Results 1 to 2 of 2
  1. #1
    Niels E. Wisth
    Guest

    BR Adventures (and roleplaying

    Ok, this might be considered a bit off topic, so those of you who's not
    interested in our little discussion may very well skip it. On the other
    hand, personally I believe it to be one of the most interesting threads to
    appear. ;)

    Nuff said, back to our little argument:

    Gregoire Alexandre Seguin wrote:
    > - Ruins of Undermountain was a dungeon crawl. I will give you that.
    I've
    > played And I say again Played, the "Temple of Elemental Evil" at least 10
    > times. I am currently doing it again with my GreyHawk DM.

    (Stuff about the Temple of Elemental Evil snipped)

    Well, my only encounter with the TEE made the scenario seem extraordinarily
    lousy, but then I had an extraordinarily lousy DM. ;) I haven't read it, so
    I can't really discuss it with you.

    > - A good adventure is one wher you can go into more than once, knowing
    the
    > plot and still find new twists and traps.

    Now, here I disagree with you completely. IMHO, a good _computer_ RPG is
    one where you can go into more than once, knowing the plot and still find
    new twists and traps. A good adventure is one where the characters are
    truly motivated, where the plot is based around the specific character
    backgrounds, where playing it several times would be no fun due to the
    information-based plot structure, and where the world/setting around it
    still plays a major part.

    From your earlier postings it seems like you stress the _game_ part of
    RPGs, while I focus on the _roleplaying_ part, including building a good,
    realistic (withing the boundaries of the setting) story together with my
    players.

    Then, I believe we have varying definitions of the word "roleplaying" as
    well, so you'll probably disagree with me. ;)

    > >If the Creative Folks at TSR could publish a scenario built around
    > >pre-generated characters (with about 5000 words of background and
    > >personality each), with realistic character motivation to drive the plot
    > >forward, and a loose, non-railroaded structure, Birthright could REALLY
    > >show what it's good for.

    > - Well, Birthright being good for every aspect of the game I truly
    > disagree. I have played a D&D game with pre-made characters. It was
    fun,
    > but I couldn't then built it into a campain because the players could not
    > develop the same love for their characters as one they have invented
    > themselves.

    A scenario with pre-generated charachters should be extensive enough to
    _be_ a campaign in itself. As for developing love for characters - OK, you
    have a point, but I find playing a detailed (and, above all, well-written!)
    character once in a while MOST entertaining. It's more of a challenge,
    really, to role-play a character written by someone else, since the writer
    does not know your (the player's) roleplaying strengths and weaknesses.
    There are too many people out there who stick to their favorite stereotypes
    ("What? You killed Balin, my dwarf fighter! Ok, my next one is named
    Dwalin. Pass me the PHB"), so publishing a few challenging characters
    wouldn't hurt... :)

    I love playing characters I have made myself, but creating a character
    takes a lot of time, and doing it properly requires a GM with a lot of time
    on his/her hands (merging the ton of background threads into the campaign's
    plot, etc)...

    (If all adventures fit all PCs)
    > - As for most of the adventures being like that, I disagree. It's up to
    > the DM to buy a good scenario that fits around their PC group, or have
    the
    > PCs built characters around the scenario. BR has enough described people
    > to last me a lifetime. How am I supposed to remember their names and
    where
    > to find them.

    Regarding characters and scenarios, I agree. But from my experience, it
    takes more time to adapt the scenario to your characters than it takes to
    make one from scratch. :)

    Regarding "described people," why should you? It's _your_ Cerillia,
    populated with whomever you please. If you wish the ruler of Osoerde to be
    called "John the Black," so be it! Improvising isn't a crime (at least not
    in Norway). ;)

    > - Mabe an index of described places and characters would be more useful.

    True. When you have improvised a lot of NPCs and locations, it's a good
    idea to write them down for future reference. Concistency is a must in any
    serious campaign...

    > - I don't think (again, no offence) that you will find any authors of
    > Birthright that will put in that someone bought a 20GB horse.... wether
    > it's a boxed set, or an epic quest.

    ;D

    > >To those who run published scenarios because they do not have time to
    make
    > >their own: A scenario with finished, detailed characters would both save
    > >time in adapting the scenario to the PCs, and give a much better
    > >roleplaying experience (not to mention challenge - what is more fun than
    to
    > >play a complete character that you haven't made yourself?).
    >
    > - I partially agree with your comment. I like playing ready made
    > adventures because they easily cast characters in a given direction.
    Then
    > again, they tend to still limit the roleplay because the players aren't
    > playing the same style as the characters were intended.

    Well, that's a problem with poor players, not a poor scenario, eh?

