soooo Kent.

My favourite ever example (well the top one I can remember right now) of bad room description in a dungeon:

QuoteNow looted and empty, two chambers down a short passage from Ghul's Tower once contained weapons (westernmost) and armor (easternmost) for the guards in the fortress—mostly orcs and ogres, but also a variety of other monsters. Only hooks and empty racks suggest the rooms' former purpose.

It has the virtue of being short, but still, 80% of the above text is describing things that are no longer in the rooms. For reference, this is a location which has been abandoned for hundreds of years.

Quote from: misterguignol;625218Evocative descriptions are for novels.  Give me a list of interesting stuff in the giant's kitchen that I can scan quickly in play, not canned text for people who don't understand what a big kitchen would look like.

50 words is too long for you to scan quickly in play?  Your players think and decide a hell of a lot faster than mine...

Quote from: Zak S;625226If it has "something cool I wouldn't have though of" that requires those 50 words to describe, I'll buy that, run it, and be happy.

But that isn't what TSR gave people in modules.

On this board, or a couple of others I can think of, you'll find people who can do that.  It's true that they weren't writing for TSR thirty years ago.

Quote from: Zak S;625225"Boxed text to be read aloud" is a freakin' abomination and if a GM uses that stuff she or he had better be one charming motherfucker.

Boxed text is a decent teaching tool, however, for fledgling DMs - new gamers - who are trying to learn how to play this freakin' type of game. It is absolutely unnecessary for anyone with any experience with RPGs. But the average new gamer (AKA drooling rube), who's picked up a retroclone or version of TSR D&D and a few modules, could probably use a hand - some direction on how to develop into a capable DM.

I'm sure that the numbers of new gamers entering into the hobby continues to diminish. But, I think it's unfortunate to ignore this group and focus only on the already-capable, the experienced, (the aging, and eventually dying).

Quote from: P&P;62525350 words is too long for you to scan quickly in play?  Your players think and decide a hell of a lot faster than mine...

Honestly?  Yes.

Quote from: P&P;625254On this board, or a couple of others I can think of, you'll find people who can do that.  It's true that they weren't writing for TSR thirty years ago.

Good, I will totally buy their stuff.

If you look at the things I like and have put out you'll see rooms described with more than 50 words. Because they needed to be.

A snake in the corner of a fucked up kitchen is not one of them.

This thread's about TSR v OSR and someone pointed to the TSR megadungeons as great achievements--they really really weren't. They were big. That's about all they had going for them.

Quote from: K Peterson;625255Boxed text is a decent teaching tool, however, for fledgling DMs - new gamers - who are trying to learn how to play this freakin' type of game. It is absolutely unnecessary for anyone with any experience with RPGs. But the average new gamer (AKA drooling rube), who's picked up a retroclone or version of TSR D&D and a few modules, could probably use a hand - some direction on how to develop into a capable DM.

I'm sure that the numbers of new gamers entering into the hobby continues to diminish. But, I think it's unfortunate to ignore this group and focus only on the already-capable, the experienced, (the aging, and eventually dying).

"Nonstupid" and "experienced" are not the same.

I've seen many many people GM for the first time--including kids. Going "Oh, read aloud to your players, that's totally the way to GM" is bad advice.

The first thing to learn to do is to engage your players. Reading aloud teaches the opposite of that.

Quote from: misterguignol;625258Honestly?  Yes.

The differences between gaming groups still surprise me.  My players have been known to take twenty minutes deciding who'll stand where when they open the door.  (To be fair, I sort of semi-encourage this by saying that game time freezes while they talk to each other.)

Quote from: Zak S;625261"Nonstupid" and "experienced" are not the same.

I've seen many many people GM for the first time--including kids. Going "Oh, read aloud to your players, that's totally the way to GM" is bad advice.

The first thing to learn to do is to engage your players. Reading aloud teaches the opposite of that.

I'd agree with this as a general principle - but there's a side issue where I think that boxed text can be the "least worst" option in a printed module, especially in complex room environments. Which, may, of course, just mean that modules are also not a good way to learn how to GM, which is certainly a defensible position.

