Module crap [Archive] - Wizards Community

Module crap [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
LordAries
06-24-07, 08:31 PM I just got into RPGA, and XENDRIK so I am not by any means an expert on RPGA... however I DO know D&D and have been playing and DMing for 10 years. I recently played 2 of the adventures for the Crimson Codex, and they were pretty bad...

There were a hundred and one typos... and the adventurers were not well written either. It seemed very confusing, and didn't explain enough to make sure you knew what was going on. Now I can agree that part of this might have been on the guy who was running the game, I hadn't ever playing in a game he has DMed, so I don't know his level of skill. But I think there is one major thing you can do to fix all this.

The adventurers assumed you had played and read quite a bit about the previous adventures and it shouldn't. In the least it should have made some bullet points about previous adventure plot points that we would have needed.
smerwin29
06-24-07, 08:50 PM All feedback is welcome. I ask that you either get a copy of the adventure and read it yourself so you can give me more specific feedback about where the problems were, or you can tell the DM to please write me with all the problems.

The issue with module continuity is a tough one. We posted plot summaries of retired adventures to the website so people who played later mods would not be too lost. Putting a summary of what has come before in each and every mod can overwhelm a DM. I usually try to explain things in the adventure that the PCs might need to know from previous adventures without getting too bogged down.

One thing I do in the adventures is have recurring NPCs/events. In the text I will say where the NPCs have been seen before and why they are important. But if the PCs have not met them before, these explanations can be skipped to avoid confusion.

But like I said, and as the other Factionmaster have said as well, we try our best to create interesting and challenging adventures for our players. We are not perfect, and we do make mistakes. Hearing how we can improve is always appreciated, as long as the feedback gives us something concrete we can take away from it. As far as typos are concerned, there is no excuse for that. I should be turning in my MA in English and MFA in Creative Writing if there are that many.

Thanks,

Shawn
smerwin29
06-24-07, 09:47 PM Also, if you have comments that would be considered spoilers for currently available adventures, please send comments to me via PM or to crimsoncodex@hotmail.com.
lseelba
06-24-07, 10:14 PM I just got into RPGA, and XENDRIK so I am not by any means an expert on RPGA... however I DO know D&D and have been playing and DMing for 10 years. I recently played 2 of the adventures for the Crimson Codex, and they were pretty bad...

There were a hundred and one typos... and the adventurers were not well written either. It seemed very confusing, and didn't explain enough to make sure you knew what was going on. Now I can agree that part of this might have been on the guy who was running the game, I hadn't ever playing in a game he has DMed, so I don't know his level of skill. But I think there is one major thing you can do to fix all this.

The adventurers assumed you had played and read quite a bit about the previous adventures and it shouldn't. In the least it should have made some bullet points about previous adventure plot points that we would have needed.

Crimson Codex is not the easiest faction to understand what is going on, especially if you haven't played all the mods. Here is a snippet of the factions, if you don't like one just play another:

Blackwheel Company: Play if you like fighting stuff.
Cabal of Shadow: Play if you like fighting your own party.
Covenant of Light: Play if you like not killing stuff.
Crimson Codex: Play if you like figuring stuff out.

These are complete generalities, but do remember that all the factionmasters put a lot of work into the factions, and they all read these forums. Try to be polite if you are going to criticize (module crap isn't exactly the best thread title).
LordAries
06-25-07, 03:35 AM Well, I didn't mean disrespect by the title... I meant module crap as in... module stuff ... except I wanted to infer that my post was just mundane crap, nothing too important.

One example was... There was a place where a name was transposed. You put the name of the captive redhead instead of the beholder... so it was confusing... We found a LOT of Typos, but not misspelled words, just incorrect words, things that a re-read should have fixed.

I'm pretty sure the same guys behind the grell trying to kill me in the first one I played that day, was the same guys giving us information and showing us hidden passages.

