Do you think passive, non horror campaigns could work? Suggestions? Campaign ideas?
The fuck does that even mean
Define your terms old man
So you mean things like political simulators, day to day daily breadwinners, surviving on a typical medieval farm and so on?
I think there is a small niche of players who would enjoy such a thing. I'm the kind of guy who enjoys roleplaying things like that, I've roleplayed entirely non-violent stories about traveling companions or a young adventurer speaking philosophy to a great genie-like creature in a cave. This shit is great, but without a few monsters to slay and challenges to overcome I'm sure it will bore many people.
>>44357291
You know, a campaign without murderhobos
>>44357492
That doesn't explain anything, at all
What's passive about the campaign? Are the protagonists passive, or is the situation not particularly compelling them to action, and thus could be described as passive? Why the "non-horror" bit? If it's not horror, why even bring it up?
Your question is shit and can therefore produce no useful answers
>>44357492
In passive you say no slaying the monster? Just trying to make a deal and resolve everything in talk? Or you are saying less slasher moments in the campaing?
>>44357321
This, it depends on your players. I and one of my players would enjoy such a campaign, but the rest of the players would find it far too dull to play. I'd wager and say no, most likely one or more of your players will grow bored, and either start shit or want to drop out of the campaign.
>>44357283
This post is really confusing.
>>44357283
I would call it a "slice of life campaign". And yes, some systems suit it well. Games like Maelstrom (the paperback RPG) and WFRP allowed you to play roles like a grocer or printer or glassblower. It could be heaps of fun but the DM would really have to know their stuff.
>>44357283
Depends greatly on the premise and the system.
I mean, you could make a D&D 3.5/Pathfinder game with nothing but political intrigue, but you'd have to make the story compelling enough for the players to be interested in the plot more than just killing stuff.
An example of a non-standard campaign using a standard setting/system: The kingdom needs a magical macguffin that is thought to be buried in some ancient ruins. The party is a bunch of historians/politicians/nobles who fund and manage the groups of adventurers that are to be sent into the various ruins. You'd need to do research on stuff like traps and guardians, and with limited access to adventurers since other kingdoms want the macguffin as well. Further into the campaign, an enemy kingdom sends assassins to take out the party. The assassins fail, but the party must now find out which enemy kingdom sent the spies, and advise the king on whether or not to declare war (or to send spies himself). Eventually both kingdoms end up unearthing the final clue to the macguffin's location, and the PCs have to find out a way for their hired adventurers to reach the macguffin while slowing the enemy group (and maybe while evading enemy soldiers, if war has broken out).
>>44357530
Undertake would actually work for one. You might do a lot of awesome, nice, and badass things, but not really intentionally, you are just trying to go home.
>>44357283
You need to spend a couple more years in education so you can formulate coherent questions. Now fuck off.
