What do people think of campaign twists?

[jdrakeh]

If I am led to believe that I'm playing in a 3e city-based campaign, and I build a socially-minded rogue, and then I find that I'm actually playing in an underworld filled with undead, I'm going to be rather put out - the DM has allowed me to make a character that's going to be next to useless in the game. That's not much fun.

Excellent point. I guess that goes for me, as well — if the twist will make my charatcer near useless, I need to know about it beforehand. Playing near useless (or totally useless) characters is not any fun. In fact, I recall a thread along those lines being posted here (something about a social-ish rogue being trapped in campaign that revolved around a tomb of undead and iron golems, IIRC).

 

[Lord Mhoram]

Collaboratively all the way.

When our group decides on games, The GM will lay out the basic structure/idea for the game. As every member of the group GMs (we rotate), we always have 4 or 5 backlogged games. So the group votes on what to play next.

If there is no concrete info on the game it will never get voted in to play. We'll do one of the others.


As for twists in the game - if the basic idea of the game is completely twisted then I walk. I build my characters based on the tone, approach and plot of the game. If that changes, then my character (and the structure I have for both build and personality) change. At that point I walk.

I like to have the group make characters together, and I will make major plot elements of the game tie into the character's backstory and such. I don't do twist games.

I prefer spoilers to getting a screwjob.

 

[delericho]

In general, what do you folks prefer:

1. Collaborating with the GM before the campaign starts so that you have a clear idea of what the campaign is going to beabout and how your character fits into the campaign.

OR

2. Making characters in something of a vacuum and not really knowing what the themes are going to be.

Somewhere in the middle. IMO, the players should have some sort of idea about campaign setting and themes (at least initially), but shouldn't know everything. Certainly, the old standard of "plotting your character out to 20th level" always rubbed me wrong - sure, you can do it, but be prepared to have to replan if the campaign goes in a different direction. (The same applies to DMs as well, BTW, if the PCs take the campaign off in a direction you didn't foresee, the correct response is usually to replan some or all of the remaining campaign, not to railroad them back on track. Usually.)

If something is going to happen to the characters early on which sets up the campaign would you rather know about it before we start. For example, if all of the characters are going to die in the first session and the first half of the campaign is going to involve fighting your way out of the underworld and then seeking out and reclaiming your soul.

Something like that I would probably want to know about in advance. If nothing else, that premise would probably see me approaching the DM about playing a more off-beat character than normal - a character that wouldn't fit a 'standard' FR or Eberron game might well fit really well here, and it would be good to know ahead of time so I could use such a character.

 

[jenskot]

I prefer #1, colaboration as a player and as GM. I love when the characters are tailor made for the scenario.