What does 'modding excellence' mean for modules?

[sirchet]

I believe we may be treading on thin ice when we start to encourage certain practices that we, (AME) may find more desirable when reviewing a work for nomination, this has the possibility to appear biased or leading.

It might be best to leave the work's creation up to the creator and then merely debate if what has been created is worth nomination.

[Invisig0th]

Even my favorite authors cover a multitude of different styles, even ones that are opposite of one another.  Same thing with modules.  I like a multitude of modules from the extreme hack & slash to no combat at all.  That said, I don't think it would even be possible for all of the members to agree on any set guidelines.  Methinks that's a good thing. 

We may be talking about two different things here. Different styles of modules are obviously a matter of personal taste, and that's not at all my concern here.

What I'm talking about here are things that aren't really matters of personal taste. Most authors of high-quality module use map pins whenever possible to make the experience better for their players. I doubt you'd find any NWN players that get upset about a module author using map pins. If the player finds themselves looking for map pins and the author didn't bother to use any in the module, then the author has probably dropped the ball there.  So using map pins effectively where it makes sense to do so is a good general best practice for module builders trying to achieve excellent quality.

There are universal best practices in most forms of entertainment. Let's use your example writing a novel. It is a best practice for authors of novels to follow basic rules of grammar at all times. Regardless of whether you like mysteries or historical novels or whatever, this is something that every high quality author spends a lot of time and effort on.

And like every suggestion of the sort, there are lots of important exceptions. An author that *strategically* breaks the rules (like Mark Twain did with Huck Finn) is doing so for a specific reason, with full knowledge of what rule are being broken and why. If you don't understand the rules, you can't effectively break the rules   This is the exact opposite of someone who submits a manuscript with terrible grammar because they didn't proofread or didn't bother to learn good grammar before becoming a novelist. That person probably wouldn't be considered an "excellent" novelist, no matter how great their ideas are -- because they didn't provide the minimum level of quality necessary to effectively convey their cool ideas to the reader.

A lot of this has to do with larger concept of the "contract" between author and reader. There is a similar "contract" between game designer and player. For example, there is an assumption in plot progression based role playing games that the game developer will try to to protect players from getting stuck in a situation where they cannot complete the plotline goals. A plot-based module where players frequently find themselves unable to finish the main plotline quests (by no fault of their own) wouldn't be considered "excellent" by any definition. 

It seems clear that at least a few things about module building are generally useful "best practices", completely regardless of the builder's or the player's personal tastes. As I said, these are just guidelines and things for authors to think about as they strive to improve their modules, perhaps even to professional quality. But thinking about such things is useful in most cases.

That said, I can certainly see why the AME would be hesitant to publish guidelines. So setting that issue aside, I'd be interested in hearing more of the opinions of individual community members regarding what sort of "best practice" suggestion they think would be most useful for builders to keep in mind when trying to produce the highest quality NWN modules. What are some other solid ways that experienced module authors can "take it up a notch" regarding quality?