Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jgsugden" data-source="post: 8693756" data-attributes="member: 2629">That is a bit of an oversimplification of the breadth of statements against this approach.&nbsp; When a DM uses these approaches, the DM is slapping things together to follow his railroad and connecting the dots by convenience, rather than plan.&nbsp; That is going to be messy. That will result in nonsensical elements being attached to each other.&nbsp; It will not result in immersive world building that has cohesive senssibility for the functionality of the dungeons and spaces in which PCs are adventuring. This has nothing to do with the DM lying to players being 'bad'.&nbsp; It has to do with the DM's design not having cohesion.&nbsp; If you put together a murder mystery and want players to put together the puzzle pieces, they're discouraged from trusting the significance of clues when so much of the setting is nonsensical.&nbsp; Is the lack of a privy in a manor house a sign that the residents are undead, or just that the DM didn't leave room for one?&nbsp; If the PCs enter a room and find three doors, explore one and determine it is a dead end and then come backl to the next ... onlyto find out there is a roaringly loud sound on the other side of the door - why didn't they hear the sound when they first found the door?There is a reason we plan.&nbsp; There is a reason we tie things together.&nbsp; It makes it easier to be immersive and suspend disbelief.&nbsp; There are times when we have to either stop the game or 'wing it', but 'wining it' as a primary plan you use every game has limitations that players will feel.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jgsugden, post: 8693756, member: 2629"] That is a bit of an oversimplification of the breadth of statements against this approach. When a DM uses these approaches, the DM is slapping things together to follow his railroad and connecting the dots by convenience, rather than plan. That is going to be messy. That will result in nonsensical elements being attached to each other. It will not result in immersive world building that has cohesive senssibility for the functionality of the dungeons and spaces in which PCs are adventuring. This has nothing to do with the DM lying to players being 'bad'. It has to do with the DM's design not having cohesion. If you put together a murder mystery and want players to put together the puzzle pieces, they're discouraged from trusting the significance of clues when so much of the setting is nonsensical. Is the lack of a privy in a manor house a sign that the residents are undead, or just that the DM didn't leave room for one? If the PCs enter a room and find three doors, explore one and determine it is a dead end and then come backl to the next ... onlyto find out there is a roaringly loud sound on the other side of the door - why didn't they hear the sound when they first found the door? There is a reason we plan. There is a reason we tie things together. It makes it easier to be immersive and suspend disbelief. There are times when we have to either stop the game or 'wing it', but 'wining it' as a primary plan you use every game has limitations that players will feel. [/QUOTE]

Verification