    > - Many adventures expect players to sit and think, or to go forward and
    > attack. Many adventures do not expect characters to sit and wait or to
    > hide and, not attracting suspicion, sneek up to information, burglar
    their
    > way to knowledge. Any way you look at it, you'll need to modify the
    > adventure and know how to improvise.

    Oh, yes. Definately. A scenario should ideally leave all options open -
    railroad adventures are rather uninspiring to play. Improvisation is alpha
    and omega in roleplaying...

    > >Birthright is such an excellent and revolutionary setting, that wasting
    it
    > >on old-fashioned scenarios is a real waste. With BR, TSR has taken the
    step
    > >into the future regarding setting. But is TSR ready for modernization
    > >regarding adventures and scenarios as well?
    >
    > - I don't quite agree. BR is revolutionary by the fact that you can play
    > "Wide Scale" campains and battles AS WELL as "short scale" dungeon
    crawls.
    > I think that TSR doesn't really need many other worlds anymore.
    Birthright
    > is ok for anyone to play wether you like the old style of adventure or
    want
    > to play a war game style game.

    Ah, my dear Watson, I see the nature of our little disagreement. As I've
    said above, we focus on different aspects of roleplaying. Sure, I respect
    your gaming style, but there are more than one way to fry a hen. What I see
    as revolutionary about the Birthright setting isn't the new rules for
    realm-governing or warfare - it's the world itself. You have five distinct
    cultures with tons of roleplaying challenges, you have a functioning
    economic life, well-defined social structures, and intriguing, realistic
    (within the setting) politics. They have changed the "I cast a
    fireball"-nature of standard AD&D magic to something new and inspireing,
    have a consistent history, and even a theological frame.

    I don't want to play either the "old style of adventure" or a "war game
    style game." Sure, I might want to include elements of these, but the main
    point of my roleplaying is *simulation*. I want to be a different person
    living in a different culture, with a different wold-view, different
    ethics, morals, and religion. If I, for just a few moments, really can
    _think_ like a Cerillian, be he Sidhe, Anuirean or Khinasi, and know that
    everyone else around the gaming table is too, I know why I roleplay.

    As a GM, I want my players to experience this. When I start up a campaign
    in a new setting, I usually write cultural compendiums (let's say 25 pages)
    for each player, to give him or her a foundation to base their roleplaying
    on. Now, if I could go into a store and buy a scenario where the characters
    included all this information, as well as a unique personality and
    background story filled with plot threads, it would lessen the amount of
    work both I and my players would have to go through to start something
    worthwhile.

    > - IMHO, TSR (or WotC) should continue to make all sort of different
    > adventures for Birthright.

    Yes, I agree. There's a lot of gamers out there, playing in a multitude of
    different ways. If TSR would publish scenarios where the "for 4-6
    characters of levels 1-3" was replaced with "for 5-6 experienced players
    who enjoy advanced, realistic roleplaying" or "for 4-5 novice players who
    enjoy wide-scale campaigns and battles," the number of customers would
    probably grow... :)

    They've already published "normal" scenarios, so an extensive one based
    around a cast of, let's say, six well-written characters, would be due...


    - --
    Niels E. Wisth - Nudis Verbis

  2. #2
    Inge =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kj=F
    Guest

    BR Adventures (and roleplaying

    >Ok, this might be considered a bit off topic, so those of you who's not
    >interested in our little discussion may very well skip it. On the other
    >hand, personally I believe it to be one of the most interesting threads to
    >appear. ;)

    Off topic???? How can it be. I think that this thread is the more
    interesting, since how adventures should be built up is quintessential to
    any roleplaying campaign. I used to play in a gaming environment where the
    focus was solely on powergaming. After some time, "roleplaying" became
    extremely boring, and frustrating since new challenges were hard to find. I
    became frustrated with roleplaying in general and Ad&D in particular. I
    didn't even touch AD&D until Birthright came along. I can't praise the
    system enough, since it actually raises the questions that are interesting
    in a fantasy setting with regards to culture, race, politics, religion etc.

    I would consider the camapign I'm running now very dynamic, but I chose to
    start all my players off at a disadvantage, and after 1 1/2 years playing
    this campaign they are just starting to fulfill their potential.

    Well, enough about this ranting, to the points raised below!!

    >(Stuff about the Temple of Elemental Evil snipped)

    My experience with TEE is that it leaves no room for for personal
    roleplaying, there is little possibility of having personal goals for your
    character!

    >Well, my only encounter with the TEE made the scenario seem extraordinarily
    >lousy, but then I had an extraordinarily lousy DM. ;) I haven't read it, so
    >I can't really discuss it with you.

    Second that!


    >Then, I believe we have varying definitions of the word "roleplaying" as
    >well, so you'll probably disagree with me. ;)

    Most people have different opinions about roleplaying, and a scenario which
    one person finds brilliant another would consider mediocre at best.

