PDA

View Full Version : How often do you use modules?



CharonsHelper
2018-02-19, 04:34 PM
About what % of the time do you use modules?

In college I used to create the bulk of my own campaigns, but as I've aged I've become fonder of the time saver that modules are - and a lot of them are pretty solid. (A lot are bad too, but that's a separate issue.)

Is the existence of modules a draw to a new RPG system? If so - how many would you need to jump in?

Kaptin Keen
2018-02-19, 04:40 PM
0%

I don't even use monsters as described in whatever manual they come from - and mostly create from scratch.

RazorChain
2018-02-19, 04:48 PM
I almost never use modules if I do it's usually for inspiration.

I think I've used maybe 5 modules the last 10 years and usually either just for inspiration or heavily modified.

The last one I used was the Ghoul of St. Lazar written for Ars Magica but I used it in my Gurps game and redubbed it to the Revenant of Vezio and modified it to fit my setting.

I rarely use modules because I very often run character driven games where the focus is on the character and what is happening to them. It makes for more personal journey.

When I run more mission or Op based games I am more inclined to use modules. This applies to Cyberpunk, Shadowrun or black ops games where each mission or operation is mostly self contained.

Max_Killjoy
2018-02-19, 04:53 PM
Pretty much 0%.

Pugwampy
2018-02-19, 05:48 PM
50 percent of the time I imagine . I prefer short adventures that can be woven into your campaign .

It's a good tool to make use of and new experience for the players . DM,s each have unique playstyle quirks and comfort zones . Done too often can be boring .

A mod can shake things up and offer a unique adventure experience . For the sake of different add a few mods to your campaign .

Quertus
2018-02-19, 05:54 PM
I really want to give my players the opportunity to have that shared experience with the larger community, and to experience different styles of content. Still, it's smaller than I'd like, at a decidedly single-digit percentage of the time.

Steel Mirror
2018-02-19, 05:58 PM
Back when I played a lot, and mostly with other folks in my high school, I probably used short modules dropped into the campaign about 25% of the time. This was back when Dungeon Magazine was a physical thing (do they even still have some version of Dungeon? I honestly have no clue), and I'd skim my monthly issue and pick out anything that seemed really cool and interesting. Led to a lot of barely connected adventures, but that was our playstyle at the time so it worked out very well and saved me effort some weeks when I just wasn't feeling it.

These days, I don't really run modules anymore. Course I barely manage to play at all, most of the time...

LibraryOgre
2018-02-19, 06:40 PM
Close to 100%, these days, with a similar progression. Back in the day, I may start off with a single adventure, but then they'd spin off into whatever it is that they're going to do. Now, I'm more likely to keep to a module... not limit their options, per se, but try to make the module stuff interesting enough that they're less likely to go entirely off stage.

Aliquid
2018-02-19, 07:18 PM
1980s - 100%
1990s - 25%
2000s - 0%
2010s - 10%
Future - 75% (I just don’t have time anymore)

Mr Beer
2018-02-19, 07:23 PM
Now probably about 100%, I don't have time to write a lot of material any more.

I tend to change the modules up to some extent in order to use them in long-running campaigns. Also I cut down on some of the irritating old school dungeonisms such as absurdly provocative NPCs that are too powerful/important for the PCs to attack, rigged encounters where the PCs get auto-captured but we still have roll it out etc.

Knaight
2018-02-19, 07:43 PM
Exactly once, though I might bump that up to twice. I'm not sure exactly where this works out to percentage-wise, but it's one session out of hundreds, so it rounds down to 0%.

LordCdrMilitant
2018-02-19, 09:52 PM
Never. Actually, I take that back: I've used one once, because it was already in progress when I assumed GM-ship. I finished it, and then moved on to my own creations.

