Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The Shaman" data-source="post: 5343562" data-attributes="member: 26473">Which is kind of my point, and kind of not.First, I think there's too much anticipation that the adventurers will do this and do that and do the other. What happens if the adventurers do this, but not that? What happens to the other?Second, the larger question, for me anyway, is, do the players have any control over the events of the game beyond their characters being shuttled from one adventure to the next by the referee? It sounds like the OP wants to create an adventure path-style campaign, and if all the players buy in at the start, and understand the boundaries which the format imposes, then disco. But that buy-in better be there, and the referee may want to consider what happens if that buy-in is lost at some point during the course of the epic.A good idea, but in my experience this can often result in ham-fisted stuff like, &quot;Your family's been kidnapped by the Big Bad Evil Guy!&quot; Again, an up-front buy in by the the players that their characters are The Heroes of the epic is probably a good idea, to weed out anyone who might have their own ideas about with whom their characters may ally.That would be my personal preference, but this means that the events of the game leading up to this should perhaps be a bit more subtle, if they are to be appropriately scaled to the adventurers' abilities. Instead of beginning with an overt war, start with subversion - something devils should be good at - and a rebellion in the 'good' lands before armies begin marching across the landscape.If the OP doesn't want to wait that long, the adventurers at low levels may be invited to join an organization - a knightly order, a wizard's coven, a holy order - devoted to opposing the fiendish foes ahead.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="The Shaman, post: 5343562, member: 26473"] Which is kind of my point, and kind of not. First, I think there's too much anticipation that the adventurers will do this and do that and do the other. What happens if the adventurers do this, but not that? What happens to the other? Second, the larger question, for me anyway, is, do the players have any control over the events of the game beyond their characters being shuttled from one adventure to the next by the referee? It sounds like the OP wants to create an adventure path-style campaign, and if all the players buy in at the start, and understand the boundaries which the format imposes, then disco. But that buy-in better be there, and the referee may want to consider what happens if that buy-in is lost at some point during the course of the epic.A good idea, but in my experience this can often result in ham-fisted stuff like, "Your family's been kidnapped by the Big Bad Evil Guy!" Again, an up-front buy in by the the players that their characters are The Heroes of the epic is probably a good idea, to weed out anyone who might have their own ideas about with whom their characters may ally.That would be my personal preference, but this means that the events of the game leading up to this should perhaps be a bit more subtle, if they are to be appropriately scaled to the adventurers' abilities. Instead of beginning with an overt war, start with subversion - something devils should be good at - and a rebellion in the 'good' lands before armies begin marching across the landscape. If the OP doesn't want to wait that long, the adventurers at low levels may be invited to join an organization - a knightly order, a wizard's coven, a holy order - devoted to opposing the fiendish foes ahead. [/QUOTE]

Verification