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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mouseferatu" data-source="post: 340631" data-attributes="member: 1288">Let me preface this by saying that, to date, the vast majority of my published work has been for Vampire, a very metaplot heavy game, so take what follows with however many grains of salt you feel appropriate...I think that it's vital for gamelines that plan to run more than a year or two to have something in the way of a metaplot.  After a time, there's only so much you can do, publication-wise, with a static setting.  Yes, you can expand "horizontally," yes, you can keep adding more detail, but eventually things get--well, static.  And static books often (not always, but often) lead to static campaigns.Now, all that said, I think it's important that metaplot not become the lead factor of a setting.  It's okay to change the setting somewhat due to plot events, but not drastically.  (Unless, of course, you were planning to do a drastic revamp anyway, and are simply using the metaplot as an excuse.)Let's take Vampire for a moment.  A few years ago, they did a very metaplot-heavy year of products.  Some people objected, and that's understandable.  I, personally, think they came pretty close to going too far.But you know what?  In the year or two since, they've cut back a great deal.  The core book can still be run as-is, without acknowledging the metaplot at all.  And while some of the "chronicles" (read: modules) and related products were impacted by the metaplot, most of the books to come out since then are equally useful whether your follow the metaplot or not.My point, assuming I have one?  Settings have to move forward, but they don't have to move forward drastically at any given time.  I don't want a static setting, but I don't want one that dictates my game to me either.  When you can find a path somewhere in the middle, that's where you're nigh-perfect game setting lies.</blockquote>

Verification