Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AaronOfBarbaria" data-source="post: 6750556" data-attributes="member: 6701872">When it comes to character turn over, I actually kind of feel like I've made mistakes as a DM if a player loses interest in their character before that character's tale comes to a close.I only consider it adversarial if the DM is setting challenges with the intent that the players have strong chance of failing, which is a different approach from mine in which I set challenges with the intent for the players to be able to have fun while winning (which is a subtle distinction considering that part of that fun is, at least from time to time, seeing that bad choices and bad luck combined would make you fail).That's a common misconception. Whether it is written out beforehand, or written down afterward, consistency is identical so long as it is written down and referenced when needed.One can learn to reach the same answer on the spot that could be plotted out in advance - just like a pre-planning DM can change a detail during play because something "cooler" came to mind in the moment rather than binding themself to their plan. I find that I don't have any difference in answer to questions like "what is north of this town?" whether I spend a week planning out things or I have only just invented this town on the spot.I'm sure if my group did that, we'd start handling the treasure inventory differently than we do.My group actually uses a very loose system... specifically that each character sheet only has the character's specific equipment that no one else is allowed to use, and all other items (potions, for example) are recorded on the party inventory sheet, and any item that is on the party inventory sheet is assumed to be passed around and shared to the point that any given item is assumed to be currently carried by whichever character ends up needing to use it first.I've always been conflicted about training rules. When it comes to D&D, I don't use them because they always seem to feel like they are getting in the way, whether it is by forcing the players to choose between pursuing some seemingly time-sensitive goal or to actually get the level they've already earned, or it is by forcing me to include sufficient wealth that the players actually have the choice whether to pay for training in the first place.But in other games, Exalted for example, I not only use the training times but actively use them as a means to pace the story so that it doesn't all happen within the span of a single week.As strange as it may seem, my group sees the costs in 5th edition as being pretty steep (steep enough to actually cause consideration, but not so steep as to leave them preferring to simply stay dead no matter the circumstance).Realism is very, very low on the list of qualities I want my game-play to have, especially when the options are potentially-unrealistic-and-enjoyable or realism-at-the-cost-of-enjoying-the-game, which players not having the information they need to make good choices for their characters tends to fall into, especially when the character actually did the work to get that info and it has just slipped the player's mind.</blockquote>

Verification