# What do you like most in a story hour?



## Oghma (Jan 29, 2002)

What things attract you most to a story hour?  What brings you back for new posts?


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Jan 29, 2002)

Thats a really tough poll to answer, because the answer is really "All of the above."

However, writing skill is a basic prerequisite.  If the first installment  of a Story Hour is just one long two page paragraph, I won't even bother reading a single sentence - I'll see it and back right out.  

Competent writing allows all the other elements to be seen.  After that, I think the character of both the setting and the PC's is what draws me in - it did in Sagiro's and Piratecat's Story Hours, thats for sure.  Wulf's drew me in because of the PC characterizations, and the distinctive writing style that got Wulf's personality across so clearly.

I'm not generally too fond of Story Hours that delve into modules - I might want to play in those modules!  For example, there's a Story Hour about Freeport going; I know that one group I play wth plans on going through those modules.  That means that no matter how well written, I won't read that Story Hour.

I also like Story Hours that use the conventions of the game in neat ways and tht give me cool ideas to spring on my own players - Piratecat and Sagiro are particularly good at that.


----------



## Carnifex (Jan 29, 2002)

I've got to agree with Kid Charlemagne. All of those qualities can make a story hour good.

In terms of story hours delving into modules, I don't mind too much, since I rarely if ever use modules at the moment (I'm using a homebrew campaign setting).

I'd say in terms of good story hours, Sagiro's and Piratecat's are certainly the masters


----------



## drnuncheon (Jan 29, 2002)

Kid Charlemagne said:
			
		

> *
> I'm not generally too fond of Story Hours that delve into modules - I might want to play in those modules!  For example, there's a Story Hour about Freeport going; I know that one group I play wth plans on going through those modules.  That means that no matter how well written, I won't read that Story Hour.*




Crumbs.

J

Tell them to hurry up and run the things already!


----------



## el-remmen (Jan 29, 2002)

To me it is all about characters. . . If I cannot remember the names of the PCs and what makes them distinct my interest fades quickly. . .


It is one of the things I love about Sagiro's Story Hour (and that I think is good about mine) is that the characters are distinct, and little larger than life and memorable.


----------



## The Sunderer (Jan 29, 2002)

Chalk me up as another all of the above!


----------



## Rashak Mani (Jan 29, 2002)

We very rarely play in higher levels and Piratecats groups super duper spells and the enemies using a lot of magic and different tactics...  are very different from my regular gaming.

   I voted combat thing... but I really like the tactics and magic used in his story hour...  Piratecats babies tied to front tactic was great !   Spells I never have seen used before in very dramatic combat stories....


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jan 29, 2002)

GRIT.


----------



## DoctorB (Jan 30, 2002)

I think I like everything too, but Pirate Cat's good writing is what draws me to it.

I am determined to write the Legacy of Alexander story in a more literary way now.  It could be a good way to make the world come alive for me and my players too!


----------



## Horacio (Jan 30, 2002)

Oghma, in your story hour it can be resumed in a word:

Posy 

The best character ever 

In general, I must say I like stories with well defined characters and twisted plots (like Nemmerle's one  ), and I don't like stories where the PCs are so dull I cannot even remember their names or personalities, but there are not many like that in the boards...


----------



## Scarab (Jan 30, 2002)

I was going to vote for the combat option because I love Wulf Ratbane's style, but then I realized it was actually Wulf himself I liked (no, not like that, you perverts!). He sure has a good writing style combined with attitude...


----------



## CRGreathouse (Jan 30, 2002)

It's all about characters, both PCs and NPCs.  Good writing is neccisary but insufficient.


----------



## Paka (Jan 30, 2002)

Grit, good answer.

Writing, good writing is what curls my toes.


----------



## Horacio (Jan 31, 2002)

CRGreathouse said:
			
		

> *It's all about characters, both PCs and NPCs.  Good writing is neccisary but insufficient. *




So it's like for a good gaming adventure, the memorable PCs are NPCs are most important than convoluted plots...

Well, I think I agree.


----------



## Dinkeldog (Jan 31, 2002)

Not grit.   

I like heroic stories featuring heroes.  If someone starts the story hour out:  "these PCs aren't good", I back out and look again.

Other than that, KidCharlemagne's list works for me.  I enjoy myself more when my internal English teacher doesn't have to correct grammar as I read.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jan 31, 2002)

Dinkeldog said:
			
		

> *Not grit.
> 
> I like heroic stories featuring heroes.  If someone starts the story hour out:  "these PCs aren't good", I back out and look again.*




Or you convince yourself that they bad guys are really good...


----------



## Dinkeldog (Jan 31, 2002)

It's a good thing that I can.

Real life is full of grit.  I don't play games in my off time to provide even more to it.   I play games that have heroes that can solve the problems that can't be solved in real life.  

I read stories about games that I would like to play in.


----------



## Dr Midnight (Jan 31, 2002)

I'm with Dinkeldog. I don't like grit, I'm not a big fan of antiheroes. I like your classic epic adventure; grand heroic fantasy, sweeping vistas, poetic justice, good vs. evil, etc.


