Posted by: Mothman on November 21, 2003 at 22:15:07

: I kinda like the idea of staged chronological events instead of a free flowing game. It keeps key objectives from just being "run and grabs" and also allows the producer to control the game from becoming lopsided. A series of staged events based on the outcome of previous events would allow more players to actually be involved in the role-playing and background of the game instead of just trying to control real estate. I have played two games where we sorta had staged events, Oklahoma DDay,had them. and made the game interesting. I played another and it had one staged event at the end. I agree with your point on staged events, and find they are fun and have their place in Scenario Games . A game doesn't need to be chock full of them but, a few isnt bad either. I also wasn't dissapointed in the reduction of playtime.

Follow Ups: Post a Followup Show your name as: DefaultRealnameBothNickname E-Mail address (eg: joeschmoe@aol.com): Show your e-mail address? DefaultYesNo Your Password: Don't have a password? CLICK HERE - Forgot your password? CLICK HERE Subject: Subject:Message: : : : I kinda like the idea of staged chronological events instead of a free flowing game. It keeps key objectives from just being "run and grabs" and also allows the producer to control the game from becoming lopsided. A series of staged events based on the outcome of previous events would allow more players to actually be involved in the role-playing and background of the game instead of just trying to control real estate. : I have played two games where we sorta had staged events, Oklahoma DDay,had them. and made the game interesting. I played another and it had one staged event at the end. I agree with your point on staged events, and find they are fun and have their place in Scenario Games . A game doesn't need to be chock full of them but, a few isnt bad either. : I also wasn't dissapointed in the reduction of playtime. [ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ WARPIG Rec Talk ]