It depends entirely on what your group wants from the game. If you want epic stories, you have to ditch elements of gameplay to make that happen. You have to curate the experience and curtail player agency to some degree, usually quite a bit to force the game to unfold in something resembling a story.But (and here’s the big question) … should we do it? Should we go back to this style of game? Would our games feel more epic if we did? If they were better curated, more narrative, etc.? Would campaigns feel more satisfying?
This is exactly how some people played, yes. Not most and certainly not all. Proper is a moral judgement not a factual one.Was this the “proper” way of playing back in the day?
OSR products are meatgrinders because characters are weaker and die easier. Combat is assumed to be deadly and best avoided. Etc.Is this why OSR products are considered meat grinders?
Depends on what you consider cheating, really. Fudging rolls? Quantum ogres? Illusion of choice?Because we were all cheating (by today’s standards)?
Honestly, I've never found 2E's adventures to be particularly good. Ravenloft adventures in particular tend to be very railroady, with the players just along for the ride.
Yeah. I'm sure there are better ones. But I'm running this specific one because it was the "one" that we never finished back in the day. It's a way to complete the stories of these characters that have been sitting in limbo since the mid-1990s.The module in question, which I won't name since you used a spoiler tag, wouldn't be my first suggestion for Ravenloft.
Yeah. I'm sure there are better ones. But I'm running this specific one because it was the "one" that we never finished back in the day. It's a way to complete the stories of these characters that have been sitting in limbo since the mid-1990s.