Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="SiderisAnon" data-source="post: 3637436" data-attributes="member: 44949">I don't know what I would want out of a "Living" style game, but I do know what I would not want. There were three things with the RPGA that drove me absolutely nuts and made me stop running adventures for the RPGA. (I hated to stop because I like helping people into the hobby, but it was just not worth my time anymore.)The first and worst problem was the modules. Many of them were quite awful. I won't go into details because there have been other threads on the internet talking about the multitude of issues.The second problem I had was that as a DM there was no freedom. I had to run the adventure their way, with their setup and statistics, and there was no latitude to adjust the adventure to the party. I understand that when you're running modules across the country with different groups, you want everyone to get the same experience and not have one DM be "easier" on the party than another. However, I have seen a TPK simply because the group of characters/players at hand were not suited to the chosen module. (Obviously, this could be less of a problem in a more home-game environment, but unless you allow DMs to read the module before deciding to run it, which I was not able to do with the RPGA, there's no way to ensure that a particular module would be suitable for your group.)The third problem I had, which was the least of the problems, was that with RPGA you had no choice in your players. There were some players that came to the RPGA that no one wanted to game with. However, as long as they didn't violate too many of the RPGA rules, you couldn't get rid of them. (And you pretty much have to obviously cheat multiple times or punch another player in order to get tossed from the RPGA events.) Obviously, if your "Living" model is about home play, this would not be an issue.I do think that if you want the "Living" model to work, you will need to be updating the players on the storyline of the world over time. If you want players to feel like their characters are part of a greater living world, they need to hear about things going on in other parts of the realm or of the world. Maybe instead of 1-year story arcs, some adventures are playable for only a few months, and then there are reports posted so that the players can hear rumors of the things that happened over in Glendale in their world. (Assuming they weren't part of that.)The problem that comes up here is what if that Glendale information doesn't match my home game? What if my party succeeded but most parties failed? (Or the other way around.) The world is changing in a way that doesn't make sense for what happened in our game. Over time, we get further and further apart until it's not the same campaign.I will admit that I would never run from a "Living" world. My games tend to involve things that make noticeable changes in the world, whether it's setting up new businesses in a town and growing it or building a castle or claiming more land form the "monster" areas, the parties tend to make an impression. In a "Living" world, what they do might not have any effect on the "Living" part of the world, and that would seem disappointing.</blockquote>

Verification