|
4 years ago ::
Dec 10, 2009 - 7:16AM
#961
|
|
|
Sounds like he'd be a problem no matter what system was used... never understood that mentality when it came to gaming. It always struck me as a sadistic bastard having fun at the expense of their players, rather than a group having fun together.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 10, 2009 - 8:11AM
#962
|
Date Joined:
Sep 15, 2006
|
None of my 1st edition games had high mortality rates. The only group I was ever in with a high mortality rate was a recent 3.5 group (my only 3.5 experience).
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 10, 2009 - 10:38AM
#963
|
|
|
You're honestly going to tell me that you, as a DM, have no idea how you intend to end the campaign (should it run that long)? That's rather sad, and NOT a testament to an involved or dedicated DM. Railroading has ZERO to do with it. You're the DM. You present the adventures the PCs are going to go through. Yes, they go off on side-treks and tangents, but a camapign is little more than a string of adventures with a distinct beginning and end. If you have no idea how you're going to progress your players through your campaign...I really don't know what to say.
It has become far too easy to claim DM "railroading", but there is a HUGE difference between writing a campaign where you know how you want things to progress in order to further the storyline and railroading, where no matter what the PCs do, you shoehorn them back in line. The players can go off on as many tangents as they please, and the DM can incorporate them into his story without sacrificing the ultimate goals of the campaign. That's basic DMing 101. At least I thought it was. That's the entire point of a campaign. If there is no ultimate goal to pursue, then you're not running a campaign...you're just running a few adventures that might or might not have anything to do with each other. There's nothing at all wrong with that, just please don't confuse it with a campaign.
Or you, know, you can start with a single story arc, see what the players are enjoying and continuously build off of a shared narrative. I haven't planned the end of a campaign since I first started playing. I'd plan all these spectacular events and amazing stories -- and my players didn't give a monkey's balls about them. This got me really frustrated.
Until I grew up and realized that I'm not writing a novel. I am presenting my players with challenges they find interesting and narrating them through what THEY want to do. I'll plan a short story arc based off of recent campaign events and I'll alter the NPCs and game world based on what has happened in the past but I don't plan more than a few sessions ahead. Mostly because I don't know what my players will be interested in 1 month from now or what in-game event will draw them away. I don't force all my tangents to eventually lead back to an overarching plot. Sometimes my players lead me off in directions that are WAY cooler than what I may have originally been thinking and so I ditch my planned story arc and run with what they give me. I don't take their idea, brainstorm ways that it can lead or fit back into my plotline, and then lead everything back to that. This is far more rewarding for everyone at the table. They get what interests them and I still get to direct the show.
Does this make me a lazy DM? You appear to think so. I take what my players give me and I roll with it. I believe I am a better DM than you because you seem to need a pre-defined narrative to create a rewarding experience whereas I can improvise and work with my players to give a rewarding experience that we all built. The way you do it is much more likely to result in Railroading than my way of doing things.
Yes a DM needs to have fun too. But if the DM fun affects the Player's fun then you won't be a DM for long.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 10, 2009 - 10:47AM
#964
|
Date Joined:
Jan 22, 2008
|
The narrative can change. The dm can have a specific story line in mind but without railroading the pcs could go off on a completley different direction, and to me sometimes thats more entertaining.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 10, 2009 - 1:49PM
#965
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2008
|
I'll plan a short story arc based off of recent campaign events and I'll alter the NPCs and game world based on what has happened in the past but I don't plan more than a few sessions ahead. Mostly because I don't know what my players will be interested in 1 month from now or what in-game event will draw them away. I don't force all my tangents to eventually lead back to an overarching plot. Sometimes my players lead me off in directions that are WAY cooler than what I may have originally been thinking and so I ditch my planned story arc and run with what they give me. I don't take their idea, brainstorm ways that it can lead or fit back into my plotline, and then lead everything back to that. This is far more rewarding for everyone at the table. They get what interests them and I still get to direct the show.
Then what you are doing is not a campaign. As long as you're aware of that, then it's fine. I am finding that folks are having a bit of difficulty when it comes to common terms used in D&D. In this case "campaign" is one of them. Adventures that skip around with no particular plot or purpose are awesome...they just aren't a campaign.
Take the Scales of War path for 4E. Ran independently of each other, they are adventures. Put together, they form a campaign. There is an opening adventure that introduces the players to the storyline, and each adventure flows into the next with a definitive end-goal. That's what seperates it from just a few adventures. That's what makes it a campaign. While the PCs are going through these adventures, they can go off on as many side-treks and tangents as they wish, as long as the end-goal is kept in mind and pursued, then it's still a campaign. See the difference now?
Does this make me a lazy DM? You appear to think so. I take what my players give me and I roll with it. I believe I am a better DM than you because you seem to need a pre-defined narrative to create a rewarding experience whereas I can improvise and work with my players to give a rewarding experience that we all built. The way you do it is much more likely to result in Railroading than my way of doing things.
