Campaign CPR – Ep74

Campaign CPR   Ep74

Are you okay?..

What can you do to revive a dying campaign? When you or your players are dreading the next game session, we have some suggestions to spark some interest into the game and maybe make it fun again.

 

If you have some input on this, leave a comment here, via email or on our Facebook page.

 

Thanks to Rich Trickey for giving us this topic to work with.

 

Campaign CPR – Ep74

 

Cast – Eric, Mike, Dan, Mark, Jayson and Shawn

 

Intro: Mike

Outro: Shawn

 

Running Time – 31:24

 

Links to Items Mentioned:

Gen Con

Fantasy Flight Games

Archon St. Louis

Dungeons & Dragons

Forgotten Realms

White Wolf

Star Wars

Mutants and Masterminds

Dresden Files RPG

Pathfinder

Warhammer

Munchkin

Aces & Eights

Shadowrun


This entry was posted in Podcasts and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Campaign CPR – Ep74

  1. Robert Sullivan says:

    The Sundering has been specifically stated to not be a time-line reset; the shit-fuck that is the Forgotten Realms in 4E is still on the books.
    I am a fan of New World of Darkness and willing to debate it merits, but that is a subject for a different day.
    One way an old campaign I was in dealt with the “keeping it fresh” issue was by letting everyone in the campaign keep three characters. You only ever played one at a time, but you could move from your rogue to your paladin to your wizard, etc.
    However, how does the kind of campaign shake up your talk about here potentially trigger some of those player v. gm blow-ups you talked about before?

    • Eric says:

      I like to think of The Sundering as a death-knell myself, but I digress.

      I am also a fan of the New World of Darkness, mostly because I don’t have the baggage that Mark or Greg has. They love the old world so much that the new one just offends them. I on the other hand, LOVE Promethean and like the things I’ve seen and read about Hunter and Mage.

      We have tried the multiple characters idea before and it worked well. Unfortunately, you inevitably have the one guy who refuses to play his other characters and he begins to out level everyone else.

      As for blow-ups (great question, by the way), it is my experience that you cannot please everyone and if there is a player at the table who wants to throw a tantrum because the GM wants to save his campaign, present them with the alternative. Change or let the campaign die. If the game is important to them, they will change. If not, maybe the problem isn’t what you thought it was. Maybe the reason your campaign is dying is because there is a cancer at the table.

  2. Skunkape says:

    I have a campaign world, micro brew, that I keep running games in and have run multiple games with my current group. When we have new characters that a created, I either move them to a different country in the world, or change the time.

    Most times, I move the timeline into the future so that things players have done to effect the world in the past, can be brought to the new characters attention, which does a really get deal to tie the players to the world! It also helps make the world a more real, living thing and helps reinforce to the players knowledge that things continue to happen in the world even when their characters aren’t directly involved!

    • Jayson says:

      I like that idea, and it’s one I wish we could have incorporated into all of our campaigns. For me, my memory is already shaky (I’ve had more than a few concussions) and restarting the timeline just adds to my confusion. The campaigns blur together and I can’t remember if it was Valkaun, Amahd, Crey or Rando that explored that dungeon, slayed this bad guy or stole this item – particularly when it’s the same places, people and things – not that rehashing is all we do, we certainly don’t. But it would be cool to stumble across the remains of some long ago fallen PC in the Dungeon of Castle X, who has some usable equipment to help the new PC’s finish the exploration that we started many years ago.

  3. Brian says:

    1.) Shared world concept is something that I have changed opinions on over the years. My current view is that the world either A.) Has to be large enough that multiple campaigns can exist on their own so that each DM has their space. B.) VERY well defined guidelines on power level, scope, theme, and NPC death. It can work, and work very well to keep things fresh. The massive nationwide vampire LARPs are a perfect example of how defined rules and huge scale can actually work.

    2.) As a huge long term WOD fan, I hear the same point constantly dividing old wod/new wold players. I personally believe that new wod players generally hate old wod’s heavy backstory because they mistakenly feel restricted or overwelmed by it. The older players got it little by little, book by book, as fragmented contested history, and what version they chose helped define their character’s opinions on the world in a far deeper way. Sure, you might be ‘stamped’ one clan at start, but there always factions within factions. NOBODY, clansman or otherwise, seems to be able to AGREE on anything 100%! Even the history! By being embraced into a clan, entire scores of other vampires you’ve never met will hate and despise you!

    You (the player) start making choices in the face of conflict. You are CONFRONTED by these situations, and must decide what to believe and whom to ally with (or not). Difficult Choices define characters. I choose to play the game that poses more conflict.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>