Worlds of Design: Why Buy 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
Almost all adventures from WotC have a section titled, "Running the Adventure." They also have flow charts, a section on how to use the maps, and how to tailor it to your table. Can you give an example of what is missing? (Thanks in advance for your answer. I am genuinely curious as to what else they need.)
I'm not terribly familiar with WotC adventures so that is good to hear. I think something along the lines of sandbox play vs linear style. Adventure Module vs adventure campaign. A higher level overview for folks not quite as experienced.

For example, I am very familiar with Paizo adventure paths. They go from linear to non-linear. Often within the same AP itself! While a thorough read will give you the right impression, its often a bit obfuscated in the material when these changes happen.

I'd love to see more branding around the ideas. Modules are short adventures without a metaplot intended for folks that want a campaign that theme isnt so long term. Adventure paths are campaign length adventures intended to be played for months maybe years. etc..
 

log in or register to remove this ad

It takes you SIX MONTHS to edit a module to your taste?
No, it takes 6 months to a year to run through one of the WotC hardcover modules. I've played through several of them.

:oops: ? I can usually edit a module in a few hours and then it's good for the group play.
A few hours before play and you're done?! Wow, your standards are far, far lower than any DM I've ever played with. You don't continuously make adjustments during play to take into consideration your player's actions, especially when they differ from what the module expects?

But hey, if your table is happy with it, go for it.
 

I have used modules for most of my DMing since I started as a DM in ‘85?

I appreciate having pre done plot events and challenges to use and see how things develop when the PCs interact.

I modify as needed or desired but I like having a decent structure to riff off of.

I buy a lot of modules. More than I could ever run. It is nice to have different options.
 

Yeah and that makes sense: the designers were busy learning the game themselves, then eventually they started creating adventurers based on their experiences. This why IME introductory adventures are so important, especially if they come with the core rules.
That and they didn't think there was a market for adventures. Miniatures were about the rules set. Scenarios were either historical or point buy. The first fantasy rules I played was Chainmail with the fantasy supplement... 1972 I think. We played historical miniature campaigns that involved maps of imaginary lands with taxation raising troops etc. and small states fighting over turf. We had been doing 18th and 19th century. We started doing medieval and added fantasy. I drew up a fantasy campaign area for us and along came D&D :D
 

Scott mentions...
Almost all adventures from WotC have a section titled, "Running the Adventure." They also have flow charts, a section on how to use the maps, and how to tailor it to your table. Can you give an example of what is missing? (Thanks in advance for your answer. I am genuinely curious as to what else they need.)

payn replies...
I'm not terribly familiar with WotC adventures so that is good to hear. I think something along the lines of sandbox play vs linear style. Adventure Module vs adventure campaign. A higher level overview for folks not quite as experienced.

For example, I am very familiar with Paizo adventure paths. They go from linear to non-linear. Often within the same AP itself! While a thorough read will give you the right impression, its often a bit obfuscated in the material when these changes happen.

I'd love to see more branding around the ideas. Modules are short adventures without a metaplot intended for folks that want a campaign that theme isnt so long term. Adventure paths are campaign length adventures intended to be played for months maybe years. etc..

Maybe being more open, or plain in terms of what the printed book offers in each of the above sections, is what comes to mind. I am in the 1st chapter of running Waterdeep: Dragon Heist, which frequently makes an appearance on favorite lists of published campaigns that were enjoyed by players. In getting ready for it, I've found for its concept, it is not as well-designed and lacking from a campaign running perspective. Based on the number of 3pp supplements available, including some by the original contributors, the remix offered on the Alexandrian, this seems to be the general response expressed by others.

Its bones are good, which is why I suspect it gets mentioned by players who've played it. But its "Running the Adventure" and flowchart gives the impression you could run it smoothly just with the book by itself, that it is a good stew with meat-- except in play people have noted it waffles between its core as a city sandbox, yet uses linear guides as the main mode into the different parts.

Some elements for example, would've been much improved if a couple random tables were offered, with a line or two of flavorful text.

I've ended up compiling two, two-inch binders for it; the first five or so tabs in one, covers the changes from DH roughly by chapter. The rest is material and lore related to Waterdeep taken from repositories online, the factions that the players will be involved with, npc's original and otherwise, the Waterdeep City Encounter supplement by Will Doyle, and so on.
 

