Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightshade
While I don't entirely disagree, I think that both medium and genre matter; TV superhero shows don't look entirely like comic ones, nor do movies, so making some adjustments for games to not look entirely like their genres in other medium is no greater evil.
|
But with RPGs part of the fun is simulating a setting. Of course, you can always model a superhero camaign off of a TV show or film adaptation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightshade
I think what I'm doing is delicately suggesting that this is less an issue of maturity than whether one's tastes change over time. Some of the most role-playing intensive groups I've ever seen were fairly young, but I'd hardly have qualified them all as "mature"; they were simply focused on a different part of the game. Its quite easy to have a roleplaying adventure that's not combat oriented but still pretty immature in any general meaning of the term.
|
I can accept that too. When I was younger I ran a camapign where we had, of all things, a girl. At one point much of the campaign was fouced around some players "conquering" the girl (both in and out of character), than combat or any other aspect of the camapign. While role-playing was heavy, said group was far from mature. We were also 14.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightshade
I'm still unconvinced that for _group_ participation, much else is.
|
Sure, lots of thing are. It isn't the combat that is exciting, its that combat is presented as a challenge, and has risks. If something is presented as a challenge and with risks and rewards, it can work effectively.
For example, many CoC adventures aren't focused around fighting Mythos nasties, but preventing such a conflict. Likewise PCs aboard a run away train, or trapped in a buring building can all be good alternatives to combat.
Its the conflict and elements of risk, danger and reward that are exciting.