----------



## el-remmen (Jan 31, 2002)

Why can't you have both?

In my game the PCs are in a gritty world, with harsh realities, pain and anaguish and constantly dealing with the trouble of trying to do the good thing.

But they are still clearly good and clearly heroic - it is just that being heroic isn't all its cracked up to be sometimes - I guess I come from the Spider-man school of heroism.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jan 31, 2002)

Exactly, Nemm... 

I had something I wanted to say but you said it better.

So dinkeldog, I know you're reading _our_ story hour, which means that one of us is kidding himself...


----------



## Dr Midnight (Jan 31, 2002)

Well, I do have both... I just prefer the epic goodness vs. villainous evil. It's the whole theme of my campaign- heroic characters coping in a world where bad things happen.

_Adventuring is a dangerous business, and what Gorgoldand knew the public didn’t see was the absolute despair in defeat- the result of an epic quest gone horribly wrong, the adventurers dead, the evil threat fulfilled. Whenever possible Gorgoldand avoided using people he cared about, and made sure he kept those he trained at arm’s reach emotionally. _ 
-KotSQ, the beginning

_Dartan sat beside Menerous, weighing what his life had become. His mind kept returning to that first day in the Silver Quill, when Gorgoldand had told them that he had to send them into the world, as the world needed heroes. Jamison had often told him afterwards that Gorgoldand's greatest fear was in seeing his son's party fall to the evils of the real world. The golden dragon had wanted to shelter his adopted son from becoming jaded by the world's cruelties. High adventure doesn't always lead to the treasure chest, some epic quests are left unfinished, and the good guys don't always win. Tenchi hadn't gotten the chance to avenge his master. Jamison and Hannah never got to explore the growing sentiment they shared for each other. Dekker couldn't save Bree. Angelique, it seemed, wouldn't complete her quest for the Glaring Sun. 

Of the six bright-eyed youngsters sent forth on that day, only Dartan and Jamison still lived. Jamison was now a heartless and evil servant of whatever foul forces had taken him, and Dartan- well- he'd never found that the people around him had faith in him at all. The others viewed Dartan with distaste. They found him to be dark and heartless, which hurt him and only drove him further into his shell. Finding the dead griffon at the end of the rainbow had shattered his faith, and he felt himself plummeting- no, pulled- toward some unknown black fate. With nothing filling him, he was empty. 
_ 
-KotSQ, much later in the campaign


----------



## Horacio (Feb 1, 2002)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> *Exactly, Nemm...
> 
> I had something I wanted to say but you said it better.
> 
> So dinkeldog, I know you're reading our story hour, which means that one of us is kidding himself... *




It means he thinks Wulf is and HERO!!! Wow, Wulf, a true hero...


----------



## LightPhoenix (Feb 1, 2002)

I voted for writing style, because my biggest point could be under that category.

A story hour absolutely must have good spelling and grammar for me to maintain interest.  Not that it has to be perfect, but it has to be at least decent, and usually above decent.  Certain liberties with grammar can be taken if it fits the narrative style, that doesn't bother me.

Beyond that... characters.  Characterization and more importantly character growth.  That's the key to a good story hour, I think.  Take Wulf's - it's just a string of adventures thrown together, but the characters really make it a good story.  It wouldn't be a quarter as good if it wasn't for them.  (Heh heh... assmar  )

Background really helps too - the world changes around and independant of the players.  I think this, more than any other aspect, makes a world come alive.

LightPhoenix


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Feb 1, 2002)

Heh heh... interestingly enough, it's my odd grammar and spelling that gives me such strong characterization. =)

I'll pile on the grammar thing, though. I shouldn't say it, since my own first entry is so bad, but I have abandoned a lot of stories after the first paragraph. There are exceptions, but they are rare.

Wulf


----------



## Dinkeldog (Feb 4, 2002)

nemmerle said:
			
		

> *Why can't you have both?
> 
> In my game the PCs are in a gritty world, with harsh realities, pain and anaguish and constantly dealing with the trouble of trying to do the good thing.
> 
> But they are still clearly good and clearly heroic - it is just that being heroic isn't all its cracked up to be sometimes - I guess I come from the Spider-man school of heroism. *




Your PCs, like Spiderman, are trying to do the right thing.

The place I stop is "the PCs aren't heroes".  No point in going any further.  Spiderman is a hero.  He might beat himself up over the occasional failure, but his goal is to do good things.  He's not a simple mercenary.

There really have been two (now three) constants in the Sunday campaign that I hold on to.  One is dead.  The second is a cohort.  The third just joined and I have neglected getting him fully integrated into the story (bad DM, no biscuit).  And Wulf is Wulf.  The old man will make him a hero if he has to break every bone in his body because the old man needs a hero of the type that was ancient when he was young, and now he is ancient and darkness lurks around every corner.


----------



## Immort (Feb 5, 2002)

Personally, I really like stories told from a characters point of view, case in point Wulf.  (shameless plug)  I also enjoy seeing how other characters fared in modules my party has gone through.  Roll both into one and throw in an involving storytelling style,  case in point Wulf, (second shameless plug) and for my money, you've really got something entertaining.