I neither like running nor playing modules constructed by someone other than me/the current GM.

oxybe
2018-02-20, 01:35 AM
I don't mind stealing a highly generic one-shot adventure that I can basically swap out the names of people and places, really just looking to steal a short dungeon or hook for an evening, but anything resembling an adventure path is what drove me away from my regular group for the last 6-7 months, though i'll be joining in again now that they've wrapped it up.

RFLS
2018-02-20, 01:53 AM
I've run two modules; RHoD and Food Fight (from Shadowrun). I've run RHoD a few times; it's a great intro to 3.5 (and PF, if you port it) in general. Even counting that, about 10% of the games I've run have been modules. My group is big on collab world building.

BWR
2018-02-20, 02:00 AM
About 50% of the time these days. Used to be close to 0%. I've only ever run one unmodified module/adventure, however. Sometimes because they need a little tinkering story-/fluffwise to fit into the game I'm running, sometimes because there are a variety of problems with the module, from the annoying oversight to the literally laugh out loud bad.

Anxe
2018-02-20, 03:58 AM
15%. I use what I like and what fits.

Khedrac
2018-02-20, 04:04 AM
These days it is 100% because I am only getting to play D&D 3.5 and I find it too much work to create my own stuff (too many feats etc to develop any opponents beyond really low level one).
I would like it to be a lot lower, but that means getting my players to switch systems, and we don't play often enough (two monthly groups with different DMs and significant overlap on players) for them to want to change system right now.

Glorthindel
2018-02-20, 04:05 AM
Maybe about 10% of the time - I might run one or two full modules (usually heavily modified) during a campaign, and insert a few one-shot side quests if I find one that looks particularly fun or clever.

The most I have ever done in one campaign was when I ran the full Enemy Within campaign for WFRP (because it is one of the famous classics), but even then, with additional bridging material of my own, and completely re-writing the final part (which is renowned for being a bit poor compared to the early parts), I probably still ended up well over 50% of the campaign being my own material.

Florian
2018-02-20, 04:22 AM
Between 0%, 50% and 100%, depending on game system. Even when not using modules directly, I tend to stockpile them to scavenge maps, npc and artwork and save me the work.

Anonymouswizard
2018-02-20, 09:46 AM
About 1%. I have run modules (two in total), and if more 'site' modules that provided a location to adventure in and a 'nudge the characters into the location' plot meant as a jumping off point I'd run a lot more. But I'm not interested in adventure paths or anything like that.

Velaryon
2018-02-20, 10:33 AM
Maybe 2-3% of the time at most, over my whole ~17 year gaming career. And all of that within the last couple years.

I have never run a module (though I once made plans to adapt a series of AD&D Ravenloft modules to 3e, it never actually materialized). There have been one or two times when groups I was in started Expedition to Castle Ravenloft in 3.5, but we never finished it.

The majority of module experience I have comes from 5e. My main group ran Curse of Strahd with some modifications, liked it well enough, and continued the game into an original story afterward.

Another group of library folks I played with for awhile started with the basic adventure in the 5e starter set, ran a short original campaign, and then started up Storm King's Thunder before real-life issues got in the way.


I'm not a huge fan of using modules, and the only reasons I will do so are if no one in our group has time to design our own story, or if there are new players in the group and it's easier for them to follow along a somewhat more predetermined adventure path. I don't care about having a shared experience with the wider gaming community, and my main group of gaming friends are all veterans at designing and playing the kinds of games we like without falling back on modules.

Tanarii
2018-02-20, 12:24 PM
Does taking module content and breaking it up all over your map count?

Anxe
2018-02-20, 12:33 PM
I didn't notice the second question!

Modules are important. When I first started DMing they were all I used. Made it a lot easier to learn how to DM. An introductory module is a great help when learning a new system. Other modules after that are more like a status symbol to me indicating the system's renown.

CharonsHelper
2018-02-20, 01:47 PM
When I first started DMing they were all I used. Made it a lot easier to learn how to DM. An introductory module is a great help when learning a new system.

I'll +1 that. My first successful session was a module. (It was my 2nd or 3rd session as DM, but it was the first one which went smoothly.)


