Thanks Beoric!A random thought I had, for making modules that can easily be dropped into a campaign. Make your area map no larger than 24 miles across - that is, no larger than the size of a single "large" hex, using the smallest scale in common use. And don't imply that there is unusual terrain extending beyond the boundaries of the map.
I say this because of how difficult I find it to integrate area maps into my campaign, where the area map takes several hexes, and I have to find a location with (for example) mountains on two sides, and large forests on the other two sides, without redrawing my campaign map.
Bryce talks a lot about usability at the table, but I have more trouble with usability in the campaign. For this quality, I think the old TSR modules are generally superior to OSR efforts. I can drop Hommlet into most of the nations in my campaign world - pretty much anywhere I want to start a campaign. I really struggle to find a home for most OSR efforts, although @Malrex's modules are often an exception).
lol, try jamming the massive wilderness areas in S4 and WG4 into your own world! Previous to my heartbreaker, I built a massive hexcrawl, sandbox island roughly the size of Britain with the purpose of jamming all my favourite printed adventures into it and letting the characters drive their own campaign. What I ended up doing in a lot of cases was shrinking the scale of the Wilderness portions (old adventures loooove to use giant 12+ mi hexes). In almost all cases the trek would be just as much fun at 1/6 the scale, and will fit neatly into the appropriate generic biome with a minimum of alteration.For this quality, I think the old TSR modules are generally superior to OSR efforts.
The relevant portion of both S4's and WG4's area maps are all mountains. I don't have difficulty finding a big area of mountains where I can drop them. The scale is a bit big, but there is no time crunch for the wilderness portion, so the scale can be changed; also, 0e/1e/Basic overland travel speeds are always unrealistically fast, so it often doesn't make a big difference when I use my own travelling rules. I usually change the scale on the B1 overland map as well, to make it bigger.lol, try jamming the massive wilderness areas in S4 and WG4 into your own world! Previous to my heartbreaker, I built a massive hexcrawl, sandbox island roughly the size of Britain with the purpose of jamming all my favourite printed adventures into it and letting the characters drive their own campaign. What I ended up doing in a lot of cases was shrinking the scale of the Wilderness portions (old adventures loooove to use giant 12+ mi hexes). In almost all cases the trek would be just as much fun at 1/6 the scale, and will fit neatly into the appropriate generic biome with a minimum of alteration.
In cases where the whole point is that the players must trek across 200 grueling miles of tundra to save the horse clans or whatever, you can usually break the map into pieces and distribute the Points (A, B, etc.) at appropriate distances in your own world map.
Like Malrex said, that leaves the real problem with all of these, which is adaptation. Old Greyhawk adventures were set in a generic, earthlike, magical medieval world, so they transfer easily to most campaigns. Later adventures start introducing world-specific crunch that can be very difficult to transplant without significantly altering your campaign world.
I guess I'm feeling defensive (due to the ridiculous size of my own work), but as a consumer, I LOVE getting a big book with a ton of usable content, lush artwork, and professional layout/design. I've definitely seen people shitting on 100+ page adventures in the comments section of Bryce's reviews, but (possibly unfairly?) written them off as miserable old bastards. Now I'm actually curious though, what's selling more successfully at the moment; short and sweet or long and delicious?
Agreed, whole-heartedly. Modules, to be useful, need to be modular and portable, since (as of the old 1999 or 2000 player survey) many (most?) campaigns were run in homebrewed settings. (I’m not sure how that data has evolved over the last 25 years, but WorC certainly kept polling the customer base).A random thought I had, for making modules that can easily be dropped into a campaign. Make your area map no larger than 24 miles across - that is, no larger than the size of a single "large" hex [snip]
Bryce talks a lot about usability at the table, but I have more trouble with usability in the campaign. For this quality, I think the old TSR modules are generally superior to OSR efforts.
I have a weakness for making wilderness maps. I use to many symbols....less is more, but my brain can't do it well, so I tend to make smaller areas, but then the scale may not make as much sense? Although...It may also not be me as Jon and I work together a lot and if its one we work on together, sometimes he draws the maps (and I digitize them).The relevant portion of both S4's and WG4's area maps are all mountains. I don't have difficulty finding a big area of mountains where I can drop them. The scale is a bit big, but there is no time crunch for the wilderness portion, so the scale can be changed; also, 0e/1e/Basic overland travel speeds are always unrealistically fast, so it often doesn't make a big difference when I use my own travelling rules. I usually change the scale on the B1 overland map as well, to make it bigger.
