hoary old chestnut

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Colin Watson (watson@computing-science.aberdeen.ac.uk)
Date: Fri 05 Nov 1993 - 18:37:06 EET


David Dunham says:

>A good scenario must be one I can not only admire, but use.
[..plus several sensible points about making scenarios as general as possible.]

I agree 100%. Background is all very nice, but it belongs in a sourcebook. Scenarios should have the bare minimum background required to run them, and otherwise should concentrate on plot and characters. The setting should be flexible (dare I say generic?). All my Humble Opinion, of course.

But the Daily has been down this path before, hasn't it?... ..a couple of months ago?
Some people (allegedly) only buy scenarios for the Gloranthan background stuff. Oh well.

Combined scenario/sourcebooks seem to be the trend. Are they cheaper to produce? Are they what the punters want to buy? There must be some reason, I guess. For me they make hassle: I have to re-work chunks of the scenarios to fit my campaign (or re-work chunks of my campaign); and when I *do* want to find some tidbit of background info it's a pain to have to thumb through scenarios. Organised, indexed, sourcebooks would be so much more useful. And one or two context-free scenarios wouldn't go amiss either.

All we can do is voice our opinions and hope that someone upstairs takes note.

___
CW.

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:32:06 EEST