Is 'Good vs Evil' fantasy better for long-term campaigns than more 'amoral' Swords & Sorcery?

[Imaro]

My 2 cents is that it isn't any harder, it just has a different focus. In BBEG campaigns (and stories), there is usually a pre-set goal of defeating the BBEG...this goal exists independently of the PC's and is usually the driving force for the majority if not all of their actions. S&S fiction however seems to deal with personal goals and thus a long running campaign is going to need PC's who have long-term goals or evolving goals who are willing/forced/driven to act in order to achieve them. I don't think power is especially relevant since S&S fiction in the vein of the Eternal Champion stories and Karl Wagner's Kane stories deal with some pretty heavy hitters as protagonists (immortal sorcerers, god-summoning proto-humans, etc.) but they don't do what they do because they are motivated to save the world, they do what they do because it suits whatever goals they have and that's what I think is important, whether it's just becoming richer, winning a kingdom, giving meaning to an eternal existence or even destroying your homeland... It's their goals that give them purpose and create the S&S heroes stories.

 

[Ahnehnois]

It is helpful for the DM to have philosophical themes underlying longer campaigns? I'd say yes.

Is it helpful for the players to buy in or bring their own? Maybe.

Is D&D-style morality particularly helpful? I'd say no, simply because it's such a limited, ham-fisted approach to the topic.

 

[Ratskinner]

I think the trick is to have compelling conflicts (or rather a compelling central conflict). By that I mean conflicts which are both interesting and come in many dimensions or levels to be explored over the course of the campaign. Good vs. Evil can often provide an "easy"/obvious way to do this sort of thing, its not the only way. There is also the problem of MEGO, if the conflict gets too far into the weeds.

 

[GSHamster]

I think that a successful campaign needs Conflict and Purpose.

The thing about Good vs. Evil is that it's fairly easy to keep the Purpose of things going. There is always Evil out there to be vanquished.

In my view, non-GvE campaigns often find that their Purpose ... breaks down, becomes lost, loses it's luster. (I'm not really sure I have the exact words I want to describe this.) When that happens, the campaign stalls out, and tapers off.

 

[Savage Wombat]

I think maybe the presence of clear-cut enemies - these guys are evil, we can kill them - might have something to do with it.

 

[Michael Silverbane]

My experience has been the opposite of that in the OP.

Thinking back on past campaigns, those that have had the most staying power have been ones without a strong aspect of good versus evil or much in the way of an overarching plot.

 

[N'raac]

I wonder to what extent the G v E simply makes it easier for the players to have common motives. RPG's are a group endeavour, where a lot of S&S features one character, so his goals are always at the forefront. If the PC's have common goals (like one side of the G v E conflict), then to some extent, everyone's goals are always at the forefront. If we have different goals, even non-conflicting ones, then my goals aren't at the forefront a lot of the time.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Depends on the DM and the campaign. Personally I think amoral would be easier to run a long term campaign, as you can get episodic without getting stale -- GvE Episodes interspersed with other things.

 

[dd.stevenson]

I was wondering if other people have had similar or reverse experiences? Is a strong Good vs Evil framework an aid to long term campaigns? Does its lack inhibit long term play?

The key to a long running campaign is motivation: both players and characters need it. Good vs. evil is a cheap, effective, proven way to establish this motivation; but its hardly the only way. Self-preservation and revenge work pretty damn well too, IME.

 

[the Jester]

My campaign (consisting of many groups in the same setting over a wide time span) is full of shades of grey ambiguity, and if you trace it back, it's run since about 1981.

So, I don't think there's an inherent advantage re: a game running long term in running a more black and white game, but that's clearly my own experience talking.