[dungeoncrawl] Re: Campaign thoughts
- From: jimkaren@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- To: dungeoncrawl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 10:33:32 US/Eastern
Anything I ever ran was from a module
too. I forgot to mention that
before. :)
> Ah yes, never shall I live down
the "Giant Robot" plot. But, I must
defend
> myself by saying that it truly wasn't
my idea. It was a module that I ran.
> A poorly written module with a giant
robot set in a fantasy world...but a
> module none-the-less!! :)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Johnathan Detrick
[mailto:jdetrick@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 9:58
AM
> To: Riders II
> Subject: [dungeoncrawl] Re: Campaign
thoughts
>
>
> Very nicely, well thought out e-
mail Damon. I think you nailed a
> lot of things pretty squarely. I
still stand by my theory of the two
> top priorities of the DM though. Of
course, you can break DMs down even
> further. To compare, I see it as the
classes in the game. There are
> four basic classes: fighter, thief,
mage and cleric. No matter how
> many prestige classes, sub-classes,
epic classes and the like that they
> create, all classes can be broken
down into one of the four main
> classes. Sure, some have parts of
more than one class, but they all
> fall within one of the big four. I
think DMs are the same way.
> However, I break the four of us down
a little differently.
> Bobby is the "martial arts" DM.
> Jim is the "make my characters
miserable" DM.
> Damon is the "giant robot" DM.
> I am the "plots so complicated
we'll never finish them" DM.
> Sorry, couldn't resist. :)
>
>
>
>
> Hi guys! Sorry it's taken me so long
to jump in here. I finally
> finished
> reading the books that you guys have
been writing back and forth. :)
>
> In my opinion, I would normally
prefer to have the more intricate
> details
> that Jim tends to put in. I like the
fleshed out backstory and the
> vivid
> accounts of things. However, I
understand that with our current amount
> of
> time to play D&D, we just don't have
the time for it.
>
> As John said, there are two BASIC
types of DM's, but I can look at the
> four
> DM's that I've experienced and see
four different styles.
>
> On one end of the spectrum you have
Bobby. Bobby is a very, very
> descriptive DM who mentally builds a
world around your character(s).
> I'd
> say that Bobby is more focused on the
history and little details that
> make a
> world rich. Everything is important
and described. The plots are good,
> but
> "generally" less complex and detailed
than some other DM's. Combat is
> described in detail. The main focus
is on the ambiance of the world and
> of
> the characters. This is a slower
paced campaign, because it takes more
> time
> to describe things and to work with
all of the details, but it also
> gives
> the characters the most opportunity
to flesh themselves out and you
> always
> feel like you accomplish something.
The emphasis here is on the world
> and
> the characters role in that world.
>
> Jim is next on the spectrum, still
incorporating a lot of description
> and
> history in his worlds, but not
focusing as much on the smaller details
> about
> the characters. His things are more
plot driven, although sometimes
> those
> plots are driven by characters, the
main focus is the story. How the
> world
> interacts with that story is another
important part of it. The plots
> are
> often very, very complex and the
world is vividly described. I think
> this
> gives the characters less of an
opportunity to focus on their
> personality
> and sense of self, but it provides
more of an opportunity for the
> character
> to interact with the world and see
what changes occur. The emphasis is
> on
> the story mostly, but also on the
world in general.
>
> I think I'm next on the spectrum. I
tend to have much simpler plots
> than
> any other DM. Mine are usually
straight forward and my focus is
> generally
> on setting. Not so much the NPC's to
interact with, but the environment
>
> that the characters are in. I try to
give the characters things to
> interact
> with that are personal to them and I
like to make the characters feel as
>
> though they are part of something
important. This has its downfalls, as
> it
> can get overdone. I don't have
nearly as much description as Jim or
> Bobby,
> but I do think that I focus more on
characters than Jim does. I don't
> provide the ambiance, but give the
characters a chance to shine. The
> emphasis is mostly on the characters.
>
> John is the opposite end of the
spectrum from Bobby. John focuses more
> on
> plot. He isn't concerned so much
with description, although he does
> throw
> it in when it is warranted. He tends
to be more into developing a
> complex
> plot or plots that interweave with
each other. He is great at "teaching
>
> lessons" with his plots and they
often have the characters questioning
> or
> strengthening their resolve on
different issues. I don't think his
> focus is
> so much on making the characters look
good as it is seeing how they
> interact
> with NPC's and the plot in general.
The emphasis here is mainly on the
> plot, but also John develops his
villains more than anyone, I think.
> You
> really end up wanting to see the
villains fail.
>
> Now, these are all just my opinions,
but you can see how different the
> styles are. I definitely don't think
that any one style is better than
> another, although there are some that
I prefer. However, as you can
> see,
> some of the styles just
aren't "compatible" with the time
frames that we
>
> play in. If we could play 3 times a
week for a couple of hours each
> time,
> things would be different, but since
we can't, I think we have to make
> sacrifices. Unfortunately, some of
those sacrifices are what makes the
> game
> so fun for some of us.
>
> But, even with the time constraints,
the fun of the game is still
> there. I
> have no doubt that we could easily
play out this Riders thing for a
> couple
> of years.
>
> Heck, all of you would be forty by
the time we'd finish...I'd still be
> in my
> 30's, but we won't talk about
that. :)
>
> Seriously though, we could take one
campaign and make that the focus of
> the
> next several years without a problem,
I'm sure. But, I just think that
> we
> would be depriving ourselves of
getting to experience so many other
> campaigns, characters and ideas. In
essence, we are sacrificing a bit
> of
> quality to experience more quantity.
But I think that we can make that
> quantity a heck of a lot of fun to
play!
>
> I'll answer my expectations for the
Riders in another email because this
> is
> getting to be a book!!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