Other modules after that are more like a status symbol to me indicating the system's renown.

That's interesting. So - the modules' existence makes you like the system more even if you never use them?

I've heard that some publishers consider modules almost like marketing - if they make $ it's great, but they mostly boost the core system's sales - but I've never thought that it was so literal before.

GreatDane
2018-02-20, 02:27 PM
I mostly use modules/adventure paths these days. My history is similar to yours - I started DMing with a smattering of individual modules to learn the ropes, then graduated to making my own content and campaigns in college.

Since about a year after college, I've flipped back to relying on pre-made content; I just don't have the time to write out endless plotlines and statblocks.

LibraryOgre
2018-02-20, 02:35 PM
Good modules, IME, are a framework on which you can build.

One of my favorites, though it's a bit cliche, is B2: Keep on the Borderlands. There's a lot going on in that module, with bandits and humanoids and lizards and spiders. A crazy hermit, a mystery spot... all sorts of things. But, built into the Caves of Chaos, there are political factions among the humanoids. The priests seem completely outside that. The bandits are unrelated to anything. The Lizard Men don't care. With that, there's a lot of ways to play the scenario, and you can play up different aspects of it on different playthroughs. Who are the priests? Are they connected to the bandits? What's the opinion of each of the groups on working for the priests? Using B2 as a framework, you can spin a whole bunch of different adventures.

CharonsHelper
2018-02-20, 02:51 PM
Good modules, IME, are a framework on which you can build.

One of my favorites, though it's a bit cliche, is B2: Keep on the Borderlands. There's a lot going on in that module, with bandits and humanoids and lizards and spiders. A crazy hermit, a mystery spot... all sorts of things. But, built into the Caves of Chaos, there are political factions among the humanoids. The priests seem completely outside that. The bandits are unrelated to anything. The Lizard Men don't care. With that, there's a lot of ways to play the scenario, and you can play up different aspects of it on different playthroughs. Who are the priests? Are they connected to the bandits? What's the opinion of each of the groups on working for the priests? Using B2 as a framework, you can spin a whole bunch of different adventures.

I agree - I prefer for larger modules to take this sort of approach.

Short ones should be a bit more direct/focused - it's just up to the GM to figure out when to drop it in.

Nupo
2018-02-20, 04:00 PM
Back in the 80's I used modules about 50% of the time. Since then, pretty much 0%.

People frequently quote lack of time as a reason for using modules. Well for me using modules requires more prep time. I have a hard time using a module unless I have read through it several time and know it pretty good. If I don't, the game continually has to pause while I read stuff. For me it's quicker to create something than it is to figure out what some else someone else created, where it's going, and all the minutiae.

PhoenixPhyre
2018-02-20, 04:07 PM
Back in the 80's I used modules about 50% of the time. Since then, pretty much 0%.

People frequently quote lack of time as a reason for using modules. Well for me using modules requires more prep time. I have a hard time using a module unless I have read through it several time and know it pretty good. If I don't, the game continually has to pause while I read stuff. For me it's quicker to create something than it is to figure out what some else someone else created, where it's going, and all the minutiae.

I had a DM who used (modified) modules constantly. That "pause the game while he looks stuff up" thing you describe was absolutely obnoxious. I've come to prioritize flow over just about everything--better to have a decision, even if it's wrong, right now than to hem and haw for more than about 30 seconds. If it will break the module if you're not painstakingly precise, then it's probably a bad module.

inexorabletruth
2018-02-20, 04:23 PM
I've never used a module, so 0% of the time.

But it has more to do with budgetary constraints than a dislike for modules. I've played in games with modules and had a fantastic time (pun intended).

I'm playing my first 5E campaign in a module, and loving it, actually. However, I seldom have disposable income, and I don't want to steal from the company that has already granted me over a decade of mostly free fun with my friends and family. So I stick to doing my own paperwork based on the elaborate framework set up by the system designers.

