Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 8694576" data-attributes="member: 97077">We'd have to define what &quot;mattering&quot; meant here. It matters to the emergent story certainly. For example, they took the scenic route instead of the the most direct one. Does the additional time spent matter? It might not. Did it matter to the possibilities of encounters? It seems like it didn't and the DM is perfectly free to say which stretch of terrain has a chance of an encounter or not. So it's a choice that doesn't have much impact and that's okay. As a DM,&nbsp; I would have the choice actually have an impact, particularly as it seems like it was information gleaned from an NPC and therefore seemingly relevant in some way. Perhaps the longer route is freer of encounters, but runs the risk of exhaustion due to forced marching, whereas the direct route on the road has no risk of exhaustion, but a greater chance of being waylaid by bandits. But, ultimately, the DM still isn't railroading here if the choice doesn't have as much import. Certainly it may not matter to the players if they are happy with what they found in the 3 door scenario. The issue has never been, for me and clearly for others, that the group uses these techniques. The problem has been the DM who does this without the players buying into that kind of play. For players that didn't consent to that sort of play and who imagine that their choices matter, may not be too pleased. Honestly, the 3 door scenario just seems kind of stupid to me. It's not clear what purpose it would serve in game play and I can't see why a DM would even want to do that in the first place. It's setting up the possibility for dissatisfaction with absolutely no upside that I can see. Why do it at all?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="iserith, post: 8694576, member: 97077"] We'd have to define what "mattering" meant here. It matters to the emergent story certainly. For example, they took the scenic route instead of the the most direct one. Does the additional time spent matter? It might not. Did it matter to the possibilities of encounters? It seems like it didn't and the DM is perfectly free to say which stretch of terrain has a chance of an encounter or not. So it's a choice that doesn't have much impact and that's okay. As a DM, I would have the choice actually have an impact, particularly as it seems like it was information gleaned from an NPC and therefore seemingly relevant in some way. Perhaps the longer route is freer of encounters, but runs the risk of exhaustion due to forced marching, whereas the direct route on the road has no risk of exhaustion, but a greater chance of being waylaid by bandits. But, ultimately, the DM still isn't railroading here if the choice doesn't have as much import. Certainly it may not matter to the players if they are happy with what they found in the 3 door scenario. The issue has never been, for me and clearly for others, that the group uses these techniques. The problem has been the DM who does this without the players buying into that kind of play. For players that didn't consent to that sort of play and who imagine that their choices matter, may not be too pleased. Honestly, the 3 door scenario just seems kind of stupid to me. It's not clear what purpose it would serve in game play and I can't see why a DM would even want to do that in the first place. It's setting up the possibility for dissatisfaction with absolutely no upside that I can see. Why do it at all? [/QUOTE]

Verification