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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 5876527" data-attributes="member: 17106">Should? Really?Not that 20-year campaigns are a bad thing, but they are completely unrealistic and/or innappropriate for most people. How many people live in one place for that long, know each other and get along with each other for that long, or have so much free time that they can maitain regular sessions for that long? I would also think that most groups would want to try different DMs and styles and roll up new characters on a regular basis, which means either running multiple games (very time consuming) or starting new ones. Don't get me wrong, I think that playing a long-term game like that would be great, but it's not something I would consider strongly when designing a game. People who are expert enough to do that can handle the rules implications themselves. Conversely, people who play campaigns that never last more than a year and can't run a session every week really need to experience the breadth of the game.Then again, I'll also say what I said the first time around, that pace is for the individual groups to determine, and wide variation should be expected. For instance, the 3e assumption that 13.3 encounters are needed to gain a level is completely ridiculous. I really don't want to see any one number for something like that. If you know you're playing long-term, it might be 50. If you know you're crushed for time, it might be 2 or 3 (which it usually is for me).</blockquote>

Verification