4 ms·

A word of warning about RPGs; basing a book around a role-playing campaign can lead to books which read just like they're based around role-playing campaigns...

A word of warning about RPGs; basing a book around a role-playing campaign can lead to books which read just like they're based around role-playing campaigns... The classic example is Raymond Feist's Magician. There's a scene near the beginning where our characters choose what class they're playing, and then you can watch them level up throughout the rest of the book. (Not that it's a bad book; I like it a great deal. But once you know what to look for, the signs are everywhere. It is fascinating to see his writing skill get better throughout. It's also interesting to read the original version with the Author's Preferred Edition, where he put back all the bits that his editor cut out, and realise exactly what editors are paid for. The original is so much better.)

Jtsummers 10y ago
I agree and would point to the same book. It can offer an interesting way to explore characters and ideas, however. Flesh out the world, for instance, if the book is less based on the RPG but happens to exist in the same world. An opportunity to explore different areas that may impact others. Or just play and don't base the book on it in a literal sense. Make a scenario to see what the characters might do and discuss what they should actually be like, then use that to inform their story decisions in other scenarios. Also a benefit of the lightweight systems for this as they usually don't have a notion of classes. Maybe an idea of competency in some fields instead.
eru 10y ago
> basing a book around a role-playing campaign can lead to books which read just like they're based around role-playing campaigns... Like Lord of the Rings and Star Wars? Guilty pleasures, they are two webcomics that re-imagine those two works as role-playing campaigns. The Star Wars prequels actually make more sense that way. http://www.darthsanddroids.net/ http://www.darthsanddroids.net/ http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?cat=14 http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?cat=14
e12e 10y ago
On the other hand the triology he co-wrote with Wurst (starting with daughter of the empire) reads less like a ad&d campaign run by an inexperienced gm... And I also think the Greyhawk books started as a setting for a private game, then became books, and finally a published rpg setting?

Jtsummers 10y ago

I agree and would point to the same book. It can offer an interesting way to explore characters and ideas, however. Flesh out the world, for instance, if the book is less based on the RPG but happens to exist in the same world. An opportunity to explore different areas that may impact others. Or just play and don't base the book on it in a literal sense. Make a scenario to see what the characters might do and discuss what they should actually be like, then use that to inform their story decisions in other scenarios. Also a benefit of the lightweight systems for this as they usually don't have a notion of classes. Maybe an idea of competency in some fields instead.

eru 10y ago

> basing a book around a role-playing campaign can lead to books which read just like they're based around role-playing campaigns... Like Lord of the Rings and Star Wars? Guilty pleasures, they are two webcomics that re-imagine those two works as role-playing campaigns. The Star Wars prequels actually make more sense that way. http://www.darthsanddroids.net/ http://www.darthsanddroids.net/ http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?cat=14 http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?cat=14

e12e 10y ago

On the other hand the triology he co-wrote with Wurst (starting with daughter of the empire) reads less like a ad&d campaign run by an inexperienced gm... And I also think the Greyhawk books started as a setting for a private game, then became books, and finally a published rpg setting?