Yes, I was just thinking this morning about the difference between what most of us (probably) actually spend time producing, and what's required. It's for our own games, after all. So we look up the background, invent more background and NPCs, and then write something vaguely resembling a scenario - but it'll be tuned for our PCs, their backstory, their skills. For any other group, it'll be useless. Half of what happens is triggered by back-story and tensions between our campaign characters, after all.
(If anyone wants scenarios and heroquests suitable for a group of philosophical Humakti wandering around Prax, just ask. No?)
Some of us also do stories: but again, there's a huge difference between a story and a scenario. Even when it's written so that the characters are quite obviously obeying HQ rules, the author has to be able to fiddle every single dice roll, and scenarios done like that just won't work.
No, I don't have a solution. But is that a step towards understanding the problem?
And does anyone actually use pre-written scenarios, as written? I know I use them as inspiration, borrow NPCs from them, but always adapt for my group. I've run them "straight" at conventions, with pre-gen PCs, but that's very different. If anyone does use them "straight", could you explain how it works for you, and what's required to make it useful?
Powered by hypermail