Ultimate User-Friendliness

[DangerousPuhson]

What helps make modules more or less user-friendly? What information benefits from being included on maps or tear-outs? Where is the fine line between uncluttered and too cluttered?

Most reviewers allude to this - "too much boxed text", "this should be on the maps", "needs an NPC relationship matrix", etc. but nobody (as far as I've seen) is able to come forward with a perfect example of the ultimate user-friendly module. Some are near-perfect by a few people's standards, but hardly anything could be considered a "universal approach". My guess for why none can every truly exist is because different people have different thresholds for what is or isn't an inconvenience (ie. missing parts will upset some but not all people, the presence of Annexes over sidebars is a personal preference, enemies not being included on the map is fine to some and abysmal failure to others, etc.). But surely we can come close, no?

Why do YOU think is a MUST-HAVE for user-friendliness in an adventure module?

PS. May or may not be asking for my own upcoming project

 

[DangerousPuhson]

I'll get the ball rolling on this one:

1) Treasure Roster. It's good to know how much that "jade statue of a snake" is worth at a glance, or what that "red and black wand" does, rather than having to sift through the room keys.

2) Door open directionality on maps (along with traps, locks, and whether a door is tough to open). Usually comes up.

3) Light/noise sources on maps (and the color of the light, if its something other than "flame"). I like to let my players know BEFORE they enter a room if the lights are already on or something is moving around.

4) Page references next to stuff. No more searching through [See Chapter 6] when you could just give me the exact page the information is on.

5) Hand-outs. Describing puzzles and journal entries is easy for the author, but a bitch for the DM. Put that shit on a detachable piece of paper and let the players SEE/INTERACT with it!

6) Monster Rosters. Good to know beforehand what monsters to bookmark and how much XP the party has coming their way. Also goes for things like monster patrol routes (on a map), and major NPCs (with their location).

7) Controversial, but Read-Aloud. Some days I don't want to have to come up with an exciting way to describe something based on a few crib-notes; some days I just want someone else to tell me what I need to say to convey the situation. Done right, I don't think Read-Aloud is a bad thing.

 

[Yora]

What I really want to see is a little map of the dungeon area that is being described on each double-page. I absolutely hate it to read about a maze of room and having to flip back and forth to the full page map. It doesn't need to be pretty or have much detail. Just showing me where the rooms are and how they are connected.

It's also always a real help if every area has a name and not just a number. And the number indicating on which map the area is located. Having all the areas numbered from 1 to 114, or starting back at 1 for every new map isn't helpful.

 

[squeen]

@Yora: Yes! Maps! Lots of them!

When I'm reading a new adventure (usually after Bryce has clued me in to its existance) I am always searching for the map that helps me get orientated. I am gobsmacked by adventure writers that put the map at the end of their product. I'm always left wondering "Why didn't you show me this in the first place?! Then I would have known what the heck you were talking about for the last 50 pages!"

I also like detailed maps, but generally not photo-realistic ones. Not really much of a fan of a garish or extensive color pallet either---simple greys or beiges are sometimes best. Not sure why that matters, but it does. Maps should be functional for the DM, but more of a technical document than a cartoon. Sometimes Mike Schley's maps turn me off as too over-drawn (i.e. too much light and shadow for something that's suppose to be explanatory).

Area names are way better than just numbers---and if you can fit both on the map without cluttering that's a big win.

Of all the area maps I've made, this is the one stylistically I'm the least unhappy with even though it's incomplete (mainly because the party moved on and I'm always just barely managing to document a session ahead---or more frequently, a session behind). What bothers me most about it is that the numbers are too small and hard to read. Someday I'll go back and fix it...(sigh)

 

[Yora]

And if you publish it as a file, make the maps available separately. Flipping between pages is a nightmare on a screen.

 

[DangerousPuhson]

So, what I'm getting here is a distinct "maps EVERYWHERE" vibe... put before the section, embedded in the section, and hosted separately outside the document...

I guess physically looking at maps is the most complicated part of a DM's job these days (?)

 

[squeen]

So, what I'm getting here is a distinct "maps EVERYWHERE" vibe... put before the section, embedded in the section, and hosted separately outside the document...

I would say yes, yes, and yes.

The one before the section should have regional scale. The embedded one, local scale.

...like Google maps.

I guess physically looking at maps is the most complicated part of a DM's job these days (?)

It sounds a bit pathetic when you put it that way.

Instead, how about: Looking for maps is a real PITA and having a good map handy is terribly convenient.

Also, having an embedded map in-line with the text is probably the best way to find things quickly in a booklet. It's the perfect bookmark.

Makes layout harder, no doubt. I imagine that's why (like artwork) it often gets skipped.

 

[Yora]

I wouldn't say maps are the most challenging part about running an adventure.

It's just where I feel most adventures make things needlessly inconvenient. With just a little bit of effort that doesn't actually require additional work, everything can be made a lot easier for me.

 

[Malrex]

First of all, I find this thread EXTREMELY useful and valuable. Usually people complain about adventures....you hardly see what people want to see!!

Second of all...just so I understand....you guys would prefer maps in the front. If it's an adventure with 5 maps (town, wilderness, 3 dungeons)...you would still want them all in front?