-Immort

This would now be a shameless plug for my own struggling story hour.  
http://www.enworld.org/messageboards/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3689


----------



## Eosin the Red (Feb 6, 2002)

I wanted to put both interesting characters and good writing, but was only allowed one.

I prefer stories told from a first person PoV.


----------



## Joker (Feb 6, 2002)

Eosin the Red said:
			
		

> *I prefer stories told from a first person PoV. *




Dito.  Maybe I'm just saying this because my Story Hour is in first person, but I also think that it's easier to relate and understand what a character is going through because s/he is telling you.

I also like a story if it begins right smack in the middle.  I positively hate introductions.  I'm just a big fan of medeas res, I suppose.  Big fan of Shakespear.

Anyway, just some useless thoughts.

Tata.


----------



## Hatchling Dragon (Feb 11, 2002)

*Well duh...*

It'd be the obvious, yet left-out, choice of *All of the Above*.  While having one, or even 2, of the selections in a Story Hour is good and might get me to peek at it from time to time, it'll only truely hold my interest if it's got all of those choices.  Sure I'm picky, but I can't help it, Pkitty and so many others have spoiled me rotten.  Yes, I'm loving every minute of it!  

Another 'must' for choice/vote would be 'grammer/spelling', or something of the sort.  I've started a couple Story Hours that had a lot of promice, and easily full-filled all the other requirements, but they were so poorly edited that it was literally too much work to read them.  Pitty, that.

Hatchling Dragon


----------



## Tickleberry (Feb 14, 2002)

*Good story, good characters!*

A good story hour will have good characterizations, and good writing. I hopefully deliver both, (I probably don't), but I am trying. A setting helps, but to me, that can mostly be left to the imagination. Too much, and a reader gets bogged down.


----------



## Gideon (Feb 15, 2002)

A good story is the one where i can feel the breath of the world and charachters around me.  So i guess my votes are for Writing and Charachters.  I do wonder though how much of the breath comes from the players roleplaying and how much comes from the clever "swirl of the pen".


----------



## LostSoul (Feb 15, 2002)

I don't like Story Hours that are written as stories.

I like ones that are told from the perspective of the DM or one of the Players.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Feb 15, 2002)

Gideon said:
			
		

> *I do wonder though how much of the breath comes from the players roleplaying and how much comes from the clever "swirl of the pen". *




Many of the writers discuss this very issue in this thread:

http://www.enworld.org/messageboards/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2954


Wulf


----------



## Junebug (Feb 18, 2002)

*Re: Well duh...*



			
				Hatchling Dragon said:
			
		

> Another 'must' for choice/vote would be 'grammer/spelling', or something of the sort.  I've started a couple Story Hours that had a lot of promice, and easily full-filled all the other requirements, but they were so poorly edited that it was literally too much work to read them.  Pitty, that.
> 
> Hatchling Dragon [/B]




grammar/spelling
a lot of promise
Pity that.

But I do agree, HD.  My favorite Story Hours are well-written.  Although memorable characters bring me back.


----------



## Paka (Feb 19, 2002)

LostSoul said:
			
		

> *I don't like Story Hours that are written as stories.
> 
> I like ones that are told from the perspective of the DM or one of the Players. *




I tried to write that way during my first few games and just didn't enjoy writing it.  For me the Story Hours are an excuse to write and a way to share my game with this Forum and friends abroad.

The Players are there in every story but in a sideways manner.

While it works for many people the act of transcribing games just bores the heck out of me.

But not all Story Hours are for everyone.

I write mine from NPC points of view, allowing me to flesh out my world and the NPC's in it.

Writing helps me think things out, makes them more real.  Like this post for example.

Anyway, check out my story hour (link in the sig) and let me know what you think.

thanks,

P-


----------



## Viking Bastard (Feb 20, 2002)

LostSoul said:
			
		

> *I don't like Story Hours that are written as stories.
> 
> I like ones that are told from the perspective of the DM or one of the Players. *



It's just soooo hard to write it like that. I tried it and it just was way too hard for my english-not-mother-tounge writing capabilities.

Stories are easier to write _and_ read IMO.


----------



## Piratecat (Feb 20, 2002)

I'm with Mastermind. I can't write in a first person perspective, either!


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Feb 20, 2002)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> *I'm with Mastermind. I can't write in a first person perspective, either! *




Wulf says, "Yer just did!"


Wulf


----------



## Dinkeldog (Feb 21, 2002)

When I was doing Brother Cadir's story it was from the first person.  It helped me focus on what I wanted in the story and helped pull the campaign into focus as a player.


----------



## LostSoul (Feb 22, 2002)

Paka said:
			
		

> *I tried to write that way during my first few games and just didn't enjoy writing it.  For me the Story Hours are an excuse to write and a way to share my game with this Forum and friends abroad.*




In your case I don't mind.


----------



## LostSoul (Feb 22, 2002)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> *I'm with Mastermind. I can't write in a first person perspective, either! *




Actually, I consider your Story Hour posts as told from the perspective of the DM and Players.  You don't have lots of needless prose; you include game terms; in short, a summary of what happened during the game session, with important events highlighted.


----------

