@Taskerland In rare event that I'm buying a module, I want it to be open enough that I can drop it into any campaign. On the other hand I don't want to be doing any non creative prep, e.g. as a GM I shouldn't have to go hunting stat blocks for monsters, make maps for someone else's dungeon, organise info that is scattered throughout the module. Give me space to place it in a setting and make creative decisions, yes, but the module designer better have done all the tedious busywork.

It's odd how many scenarios that have been around for a long long time have glaring omissions in their provided maps and prep. Shadows of Yog-Sothoth has glaring gaps and it's been around for decades. It's quite common in Chaosium stuff to find reddits full of people asking questions "where is the map of Mr Doglather's house?" and the like.

@strangequark @sbszine @Taskerland

@Printdevil I think it was only last year I was looking at the scottish chapter of Yog-Sothoth and sent you a list of inconsistent, ambiguous and missing information.

@sbszine @Taskerland

Moreau Vazh This is why I don’t run APs (since strong narrative guardrails need to be set by the end of one book/chapter in order to actually facilitate the flow from one episode to the next).

The flip side of this is that I also just don’t seem to be able to fit in in the general online TTRPG spaces, since they’re either filled with people who think that pre-written adventures should be as linearized and as firewalled as possible, or those who refuse to accept rules sets as anything short of the inflexible, inarguable commandments from God Almighty. Meanwhile, I also can’t stomach OSR spaces and circle jerk around “rulings not rules”, because I still expect to get some kind of state or physics engine out of these things I’m paying for.

@kichae I was initially drawn to the OSR because of "rulings not rules" but that is very much not the vibe anymore.

Moreau Vazh “Rulings, not rules” is fine and dandy if someone is marking down the rulings and ensuring consistency over time. But then rulings become rules, or valence players become tools for the GM and their bestie to play with.

I’d rather have rules I can ignore than rules I need to make up and codity myself in order to maintain my own self respect.

@kichae To each their own bud My games tend to be quite socially-anchored and there's a lot of 'what would make sense in this situation?' where it's partly me making rulings, partly players explaining their thinking, and partly the group negotiating stuff.

Moreau Vazh Indeed. And that’s great at the table level. I run my games very similarly. The issue is more… “out there”, you know? Like, when “rulings, not rules” becomes a mantra that translates to “the GM has spoken, so sit the fuck down”.

I’ve seen the moden/OSR divide spoken of as “high trust” vs “low trust”, and the bulk of the OSR community has kind of shown itself to be individuals you probably shouldn’t trust demanding to be in high trust environments.

Meanwhile, the modern game landscape seems to be split between people who refuse to read, and people who refuse to think for themselves.

Everywhere you look, it’s kind of a hellscape.

@SJohnRoss @Taskerland The thing is, the target demo of people who consume canned adventures are either fans of railroading or people who don't mind them. High-trust GMs using canned goods are the exception, not the norm.

@Taskerland History moves in cycles and gaming is not the exception (hell, someone recently re-invented Marauder 2107).