Then, if possible, you would want a map on each double page of the area being described...so basically zoomed in maps of the location on those areas that is being described so you don't have to flip pages. I guess like Stonehell did it?

So like in the Adventure Design Contest that DangerousPuhson put on where we are still trying to find a judge *cough* *ahem*....I could of put a title page, credit page, map of entire dungeon, intro, GM's notes, wandering monster table, maybe some art, next double page would have a smaller map (1/2 page? 1/4 page?) of the rooms I plan to describe..maybe 1-6, then the next double page would have a map of areas 7-13 (or whatever), and so on and so forth. What size is most helpful for embedded maps--1/2 page or 1/4 page?

 

[squeen]

Second of all...just so I understand....you guys would prefer maps in the front. If it's an adventure with 5 maps (town, wilderness, 3 dungeons)...you would still want them all in front?

I'm the only one who voiced a preference for "maps up front", so I wouldn't assume it to be universal without some additional buy-in. Yora clearly prefers detach-able maps. (I prefer both, but I definately would rather "see it", then "read about it".)

But...what I think would be useful is the largest scale map in front (say wilderness) and then some information (page numbers) on where to find the next lower level-of-detail map. (Ad infinitum.)

If a two-page spread covers rooms #1-10 of the dungeon, that's all I'd (ideally) like to see in a 1/4-page, 1/2-page or full-page embedded map. The size of the map really depends on how much textual real estate rooms 1-10 of the dungeon require and how detailed the map is.

Also, I don't think it's necessarily practical to always limit "sections" and their associated map to just two-pages---but having the section-map as a prelude (close-by) to the sectional-text is the layout I prefer. You have to use some judgement for a nice aesthetic balance. During play, a two-page spread that includes the local-map is definately the "bee's knees", but again, you can't always get what you what.

Please understand these are my personal preferences---how my brain likes to process information---but I like to think that if I find something difficult/frustrating/confusing, there's a good chance someone else does too.

P.S. If I judged the contest, I fully expect I'd end up at the bottom of the proverbial "dogpile". Bryce is the pro---let's make him do it!

 

[DangerousPuhson]

If I can envision what you're saying Squeen... sounds like you'd like a roll-up map of the dungeon at the front (makes sense, standard practice), but also if there are, let's say, boxes drawn around sub-sections sections on the roll-up map with little page numbers next to the boxes to tell you where to find that specific area in the keys, and then a copy of that little boxed area in the keys as well for quick reference? Something like that?

And adding to Yora's request, a separate file of just maps for reference without looking through the booklet (plus also player copies without secret doors and room numbers and whatnot, and grid-free copies for Roll20 users, etc.).

Does that sound like what you're saying?

 

[Malrex]

The extra maps would take a lot of work....I think...maybe I'm wrong...Ill have to play with it. My fear is I would have to draw all those zoomed in maps because it wouldn't come out clear if I zoomed in and tried to get the image that way...Then really fiddling with the writing to make sure it all fits on the 2 pages or if I have to trim a room off the map, etc.

And universal thoughts or not...this is the only place where I have seen people say what they want to see...before this, its just been a guessing game then get raked over the coals from reviews. But just watch....if I did something like what you guys are saying with the maps...someone will complain about the inflated page count...

 

[DangerousPuhson]

But just watch....if I did something like what you guys are saying with the maps...someone will complain about the inflated page count...

Can't please all people all the time. It's a fine line too, given how so many OSR reviewers are big on "conciseness" in their products.

I think I'll try something akin to what has been talked about though - the nice thing about doing your maps digitally is that the layers are pretty easy to add or omit on a whim.

 

[Crit_Fail]

On the subject of maps, specifically dungeon maps, I always love it when you have a name for the room on the map or a map key right beside it. It drives me crazy when I have the map with rooms 1-20 on it, but no way to quickly reference what those rooms are during play. Combining a key with a monster roster is also great. Heck to go even further, if the map key had the page numbers of the full room descriptions it it'd be even better.

Example:
#1-Gatehouse, pg 3
#2-Barracks, 3 Orcs, pg 4
#3-Forge pg 4
etc.

 

[DangerousPuhson]

Easy to do for small dungeons - pretty ding-dang tough on bigger ones though, unless you like a size 4 font.

 

[Crit_Fail]

Best idea I can think of is to have the dungeon map take up a whole page, and then have the key on the opposite page. I remember once seeing a photo of one of Gygax's dungeons where he had a map on a page of grid paper and then a full key/roster on a page of notebook paper. That said, if you've got a mega-dungeon over multiple pages, then you've got both a greater need for a key and an equally difficult problem of having nowhere to put it.

 

[Beoric]

And if you publish it as a file, make the maps available separately. Flipping between pages is a nightmare on a screen.

You know, you can make a copy of the file and reopen it as a second PDF.

 

[Yora]

Yes. But having it already done would be user friendly.

 

[DangerousPuhson]

Anybody have any non-map input?

 

[Yora]

If you can see area B from area A, include what can be seen in the description of area A.

When creatures in area B react to things in area A, also include that in the description of area A.