LibraryOgre
2018-02-20, 04:33 PM
I've never used a module, so 0% of the time.

But it has more to do with budgetary constraints than a dislike for modules. I've played in games with modules and had a fantastic time (pun intended).

I'm playing my first 5E campaign in a module, and loving it, actually. However, I seldom have disposable income, and I don't want to steal from the company that has already granted me over a decade of mostly free fun with my friends and family. So I stick to doing my own paperwork based on the elaborate framework set up by the system designers.

FWIW, there's a lot of free modules out there, depending on your choice of game/edition, and your fluency with other games/editions (for example, I usually run B2 in Castles and Crusades).

RazorChain
2018-02-20, 04:51 PM
Back in the 80's I used modules about 50% of the time. Since then, pretty much 0%.

People frequently quote lack of time as a reason for using modules. Well for me using modules requires more prep time. I have a hard time using a module unless I have read through it several time and know it pretty good. If I don't, the game continually has to pause while I read stuff. For me it's quicker to create something than it is to figure out what some else someone else created, where it's going, and all the minutiae.


I had a DM who used (modified) modules constantly. That "pause the game while he looks stuff up" thing you describe was absolutely obnoxious. I've come to prioritize flow over just about everything--better to have a decision, even if it's wrong, right now than to hem and haw for more than about 30 seconds. If it will break the module if you're not painstakingly precise, then it's probably a bad module.

This is so true. I ran a modified module about a year ago that was very straighforward and resolved in couple of sessions. I spent double the time on it than if I would have prepped the content myself.

Also the game came to halt when I had to find some info, something that never happens when I make the adventure. I hate when the game comes to a halt as it NEVER HAPPENs because one of my biggest strengths as a GM is improvising, remembering everything that I create and juggle 7 plots and keep all the balls in the air at the same time!

So I dont think modules save time at all and IME just slow the game down. And then there is bigger chance that the GM screws up because he thought he needed a Phd. to run the module and forgot the vital clue

inexorabletruth
2018-02-20, 06:16 PM
FWIW, there's a lot of free modules out there, depending on your choice of game/edition, and your fluency with other games/editions (for example, I usually run B2 in Castles and Crusades).

You've piqued my interest, friend. Of course, I've only ever bothered to learn D&D 3-5, and I barely know 5E... not enough to run a campaign yet. How do you know which ones are legally free? I'm only a pirate in aquatic campaigns... or aerial campaigns. Sky pirates are friggin' awesome!

I've read evidence that WoTC tends to hand wave older editions these days... pretty much considering it all SRD and open license at this point. Is that the same with their modules?

Tanarii
2018-02-20, 06:23 PM
I like modules, or at least chunks from modules, because they're often far more fleshed out that my own content would be. And contain things I never would of thought of.

Otoh I'm stealing and adapting parts of the content to my own world, so I'm still putting my own spin on it.

For example, one of the first modules I broke up around my map was B2 Keep on the Borderlands. It's one of my favorites as a full module. So I took the keep and stuck it where I needed a local base. I put half the caves in one location, half in another, used the mad hermit as a non-combat wilderness encounter, and lizard men burrow (beefed up) elsewhere. An idea I stole directly from the Alexandrian when I was researching hex crawls.

2D8HP
2018-02-20, 06:48 PM
About what % of the time do you use modules?


With the very big caveat of my not GM'ing anymore, I'd guess that about 25% of my time behind the screen I've used modules, the ones I can remember the names if were "B1 - In Search of the Unknown" and "T1 - The Village of Hommlet", but I used others, including some from magazines, maybe more Call of C'thullu and Traveller than D&D, but I didn't keep notes or use a stop watch.


...Is the existence of modules a draw to a new RPG system?


Sure.


If so - how many would you need to jump in?


If it looks cool just one, but in some cases I've bought adventures, and ignored "core rules", because studying rules is often tedious for me.

