I've been a bit indecisive about how I want to run the campaign I've started designing. Do I want to try and form a face-to-face group locally, or should I run it as a play-by-blog? As a rule I'm not an indecisive person, but it happens on occasion and, when it happens, I find it helpful to make a list of pros (+) and cons (-). Here are the major ones I've come up with.
(+) There's a spontaneous energy over the table that isn't always there in PbP
(-) Given my work schedule, it'd be hard for me to commit to more than one play session/month
(-) If only playing once a month, the unfolding of the campaign may be a bit slow
(+) Players and GM have time to think things out carefully
(+) Experience is currently showing me that PbP/PbB really fits my schedule well
(+) I love writing as a medium
(-) May sometimes lack the spontaneous energy of a group sitting together around a table
(-) The unfolding of the campaign can be a bit slow
Looking at the lists, PbB has a better + to - ratio, especially since the "slowness" issue appears in both formats (given my circumstances), and sort of cancel each other out, giving FtF +1/-1, and PbB +3/-1. Are there any inherent features of either FtF or PbB I haven't thought of?
Of course, one might not necessarily preclude the other. I might, for example, do a PbB year round and, if that's working out, then at some point try to start running FtF games over summers when my workload tends to be substantially lighter. Hmm...
On a related note, fleshing out of the region around Fairbrook is coming along nicely, and I'll be posting about that soon (though perhaps with not too much detail since I could end up running a PbB...)