    >A scenario with pre-generated charachters should be extensive enough to
    >_be_ a campaign in itself. As for developing love for characters - OK, you
    >have a point, but I find playing a detailed (and, above all, well-written!)
    >character once in a while MOST entertaining. It's more of a challenge,
    >really, to role-play a character written by someone else, since the writer
    >does not know your (the player's) roleplaying strengths and weaknesses.
    >There are too many people out there who stick to their favorite stereotypes
    >("What? You killed Balin, my dwarf fighter! Ok, my next one is named
    >Dwalin. Pass me the PHB"), so publishing a few challenging characters
    >wouldn't hurt... :)

    The fact that many people have stereotypes they play is true, but I have
    discovered personally that there are som types of character(not necessarily
    classes) that I prefer to play, and to many they seem VERY much alike, but
    these are the types I play best, since I have no wish to come to the point
    of exhausting the character too early, where I have used up the potential
    of the character. I believe that this is basically a much more healthy way
    to approach character-generation than to put oneself in the situation where
    I -HAVE- to make a totally new kind of character each time. If I can't put
    something of myself into a RPG, I don't think I would be doing it anymore.

    >I love playing characters I have made myself, but creating a character
    >takes a lot of time, and doing it properly requires a GM with a lot of time
    >on his/her hands (merging the ton of background threads into the campaign's
    >plot, etc)...
    >
    >(If all adventures fit all PCs)

    >> - Mabe an index of described places and characters would be more useful.

    We should all have this little item, it REALLY is quite useful!!!


    >
    >Oh, yes. Definately. A scenario should ideally leave all options open -
    >railroad adventures are rather uninspiring to play. Improvisation is alpha
    >and omega in roleplaying...

    Players possibilities to affect the outcome of the campaign are relevant
    and important, since otherwise one cannot hope to motivate them properly!!


    >
    >Ah, my dear Watson, I see the nature of our little disagreement. As I've
    >said above, we focus on different aspects of roleplaying. Sure, I respect
    >your gaming style, but there are more than one way to fry a hen. What I see
    >as revolutionary about the Birthright setting isn't the new rules for
    >realm-governing or warfare - it's the world itself. You have five distinct
    >cultures with tons of roleplaying challenges, you have a functioning
    >economic life, well-defined social structures, and intriguing, realistic
    >(within the setting) politics. They have changed the "I cast a
    >fireball"-nature of standard AD&D magic to something new and inspireing,
    >have a consistent history, and even a theological frame.
    >
    >I don't want to play either the "old style of adventure" or a "war game
    >style game." Sure, I might want to include elements of these, but the main
    >point of my roleplaying is *simulation*. I want to be a different person
    >living in a different culture, with a different wold-view, different
    >ethics, morals, and religion. If I, for just a few moments, really can
    >_think_ like a Cerillian, be he Sidhe, Anuirean or Khinasi, and know that
    >everyone else around the gaming table is too, I know why I roleplay.
    >
    >As a GM, I want my players to experience this. When I start up a campaign
    >in a new setting, I usually write cultural compendiums (let's say 25 pages)
    >for each player, to give him or her a foundation to base their roleplaying
    >on. Now, if I could go into a store and buy a scenario where the characters
    >included all this information, as well as a unique personality and
    >background story filled with plot threads, it would lessen the amount of
    >work both I and my players would have to go through to start something
    >worthwhile.

    Everybody har their own way of playing, but I feel that one cannot ignore
    the possibilities of making the BR setting really "LIVE". Some people put
    more work in the background of their campaigns, but we all have a very
    distinct perception of the world we are playing in. I have a vision for my
    Cerilia, and I am trying to run my one epic campaign. I believe that all GM
    will only be able to run one truly epic campaign in their lifetime. They
    may be able to run very good campaigns later, but to run a truly larger
    than life storyline requires a lot of the Players and the GM. It's very
    difficult, but possible. I would like TSR, to continue to produce their
    high-quality country settings, although I would prefer them to start
    producing more information on the theological and financial aspects of
    Cerilia, since these are venues that they have explored little or not at
    all! Maybe someone in TSR would read this last part........"hope:)"


    A kingdom for a church-book,

    Inge

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Roleplaying game
    By Sorontar in forum Main
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-11-2007, 05:54 AM
  2. Roleplaying
    By Sorontar in forum Main
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-10-2007, 06:21 AM
  3. Roleplaying
    By Arjan in forum Category
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-21-2006, 08:40 PM
  4. roleplaying.gif
    By Arjan in forum Image
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-21-2006, 08:30 PM
  5. Fun in roleplaying and divinity
    By Alaric in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-20-1999, 12:44 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.