Also... i will go back and read some of the past adventures, now that I know its pretty much a nessecity, but at least a disclaimer to the DMs at the begining of the module, stating: if players are not familiar with previous modules or crimson codex advenures, you may want to direct them to this webpage prior to the game.

Really, its not like it was a bad adventure, I'm not saying it was horrible, but I deffinitely think that I've seen better. I think that the main reason is that they don't give enough information to clearly give you a direction to go. Mostly because a lot of the information you need to figure it all out comes from the past adventures which I may or may not have played.

We are going to run ALL of the adventures, from all the faction. I'm running Covenant of light, another guy is running blackwheel, another codex, and another cabal.

The good thing is... I did level and I did get all my story objectives from BOTH games, and a lot of EV so I'm happy with how that character is progressing. I wish I would have known more going into the game, I might have played somthing with higher than a 6 CHA and 8 Wis. Luckily, I am a Warforged Totemist and I can do a lot of wierd things to help the party, and I can be a pretty good meatsheild for the bards and stuff to get behind.
smerwin29
06-25-07, 07:34 AM Well, I didn't mean disrespect by the title... I meant module crap as in... module stuff ... except I wanted to infer that my post was just mundane crap, nothing too important.

No worries. I've been called worse. By my own family. On my birthday.

One example was... There was a place where a name was transposed. You put the name of the captive redhead instead of the beholder... so it was confusing...

Yes, this definitely was a problem that someone else pointed out to me as well.

We found a LOT of Typos, but not misspelled words, just incorrect words, things that a re-read should have fixed.

This is definitely a problem that I take full responsibility for. Since there is no editor for us at WotC beyond ourselves, this happens when I don't take the time to have someone else look at the work. In the case of one adventure, I didn't have time, and this was the result.

I'm pretty sure the same guys behind the grell trying to kill me in the first one I played that day, was the same guys giving us information and showing us hidden passages.

This is a spoiler for an active adventure, so please don't post it in public. And whether it is true or not is something that the players should not be told straight out, because it may or may not be true. This is an ongoing plot arc that should not even be known by the DM, since the DM of one adventure is a player in the next.

Also... i will go back and read some of the past adventures, now that I know its pretty much a nessecity, but at least a disclaimer to the DMs at the begining of the module, stating: if players are not familiar with previous modules or crimson codex advenures, you may want to direct them to this webpage prior to the game.

Honestly, I would hope a DM would do this without prompting as he/she prepares the adventure. But if I notice a trend of people reporting problems to me because of this, I'll see what I can do.

Really, its not like it was a bad adventure, I'm not saying it was horrible, but I deffinitely think that I've seen better.

You stated that you are new to the RPGA, so I would love to hear your impression after you play/read/DM other adventures.

I think that the main reason is that they don't give enough information to clearly give you a direction to go. Mostly because a lot of the information you need to figure it all out comes from the past adventures which I may or may not have played.

These are two separate issues. The first is a conscious choice. One of the biggest criticisms of RPGA adventures in particular is that they only offer one choice (i.e. they are railroads). I have chosen to the DMs the power to open things up a bit and let the players manuever a bit on their own. Now, this might make things a bit easier for people who have played previous adventure, true. But I think I know the part of the adventure you are talking about, and the adventure is quite specific in saying what to do if none of the PCs have played previous adventures and met certain NPCs.

The good thing is... I did level and I did get all my story objectives from BOTH games, and a lot of EV so I'm happy with how that character is progressing. I wish I would have known more going into the game, I might have played somthing with higher than a 6 CHA and 8 Wis. Luckily, I am a Warforged Totemist and I can do a lot of wierd things to help the party, and I can be a pretty good meatsheild for the bards and stuff to get behind.

I am glad the database is working well for you. Yes, Codex adventures are going to be interesting for players who have lower mental stats. It is interesting that you are playing a totemist. I will raise a point here and let people speak to it.

