Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="prabe" data-source="post: 8225958" data-attributes="member: 7016699">There are two sets of notes in the campaigns I'm running. Possibly a third.One set of notes is the notes I write as prep. Names of NPCs, places, and such. Situations as they exist at the start of session (or when encountered). If I'm anticipating combat, lists of the opposition. Treasure, if I'm placing it.The other set of notes is what my wife writes down. What actually happens in the session. (These are what I'm posting in the Story Hour threads.)The notes I write in prep, I write after reading my wife's in-session notes for the previous session, so I can keep the situations consistent with prior events. Often, what happens in a session results from (metaphorically) standing at the starting (framed) situation, looking past the PCs' actions, and narrating what we see.The possible third set of notes is the world-building notes I'm generating as I create the setting the campaigns are happening in. If I'm being honest, I enjoy world-building a lot, and that's a major part of why I reserve most of it for myself.I saw where [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER] compared AP-play to Gloomhaven, and I think that's a strong comparison. I enjoy the tactical elements of Gloomhaven (and I enjoy other collaborative games like Arkham Horror and Eldritch Horror) but I think the RPG-esque elements--including the campaign style of long-term play--are the weakest parts. Between Arkham Horror 3 (current edition) and Eldritch Horror, I much prefer Eldritch Horror: I find it more-replayable precisely because the elements are more random, and not written to fit into a path. I guess a summary of my feelings here is that I think writing RPG-esque elements into a collaborative boardgame or putting a TRPG on a fixed (ish) path make for games that don't give me what I want out of either. Which isn't really about notes. Sorry.</blockquote>

Verification