I have a photographic memory and a sick streak a mile wide, so I wing it.
(I think Dow's figured that out by now. |->) I generally find that the best
way to run an "adventure" is to set up an overall history line that's
internally consistent for a period of several years before,. during, and
after the campaign, and let the characters "fit" into it and maybe alter
it as they go. Once that's done, and I have a consistent list of names
for NPCs and places, I just go with the flow. Once in a while, when I
make up something really brilliant (like Hector, the robot who ain't),
I note down only WHAT THE PLAYERS HAVE SEEN and then fill in the details
they don't know yet, later. As a campaign build in time and complexity,
the structure becomes more filled-in and realistic....
I just had an interesting set of experiences in this vein, actually.
last Friday night, my roommate saw that I was feeling glum about another
weekend in Tennessee, so he invited me to a D&D game with his friends.
His buddy who was supposed to GM didn't feel liuke it, though, so I
volunteered. Half an hour to generate characters, and we were off, with
me making it up as I went for about six hours. Afterward, I heard from
my roomate that all concerned had had the time of their lives. The very
next night, we went to another game, one reffed by a friend of one of
the people in the Friday game (a novice gamer). He had everything planned
out ahead of time, to the last detail, and all attempts to vary from his
path were met with smirking refusal or blank looks. The novice began to
fidget after about an hour, as she suddenly realized that she wasn't
enjoying herself. My roommate and I left in disgust halfway through the
game, and we aren't planning to go back. The ref is very upset, and wants
to know "why we weren't cooperating."
Think I should tell him? |->
metlay