Do you prefer a single style of campaign?

[Hussar]

Reading through the forums, I've noticed that some people really, REALLY like a single style of game - be it plotzy, sandbox, whatever. They focus on that style of game almost to the exclusion of all else.

I have to admit, I'm not like that. I like many different styles of games. Sometimes I want a light hearted hack game, sometimes I want a really deep plotzy based game, sometimes I want a sandboxy game, and sometimes I want something else.

I'm pretty happy in any game that people run, so long as it's run with a modicum of skill. My dissatisfaction with various groups or campaigns has come from a variety of places, but, "style of game" has never really been one of them.

How about you? Do you prefer a single game style to the exclusion of all else, or are you more open to different styles?

 

[TheNovaLord]

I like quite a range of styles though i dont like

-where it is supposed to be innately silly, and just feels irritatating and stupid
-where its too high action and speedy like in a martial arts style

so sandboxy, deep mystery, deep immersion, railroady dungeons, kingdom buidling and many others are all good for me

 

[Jdvn1]

I only GM one style of game. I can't really GM more than one style, it just doesn't come too naturally to me. But playing? I like a variety of games. I wish I could play a bigger variety.

What I don't like is being railroaded, or when the GM messes with rules to fulfill his story or to make things harder for me.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I enjoy multiple styles. I like D&D in the open sandbox style. I have run and played in some fairly plot heavy games with other systems. Pretty much if the other people are likeable and fun the game will be too.

Even an abysmal game session can be fun with the right group.

 

[Nagol]

I run sandbox games regardless of system from Aftermath! through to Witchcraft. I prefer open-ended long-term campaigns to one-shots or short-haul games.

My biggest successes have been with Aftermath!, CHAMPIONS, and D&D 1e and 3.Xe.

I dislike humour focused games like Teenagers from Outer Space, but can be talked into running them. I find they are much more work for me to keep the energy up. I won't run systems where the characters are guaranteed to lose one way or another like Call of Cthulu or Paranoia.

I am willing to play in a plotted game if it's the only thing available, but avoid humour-based and guaranteed-loss games as a player.

 

[Celebrim]

I like to play everything, but as with food, I don't like to partake of the same thing for too long. I believe that within a single campaign, its possible to mix and match periods of exploration, detective work, drama, tactical combat, and so forth to create a hopefully harmonious whole experience. At least, I've had that experience playing and hope to provide that experience when I run a game.

There are limits to my ability as a game master though. I can't run a humorous game. My attempts invariably turn dark and serious. Ever played Paranoia as a straight up dark dysotopian sci-fi? Wasn't my intention, but that's where it ended up. I'm afraid I get creepy and scary alot better than I get funny. If I did an RPG based on 'Red Dwarf' it would probably end up a nightmarish exploration of the horrors of isolation and lonliness, complete with regular sanity checks and interludes of terrifying halucinations. My 'Squirrel Attack' would probably end up as a feral gorey splatterfest red in tooth and claw. I probably should not be let anywhere near the 'My Life With Master' rules. I'm just not good at being intentionally funny.

 

[Umbran]

How about you? Do you prefer a single game style to the exclusion of all else, or are you more open to different styles?

I'm definitely a player who enjoys many styles of play. And, as a corollary, I also enjoy many different games, as opposed to picking one single game over all others.

I believe that within a single campaign, its possible to mix and match periods of exploration, detective work, drama, tactical combat, and so forth to create a hopefully harmonious whole experience. At least, I've had that experience playing and hope to provide that experience when I run a game.

This is usually my goal as well. My players don't all want the same thing, and even a single person may not want a constant diet of one thing, so varying it a bit over time helps keep people engaged.

 

[Fifth Element]

I'm pretty happy in any game that people run, so long as it's run with a modicum of skill. My dissatisfaction with various groups or campaigns has come from a variety of places, but, "style of game" has never really been one of them.

I'm with you there. I'll play pretty much anything. Haven't had a lot of variety in the past few years though; see below.

How about you? Do you prefer a single game style to the exclusion of all else, or are you more open to different styles?

I'm open to different styles, but both of the groups I play/DM with now have very similar tastes. Pretty plotty, and quite silly for short-term or one-shot deals.

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

I get very.....scary (in more ways than one) if I encounter dark stuff, so it's better for my mental health to avoid it as completely as possible.

I can't take things serious for too long or my wild imagination will burst out. I can manage short periods of serious, and don't need all of the rest to be crazy, but the game needs to feel as if it lacks a lot of restriction on imagination.

I very much prefer story over combat as the mechanics are really superfluous to me. However I lack a certain amount of patience, so games with a lot of planning or social maneuvering will eventually lose me.

 

[BryonD]

No, I like a wide range.

Though Lovecraft always seems to turn up sooner or later.....