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="Barastrondo" data-source="post: 1122961" data-attributes="member: 3820">But that's cool, too. Hell, I found out recently that a couple of players who had moderately good buy-in with my D&D game and moderately good ideas for said setting have Total Complete Buy-in with the pulp genre, becoming twice the players I'm used to. So yeah, you can say "sadly", but you don't really mean it. If they hook into the default D&D with the sort of laser-like intensity that involves Prisantha's creative sculpting of dream spells and Heydricus' just-perfect over-the-top speeches, you're doing a lot better than a whole lot of gaming groups. So you can be justly proud, as I know you are.Sure. That's what I'm saying; episodes like that are perfect for your style, and are what hook people like me. I like to think I'm clever enough to notice when an author's voice is exactly where it should be. We aren't arguing. I'm saying that one writing style works better to capture the cool stuff from one style of game, and another style works better to capture the cool stuff from another style of game. You noted that at-the-table flavor can hurt a fictional recap of a D&D game; I agree. I just think that, depending on the game itself (and how well it hews to the expectations of the average D&D gamer), it doesn't have to. In fact, for those games that kick a bunch of the standard D&D expectations out the window, a writer is arguably better off showing the in-character result and not the metagame exposition. But this game isn't one of them, and "show, don't tell" is not a rule that would help your Story Hour voice more than it would hurt it. Y'know?</blockquote>

Verification