Anxe
2018-02-21, 01:35 AM
That's interesting. So - the modules' existence makes you like the system more even if you never use them?

I've heard that some publishers consider modules almost like marketing - if they make $ it's great, but they mostly boost the core system's sales - but I've never thought that it was so literal before.

Not quite what I meant, but pretty much. Modules are made for popular systems as "advertisement." Systems that are more popular are usually that way because more people enjoy playing them. A smaller niche system probably doesn't have the money to spare developing modules. Doesn't mean that system is bad. It just means its less famous/developed.

D&D has tons of modules for all editions and some famous adventuring paths. It's definitely a more recognized system, but better? Not necessarily. Just a broader appeal combined with marketing and brand name recognition.
Example: I tell nongamers that I play Dungeons and Dragons even if I'm not, because the system name conveys what I'm doing.

I seems to me that you're digging at "how many modules should one make when releasing a new game system?" I would say 3-4.
One really small one with the base rules that is an easy way to learn the rules for players and GM.
One medium sized one with a lot of minor adventures. Keep on the Borderlands is an excellent example.
A follow up "sequel" to the medium sized adventure.
A mid level adventure of medium to long length. Ideally in a different location than the medium sized and prequel. The group gets to see what the game is like in a different place besides the "default" location and gets to see how the game shifts after you've gained a few levels.

John Campbell
2018-02-21, 01:49 AM
Never. It's not worth the trouble it takes to hammer a module into something that'll fit into an ongoing campaign, especially when I then have to throw it all away when the PCs inevitably go completely off the rails.

I don't like playing them, either, in large part because I react badly to being railroaded - the harder I'm pushed, the harder I push back - and GMs running modules, IME, are much less able to roll with whatever crazy-ass plan I come up with than ones running original material that they're fully familiar with. They tend to get stuck in, "Well, the module says the NPC has to plant this MacGuffin on you in order for the adventure to continue, so that's going to happen, and it doesn't matter that his Sleight of Hand cannot even theoretically beat your Perception," and then I get annoyed and start finding obvious plot widgets and twisting them the wrong direction, and then the entire city is on fire and we're fleeing the scene in a ship that we're not supposed to have.

Cespenar
2018-02-21, 07:59 AM
About what % of the time do you use modules?

In college I used to create the bulk of my own campaigns, but as I've aged I've become fonder of the time saver that modules are - and a lot of them are pretty solid. (A lot are bad too, but that's a separate issue.)

Is the existence of modules a draw to a new RPG system? If so - how many would you need to jump in?

Almost the same experience here. In college and below, we always played in intricate, custom hand made settings. Now that the whole party consists of working people, we turned almost 100% to modules.

I'd rather prefer the former, though.

CharonsHelper
2018-02-21, 08:26 AM
They tend to get stuck in, "Well, the module says the NPC has to plant this MacGuffin on you in order for the adventure to continue, so that's going to happen, and it doesn't matter that his Sleight of Hand cannot even theoretically beat your Perception,"

That sounds like an issue with a poorly written module rather than modules as a whole.

Max_Killjoy
2018-02-21, 09:36 AM
Never. It's not worth the trouble it takes to hammer a module into something that'll fit into an ongoing campaign, especially when I then have to throw it all away when the PCs inevitably go completely off the rails.

I don't like playing them, either, in large part because I react badly to being railroaded - the harder I'm pushed, the harder I push back - and GMs running modules, IME, are much less able to roll with whatever crazy-ass plan I come up with than ones running original material that they're fully familiar with. They tend to get stuck in, "Well, the module says the NPC has to plant this MacGuffin on you in order for the adventure to continue, so that's going to happen, and it doesn't matter that his Sleight of Hand cannot even theoretically beat your Perception," and then I get annoyed and start finding obvious plot widgets and twisting them the wrong direction, and then the entire city is on fire and we're fleeing the scene in a ship that we're not supposed to have.


