Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8144380" data-attributes="member: 82106">I find this to be a highly theoretical objection, at best. I say this because I have not witnessed a situation like this in an actual game. I mean, yes, 2 players agendas could simply be mutually exclusive, but it is actually pretty HARD to arrange that, unless each player is very specific in what they declare as an agenda/goal, and then they would almost have to arrange for this to be a problem (IE if I claimed my PC must destroy the Book of Eibon and you claimed your PC must own the Book of Eibon). You almost have to contrive something like that. Plus I'm not super convinced this would create an actual problem in play, because the conflict would surely drive a lot of story! Again, I think it is quite likely similar problems can arise in games without this sort of mechanics. In fact, the very coherence of action of most D&D parties smacks of being pretty contrived. That actually bothers me a heck of a lot more than questions about who is going to get to build their castle on the hill.</blockquote>