Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="nimisgod" data-source="post: 1192286" data-attributes="member: 10283">Well, here are my thoughts on what KB brought up. Feel free to disregard.The unbalanced party. People mentioned that this can work well with a Superhero type of game. I can imagine it working for D&D. The thing is, it won't work for the standard D&D campaign (4 PCs in a dungeon crawly environment). But I can see it working in a very character development centered game. An example of this: Justice League. How do you make adventures for a group that has a superman type in it? Give each party member something to do (except for Aquaman. Let him die)Imagine the campaign about the noble samurai and his entourage. The samurai may be higher powered (in combat and social skills) but his assistants can do stuff that he could never do. The  courtier could be excellent in political intrigue, the ninja could be the "stealth and poison guy" (and maybe assassin)and ronin could be "Mr. Investigation".What I mean to say is that it would require a lot of GM attention and planning. I'd imagine each adventure, each campaign to be a multi-faceted gem with each player getting his/her share of glory each time even though the Samurai could easily toast any of them. I can't imagine doing this myself (yet) though but I've seen a few GMs that were able to pull it off. (I played Stealth and Poison guy)The moral evolution. Well, its already been said that moral evolution can be a side-story instead of a main point. If it is a main point, I'd think that it would be an NPC with the PCs guiding his path. Imagine a BOED campaign where PCs have to battle evil and help mortals resist temptation (or achieve redemption). It depends on the players. I'd imagine that most don't like support roles. I guess I was blessed with nice ones that were willing to go along with the story. At the end of my campaign, I held two adventures dealing with the consequences of what the PCs did. The second (and final) adventure was centered mainly on one PCs de-evolution into evil. By the end, he had turned from an honorable and gentle paladin into a hard-edged guy who would do ANYTHING for the cause of good, even kill his own wife and child.  By no means did I force his corruption, though I did put a lot of hardship in his way. He made that choice by himself and by the end, surpised everyone (except me, who had anticipated most of the endings to the game) by his actions. During the game, his companions tried to comfort his character and tried to sway him back but his murderous acts at the end spelled his ultimate descent into darkness.Rough and gritty/high body count. Once again, it's really dependent on players, GM and playing style. Some players like going through hell itself to survive. Some GM's like putting difficult challenges that the PCs have to go through, sometimes surviving only by the skin of their teeth. Some playing styles use an adversarial-like relationship between PCs and GM without the hate and anger and only with the love of story and challenge.I agree with KB's main point though. Just because it makes a great book/show/movie/etc. doesn't make it a great adventure. I would add that it takes a certain mix of GM, player and playing style to achieve the best kind of adventure (the one you end up raving about for years after). One more thing:Normal human beings? Ever played Call of Cthulu? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification