A few days ago (as of writing this), I got to watch this very interesting video by Matt Colville. In it, he basically says that old-school modules, which used to only be maybe 30-60 pages, are superior to campaign books and that most people would rather play modules.
Maybe he’s right. Maybe he’s wrong. I dunno’. But I don’t think it’s a black-and-white issue. While he does say that a string of unrelated modules is still a campaign–no argument there–he leaves out the way many of us link those unrelated modules. And there’s no mention of how many people play regarding the campaign books. Ultimately, I believe that the two ways of coming at a campaign have more similarities than differences.
So Much Reading and Prep
First, he mentions that the D&D designers are always stating in those books that the books should be read front to back by the Dungeon Master before starting to prep for the adventure. This, of course, already overwhelms DMs with too much work and might prevent them from even starting that campaign. He is absolutely, 100% correct. Modules, being much shorter, are much easier to read through and so they are less overwhelming. Also true.
BUT…
That implies that DMs really do have to read the entire campaign books–or even an entire module–before beginning to prep a game session. I think those of us with blogs and vlogs and such should start telling everyone not to do this unless they feel like it.
I honestly can’t remember how I did it with modules back in the 80s, but I know I didn’t read entire modules before running them. I think I did the same thing I do now with campaign books. I read the introduction stuff, read the first chapter or three, and skim (barely) the rest of the book. Then I’ll actually read the last adventure chapter and any conclusion. If the chapters/episodes end with a couple of paragraphs on what will likely happen as a result of some actions the PCs likely did, then I’ll read those, too.
Like I said, I feel like I did the same thing with modules back in the day. I’d read the intro information, read about a session’s worth of the module based on how far I think the PCs might get that day, and skim the rest. I’d skim information about things closer to the dungeon entrance more carefully–what if the players go further than I thought?–but less so as I go on, slowing down again for things that make plot points. Then I’d read whatever is set up to be the finale of the module so that my judgements and hints and clues are appropriate to help the characters get there.
Hell, even with The Lost Mine of Phandelver I only skimmed the thing as a whole, paying attention only to the main desired result for each episode/chapter. I only prepped it episode by episode. Everything came out just fine. With Dungeon of the Mad Mage, I skimmed the first three levels because that was the extent of any legitimate story (there’s virtually none in that campaign) and only actually read one chapter at a time. I would start reviewing the next level the next session or so. I skimmed ahead a couple chapters with Hoard of the Dragon Queen but only actually read and prepped for the chapter being played. The book would generally say if something in that chapter affects something down the line so I would check out those references.
I don’t think I did any more pre-preparation for the big campaign books than I ever did for a module.
Modules End More Quickly
Matt makes a point of this as well, adding that having more frequent satisfying endings is more fulfilling than having an adventure never end. He’s got a very good point here.
I blame DMs for this when it comes to campaign books, even one as short as The Lost Mine of Phandelver. They play the ends of chapters as bleeding into the next one. Don’t do that. These things are meant to be episodic. Each chapter/episode should be played like a module. The mini-bosses are BBEGs in their own rite, and they should be treated and played with reverence. The chapter should have its own climax. It should have a fairly decisive end. Without this, the game becomes a neverending slog.
Long Story Arcs for Modular Campaigns
That leads me to point out that campaign books have a major similarity to the way many people play modules or homebrew games. There is often an overarching story connecting the episodes. Matt, in his definition of a campaign, said that the story is created by the modules played connected with whatever the characters are doing to get from one to the next. Once again, he is right.
But, unless you’re playing an adventurers’ guild kind of game, then there’s a good chance that there are individual character stories being constructed during both the modules and the in-between time. At least, I hope so. (If you’re not doing that, start to.) These often involve antagonists for one PC or maybe the whole party. These antagonists can become the BB BBEG (Big BIG Big Bad Evil Guy) for an overarching story. The modules are pit stops along the way to resolving this bigger conflict.
This isn’t much different than how there’s an overarching story in the campaign books. (Okay, maybe not much of one in Dungeon of the Mad Mage.) And there’s no reason you can’t introduce more character-centric storylines in those campaigns, too! (I do it. I thrive on it.)
One Major Difference
I will say, however, that using modules or well-defined homebrew adventures do have one advantage over the campaign books. If you can see that your players or yourself are not going to be able to wait till the characters advance 15 levels before meeting the BB BBEG, you can always move the BB BBEG forward. I was running DotMM and it was obvious that neither I nor anyone else were connecting to it. I was bending over backwards to provide a compelling story. I introduced a ton of homebrew and third-party materials that were meant to make the campaign more engaging.
Eventually, we just abandoned the book. The PCs were, as a result of the first few levels of the adventure, already in conflict with an organization that had its own Big Bad. I jettisoned DotMM’s final boss and opted for this other Big Bad to be the main BBEG. We don’t have to retcon anything because the characters just going from the point we abandoned the book, even staying largely in that setting.
Abandoning the campaign book (I’ve only done that once, mind you) has allowed me to take control of the BB BBEG. If people look like they’re getting sick of the campaign, I can move him up in the campaign and have the final battle within a few sessions. Or, if everyone continues to love the campaign, I can keep him saved up until more of the story has unfolded. The power lies with me and the players. We don’t have to wait until they’re level 20 to enact a satisfying ending to the main storyline.
Conclusion
While I agree with Matt’s general points, I don’t really agree with his conclusion. I think there’s a middle ground between running a modular campaign and running a campaign from a 264-page book. If the modular campaign has an overarching storyline and the book-based campaign is being run as if each chapter/episode was a module, then the distance between them is very slight.
Except for that control over when to end the campaign. With a modules, you can always bring the greater campaign to a satisfying close whenever you want. But you can do this with campaign books, too! You just have to be willing to abandon your $40 book and do your own thing if it comes to that.