Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 8662755" data-attributes="member: 6696971">This is interesting to me.I'm curious what you feel intra-game turnover yields in terms of &quot;new players bring new things to the table?&quot;&nbsp; What &quot;new things&quot; do you have in mind?I'm curious about this because I don't remember the last time I had intra-game turnover.&nbsp; Like...I think it was 2 decades ago in a 3.x game I GMed due to someone moving out of town?&nbsp; Yet, having the same players all the time hasn't affected &quot;campaign freshness.&quot; The same players at every game (and just in the last 2 decades you're talking GMing probably 150 different players, yet every game had no more than 4 players with most of them 2-3 players) have consistently kept things fresh and brought new and different and very consequential things into play consistently...all the time.So can you maybe elaborate on that second sentence above with some examples from your games?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 8662755, member: 6696971"] This is interesting to me. I'm curious what you feel intra-game turnover yields in terms of "new players bring new things to the table?" What "new things" do you have in mind? I'm curious about this because I don't remember the last time I had intra-game turnover. Like...I think it was 2 decades ago in a 3.x game I GMed due to someone moving out of town? Yet, having the same players all the time hasn't affected "campaign freshness." The same players at every game (and just in the last 2 decades you're talking GMing probably 150 different players, yet every game had no more than 4 players with most of them 2-3 players) have consistently kept things fresh and brought new and different and very consequential things into play consistently...all the time. So can you maybe elaborate on that second sentence above with some examples from your games? [/QUOTE]

Verification