That sounds like an issue with a poorly written module rather than modules as a whole.

You know when I gripe about "narrative causality" or "the story I want to tell trumps the characters"?

That example module is a perfect example -- "It doesn't matter if character X could never pull off move A against character Y, I need it to happen for the story I want to tell, so it's going to happen."

Faily
2018-02-21, 09:46 AM
For D&D/Pathfinder, 2 out of 3 groups use modules.

One of the groups is that we always run published stuff, as we started the group up with an interest to try the published things - started with Red Hand of Doom, and have done Shackled City, Savage Tide, War of the Burning Sky, Reign of Winter, Strange Aeons, Iron Gods, and we're now doing Ruins of Azlant. Next on the list is War for the Crown. All in all, we greatly enjoy it and have had lots of fun with these. Not so much with Savage Tide, and Iron Gods was a mixed bag. War of the Burning Sky was a great favorite of ours and still stands to this day as my favorite published adventure.

The other group runs old BECMI-modules updated to Pathfinder, and inserted into our Mystara-campaign. Occassionally we've had adventures that are homemade, but they have been so to continue a specific storyline or challenge. The group started as a "we're gonna run old school dungeon-crawls", then us players just added in drama and story in-between the quests, and we've now had nearly 6 years with running the same characters (with some breaks doing other things).


I don't think we've run published stuff with any of the other types of games I've been playing... closest might've been our Vampire-GM running things of the Gehenna-plotline, but Ars Magica, Scion, L5R, have mostly stayed completely clear of published adventures.

Florian
2018-02-21, 09:52 AM
You know when I gripe about "narrative causality" or "the story I want to tell trumps the characters"?

That example module is a perfect example -- "It doesn't matter if character X could never pull off move A against character Y, I need it to happen for the story I want to tell, so it's going to happen."

That's the problem when you create the story first, then break it down into the scenes you think will lead to exact the kind of interaction that will recreate the story to its fullest again.

Tanarii
2018-02-21, 10:36 AM
That sounds like an issue with a poorly written module rather than modules as a whole.
But also, given the general attitude, an issue with a player who absolutely refuses to buy in to whatever adventure the DM is going to run, and wants a open sandbox where they can create their own adventures.

Nothing wrong with that, but it does mean (whole) modules aren't going to work, since they're generally somewhat linear. At least to the degree they assume the players will stay in the area of the adventure, as opposed to burn down the city and flee the area of the adventure forever on a ship. :smallamused:

LibraryOgre
2018-02-21, 10:44 AM
You've piqued my interest, friend. Of course, I've only ever bothered to learn D&D 3-5, and I barely know 5E... not enough to run a campaign yet. How do you know which ones are legally free? I'm only a pirate in aquatic campaigns... or aerial campaigns. Sky pirates are friggin' awesome!

I've read evidence that WoTC tends to hand wave older editions these days... pretty much considering it all SRD and open license at this point. Is that the same with their modules?

I'll start a new topic. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?551693-Sources-of-Free-Modules&p=22862338#post22862338)

CharonsHelper
2018-02-21, 10:46 AM
But also, given the general attitude, an issue with a player who absolutely refuses to buy in to whatever adventure the DM is going to run, and wants a open sandbox where they can create their own adventures.

Nothing wrong with that, but it does mean (whole) modules aren't going to work, since they're generally somewhat linear. At least to the degree they assume the players will stay in the area of the adventure, as opposed to burn down the city and flee the area of the adventure forever on a ship. :smallamused:

Yes - that too.

It sounded like the module was poorly written, and the player's response was to try to break the game. (which is sort of a "1930's PI" move to the GM even if the module was a bit bad)

Tanarii
2018-02-21, 10:57 AM
Yes - that too.

It sounded like the module was poorly written, and the player's response was to try to break the game. (which is sort of a "1930's PI" move to the GM even if the module was a bit bad)
For sure. I've been in games where a player broke the game, and run games where the entire group of players decided "screw this campaign path adventure" and broke the game instead. I was just giving my impression from the post. John Campbell I didn't mean to offend, and if I mischaracterized you I apologize.

