Working on a game module, I find myself looking for other forms of layout than the traditional style, as advanced decades ago by game companies.
It's been explained to me that I need to create a format that enables the DM to "quickly refer" to content on the module while the game is running. I think we all understand this. But I'm grasping that this quick reference necessity is a prime reason why modules are as simplistic, bland and two-dimensional as they are. Any adventure that is expansively complex, that does not fit the motif of move from point A to point B, and on to point C, will be hard to model using the format that's used for modules.
For example; if my adventure includes a considerable number of variables, such as, if the party does A, then B occurs, and if it does C, then D occurs; and if both B and D occur, then E occurs. And if E is followed by the party doing F, thus G, and the party does H, thus I, then how does what happened when the party did B affect the way that G interacts with I, leading to either J or K?
The reader may laugh, but in the recent module I'm writing, I have several such sequences that I find myself having to detail. This simply does not work easily in a linear-type layout that creates a numbered dungeon chart, with room descriptions. Nor is it capable of being handled by a DM who doesn't read and subsume the adventure before hand, instead deciding to run the thing on the fly, assuming that everything is cut and dry.
Leading to the question, isn't it wrong to expect better pre-written adventures, if the primary concern is that pre-written adventures don't require work to understand what's going on?
If you want a better adventure, then you have to forgo "instant reference" DMing. It is that simple.
The user still gets a hand up with regards to running a more complex game, as they don't have to make it from scratch. As I see it, however, I'm not writing modules for lazy DMs, because I'm not interested in writing the same old pap. I'm set to appeal to a niche market ~ which makes sense, as I can't hope to compete with the pulp mill of most game producers, who Are interested in quick reference play, because they're interested in mass marketing and mass purchasing. I'm not. I have far less overhead, for one thing, and I don't need to sell as many of something to do well.
I don't want to sell a lot of modules. I just want to sell the best ones.
True! When I was reading through the content on Authentic Adventures I was visualising a map of the locations with each piece of the puzzle and flow chart lines explaining how they interact and their movement history. But a more important knowledge is of course the "why". Why does the Bandit Queen react in a totally different way to the party if they reference the love song. This one is obvious, but only because you've told us who she is and how she thinks. I don't need a quick reference to remember what the Bandit Queen will do in that situation. It's intuitive, because I'm familiar with the character. There aren't any locks or keys, gates that can only be opened once the dragon claw is retrieved from Hufflepuff. I don't need to check that X plus Y equals Z. The expanding threads come from the complexity of possible interactions the players have with characters that we understand intimately. And the DM should also understand the players intimately, you know which player will have their heart strings pulled, who is most likely to see the connection and remember the lines.
ReplyDeleteI think it's fantastic, can't wait to see how you format it!
PS. Love the thought that's gone into explaining encounters without any reference to particular rule sets.
Sorry that this comment was pushed into my spam. Am only reading it today.
ReplyDeleteI think instant reference because a rallying cry because it appears to clear away another dreadful problem. Long columns of stream of consciousness rambling in which important details might be buried inside paragraphs which are a half page in length but only consist of two sentences each. This style of "endless slabs of small point text" is the easiest way for me to tell a module is going to be shit. If a designer is too lazy to think about layout, how can I trust their design skills?
ReplyDelete"Clarity" is a goal I've found that makes more sense. Is the important information spelled out in a way in which the DM will understand it? Instant reference is clearer than slabs of text by coincidence only since easy reference implies more thought went into the layout. Even an easy to reference adventure can leave a reader wondering things like "There's a secret door here but where in the room is the door?" if the sentences are poorly constructed or vital info is missing which is why I think easy reference and clear writing shouldn't be confused with each other.