Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Archon Basileus" data-source="post: 7419477" data-attributes="member: 6855545">Personally, I really think the topic is quite enticing. If you don't mind, I'd like to put a bit more into the thread now (earlier I was midway home from work, through the cell phone, so...)1: I can't recall a single 1-20 campaign that lasted me the whole life spam, even table-top wise. Plus, I've been playing Fitz' Scourge of Daggerford, and I love what he does: a well-tailored story, a drawn line, a good degree of freedom and attention to detail. Loving his npc's so far. No need for huge game spams. I think that's why his stories work so well. They get the player involved.2: Game start. That's a tricky one for me. The best game I managed to 'DM' in pbf was a Sabbat campaign for Vampire 2nd. Each character led a different pack within a city, and so each had a personal prologue to run. We ran two years worth of prologue. It was amazing, but many of them never got to meet. I'd still rather start with a prologue for each character, since it allows me to know the details of each player and her/his creation a bit better, but it can be boring for most, since it breaks the interactive aspect of the game. It was funny, though, to see players debating each others' choices with an objective perspective.3: Railroad. So true. But I think it could be circumvented by writing pieces that pronounce more relevant choices a bit more. And if tha players still want to pursue something clearly designed to be secondary, let them! It's even kind of humorous when someone realizes all the unimportant paths and starts taking them on purpose, just to poke the DM. Some cool stories can come out of it.4: Even if we start at lower levels - as suggested before - I think that tweaking monsters and scenarios could go a long way into breaking monotony. 5: Party components: I totally agree with this one. Except if we decide we can go separate ways. I had a table where the players rolled a troll warrior and a human necromancer. Unnecessary to say, they wanted to use each other - and eventually kill each other. At this point, circumstances split them, and when stronger circumstances allowed them to merge, well... This doesn't address roleplaying difficulties, such as silent characters, or anti-social types, even though it seems a lot easier to substitute silence for inner dialogue in written channels. 7: I tend to think numbers in terms of party balance. It gets a LOT harder to build the game around a horde of seven, for example. But roleplay is so satisfying with larger numbers! It's like having a world within a world.My half-a-cent. I just felt like talking, I guess, lol.</blockquote>

Verification