Search results

But the fiction isn't. To wit: --- I stepped off (or was knocked off) of a flying object or platform and fell --- I got panicked into running off a cliff and fell --- my Fly spell ran out and, as it didn't come with the cushy 5e safeguards built in, I fell --- something shook the tree I was...

Most often IME it's not even the GM doing the separating: the players/PCs do it to themselves either by accident (e.g. a wild magic surge puts some of them somewhere else) or intentionally (you three go that way, we'll go this way).

More to the point, perhaps: if doing some out-of-game deep introspection merely reinforced that I like what I do and how I do it, what then? Also, at what point does any of this qualify as overthinking that which doesn't need to be overthought?

I think you may have misinterpreted what @TwoSix was saying. The point being made wasn't about in-game play involving deep introspection, it was about using out-of-game deep introspection to analyse the way you already play/DM. Now, I've got no real use for deep analysis of how I do what I do...

Though I was playing and DMing at the time, I don't remember now whether the DL module series all came out in one go or were released over time in tandem with the novels they were tied to (which for sure were not all released at once). 'Cause if the modules were released sequentially over time...

For any edition or sub-edition, good sales for the core three books are essential. If they don't sell, nothing else in that edition is likely to sell either. So yes, 5.24's core three not selling well would, if true, be a very major faiing indeed. It's the "if true" bit there at which we can...

Simple-ish solution: when they split, if the group of three are intending to wait while the two go exploring, ask up front how long the three will wait (unless interrupted) and then hold them to their answer, no take-backs or mind-changing. If they say an hour then the two have an hour to get...

Depends whether they're on a time crunch or not. But indeed, strip it all down to the studs is a common SOP. :)

Well, ideally we'd be using straight-line measures and not counting squares on a grid in the first place. :) Snapping everything to grid is highly gamist. For [1]. [2], and [3] on that list, I mostly agree. Hit locations and 'called shots' are one of those gray areas where practicality and...

Not sure about that, as 3e did its clunky best to make itself at least sim-friendly. By 4e, though, they'd given up any pretensions of designing with sim in mind; and 5e has kept going down the same path.

Well, we just found out one more hazard of online play: the DM has a power cut in his neighbourhood, 1.5 hours so far and counting. In person we'd go to candlelight and just keep going. Online, not so much.....

It's a matter of expectations. If they know up front that if they split the party they'll also be splitting the players (and my attention), and they do it anyway, they know what they're getting into.

There's people I've played with for ages who I'd still describe - and who would probably self-describe - as casual.

You're lucky. Last time I looked for it here - admittedly quite a while ago - one place had it at a ridiculous price and the others simply didn't carry it (and in one case, didn't have a clue what I was talking about). Since then, that one place has closed.

Gridded flipchart paper is good but can get costly in a hurry, and isn't as easy to find these days as it once was.

Gridded chalkboard and chalk here, to much the same effect. :) Usually the players draw the map on the board form my description; if it's complex or uneven I'll draw it myself.

In my view, the bolded is the best approach by far. Tony's not dealing with the wight, Dunwick is; and asking Dunwick what he's doing encourages Tony to think as Dunwick rather than as Tony. Player note-taking, if they did such, could help cover off for lapses in the DM's memory.

Usually, no; or the notes they do take turn out not to be what I in fact later need to remember. I sometimes jokingly cheer for my monsters during a combat. I mean, hell, it's the only support they're ever going to get! :) Talking to the characters rather than the players is something I've...

Yes, bad D&D is still D&D. We've agreed Dragonlance is railroady as all hell, which makes it bad. It's still D&D, but not D&D that I'd want to use as an example of how anything is done best. And so saying Dragonlance proves death isn't necessary kinda shoots your point in the foot; as you're...

So far, I agree. We tend to overthink the crap out of some of this stuff, forgetting (or ignoring?) that most of the player-base is just here for a good time and a few laughs every week or two. I'd put this as "produces an overall satisfying run of play for however long it lasts - a few...