The campaign allows for both psionics and incarnum. There are, of course, interesting options I would love to include in adventures about these. But it is terribly difficult to include, as you cannot assume that DMs are familiar with these rules, or even that they own the necessary books. For the Mark of Heroes Special Event for GenCon that I worked on, we did include a wilder for the PCs to face. It seemed to work well, but the judges only ran it at GenCon, so they had lots of time to prepare and ask questions, and it was only 4th level. Now we are already at 7th+ level in Xen'drik Expeditions (in terms of writing the adventures).

So my question is, to those people out there playing or DMing, would adding foes with psionics or incarnum be problematic?

Thanks again,

Shawn
Harliquinn
06-25-07, 08:38 AM So my question is, to those people out there playing or DMing, would adding foes with psionics or incarnum be problematic?

Thanks again,

Shawn

As a player and DM, I have knowledge of both systems (Enough to be dangerous for Psionics and pretty extensive for Incarnum). Since Totemists and Incarnates are both allowed in Codex and the Skarn have a special place now as well, I would love to see some Incarnum ties. An enemy with Incarnum or a quest to discover more information about how this new 'soul energy' ties in with the prophecy (Maybe even some story objects relating to it).

I don't know what the 'rules' are as far as printing new game mechanics in a module, but one thing I know is you can't expect most DM's to own Magic of Incarnum (Most will probably have the Expanded Psionics Handbook I would imagine). Therefore, a very brief (2 paragraph) background of Incarnum would be useful as well as the relevant game rules.

To simplify the Incarnum rules as well for those not as familiar with the system, I would just have any NPC have a 'fixed' set of soulmelds they have bound for the adventure (Much like assigning the spells for a caster) and have Essentia invested in as a fixed amount in any particular 'feat', soulmeld or item. Otherwise, the 'reallocate essentia every round' might be a bit too much bookkeeping for a DM. However, a DM with knowledge of the rules could use the allocation if they felt comfortable with it (But I wouldn't allow them to change soulmelds).

So in short, I would like to see some Incarnum elements in the Codex faction adventures so our Skarn, Totemists, and Incarnates feel at home :) As for Psionics, a few psionics here and there might be fun as well and I think those could extend into all the factions/expenditions.

Harli

[NOTE] You might want to put your question in a new message, since not everyone will associate the title "module crap" with "Would you like to see more Incarnum or Psionics?"
smerwin29
06-25-07, 08:46 AM New thread created.
smerwin29
06-25-07, 10:46 AM I recently played 2 of the adventures for the Crimson Codex, and they were pretty bad...
There were a hundred and one typos... and the adventurers were not well written either.

If you could, please ask the DM who ran the adventure(s) you are referring to here to email me with the details. I just fixed one of the adventures and I found three places where I used the wrong word. That means there are 98 I must be missing. :D

Or if you give me his name and email address, I will contact him directly.

Thanks,

Shawn
Respen
07-03-07, 10:33 PM In the designer's defense, the other modules have typos too. I'm referring specifically to the Covenant of Light adventures.
JJeff
07-04-07, 01:37 AM In the designer's defense, the other modules have typos too. I'm referring specifically to the Covenant of Light adventures.

I agree, Shawn is human after all. It's not as if he is the GREAT SERPENT (TM)... (LG joke.. and cos I'm still waiting to see the next module in that arc)

And people make mistakes... As you can see from the posts in the BWC section of the forums, an entire monster ability was left out that would change the whole battle if the DM didn't notice the lack of the ability.

LordAries, You know, maybe your DM made a few mistakes too. But tell us (the DMs, the module writers, etc) and we're be better off for it.

And thanks for posting.
smerwin29
07-04-07, 08:03 AM I re-edited "The Korranberg Affair" and found about three typos, and corrected the name transposition that was causing confusion. I submitted the new draft to the RPGA. I am still waiting for the list of 101 typos from Lord Aries or his DM.
LordAries
07-04-07, 12:40 PM Cool... I haven't read the module myself, my DM was the one that kept mentioning all the errors. How can I get a hold of it, so that I can check them over?

