Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aenghus" data-source="post: 6818577" data-attributes="member: 2656">However, running a particular game well, following all the guidelines, still doesn't guarantee that all the players will like the result. Clear communication and acquiring prior well-informed buy-in massively improves the chances of a good game for all but can't guarantee it. Still, tastes are subjective and players can end up deciding they don't actually like a particular game, maybe due to features inherent in the game, maybe due to stuff they happen to associate with the game.Campaigns often experience some player churn at the very start as people figure out whether they like the actual game or not. Sometimes it's stuff external to the game, such as personality clashes or real life personal drama.I do think a game being run should be run on it's own merits and played to it's strengths, not its weaknesses. A game about intense personal drama should up the dramatude for all it's worth. A game about daring exploration in a persistent world should have lots of fascinating and dangerous locales to explore, possibly with traces of previous intrepid explorers and tales of their exploits.I do think it's worth trying to run  a system as it's designers intended it to be run at least a few times to establish a baseline for expectations from that system, before attempting to fix or houserule it. This can be easier said than done, a bunch of RPGs don't explain their expected style of play very well, and in a lot of cases play style has been learned by osmosis, from the interpretations of previous referees, rather than what's actually laid down in the rulebooks.</blockquote>

Verification