Imagine a spherical Thracia ...

[admin]

What if Thracia had two pages of text per entry, of the style that is typical of most adventures? IE: a good DESIGN (that certain something that makes an adventure click) buried in dross.

I find myself thinking about extremes and how much value there is in the DESIGN of an adventure. More than Interactivity, evocative writing and ease of use, the actual design. That something from Many Gates of the Gann, etc, that is the hallmark of a good design. Thracia being an excellent example of that,, or maybe Gann also ... if they were surrounded by walls of text, how good would they actually be?

 

[DangerousPuhson]

So.... your question is "what if adventures were more condensed/abbreviated?"

 

[bryce0lynch]

No. Or, I don't think so.

I talk about three things, mostly: evocative, interactive, ease of use.
Is there a fourth thing: design? As exemplified by Gann, Thracia and a few others.
Or is that fourth thing an offshoot of interactive?

And, how much of the first three, what's the balance, to get to a good adventure?
Can you home run the first three and still have a bad adventure? Or, not a GREAT adventure?
Can you lag on ease of use, a lot, but steller design makes it worthwhile to put up with it? To what degree?

 

[squeen]

I can imagine a product that is well laid out for the DM (ease of use), has lots of things for the players to fiddle with (interactive), and is well written (evocative)---but the subject matter is totally dry, e.g. an adventure in a shopping mall.

Creativity counts too.

 

[DangerousPuhson]

I talk about three things, mostly: evocative, interactive, ease of use.
Is there a fourth thing: design?

Design pretty much is ease-of-use. Err, I should say, ease-of-use is a subset of design.

Think about it: if a module is designed well, what does that even mean?

To me it means that the layout leads the eye to where it needs to look. It means the premises and stories and situations all make contextual sense, even while being followed real-time as the DM's stream of play. It means minimized frustration while following along, and swift recollection when trying to make reference. It means having everything you need delivered exactly as you need it.

 

[squeen]

I've re-read the above, hoping to grok better what you mean by DESIGN. Honestly, I am still not sure.

But, when I think of Gann, what resonates is how well everything holds together---the whole thing...all the layers of content...are in harmony.

Is that what you mean?

 

[DangerousPuhson]

Design exists to AMPLIFY the content - the words, images, and message - of the product. A well-designed product effectively packages the content in a way that makes it better at serving its purpose; for modules, the purpose is to allow the DM run an adventure.

In the case of modules, "design amplification" means taking the content and assembling it in a way conducive to utility, since a module is a utilitarian product (that is to say, it is meant to be used as a tool). This means that the best design practices you can employ when designing a module revolve around make the module more like a tool to be used, which is accomplished in the same way you'd design any tool: making it comfortable to use, ensuring it has as much as is needed to do the job, cutting out the extraneous bits that get in the way, making things simple enough that laymen can use it, etc.

Some of this design happens at the content creation stage, and some at the layout stage - if your content is designed with practicality in mind (by omitting extraneous details, for example, or ordering things sequentially), then there's less design considerations/concessions to be made at the layout stage of the process; likewise, shortcomings in the content can be mitigated in the layout (bolding and bullets and whatnot).

 

[Pkdragon]

I dunno this thread is too big brain for me but now I'm thinking of a Dyson Sphere Dungeon inhabited by Minotaurs, Gnolls, Lizardmen, and Dog Brothers.

I'm for it.

 

[grodog]

I talk about three things, mostly: evocative, interactive, ease of use.
Is there a fourth thing: design? As exemplified by Gann, Thracia and a few others.
Or is that fourth thing an offshoot of interactive?

In my mind, the pillars of module awesomeocity are:

• adventure design: creativity output distilled into content
  • something new/original = not a retread; this could take many forms: a challenging environment, new challenging monsters, a tight schedule that challenges player/PC engagement choices, etc.
  • something challenging: even if not new/original content, existing content used in interesting/innovative ways make them cool again (Tuckers kobolds vs. normal kobolds, for example)
  • a classic mix of encounters (monsters, traps, tricks, treasures, etc.) that's tweaked to support the dungeon design
  • adventure design is "good"---it leverages key design best practices to engage the players in the adventure: factions, verticality, proper level of challenge, expandability, depth that makes it fun to explore and ideally to return to later (not a one-hit wonder in the campaign)
  • thorough playtesting of both content (and presentation if you're using a new book design/template); I place PTing here, but it could easily be in the content section below
• content production: turning content into a product (books and PDFs primarily in our world); most of this is behind-the-scenes work that is under-appreciated at best in the final product, but very important to its success in the market
  • style guide
  • "just right" stat block formats (not too big, not too small)
  • excellent proofreading
  • excellent rules-checking
  • excellent editing
• product design: book design's presentation, layout, and usability to drive content accessibility and ease-of-use
  • book design/layout template that presents the writing, art, and maps in an easy-to-use, intuitive manner
  • book design should support scannability for quick-use/refresh while running a game as well as reading the adventure for the first time
• print production:
  • proper print format for the project's intended use; if to be used as a tool at the table to run and manage multiple game sesssions, the paper should support writing on it in pencil and/or pen, for example

That's obviously not an exhaustive list, but hopefully it's a good start.

And, how much of the first three, what's the balance, to get to a good adventure?
Can you home run the first three and still have a bad adventure? Or, not a GREAT adventure?
Can you lag on ease of use, a lot, but steller design makes it worthwhile to put up with it? To what degree?

This Q of balance across the "adventure criteria" is as important as (if not more important in my mind!) than excelling in a single category---that is, even if you design a brilliant adventure but it's produced in a slap-dash manner, or the book design makes it really hard to read, or the final print quality is shoddy (bad binding, for example---I'm looking at you Unearthed Arcana and Warhammer 1e hardbacks!), then the market may-well fail to see the trees for the forest of issues, and will never adopt it even if it's the next Caverns of Thracia or Village of Hommlet (or whatever your standard of excellence is). That's what I was trying to raise in my comments for the review for The Anthropophagi of Xambaala: that we should be able to distinguish a well-designed adventure as separate criteria from the adventure's content production, print design, and print production.

Allan.

 

[admin]

I dunno this thread is too big brain for me but now I'm thinking of a Dyson Sphere Dungeon inhabited by Minotaurs, Gnolls, Lizardmen, and Dog Brothers.

I'm for it.

I played Traveler in college with a group of Astrophysics PhD's. I was the only non-PhD. They all lived together in the same house. We were on the inside of a Dyson Sphere and the laser rifle beams continued until they hit something. The game paused for 75 minutes while they all discussed and calculated. Watch what you hope for ... Farewell Col Gilgamesh Richter, Solomani Marine!