Also, more than having errors, which are understandable and sometimes unavoidable, the biggest complaint at the table of 6 players was the confusing nature of what we were supposed to be doing. It seemed that we weren't ever given enough information or the hints were fairly weak in nature. I think that this is probably caused by 1 of 2 things.

1. The DM who was not very experienced caused things to be this way because he did not grasp the full picture of what was going on either... it seemed to refer back to previous adventures quite a bit... or out of character knowledge. If none of us had run earlier adventures, or read any of the ebberon back story stuff, we would have literally hit a wall in the adventure multiple times. I'm not saying that definitely the modules we've run (4 now in all) are at fault, its possible the DM's lack of skill was to blame, but could it also be that the module was written in a way that is hard for younger DM's to follow?

2. The modules rely too much on previous player experience and OOC knowledge. The group that I have been playing with recently, isn't my regular weekend D&D group... most everybody in it has been playing since the 80's and is fairly experienced. However, only one person in the group has a lot of Ebberon knowledge and we have all JUST started doing RPGA stuff within the last year or so. The module needs to be written in a way that is accessible for both young players (we are letting my 10 year old cousin play with the group), inexperienced players and DMs (our DM was trying his hand at DMing) , and players without prior module experience or any campaign backstory information. I can see a challenge in writing modules with all this in mind, but that is what it will take to make them more successful. You can't assume that we know jack about whats going on, and will come to conclusions based on previous knowledge we are 'supposed' to have.

After 4 games now, the only REAL complaint I have is there are two errors in the reporting process that caused me to have an story objective I wasn't supposed to have, and to be missing one that I should.... That has nothing to do with the modules, so after a few games they have redeemed themselves somewhat. I still think that if we didn't have a guy with a lot of Ebberon knowledge and if I hadn't played some of the modules previous to it... I might have had a hard time trying to figure out EXACTLY what I'm supposed to be doing. So be more blunt... come out and say a little more, instead of hinting around, or try not to use hints that are OCC knowledge.
Marcus Majarra
07-04-07, 05:02 PM I'd have to say the Korranberg Affair is a particular case. It requires a lot of DM participation (when beating the PCs is a simple affair in combat, it's not a mere matter of dice rolling and tactical strategy in the Korranberg Affair), and the PCs need to be fed sufficient information to carry out the module. It's probably the module requiring the most preparation, both before the game and during the game, that I have seen.

As a friendly suggestion, I'd recommend that modules involving so much information include handouts for this information, especially if the PCs are debriefed for their missions. Even Eberron vox populi/common knowledge might not be accessible to players, and without this kind of knowledge, the Korranberg Affair loses much of its appeal.
Respen
07-05-07, 01:42 PM It has been my experience that most of the Xen'drik Expedition adventures require both players and DMs to have at least a small amount of out-of-character knowledge regarding Xen'drik. And even the small amount of information found in the Eberron Campaign Setting about the Chamber, Xen'drik, Sarlona, the Inspired, and numerous other topics will help out quite a bit. The best tool for this is going to be Secrets of Xen'drik, which gives more detail and scope to both the continent itself and Stormreach. I have played in Cabal of Shadows and Crimson Codex games and plan to run Covenant of Light games and can honestly say that all three, while not neccessarily requiring information from Secrets of Xen'drik, benefit greatly if players have knowledge from that book. I would consider it a "must have" regarding Xen'drik Expedition campaigns. And of course, all Eberron campaign books have their uses in Xen'drik Expeditions.

