Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 9839910" data-attributes="member: 6785785">Just FYI, I ran a game of BitD that went longer than 50 sessions. The game does have elements in there that support it. You generally have to embrace some amount of troupe play, and you have to expect that PCs will die or retire, and new PCs will be introduced. I’ve also run or played in player-driven campaigns of Spire, Stonetop, athe Between,  A Thousand Arrows, Heart, Dungeon World, and Scum & Villainy among others. The lengths of these games varied a good amount, but I would say that all of them was shorter than the traditional “long campaign” that we tend to think of when we think of D&D. But that’s not a bad thing. These games are propulsive. Things move. The status quo is changing all the time. Most of them are far more memorable than the long D&D campaigns I’ve been in. Then of course, you can also shorten the length of a D&D campaign. There’s nothing that says your campaign against the Usurper has to be X sessions long. If it seems to make sense to wrap things up because play has lost momentum, then wrap things up. I mean… the premise has a built in endpoint… the eventual showdown with the Usurper. So offer some opportunities to the players to build toward that. Feeling that their goal may be close, they’re likely to be more energized. Take advantage of that enthusiasm and build things to a climax. Then start a new campaign. If you want that one to be player driven, then think about what worked and what didn’t in the Usurper campaign, and adjust accordingly.</blockquote>

Verification