(BTW @Malrex, I often have to change the scale on your area maps and detail maps for them to make sense. I assume you play TotM style?)
I agree with your adaptation comment. I would really like to figure out a way to use Palace of Unquiet Repose, but a lot of its elements are very specific and difficult to translate to my game world without a lot of work. Same goes for a lot of the NAP stuff; it's great, but I will never even try to use use most of it.
I expect you like hardbacks because, IIRC, you like reading modules. I only read them for the purposes of preparing to use them, and get frustrated with walls of text.
I find both hardback and softback books difficult to use for my purposes. The TSR modules, with physically separated (or separatable) maps and separate illustration booklets, were easier to work with. ATM I prefer PDFs, which I print in sections, generally one section with the text and key, and another reference section with maps, new monsters, new magic items, etc. Each section is "bound" with a staple in the corner, unless it is too big for that, in which case I have a Cerlox binder. I can write all over them, and if I want to use them in a different way in a different context I can just reprint them and make different notes. I dislike writing in bound books.
You definitely got me there, but don't get me wrong; I don't enjoy walls of text either. I'm in it for the content, not the novelization. Maps, tables, mini-quests, mini-games, alternate systems, new classes, new monsters, new magic, new crunch, appendices. I like a creator who has enthusiastically vomited up a rainbow of innovative ideas and art, and somehow knitted them all together into a coherent work. I may never run "The Dark of Hot Springs Island" or "Veins of the Earth", but they were an absolute delight and inspiration to read. That said, I couldn't get through "Maze of the Blue Medusa" either, but maybe that's because I can't find it in hard copy for less than a million bucks and I hate reading PDF's?I expect you like hardbacks because, IIRC, you like reading modules. I only read them for the purposes of preparing to use them, and get frustrated with walls of text.
So The1True, Beoric and Squeen basically all said in a roundabout way that these adventures may not be used but was a good read. Are they a different bracket of 'adventure'? Why has everyone gushed about these adventures and yet no one plays them? Is there a play-by-play for any of these adventures written somewhere?You definitely got me there, but don't get me wrong; I don't enjoy walls of text either. I'm in it for the content, not the novelization. Maps, tables, mini-quests, mini-games, alternate systems, new classes, new monsters, new magic, new crunch, appendices. I like a creator who has enthusiastically vomited up a rainbow of innovative ideas and art, and somehow knitted them all together into a coherent work. I may never run "The Dark of Hot Springs Island" or "Veins of the Earth", but they were an absolute delight and inspiration to read. That said, I couldn't get through "Maze of the Blue Medusa" either, but maybe that's because I can't find it in hard copy for less than a million bucks and I hate reading PDF's?
I haven't read Veins of the Earth or Hot Springs Island. I have read the preview of MotBM, a couple of times actually, found it unusable, and didn't particularly enjoy reading it, either. I don't read things just to read them, I read them with a view to using them.So The1True, Beoric and Squeen basically all said in a roundabout way that these adventures may not be used but was a good read. Are they a different bracket of 'adventure'? Why has everyone gushed about these adventures and yet no one plays them? Is there a play-by-play for any of these adventures written somewhere?
I think I skimmed through Veins of the Earth (the art style bothered me) and I think there was some cool ideas in there. I don't remember it being an adventure, but more of a source book, like Wilderness Survival type book for underground.
Glad you added that.OSE and the dreaded bullet-pointers rode the reactionary/utility wave back way too far.
Like the much maligned "Dungeoneer's Survival Guide" even? Yeah, it's true, it's not really an adventure, so a bad example on my part.I don't remember it being an adventure, but more of a source book, like Wilderness Survival type book for underground.
Aw, I kind of liked Shackled City and I've been looking all over for a complete set of PF1e Kingmaker for less than a bajillion dineros. I get where you're coming from though. Half the book is adventure (and even that is full of the dreaded WoT), and the other half is fluff you're never going to use.This is, to be clear, Shackled City, Age or Worms, and Scales of War, a combined seventy levels of "adventure."