Happened to me with AD&D 2e's Night Below campaign. When it came time to go down into the Underdark, which was the entire point and majority of the campaign, the players all decided "screw this" and went and established a continent wide marijuana selling organized crime syndicate. They were all college-age heavy pot smokers. It was fun but it killed the campaign in half a semester instead of lasting all year.

LibraryOgre
2018-02-21, 11:02 AM
For sure. I've been in games where a player broke the game, and run games where the entire group of players decided "screw this campaign path adventure" and broke the game instead. I was just giving my impression from the post. John Campbell I didn't mean to offend, and if I mischaracterized you I apologize.

Happened to me with AD&D 2e's Night Below campaign. When it came time to go down into the Underdark, which was the entire point and majority of the campaign, the players all decided "screw this" and went and established a continent wide marijuana selling organized crime syndicate. They were all college-age heavy pot smokers. It was fun but it killed the campaign in half a semester instead of lasting all year.

Night Below has some SERIOUS pacing problems. A friend of mine has run it several times, and each time it starts to bog down once you head into the Underdark. "Eh, we've beaten the orcs, and the little mageling has been gone for months, maybe a year... perhaps we should just stay topside, where we've made a lot of connections."

Tanarii
2018-02-21, 12:51 PM
Night Below has some SERIOUS pacing problems. A friend of mine has run it several times, and each time it starts to bog down once you head into the Underdark. "Eh, we've beaten the orcs, and the little mageling has been gone for months, maybe a year... perhaps we should just stay topside, where we've made a lot of connections."
Yeah that's exactly what happened. They also now owned (right of conquest and squatting) this handy keep they had taken away from the bandits, a friendly Wizard in the nearby town, and most importantly a friendly Green Dragon they paid to regularly cast Plant Growth on the fields they had invested their loot in and were using to grow weed. "Dragon Bud" was their cornerstone they used to penetrate the world of organized crime in (IMC) nearby Baldur's Gate.

But ultimately only one player was interested in an entire campaign based on that, so it fell apart.

The big problem was a bunch of players in the dorms signed up to play a game of D&D without knowing what I was going to run. That campaign was my learning experience never to do that again. (Apropos of my other thread on pre-game stuff.)

RedMage125
2018-02-21, 11:15 PM
I used to never run modules. Unless I was working for the RPGA at a convention, but I don't know if that counts. Probably does, I did it for a few years. But I never used to use them in my home games.

Then, in 3.5e, Dungeon Magazine released the Age of Worms Adventure Path, and I knew that I must run it. Several failed attempts (groups fell apart) over the years, but it was always in the back of my mind.

When 4e came out, I ran Keep on the Shadowfell before the Core books were even released. After that, I returned to running my own homebrewed material. I did, however, buy the Madness At Gardmore Abbey adventure pack, and incorporate it into my home campaign world (changed the names of a few towns).

With 5e's release, I've mostly done my own writing again, but my free time is becoming more and more rare. I'm getting more senior in the Navy, my responsibilities add up to spending more of my "off time" working, and I don't have as much time to write. I've bought every 5e product so far except Storm King's Thunder. When my squadron was on a month-long detachment, I ran Princes of the Apocalypse for a small group out of my hotel room. I didn't have time to write, but I had people that wanted to play. To be honest, I only bought Out of the Abyss for the Demon Lord stats, I don't think I'll ever run it. But Tales From the Yawning Portal...I'm going to run that. I don't have time to write anymore, so I plan to start using more modules.

I also had the opportunity, a year or so ago, while on Shore Duty, to get a group and run Age of Worms. They completed it. Which is a D&D Bucket List item for me.

TL;DR - I never used to, unless I was adapting one to insert into my home campaign world. But as I have less time to write, I'm starting to use them more.

