Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 3545881" data-attributes="member: 22779">I've done pretty much that approach as well most of the time.&nbsp; The problem, for me, comes not at the beginning, but months down the road as campaign after campaign comes to a stuttering halt.&nbsp; I've had it happen to me as a DM and as a player.&nbsp; Honestly, the World's Largest Dungeon is the first successful campaign I've run in years.&nbsp; By successful I mean a campaign that had closure instead of simply petering out.&nbsp; I know, for myself, that the strain of keeping ahead of the disaster curve of coming to the session with nothing is a lot of stress.&nbsp; Having a solid arc with lots of backup relieves a lot of that stress.Oh, I agree.&nbsp; You cannot get completely away from world building really, any more than you can completely get away from desserts.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; You're right.&nbsp; You really do have to do some. There is a danger here though of conflating theme with setting.&nbsp; Space exploration is a theme.&nbsp; The Trek Universe is the setting.&nbsp; I could come up with a number of adventures based on the theme of space exploration and not refer to the Trek Universe in the slightest. After I have my campaign set, then I can go back and maybe add in some stuff as needed.I'm not sure if I agree with this Rounser.&nbsp; Are you saying that smaller settings are inherently better?&nbsp; That I disagree with strongly.&nbsp; There's nothing wrong with the idea of having 500 square miles of action packed locations, so long as you don't mean that they have to be contiguous.&nbsp; A campaign which features travel along a Silk Road style set up will have a huge area from end to end, but, the actual adventure areas will be only as large as they need to be.Just like in Star Trek where we skip over all that boring travel time between episodes, we can do the same thing in an adventure first campaign.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 3545881, member: 22779"] I've done pretty much that approach as well most of the time. The problem, for me, comes not at the beginning, but months down the road as campaign after campaign comes to a stuttering halt. I've had it happen to me as a DM and as a player. Honestly, the World's Largest Dungeon is the first successful campaign I've run in years. By successful I mean a campaign that had closure instead of simply petering out. I know, for myself, that the strain of keeping ahead of the disaster curve of coming to the session with nothing is a lot of stress. Having a solid arc with lots of backup relieves a lot of that stress. Oh, I agree. You cannot get completely away from world building really, any more than you can completely get away from desserts. :) You're right. You really do have to do some. There is a danger here though of conflating theme with setting. Space exploration is a theme. The Trek Universe is the setting. I could come up with a number of adventures based on the theme of space exploration and not refer to the Trek Universe in the slightest. After I have my campaign set, then I can go back and maybe add in some stuff as needed. I'm not sure if I agree with this Rounser. Are you saying that smaller settings are inherently better? That I disagree with strongly. There's nothing wrong with the idea of having 500 square miles of action packed locations, so long as you don't mean that they have to be contiguous. A campaign which features travel along a Silk Road style set up will have a huge area from end to end, but, the actual adventure areas will be only as large as they need to be. Just like in Star Trek where we skip over all that boring travel time between episodes, we can do the same thing in an adventure first campaign. [/QUOTE]

Verification