Not the OP but I have an example: Running Rime of Frostmaiden. That adventure is in desperate need of a page/table: clues, where PCs can find them, and what they mean. Also the story needs tightening of three elements so they’re more interconnected.

Similar experience when I ran Tomb of Annihilation, but there it was simply a paucity of clues - so not even just a presentation issue.

The stuff you’re talking about in WotC adventures is like the absolute bare minimum… and even then they don’t stick the landing, omit essential info, or mess up the details (eg. flight times of the dragon in Frostmaiden don’t work).
Thank you. I have Rime, and now that you mention it, that would be a great addition!
 

I'm not terribly familiar with WotC adventures so that is good to hear. I think something along the lines of sandbox play vs linear style. Adventure Module vs adventure campaign. A higher level overview for folks not quite as experienced.

For example, I am very familiar with Paizo adventure paths. They go from linear to non-linear. Often within the same AP itself! While a thorough read will give you the right impression, its often a bit obfuscated in the material when these changes happen.

I'd love to see more branding around the ideas. Modules are short adventures without a metaplot intended for folks that want a campaign that theme isnt so long term. Adventure paths are campaign length adventures intended to be played for months maybe years. etc..
Ah, ok. Branding would be good. It would actually be really nice if WotC published more "modules," similar to their old sets. I doubt it's financially responsible as a company, but I think it teaches young/inexperienced DMs much better than trying to play through a yearlong AP.
Side not, I ran Skull & Shackles from PF, and we found it a hoot. But I must confess, I took some liberties with that AP to make it work for our table.
 

No, it takes 6 months to a year to run through one of the WotC hardcover modules. I've played through several of them.


A few hours before play and you're done?! Wow, your standards are far, far lower than any DM I've ever played with. You don't continuously make adjustments during play to take into consideration your player's actions, especially when they differ from what the module expects?

But hey, if your table is happy with it, go for it.
This all reminds me of one game I was in as a player in where the DM was running a published module and he didn't adjust the rewards to match the party. He never seemed to understand that the reason we avoided some of the in game plot hooks was because the rewards were of no interest to any of the players. For example, if none of the players wear metal armour, then seeking out a lair where it is known we could get a suit of magical full plate isn't really going to interest a party of wizards, druids, rogues, and rangers.

As a GM. I make use of published adventures but depending on the adventure or module the editing will vary. I try to do edits in advance well before games, but time is often scarce so sometimes it happens mid-game. I usually get away with it okay because I've been running games for such a long time now, 44 years or so. The important thing is keeping track of any live edits.
 

.

I've ended up compiling two, two-inch binders for it; the first five or so tabs in one, covers the changes from DH roughly by chapter. The rest is material and lore related to Waterdeep taken from repositories online, the factions that the players will be involved with, npc's original and otherwise, the Waterdeep City Encounter supplement by Will Doyle, and so on.

I ran Dtagonheist largely as written and had no major problems. It was fun.

Ran it a second time and added a mountain of stuff and had fun too.

But two binders full? For a five level adventure? That’s a lot more work than I’d do. There’s just no way I would make that much effort.
 

The last WotC adventures I bought were Wild Beyond the Witchlight and Journeys Beyond the Radiant Citadel. Since then, I've also picked up Barkeep on the Borderlands for 5E and ... I think that's it.

I do buy adventures for other systems (I just backed the new Pirate Borg adventure anthology), but I don't run a game that has people meeting often enough to run a big WotC campaign adventure. (My group hasn't even done our second Radiant Citadel adventure yet.) And I can whip up one shots easily and find that, most of the time, WotC one shots make me want to rewrite them to such an extent that they don't save me any time at all. (I'm looking at you, everything but the first adventure in Candlekeep Mysteries.)
You're right about Candlekeep Mysteries sadly.. To pick on one specifically, the adventure Book of the Raven is written like a detailed atmospheric introduction to whatever creepy place the DM wants the party to visit next (Shadowfell / Ravenloft ) but there aren't actually any connections (you know, like an adventure plot) between the various things going on.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top