Quote from: Will Graham;625240The assumptions are that,
(i)  it is 'good' to produce material which can be read swiftly and referred to with instant gratification at the gametable. The material is all surface; ideas are tiny and pop-out at the reader.

You are ignoring the fact that an adventure module is the sum of the places it details. Complex and original situations can be created from details briefly described. Plus there the introduction, overview, and notes which can supply the overview needed to see how the pieces are put together.

Quote from: Will Graham;625240(ii)  all campaigns are generic with atmospheres as coherent as the toy-stuffed child's playroom. Tonal cramming ensures a campaign is disorganised enough to receive bleeding chunks surgically removed from any other campaign.

True you have to make assumptions when publishing but the OSR is not targeting a generic fantasy either. It targeting a group of related games that largely share the same "bag of stuff". This mentality leads to GURPS style adventures that read more like sourcebooks and are rarely ready to run.

Quote from: Will Graham;625240These assumptions are *opposed* to originality.

Not at all, I generated countless original adventure using the same bag of stuff as D&D for over 30 years. The key to focus on the situation of the NPCs not the mechanics or the items.

Quote from: Will Graham;625240Opposing the assumptions I say,

(i)  no, don't only use the surface of language. I need something deeper than convenience, more thoughtful, if I am to be inspired by your ideas or believe in your world.

RPG Products are meant to be use in a practical sense which is a different style of writing than what fantasy novelist need to use.

Quote from: Will Graham;625240(ii)  no, I don't want to use your material directly. Give a good account of what it is like to adventure in your world. Make me envious of your campaign and your creativity. Inspire me to improve my game.

Which the above two assumption don't contradict because of the ability to use the interconnections between NPCs and locales to create novel and interesting situation.

Quote from: Will Graham;625240It may be true that plug and play modules are what most DMs want, in which case I ask, in the interests of modesty and honesty that it is admitted that these kinds of works are pieces of shit compared to original work.

I feel is more challenging to create a useful work that is widely used than something that targets a unique place. It not easy to take the same elements that countless other have used hundreds of times and create something new, fresh, and useful.

Quote from: Grymbok;625265I'd agree with this as a general principle - but there's a side issue where I think that boxed text can be the "least worst" option in a printed module, especially in complex room environments. Which, may, of course, just mean that modules are also not a good way to learn how to GM, which is certainly a defensible position.

I think basically TSR modules are poorly designed.

I think the way the one page dungeons do it is a good way to go--and, for more complex things there should be an essay/mood-setter/pep talk at the beginning that gives you a holistic view of what's important in the area overall.

Like: if I give you Darth Vader, you know how to run Darth Vader, you know how he reacts to people, so no matter what my PCs do, you can plausibly react as Darth Vader.

A module should try to give you that familiarity. Page upon page of crutches and prosthetics like boxed text don't do that--they chop the module into deliverable pieces which obscure the whole.

When you make your own dungeon, you start with that familiarity. With modules, the artwork and the genuinely useful descriptive text do that. The boxed text is just a half-solution.

Quote from: Zak S;625261I've seen many many people GM for the first time--including kids. Going "Oh, read aloud to your players, that's totally the way to GM" is bad advice.

I disagree, obviously. I think it's a decent training-wheels approach, and likely why TSR included boxed-text-to-be-read-aloud in practically every module. I'm sure that many many gamers 10/20/30 years ago got their start DMing with modules, and read boxed text aloud, and it didn't stunt their DM-growth, disengage their players, or leave any harmful side effects.

You know, as I read through this thread with an eye on the standard of discourse I have to say that you people, all of you, remind me of those clowns who read lp/cd liner notes and then regurgitate what you have read in the pub as your own thoughts. The discussion is cliched, worn out, hackneyed. Take this Zak, eager Zak, he won't be happy till he has said the same thing fifty times. He is the party bore circulating with one anecdote, lol. Worse, many of you take his anecdote and rebreathe it in your own words.

Is anyone here capable of thinking or should I slink away?

Estar, I appreciate your efforts but Im not convinced we are talking at the same level.