CharonsHelper
2018-02-22, 09:27 AM
I seems to me that you're digging at "how many modules should one make when releasing a new game system?" I would say 3-4.

You caught me! I've been working on a system for a couple of years, and as I near completion (probably Kickstarter it early next year since I want to be 98% done first rather than be one of those guys who delays 14 times) I'm starting to more seriously think about the modules, such as whether to outsource a couple.



One really small one with the base rules that is an easy way to learn the rules for players and GM.
One medium sized one with a lot of minor adventures. Keep on the Borderlands is an excellent example.
A follow up "sequel" to the medium sized adventure.
A mid level adventure of medium to long length. Ideally in a different location than the medium sized and prequel. The group gets to see what the game is like in a different place besides the "default" location and gets to see how the game shifts after you've gained a few levels.

Pretty much the only one I have (mostly) written up right now is the tutorial style module for the back of the core book. But yeah - I can see your point for the #/style of the others.

Nullstellensatz
2018-02-22, 11:53 AM
For one-shots I don't use modules as I'm fine with designing encounters, and players tend not to care for a fleshed out story in a one-shot.
I always consult modules for campaign inspiration. I may run a small module or an introductory section until the players are comfortable with their characters; then one afternoon they walk trough a door while humming a tune and find themselves in Sigil.

Quertus
2018-02-22, 03:03 PM
Fur the record, since I forgot to include it in my first post, I'd prefer to run (and play) about 15-20% from modules.

LibraryOgre
2018-02-22, 05:19 PM
You caught me! I've been working on a system for a couple of years, and as I near completion (probably Kickstarter it early next year since I want to be 98% done first rather than be one of those guys who delays 14 times) I'm starting to more seriously think about the modules, such as whether to outsource a couple.


From that perspective? You definitely need a few modules for a new system, especially if you're including an implied or explicit setting.

An example of this is the classic B2 (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/17158/B2-The-Keep-on-the-Borderlands-Basic?affiliate_id=315505), which does a lot of mechanical hand-holding, as is Danger in Drakesville (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/102055/Danger-in-Drakesville?affiliate_id=315505), which goes along with Hackmaster Basic (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/104757/HackMaster-Basic-free?affiliate_id=315505)... they not only introduce the setting, but the mechanics, so people can get used to both, even with a GM who hasn't played them before.

Tanarii
2018-02-22, 08:13 PM
B1 is an even greater version of that. It also teaches the DM to build basic old-style dungeons. The first two Basic modules are quite well thought out for teaching a new DM to DM.

Of course, your first few whirls probably will be less than stellar if you've also never been a player, are new to the concept of Roleplaying generally, and ten years old to boot. :smallyuk:

Nupo
2018-02-22, 08:15 PM
Of course, your first few whirls probably will be less than stellar if you've also never been a player, are new to the concept of Roleplaying generally, and ten years old to boot. :smallyuk:Been there, done that, 40 years ago. I was crap, but we still had fun.

Jay R
2018-02-23, 09:08 AM
Very rarely.

I don't run a generic world; I try to build a world with its own fantastic flavor, as different from somebody else's world as Narnia is different from Middle-Earth or Westeros.

So for my purposes, it can take at least as much time to modify a module to fit my world than to write my own scenario.

Telok
2018-02-24, 12:01 AM
For DMing I've only run the classic B1 and B2 back in the day. I've gotten ideas, encounters, and 'what not to do's from modules though. I have run a few one-session adventures or turned parts of modules into those. But mostly it's been hand made stuff.

As a player I've always had and seen much more success with DM made adventures and campaigns. The people I've played with that use modules and adventure paths are usually newer to DMing and end up having all the problems that come with relying on stuff that other people wrote. You don't know what the writers assumed that you know, you miss connections that aren't explicitly called out. Such stuff.

Bastian Weaver
2018-02-24, 01:40 AM
About 50%. I like the old Marvel Superheroes modules.