Akrasia
Procrastinator
So my group wrapped up the 8th session of my new C&C campaign tonight. (I ran two 'one shot' sessions of C&C last fall before beginning the new campaign.)
It was a great session! Indeed, all of the sessions have been great (except for the one during which I was horribly hung-over -- but the players still seemed to enjoy it, especially once my voice went all scratchy after two hours).
My last campaign was 3.5 D&D, and lasted about 9 months (with mostly the same group). It went really well too, but I was frustrated for three reasons.
The first was that the campaign progressed too slowly for my tastes. Combat was always a huge drag -- we had to bring out the battle mats, set things up, get out the miniatures, etc. A game of 'Advanced Squad Leader' followed. While most of the players seemed to semi-enjoy this (especially one player who loved combat), I came to dread it. The last few sessions of the campaign were great, but only because I deliberately designed the adventures to minimize combat.
The second reason was that I hated prepping for the 3.5 games. I dreaded sitting down and statting up NPCs and complex monsters. This irritation infected my enjoyment of the sessions themselves. (Though, again, the players didn't seem to mind too much -- but they are not paying me to do this!)
The third (and IMO most important) reason is that, when DM'ing 3e, the 'rules aspects' of the game were continually salient. During the sessions, questions about whether doing x would provoke an attack of opportunity, and so forth, were ubiquitous -- as were issues concerning modifiers to actions, synergy bonuses for NPC skill checks, questions about whether x was an extraordinary ability or spell-like ability, etc. The rules were always 'in our face', and I hated that.
In contrast, I have had none of these problems with my C&C campaign. Indeed, I would say that while running a C&C session, "the rules fade into the background". This means that the emphasis can be on the story itself -- which makes me as a GM excited.
I also love the fact that it is extremely easy to tinker with the C&C rules. When DM'ing 3e I always felt uncertain about doing this, as there were always unintended consequences (e.g. I once tried to do away with 'attacks of opportunity' -- whoops!).
Just to be clear, I am (obviously) only speaking about my own experiences here. I have run two 3e campaigns now, and both times the same issues came up. These issues prevented me from enjoying the game as much as I thought I should. Obviously, many/most other DMs have not had the problems that I have had here. All the more power to them. But IME, 3e prevented me from focusing on the aspects of FRPGs that I love.
So, in contrast, running a C&C game is an absolute joy. I have complete mastery of the rules, and so I can focus on the role-playing and plot aspects of the game.
Which gets me to my main point: the key to any successful campaign is GM happiness. (Okay, I was semi-happy during the last 3e campaign as well, and the players seemed to like it. But I also found myself frequently cancelling sessions...)
If you have a GM who is enthusiastic about the system and campaign setting, then that will affect how the games actually proceed.
I can see this in my own group. One of my players was deeply hostile to switching over to C&C (as he felt it was really important to have 'feats' and all that crap). Yet he is loving this new campaign. The reason is simple: I am excited, and willing to invest my energy into characters, plot and NPCs. (I much prefer this to worrying about feats, skills, etc.).
In short, C&C made me happy to be a GM again. I was reminded of this tonight -- and wanted to share ('cause I subsequently went out for drinks, and am now semi-drunk).
It was a great session! Indeed, all of the sessions have been great (except for the one during which I was horribly hung-over -- but the players still seemed to enjoy it, especially once my voice went all scratchy after two hours).
My last campaign was 3.5 D&D, and lasted about 9 months (with mostly the same group). It went really well too, but I was frustrated for three reasons.
The first was that the campaign progressed too slowly for my tastes. Combat was always a huge drag -- we had to bring out the battle mats, set things up, get out the miniatures, etc. A game of 'Advanced Squad Leader' followed. While most of the players seemed to semi-enjoy this (especially one player who loved combat), I came to dread it. The last few sessions of the campaign were great, but only because I deliberately designed the adventures to minimize combat.
The second reason was that I hated prepping for the 3.5 games. I dreaded sitting down and statting up NPCs and complex monsters. This irritation infected my enjoyment of the sessions themselves. (Though, again, the players didn't seem to mind too much -- but they are not paying me to do this!)
The third (and IMO most important) reason is that, when DM'ing 3e, the 'rules aspects' of the game were continually salient. During the sessions, questions about whether doing x would provoke an attack of opportunity, and so forth, were ubiquitous -- as were issues concerning modifiers to actions, synergy bonuses for NPC skill checks, questions about whether x was an extraordinary ability or spell-like ability, etc. The rules were always 'in our face', and I hated that.
In contrast, I have had none of these problems with my C&C campaign. Indeed, I would say that while running a C&C session, "the rules fade into the background". This means that the emphasis can be on the story itself -- which makes me as a GM excited.
I also love the fact that it is extremely easy to tinker with the C&C rules. When DM'ing 3e I always felt uncertain about doing this, as there were always unintended consequences (e.g. I once tried to do away with 'attacks of opportunity' -- whoops!).
Just to be clear, I am (obviously) only speaking about my own experiences here. I have run two 3e campaigns now, and both times the same issues came up. These issues prevented me from enjoying the game as much as I thought I should. Obviously, many/most other DMs have not had the problems that I have had here. All the more power to them. But IME, 3e prevented me from focusing on the aspects of FRPGs that I love.
So, in contrast, running a C&C game is an absolute joy. I have complete mastery of the rules, and so I can focus on the role-playing and plot aspects of the game.
Which gets me to my main point: the key to any successful campaign is GM happiness. (Okay, I was semi-happy during the last 3e campaign as well, and the players seemed to like it. But I also found myself frequently cancelling sessions...)
If you have a GM who is enthusiastic about the system and campaign setting, then that will affect how the games actually proceed.
I can see this in my own group. One of my players was deeply hostile to switching over to C&C (as he felt it was really important to have 'feats' and all that crap). Yet he is loving this new campaign. The reason is simple: I am excited, and willing to invest my energy into characters, plot and NPCs. (I much prefer this to worrying about feats, skills, etc.).
In short, C&C made me happy to be a GM again. I was reminded of this tonight -- and wanted to share ('cause I subsequently went out for drinks, and am now semi-drunk).
Must we start with the insults so early in the thread? 
