Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 8431656" data-attributes="member: 6785785">So these two posts got me thinking about published scenarios. I've previously posted about how I tried to run Tomb of Annihilation as part of my group's longstanding campaign, and struggled with it at times. Afterwards, I decided that I was pretty much done with pre-published adventures. In my mind, the benefit is for them to do a lot of the prep work for the GM (given how prep intensive 5e can be)and I found that I had to rework them significantly to the point where it would be less work to wing it, or create my own stuff. I haven't run a pre-written D&D scenario since. And my game is the better for it.I have, however, benefited from some pre-written scenarios when running a brand new game besides D&D. I ran the "Destroyer of Worlds" scenario for the Alien RPG. It was my group's first online game post-pandemic, and I think having prepared maps and stats and situations to lean on was actually very helpful. The game went well enough and then I ran some more Alien stuff that was largely my own (although inspired heavily by the Alien: Isolation video game) and that went well, too. Having run the published stuff first was helpful to get my feet under me with the system and its play expectations.I'm now currently running a campaign of Spire. The game is odd and definitely falls into the more narrative game category than D&D, and so I wanted to get a sense of what a scenario would look like. There are three "Campaign Frames" (which are actually available for free in pdf format on the publisher's site and on drivethru) so I picked them up. They're very interesting, and definitely help you understand the way the game is meant to be played and GMed. They totally eschew a linear sequence, and they say this throughout. There is no final scene or final encounter or anything like that, as [USER=7016699]@prabe[/USER] says the idea seems contradictory to letting the players do what they want throughout play. They each have an "Ending the Campaign" section where they make suggestions and offer advice, but that's about it. The actual scenario is just that....a situation. Here are some factions, here's what they're up to, here's what may happen if they get what they want, here's some suggestions on how these factions interact with each other, here's how they may respond to the PCs sticking their noses into things. They consist of only about 8 to 12 pages, and then the rest of the book is pregenerated PCs. What they do, though, is presume some goals of the PCs'. And although I can understand [USER=16586]@Campbell[/USER] 's criticism of that, in the game of Spire the PCs all play members of a revolutionary sect, so some assumption of motives seems appropriate.The design and presentation of these "Campaign Frames" seem far more suited to players exercising authority over the game. Certainly more than a written scenario where it's spread across 20 or more sessions and then still winds up with the same climactic scene. And yet the Alien scenario was more traditional in its presentation and play.....but the duration of it is so much shorter that its compromises (maybe the right word, not sure?) of player agency are less severe or at the very least less obvious. I think it's the duration of the campaign books that D&D has put out for 5E that makes them so challenging if you're trying to allow more freedom to the players.</blockquote>

Verification