That being said, a small amount of descriptive information, such as an excerpt from Secrets of Xen'drik when neccessary, would help out those without access to that actual source. I think the best time to help players understand more about Xen'drik is during the DM's Mark adventures. A DM can create an adventure where the players find a tome that has a detailed, if somewhat limited or incomplete, accounting of the continent's history. Or they could become acquainted with a historian from Stormreach and learn from him/her. This in turn will give them information that they can use in later sessions.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
LordAries 06-24-07, 08:31 PM	I just got into RPGA, and XENDRIK so I am not by any means an expert on RPGA... however I DO know D&D and have been playing and DMing for 10 years. I recently played 2 of the adventures for the Crimson Codex, and they were pretty bad... There were a hundred and one typos... and the adventurers were not well written either. It seemed very confusing, and didn't explain enough to make sure you knew what was going on. Now I can agree that part of this might have been on the guy who was running the game, I hadn't ever playing in a game he has DMed, so I don't know his level of skill. But I think there is one major thing you can do to fix all this. The adventurers assumed you had played and read quite a bit about the previous adventures and it shouldn't. In the least it should have made some bullet points about previous adventure plot points that we would have needed.
smerwin29 06-24-07, 08:50 PM	All feedback is welcome. I ask that you either get a copy of the adventure and read it yourself so you can give me more specific feedback about where the problems were, or you can tell the DM to please write me with all the problems. The issue with module continuity is a tough one. We posted plot summaries of retired adventures to the website so people who played later mods would not be too lost. Putting a summary of what has come before in each and every mod can overwhelm a DM. I usually try to explain things in the adventure that the PCs might need to know from previous adventures without getting too bogged down. One thing I do in the adventures is have recurring NPCs/events. In the text I will say where the NPCs have been seen before and why they are important. But if the PCs have not met them before, these explanations can be skipped to avoid confusion. But like I said, and as the other Factionmaster have said as well, we try our best to create interesting and challenging adventures for our players. We are not perfect, and we do make mistakes. Hearing how we can improve is always appreciated, as long as the feedback gives us something concrete we can take away from it. As far as typos are concerned, there is no excuse for that. I should be turning in my MA in English and MFA in Creative Writing if there are that many. Thanks, Shawn
smerwin29 06-24-07, 09:47 PM	Also, if you have comments that would be considered spoilers for currently available adventures, please send comments to me via PM or to crimsoncodex@hotmail.com.
lseelba 06-24-07, 10:14 PM	I just got into RPGA, and XENDRIK so I am not by any means an expert on RPGA... however I DO know D&D and have been playing and DMing for 10 years. I recently played 2 of the adventures for the Crimson Codex, and they were pretty bad... There were a hundred and one typos... and the adventurers were not well written either. It seemed very confusing, and didn't explain enough to make sure you knew what was going on. Now I can agree that part of this might have been on the guy who was running the game, I hadn't ever playing in a game he has DMed, so I don't know his level of skill. But I think there is one major thing you can do to fix all this. The adventurers assumed you had played and read quite a bit about the previous adventures and it shouldn't. In the least it should have made some bullet points about previous adventure plot points that we would have needed. Crimson Codex is not the easiest faction to understand what is going on, especially if you haven't played all the mods. Here is a snippet of the factions, if you don't like one just play another: Blackwheel Company: Play if you like fighting stuff. Cabal of Shadow: Play if you like fighting your own party. Covenant of Light: Play if you like not killing stuff. Crimson Codex: Play if you like figuring stuff out. These are complete generalities, but do remember that all the factionmasters put a lot of work into the factions, and they all read these forums. Try to be polite if you are going to criticize (module crap isn't exactly the best thread title).
