that they have played it.

But I don't do it to "save time". It actually takes me far longer to read and prep a published adventure than to make one up. And mine are more custom-formed to the PCs and their personal stories, so that part gets somewhat lost, which I miss.
 

J.M

Explorer
Of course, it’s much easier to use a module than to make up your own adventures.
Actually I've found that's often not the case, though I agree it should be. Many modules - and I'm looking at the main RPG publishers here - are overwritten, poorly organized and fail to account for player agency, which makes them a chore to prep and difficult to run. This is why people don't like modules, as evidenced by many of the comments here. However I don't think the problem is modules in general, the problem is how they are usually presented, because I've seen attempts at better module design that actually helps the GM.
 


Split the Hoard


Split the Hoard
Negotiate, demand, or steal the loot you desire!

A competitive card game for 2-5 players
Remove ads

Split the Hoard


Split the Hoard
Negotiate, demand, or steal the loot you desire!

A competitive card game for 2-5 players
Remove ads

Top