Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="scourger" data-source="post: 1903945" data-attributes="member: 12328">It's great for one-shots,but this poll &amp; thread are about campaigns.&nbsp; I have seen this method as a success and a failure as a player; but largely as a success as a DM.I played a game in which the DM essentially took an older edition module and handed out the bare bones of the torunament PCs from which the players could choose a character.&nbsp; The bare bones were: race, class(es), and statistics with some magic items.&nbsp; There was also a pre-made motivation for us to be together as a group, including one character as a putative leader.&nbsp; It was pretty fun to flesh out the character and play for a while, but it degenerated when we deviated from the &quot;script&quot; even just a little bit (a common problem for that particular DM).&nbsp; Also, the DM took over the unselected character as an NPC since that character was &quot;important&quot; for the story (I think he secrety wanted to play, too).&nbsp; When my PC died, I played the NPC.&nbsp; Again, it was fun until I strayed from the &quot;script&quot; for that character by doing things that the DM didn't think the character would do.&nbsp; Then, my PC was reincarnated as a different race and missed his chance at one of the artifacts in the story--a fact that was unfortunately brought to my attention by the DM.&nbsp; To make matters worse, we didn't even finish it after several months of play because the DM felt we did all the &quot;good&quot; parts.&nbsp; Overall, it was less fun than other games I've played.&nbsp; It could have worked if the DM had slackened the reins a bit and let the players get into the roles presented, but I guess that wasn't fun for him.&nbsp; (The same guy has quit our group because we don't play just plain vanila D&amp;D.&nbsp; It's a shame because he is a friend, but he's just too selfish.)Another campaign we strated was the all-dwarf campaign.&nbsp; It was great to have that unifying element in common.&nbsp; Sadly, it didn't last more than a couple of sessions.In the Star Wars game that I'm not finished not playing yet, I would love for the DM to restrict us to being with the Rebel Alliance.&nbsp; He hasn't yet, but here's hoping.&nbsp; I would also love to play an all-jedi game.&nbsp; As a DM, I have had good results from narrowing the types of characters that the players may play.&nbsp; I took my 2e game back to the core and was much happier.&nbsp; In 3e, I allowed nothing beyond the PHB.&nbsp; I ran Judge Dredd d20 for a judges-only game (I loved it and am always ready to reprise it, but I think my players are ambivalent about the game and world).&nbsp; In my current 3.5 Shackled City game, I sprinkled in human jedi, judges, and mutants as the First Tier characters with those options plus aasimar paladins and the core PHB races &amp; classes as Second Tier character options.&nbsp; My goal as DM is to encourage &quot;good guy&quot; characters with some very different options.&nbsp; It has worked very well so far.&nbsp; I think the up-front restrictions are embraced once the inherent resistance is overcome.&nbsp; I also made them roll their stats in order (S D C I W C--but with 5d6 to make it more powerful) to narrow their choices for them.&nbsp; I would love to DM many more such restricted games, but there just isn't enough time.&nbsp; The all-judge Judge Dredd, all-human Mesopotamia D&amp;D, and the Star Wars all-jedi games are at the top of my list right now.&nbsp; (The Giant's Skull is an awesome one-shot with pre-gens that I would love to do as a tie-in to my old 3.0 game, but I can't get the players interested.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="scourger, post: 1903945, member: 12328"] [b]It's great for one-shots,[/b] but this poll & thread are about campaigns. I have seen this method as a success and a failure as a player; but largely as a success as a DM. I played a game in which the DM essentially took an older edition module and handed out the bare bones of the torunament PCs from which the players could choose a character. The bare bones were: race, class(es), and statistics with some magic items. There was also a pre-made motivation for us to be together as a group, including one character as a putative leader. It was pretty fun to flesh out the character and play for a while, but it degenerated when we deviated from the "script" even just a little bit (a common problem for that particular DM). Also, the DM took over the unselected character as an NPC since that character was "important" for the story (I think he secrety wanted to play, too). When my PC died, I played the NPC. Again, it was fun until I strayed from the "script" for that character by doing things that the DM didn't think the character would do. Then, my PC was reincarnated as a different race and missed his chance at one of the artifacts in the story--a fact that was unfortunately brought to my attention by the DM. To make matters worse, we didn't even finish it after several months of play because the DM felt we did all the "good" parts. Overall, it was less fun than other games I've played. It could have worked if the DM had slackened the reins a bit and let the players get into the roles presented, but I guess that wasn't fun for him. (The same guy has quit our group because we don't play just plain vanila D&D. It's a shame because he is a friend, but he's just too selfish.) Another campaign we strated was the all-dwarf campaign. It was great to have that unifying element in common. Sadly, it didn't last more than a couple of sessions. In the Star Wars game that I'm not finished not playing yet, I would love for the DM to restrict us to being with the Rebel Alliance. He hasn't yet, but here's hoping. I would also love to play an all-jedi game. As a DM, I have had good results from narrowing the types of characters that the players may play. I took my 2e game back to the core and was much happier. In 3e, I allowed nothing beyond the PHB. I ran Judge Dredd d20 for a judges-only game (I loved it and am always ready to reprise it, but I think my players are ambivalent about the game and world). In my current 3.5 Shackled City game, I sprinkled in human jedi, judges, and mutants as the First Tier characters with those options plus aasimar paladins and the core PHB races & classes as Second Tier character options. My goal as DM is to encourage "good guy" characters with some very different options. It has worked very well so far. I think the up-front restrictions are embraced once the inherent resistance is overcome. I also made them roll their stats in order (S D C I W C--but with 5d6 to make it more powerful) to narrow their choices for them. I would love to DM many more such restricted games, but there just isn't enough time. The all-judge Judge Dredd, all-human Mesopotamia D&D, and the Star Wars all-jedi games are at the top of my list right now. (The Giant's Skull is an awesome one-shot with pre-gens that I would love to do as a tie-in to my old 3.0 game, but I can't get the players interested.) [/QUOTE]

Verification