LordAries 06-25-07, 03:35 AM	Well, I didn't mean disrespect by the title... I meant module crap as in... module stuff ... except I wanted to infer that my post was just mundane crap, nothing too important. One example was... There was a place where a name was transposed. You put the name of the captive redhead instead of the beholder... so it was confusing... We found a LOT of Typos, but not misspelled words, just incorrect words, things that a re-read should have fixed. I'm pretty sure the same guys behind the grell trying to kill me in the first one I played that day, was the same guys giving us information and showing us hidden passages. Also... i will go back and read some of the past adventures, now that I know its pretty much a nessecity, but at least a disclaimer to the DMs at the begining of the module, stating: if players are not familiar with previous modules or crimson codex advenures, you may want to direct them to this webpage prior to the game. Really, its not like it was a bad adventure, I'm not saying it was horrible, but I deffinitely think that I've seen better. I think that the main reason is that they don't give enough information to clearly give you a direction to go. Mostly because a lot of the information you need to figure it all out comes from the past adventures which I may or may not have played. We are going to run ALL of the adventures, from all the faction. I'm running Covenant of light, another guy is running blackwheel, another codex, and another cabal. The good thing is... I did level and I did get all my story objectives from BOTH games, and a lot of EV so I'm happy with how that character is progressing. I wish I would have known more going into the game, I might have played somthing with higher than a 6 CHA and 8 Wis. Luckily, I am a Warforged Totemist and I can do a lot of wierd things to help the party, and I can be a pretty good meatsheild for the bards and stuff to get behind.
smerwin29 06-25-07, 07:34 AM	Well, I didn't mean disrespect by the title... I meant module crap as in... module stuff ... except I wanted to infer that my post was just mundane crap, nothing too important. No worries. I've been called worse. By my own family. On my birthday. One example was... There was a place where a name was transposed. You put the name of the captive redhead instead of the beholder... so it was confusing... Yes, this definitely was a problem that someone else pointed out to me as well. We found a LOT of Typos, but not misspelled words, just incorrect words, things that a re-read should have fixed. This is definitely a problem that I take full responsibility for. Since there is no editor for us at WotC beyond ourselves, this happens when I don't take the time to have someone else look at the work. In the case of one adventure, I didn't have time, and this was the result. I'm pretty sure the same guys behind the grell trying to kill me in the first one I played that day, was the same guys giving us information and showing us hidden passages. This is a spoiler for an active adventure, so please don't post it in public. And whether it is true or not is something that the players should not be told straight out, because it may or may not be true. This is an ongoing plot arc that should not even be known by the DM, since the DM of one adventure is a player in the next. Also... i will go back and read some of the past adventures, now that I know its pretty much a nessecity, but at least a disclaimer to the DMs at the begining of the module, stating: if players are not familiar with previous modules or crimson codex advenures, you may want to direct them to this webpage prior to the game. Honestly, I would hope a DM would do this without prompting as he/she prepares the adventure. But if I notice a trend of people reporting problems to me because of this, I'll see what I can do. Really, its not like it was a bad adventure, I'm not saying it was horrible, but I deffinitely think that I've seen better. You stated that you are new to the RPGA, so I would love to hear your impression after you play/read/DM other adventures. I think that the main reason is that they don't give enough information to clearly give you a direction to go. Mostly because a lot of the information you need to figure it all out comes from the past adventures which I may or may not have played. These are two separate issues. The first is a conscious choice. One of the biggest criticisms of RPGA adventures in particular is that they only offer one choice (i.e. they are railroads). I have chosen to the DMs the power to open things up a bit and let the players manuever a bit on their own. Now, this might make things a bit easier for people who have played previous adventure, true. But I think I know the part of the adventure you are talking about, and the adventure is quite specific in saying what to do if none of the PCs have played previous adventures and met certain NPCs. The good thing is... I did level and I did get all my story objectives from BOTH games, and a lot of EV so I'm happy with how that character is progressing. I wish I would have known more going into the game, I might have played somthing with higher than a 6 CHA and 8 Wis. Luckily, I am a Warforged