what do you look for in a campaign log?

[Kol Korran]

well, obviously you look for quality of content, but i'm interested in a bit more detailed response, as well as other features that might influence reading the log. i'll soon be starting a new campaign, and i'd be interested in improving the quality of my logs. this however may serve a broader interest than my own.

sample questions follow, but feel free to answer this anyway you wish.

- do you prefer reading logs about original content, or modules? why? if original content, do you prefer in established settings, or home brewed ones?

- do you prefer logs written from the players' point of view, or from the game master's seat? why?

- do you prefer it to be "story like", with little to no reference of inter player chat and game rules, or do you like to know of the atmosphere at the table, and some of the crunch behind the flavor?

- length of posts: what sort of things do you want included in the post? when is it too long? too short? conversations? descriptions of locals and NPCs? battles? any estimation as to what length is "friendly to read"?

- organization of text: do you prefer one text, separated to several spoilers? multiple spoilers? any other form of organization?

- frequency of posting: when do you lose track? how often is reasonable for you to follow?

- interaction withe the audience: do you like when the log writer call on you for help? advice? or do you resent it and prefer to be a passive reader?

anything else?

(search word: piratewitch)

[Anxe]

Thing I like best is proven popularity. The good stories get recommended. Also, these ones are usually already finished, so I get to read it all without having to wait.
As for you list there...

Homebrewed or Store Bought?
Homebrewed is better because I don't like most campaign settings and often people will assume that I know things about them that I don't. I don't know those things because I don't like the setting enough to buy the book and read it.

POV?
Player's POV is better. Not really sure why. Probably because they are subjective and get more into it than the GM.

Characters and/or Players?
Table atmosphere ones are way better. I like hearing about the game. If I wanted to hear about the story, then I would just go read a fantasy book instead. Those tend to be written better and I get the finished version all at once.

Details?
I like the battles, the NPC conversations, and some dungeon description. I don't like "we ordered a pizza" or other nonsense like that.

Text?
I like text with separations. I have gone back and done it to this post as an example of what I like. Although it is highly inappropriate for a post as small as this, its what I'd like to see in a campaign session post.

Frequency?
Like I said in my preamble, I like logs that are already finished. Then there's no waiting for posts. The ones that aren't finished don't interest me enough to read them.

Interaction?
I thought interaction was the whole point of a campaign log? So you get other people's input on what was cool and what wasn't. They can help you with tactics and they can give suggestions to the DMs. It's the thing I feel is missing most from my own log.

I don't really practice what I preach in my log though. It's from GM POV. Originally it was going to be half player POV, but then he decided he didn't have time to do updates. He also decided that he wanted a very character focused narrative for the log. I started that way and I don't want to break the narrative style to do it the way I want it after 10 or so of doing it his way while he was still "helping." I probably give a few too many details on the "pizza" side, but I suppose readers can just gloss over those areas. I don't do titles for my text separations, but I do separate them. My log isn't finished, so obviously I would not read it if I was looking for a log. My log also has no reader response on it at all, which probably means its not recommended because its bad. I still continue to write it though. Gives me a little bit of satisfaction after each session and its a good place for the players to review stuff if they want.

[Totally Guy]

I like to see instances where players are making an important choice to be highlighted. That could be a mechanic thing, an in character descision or an intra party situation.

[valadil]

I've never met a campaign log that wasn't tedious so this is just speculation.

Writing is important. For me to stomach bad writings your story will have to be amazing. I'm trying to spend less time reading the Internet (and presently failing as evidenced by this post) to make more time for actual reading.

Player POV could work. It would depend a lot on the character and campaign though. I don't think all pcs are worth reading about.

From the GM POV I'd like a directors cut of what you wrote and how it was received. That's the stuff I read this forum for. I'd be interested in seeing a full campaign's worth of choices instead of the snipers and vignettes I see in forums.

[Kaveman26]

Having worked on writing several different recaps of games that I have been both player and DM, I would add these nuggets:

*DM point of view is tough. Unless you get crazy with footnotes or are willing to get very detail oriented it becomes hard to translate table to forum.

*I started writing out very detail specific. Keeping constant mention of spells prepared, spells used and to an extent even specific dice rolls. I found myself being more drawn to that style at lower levels where a single spell or a single roll can swing the tide or alter the outcome of a big event. As the levels go up and abilities expand I often focused more on the game progression and the character desicions than the small details.

