@shib71: I really like your list. Also your point about "fun to write" hits the nail on the head. Producing a polished product is
serious work, and often hobbists are unwilling to do that heavy lifting. People who are so prolific of quality content deserve a huge amount of respect (I'm thinking locally of Melan, Malrex, Gus L., etc.).
While the first-time creators are to be commended for trying to publish something (many don't even make it past that initial hurtle), they are often a bit like your gaming-pal who says "wouldn't it be cool if
they made a video game that..." but isn't about to learn how to program. They have a "cool idea", but fail to develop it and just push half-baked crap out the door.
My personal design process is the following:
- draw a map
- key the map
- throw out the first map and redraw it based on the key---scan it in and tinker with it (digitally) way too much
- play test
- sit on it for a few more months
- edit the new key and throw out the useless filler text because of something one of Bryce's recent reviews reminds me
- sit on it for a few more months (the party has totally moved on, so back to step 1 for another site)
- have the party get near the locale again and have some inspiration of how I should have done it the first time---sometimes I can't resist changing the world retroactively and tell them to "deal with it" (I'm not proud of that.)
- fix the text again and expand the scope in a way utterly useless for my home campaign---pushing outward on the boundaries of the unknown (credit to Melan)
- sit on it indefinitely thinking I should: (a) polish the presentation a bit more so that the earlier part is as good as the more recent stuff, (b) draw some decent artwork for it, (c) hire an editor, and (d) play test it again with a different group,
- decide it's pointless to publish because its all been done a dozen times already (but secretly glad I've got something to give to my kids some day if they ever inherit the DM-bug)
TMI? Sorry, I digress..
Also, it's funny, but when I first started writing up my own campaign (often just days or hours before play), I was determined to get the characters and especially
names recorded because...darned if my daughters (in particular) didn't want to
talk to everybody and known who they are! Leaving aside any discussion on gender-stereotypes, I'll just say that I am NOT very good at making up names on the spot, so that was something I needed to prep.
Consider this fact: every single person in the B2 Keep is only detailed by job-description---without a single name. "Captain of the Watch, Castellan, Scribe, etc."
While it does give that impersonal, gritty, old-school feel (i.e. soldiers on a wargame map)---and avoids some of that silly high-fantasy melodrama with extemporaneous overflowing back-storyies---I've got to believe there is some sort of middle-ground that a designer can do to help out the DM.
On a related note, it seems to be a 5e thing (WotC) to publish little head-shots of all the major NPCs---yet for some reason, I find this excessive and distasteful too....screws with the imagination...but man, just a simple (first only?) name for the beings you are likely to chat with would be cool.
Note, Gary's other intro module, Village of Hommlet (T1) is different. There is a scattering of names for major NPCs. I am thinking that's because it was played extensively in his home campaign. Maybe that's why it breaths a bit more. Feels lived in. Whereas often the B2 Keep is sometimes ignored or glossed-over in favor of just "getting to the Caves where the action is" (...and so that the nameless priest from the Keep can backstab you).
I am just going to throw at y'all one more extraneous tidbit: in my campaign world the Inn of the Welcoming Wench serves a "
Hommlet Omelet" for breakfast.
Bam! Now that mental-virus is in
your head too.
(You're welcome)