Totemist and I can do a lot of wierd things to help the party, and I can be a pretty good meatsheild for the bards and stuff to get behind. I am glad the database is working well for you. Yes, Codex adventures are going to be interesting for players who have lower mental stats. It is interesting that you are playing a totemist. I will raise a point here and let people speak to it. The campaign allows for both psionics and incarnum. There are, of course, interesting options I would love to include in adventures about these. But it is terribly difficult to include, as you cannot assume that DMs are familiar with these rules, or even that they own the necessary books. For the Mark of Heroes Special Event for GenCon that I worked on, we did include a wilder for the PCs to face. It seemed to work well, but the judges only ran it at GenCon, so they had lots of time to prepare and ask questions, and it was only 4th level. Now we are already at 7th+ level in Xen'drik Expeditions (in terms of writing the adventures). So my question is, to those people out there playing or DMing, would adding foes with psionics or incarnum be problematic? Thanks again, Shawn
Harliquinn 06-25-07, 08:38 AM	So my question is, to those people out there playing or DMing, would adding foes with psionics or incarnum be problematic? Thanks again, Shawn As a player and DM, I have knowledge of both systems (Enough to be dangerous for Psionics and pretty extensive for Incarnum). Since Totemists and Incarnates are both allowed in Codex and the Skarn have a special place now as well, I would love to see some Incarnum ties. An enemy with Incarnum or a quest to discover more information about how this new 'soul energy' ties in with the prophecy (Maybe even some story objects relating to it). I don't know what the 'rules' are as far as printing new game mechanics in a module, but one thing I know is you can't expect most DM's to own Magic of Incarnum (Most will probably have the Expanded Psionics Handbook I would imagine). Therefore, a very brief (2 paragraph) background of Incarnum would be useful as well as the relevant game rules. To simplify the Incarnum rules as well for those not as familiar with the system, I would just have any NPC have a 'fixed' set of soulmelds they have bound for the adventure (Much like assigning the spells for a caster) and have Essentia invested in as a fixed amount in any particular 'feat', soulmeld or item. Otherwise, the 'reallocate essentia every round' might be a bit too much bookkeeping for a DM. However, a DM with knowledge of the rules could use the allocation if they felt comfortable with it (But I wouldn't allow them to change soulmelds). So in short, I would like to see some Incarnum elements in the Codex faction adventures so our Skarn, Totemists, and Incarnates feel at home :) As for Psionics, a few psionics here and there might be fun as well and I think those could extend into all the factions/expenditions. Harli [NOTE] You might want to put your question in a new message, since not everyone will associate the title "module crap" with "Would you like to see more Incarnum or Psionics?"
smerwin29 06-25-07, 08:46 AM	New thread created.
smerwin29 06-25-07, 10:46 AM	I recently played 2 of the adventures for the Crimson Codex, and they were pretty bad... There were a hundred and one typos... and the adventurers were not well written either. If you could, please ask the DM who ran the adventure(s) you are referring to here to email me with the details. I just fixed one of the adventures and I found three places where I used the wrong word. That means there are 98 I must be missing. :D Or if you give me his name and email address, I will contact him directly. Thanks, Shawn
Respen 07-03-07, 10:33 PM	In the designer's defense, the other modules have typos too. I'm referring specifically to the Covenant of Light adventures.
JJeff 07-04-07, 01:37 AM	In the designer's defense, the other modules have typos too. I'm referring specifically to the Covenant of Light adventures. I agree, Shawn is human after all. It's not as if he is the GREAT SERPENT (TM)... (LG joke.. and cos I'm still waiting to see the next module in that arc) And people make mistakes... As you can see from the posts in the BWC section of the forums, an entire monster ability was left out that would change the whole battle if the DM didn't notice the lack of the ability. LordAries, You know, maybe your DM made a few mistakes too. But tell us (the DMs, the module writers, etc) and we're be better off for it. And thanks for posting.
smerwin29 07-04-07, 08:03 AM	I re-edited "The Korranberg Affair" and found about three typos, and corrected the name transposition that was causing confusion. I submitted the new draft to the RPGA. I am still waiting for the list of 101 typos from Lord Aries or his DM.