*At first I was resisting including the instances where we broke the 4th wall, or I tried to remove table talk. Truth be told that is the stuff that makes the game. If i didn't reference my groups constant quotes from Aliens, Ghostbusters etc then it wouldn't be my group I was describing.

*Post Length: I wrote a full campaign recap called An Adversarial Process. In Microsoft Word most of the sections I posted were 10-20 pages in length. I felt like that was excessive and lately most of my posts are smaller at 3-5 pages. Getting a big chunk at once was a nice sense of accomplishment but it took a lot longer to get one section up.

*I really have worked to keep new content rolling in at a daily or semi daily pace and avoid big gaps between posts.

*Ultimately whatever people had fun playing, more than likely someone else will have fun reading. In that vein I think original content tends to go further because there are no preconceived notions. The flipside of that is how each group handles things differently. Ages ago I had a friend who ran Against the Giants as a solo+1 campaign for me. I would roll up a character and he would add a DMPC and the two characters would just attack the module from every angle possible. It was like a combat simulation that we ran from every angle. While most gamers would yawn at Against the Giants, reading how a couple of obssessed gamers ran it twenty unique ways could prove fascinating.

*I wrote most of my stuff from the player's perspective then added sort of an appendix where I included DM thoughts and described some deviations from the original plan. I felt like that sort of information was best served at the end, unless it was foreshadowing or included to draw detail during the section.

I think Calimshaw-Shank Redemption is the best balance of good qualities in a recap that I have put together. It is a finished campaign with everything posted.

[vartan]

[QUOTE=valadil;13508312]I've never met a campaign log that wasn't tedious(/quote)

You've never met silverclawshift.

[valadil]

[QUOTE=vartan;13512576]

I've never met a campaign log that wasn't tedious(/quote)

You've never met silverclawshift.

Actually I did. Too verbose. Didn't have the patience for it. Heard enough good things that I might try again though. I think I'd need to approach that one as a book chapter instead of a blog post.

[Anxe]

SCS is too verbose? She skips tons of scenes! Do you mean in the parts that she does include?

[TheCountAlucard]

- do you prefer reading logs about original content, or modules? why? if original content, do you prefer in established settings, or home brewed ones?

I've seen good examples for both original content and modules.

do you prefer logs written from the players' point of view, or from the game master's seat? why?

This is another thing that I could go either way with; most people who keep a campaign journal are going to (adverdently or otherwise) center it off their point of view... As such, a campaign journal written by a player might be seen as "Joe the Fighter"-centric, but then again, that's not necessarily a bad thing.

do you prefer it to be "story like", with little to no reference of inter player chat and game rules, or do you like to know of the atmosphere at the table, and some of the crunch behind the flavor?

Both can be present.

when is it too long?

When I stop being entertained by it. If it consistently captivates me, I'll scroll through hundreds of pages of content.

too short?

Depends on how much occurred; if a four-hour game session gets condensed down to four paragraphs, either someone at the table likes to lollygag, or you're making it too short.

conversations?

Conversations are okay if it goes with the flow of the story.

descriptions of locals and NPCs?

Short, helpful descriptions of these are good; I'd like to know that the barbarian lord is scarred, but not necessarily where all his scars are.

battles?

Depends on how it's written, I guess.

organization of text: do you prefer one text, separated to several spoilers? multiple spoilers? any other form of organization?

I like it to be relatively organized; it doesn't have to be spoilered off, but I would use bolded headings for relevant sections either way.

[eggs]

I like to read about campaigns from the players' perspectives - a bit about the mechanics, a bit about the other players involved. It seems more genuine (it is the players making the decisions, with their own motives, after all), and it helps with some ideas of what aspects of a game work well and what aspects flop.

When a campaign log is written from a character's perspective, I just close the window and don't bother - RPGs can be fun to read about, but they don't make great fiction (especially with comprehensive logs rather than "Good Parts" versions), and filtered through an in-character speaker, I just find them unbearable.

I'm much more interested by player-generated campaigns than modules. Partly because modules tend to be a bit more railroady, and partly because I have a better chance of cribbing ideas without my players knowing.

I definitely prefer big chunks of updates; messageboards aren't great for sustaining attention in a long story, so it's much easier to track and keep up with logs that come in big blocks near the end of a campaign, rather than piece-wise updates throughout. It's also an approach to writing that I find more reliably completable.