Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="buzzard" data-source="post: 1456139" data-attributes="member: 3003">I play plenty of Living Greyhawk and do enjoy it. Sure some of the adventures are complete bowsers, but I usually still have fun at the table. Good gamers are more important than a good adventure in a lot of cases. Living Greyhawk is the biggest game by far, so it will expose you to the biggest selection of gamers. However as for the classics vs. living debate, well I used to play primarily classics at cons. After a period of runnning into way too many weak stories where you have to play preposterous lame characters, I gave up on them. Now we have local writers making their own classics which are reputed to be appreciably better than RPGA fare, but I've gotten sufficiently into the living campaigns, that I don't wish to invest the slots at cons (I usually have few enough slots left to me after judging). My only beef with the RPGA is their killing a bunch of good living campaigns (jungle -sniff sniff). Also they have a bunch of annoying rules about ordering scenarios which to be quite honest, everyone fudges. I mean really, why shouled you need to order a home game adventure two weeks in advance? Why can't the host not be the DM? Feh. Sure, I suppose some of it is to avoid cheating, but I really doubt it has any positive effect. buzzard</blockquote>