LordAries 07-04-07, 12:40 PM	Cool... I haven't read the module myself, my DM was the one that kept mentioning all the errors. How can I get a hold of it, so that I can check them over? Also, more than having errors, which are understandable and sometimes unavoidable, the biggest complaint at the table of 6 players was the confusing nature of what we were supposed to be doing. It seemed that we weren't ever given enough information or the hints were fairly weak in nature. I think that this is probably caused by 1 of 2 things. 1. The DM who was not very experienced caused things to be this way because he did not grasp the full picture of what was going on either... it seemed to refer back to previous adventures quite a bit... or out of character knowledge. If none of us had run earlier adventures, or read any of the ebberon back story stuff, we would have literally hit a wall in the adventure multiple times. I'm not saying that definitely the modules we've run (4 now in all) are at fault, its possible the DM's lack of skill was to blame, but could it also be that the module was written in a way that is hard for younger DM's to follow? 2. The modules rely too much on previous player experience and OOC knowledge. The group that I have been playing with recently, isn't my regular weekend D&D group... most everybody in it has been playing since the 80's and is fairly experienced. However, only one person in the group has a lot of Ebberon knowledge and we have all JUST started doing RPGA stuff within the last year or so. The module needs to be written in a way that is accessible for both young players (we are letting my 10 year old cousin play with the group), inexperienced players and DMs (our DM was trying his hand at DMing) , and players without prior module experience or any campaign backstory information. I can see a challenge in writing modules with all this in mind, but that is what it will take to make them more successful. You can't assume that we know jack about whats going on, and will come to conclusions based on previous knowledge we are 'supposed' to have. After 4 games now, the only REAL complaint I have is there are two errors in the reporting process that caused me to have an story objective I wasn't supposed to have, and to be missing one that I should.... That has nothing to do with the modules, so after a few games they have redeemed themselves somewhat. I still think that if we didn't have a guy with a lot of Ebberon knowledge and if I hadn't played some of the modules previous to it... I might have had a hard time trying to figure out EXACTLY what I'm supposed to be doing. So be more blunt... come out and say a little more, instead of hinting around, or try not to use hints that are OCC knowledge.
Marcus Majarra 07-04-07, 05:02 PM	I'd have to say the Korranberg Affair is a particular case. It requires a lot of DM participation (when beating the PCs is a simple affair in combat, it's not a mere matter of dice rolling and tactical strategy in the Korranberg Affair), and the PCs need to be fed sufficient information to carry out the module. It's probably the module requiring the most preparation, both before the game and during the game, that I have seen. As a friendly suggestion, I'd recommend that modules involving so much information include handouts for this information, especially if the PCs are debriefed for their missions. Even Eberron vox populi/common knowledge might not be accessible to players, and without this kind of knowledge, the Korranberg Affair loses much of its appeal.
Respen 07-05-07, 01:42 PM	It has been my experience that most of the Xen'drik Expedition adventures require both players and DMs to have at least a small amount of out-of-character knowledge regarding Xen'drik. And even the small amount of information found in the Eberron Campaign Setting about the Chamber, Xen'drik, Sarlona, the Inspired, and numerous other topics will help out quite a bit. The best tool for this is going to be Secrets of Xen'drik, which gives more detail and scope to both the continent itself and Stormreach. I have played in Cabal of Shadows and Crimson Codex games and plan to run Covenant of Light games and can honestly say that all three, while not neccessarily requiring information from Secrets of Xen'drik, benefit greatly if players have knowledge from that book. I would consider it a "must have" regarding Xen'drik Expedition campaigns. And of course, all Eberron campaign books have their uses in Xen'drik Expeditions. That being said, a small amount of descriptive information, such as an excerpt from Secrets of Xen'drik when neccessary, would help out those without access to that actual source. I think the best time to help players understand more about Xen'drik is during the DM's Mark adventures. A DM can create an adventure where the players find a tome that has a detailed, if somewhat limited or incomplete, accounting of the continent's history. Or they could become acquainted with a historian from Stormreach and learn from him/her. This in turn will give them information that they can use in later sessions.