Yes a DM needs to have fun too. But if the DM fun affects the Player's fun then you won't be a DM for long.
Finally, you said something that makes sense. This statement I can stand behind 100%. Nice job.
Moderated by
ORC_Sinister
on Dec 10, 2009 - 07:03PM
In fond memory of Mark "Wrecan" Monack.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 10, 2009 - 2:18PM
#966
|
|
|
Hocus- I think your being much too narrow in your definition of campaign. I don't know where you're getting your definition from, but when I use the word I am implying that the same characters will inhabit the same setting and that one adventure will flow chronologically from the previous adventure. I know it's not official, but the wikipedia article agrees with me. The only reason I site that article is to suggest that there is broad-based support for that position.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 10, 2009 - 3:24PM
#967
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2008
|
Hocus-
I think your being much too narrow in your definition of campaign. I don't know where you're getting your definition from, but when I use the word I am implying that the same characters will inhabit the same setting and that one adventure will flow chronologically from the previous adventure. I know it's not official, but the wikipedia article agrees with me. The only reason I site that article is to suggest that there is broad-based support for that position.
Flow chronilogically. Key words there.
Main Entry: 1cam·paign Pronunciation: \(ˌ)kam-ˈpān\ Function: noun Etymology: French campagne, probably from Italian campagna level country, campaign, from Late Latin campania level country, from Latin, the level country around Naples Date: circa 1656 1 : a connected series of military operations forming a distinct phase of a war
2 : a connected series of operations designed to bring about a particular result
Number one might fit a wargame or minis battle in our context, but I'm using the #2 definition. It isn't something I made up, or something I'm taking out of context. It's a textbook definition. That's why multiple sequential adventures are called "campaigns" instead of just multiple sequential adventures. Like I said before, no matter how you run your games, be them sporadic, fly-by-the-cuff games that go in a hundred different directions or a purposeful, goal-oriented campaign, as long as it's fun then go for it.
In fond memory of Mark "Wrecan" Monack.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 10, 2009 - 3:54PM
#968
|
|
|
You're honestly going to tell me that you, as a DM, have no idea how you intend to end the campaign (should it run that long)? That's rather sad, and NOT a testament to an involved or dedicated DM. Railroading has ZERO to do with it. You're the DM. You present the adventures the PCs are going to go through. Yes, they go off on side-treks and tangents, but a camapign is little more than a string of adventures with a distinct beginning and end. If you have no idea how you're going to progress your players through your campaign...I really don't know what to say.
I am running a campaign, and I don't know how it will end. My players are in the heroic tier, they are incredibly invested in their characters, and I have no idea what they'll be fighting from levels 20 to 30. Frankly, I don't know what we'll be doing ten levels from now. I'm trying to respond to what they show interest in. Here's the thing though - you and I both know that I'm not sure how the campaign will end, but do my players? Would it make a difference to them if I had every adventure plotted out from Levels 1 through 30? Could they even tell the difference? If not, then how is one a campaign and one...something else? What would you like me to call it, then? A series of adventures that flow chronologically and involve the same characters interacting in the same setting? That's kind of a mouthful. I'll stick with campaign if you don't mind.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 10, 2009 - 4:14PM
#969
|
|
|
Key words there.
Main Entry: 1cam·paign
For the love of the Chained-God - no one tell wrecan or Maxperson there is a definition debate here otherwise it will be 3 pages before the thread will recover!
Pro DnD Member of the Axis of Awesome Fighters: Using socks to kill monsters since 2012 DnD Next: Now with more then 4 minutes of Roleplay per gaming hour Spoiler:
Show
"If you can't make an interesting human fighter, then you aren't ready to play anything else yet" Edymnion
"The idea of resting up between encounters to fill-up on hit points and spells struck my meta-gaming nine-year-old as a distinct possibility. "Are you mad?" says my seven-year-old "This place is full of monsters!" "jamesgrahamuk
All characters have a story. Spoiler:
Show
Sometimes that story is short and sometimes it is long. They can be tragic, comic or absurd. Some teach. Some are just to fill the empty spaces in our lives. Rarely it is a transcendent fugue only half remembered but wondered at. And frequently: "it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." -William Shakespeare
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 10, 2009 - 4:17PM
#970
|
Date Joined:
Jun 27, 2004
|
Key words there.
Main Entry: 1cam·paign
For the love of the Chained-God - no one tell wrecan or Maxperson there is a definition debate here otherwise it will be 3 pages before the thread will recover!
Ha, maybe - if you have your display set to 40-post-per-page! 
Feedback Disclaimer
Show
Yes, I am expressing my opinions (even complaints - le gasp!) about the current iteration of the play-test that we actually have in front of us.
No, I'm not going to wait for you to tell me when it's okay to start expressing my concerns (unless you are WotC).
(And no, my comments on this forum are not of the same tone or quality as my actual survey feedback.)
A Psion for Next (Playable Draft)A Barbarian for Next (Brainstorming Still)My 4e Projects
Show
|
|
|
