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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kinak" data-source="post: 6172292" data-attributes="member: 6694112">Good thread idea.Personally, I'm not sure it depends so much on a moral framework as it does a meaty conflict. You want opposition to the PCs and want it memorable enough that they don't lose track between sessions, but it doesn't necessarily have to be good vs. evil.For example, my longest running campaigns were grey vs. grey and human evil vs. lovecraftian evil.In the former, the game had several conflicts moving from the background to the foreground. At the start of the game, these were mostly the PCs getting dragged along in international or divine conflicts. By the end, their quarrels with NPCs were driving those conflicts.The trappings of good and evil were in that campaign. One of the main conflicts was a serpent god trying to escape his binding and the followers of a sun god trying to keep him bound. That's a classic (hackneyed, really) good vs. evil plotline.But the sun god was distant to the point of being neglectful, his followers had largely lost sight of his goals, and the serpent god thought (justifiably) that he would do a better job running things and was generally fairly reasonable. The PCs teamed up with both sides as the situation warranted.In the latter campaign, the PCs staved off the apocalypse basically to preserve their own playground. But the PCs themselves were far more evil than the forces that would have brought about the apocalypse (which were more just antithetical to existence than malicious).Cheers!Kinak</blockquote>

Verification