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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hong" data-source="post: 1892235" data-attributes="member: 537">There is a parody thread on these forums pointing out the ways in which LotR would have been different if it was a D&D campaign. Hint 3: all good parody contains a kernel of truth.Oh dear.Yes, yes. "My evidence is my refusal to show my evidence"; they all get to that point eventually. I think you missed a step in the middle, though, viz: "I can't understand you, so you must be wrong". Oh, my mistake, you didn't.I was? OH YES, I WAS. FOOSIE SAID IT, SO IT MUST BE TRUE.You seem to have trouble understanding how an overarching storyline can be composed of multiple underlying plot arcs. Why is this?No, Foosie. You produced strong evidence to knock down your strawman, as is your wont. This being the climax to that specific plot arc in no way invalidates the possibility of there being a subsequent plot arc, all contributing to an overall storyline. It's called an episodic campaign structure, and is something that fits seamlessly into the usual D&D scheme of things, so much so that most players expect it (or something like it) without even thinking about it. You know this, yes?Does it often take you several months to finish reading The Two Towers?Your predilection for overcomplicating matters by turning simple English words into jargon is your problem, not mine. However, I'll use small words because I'm JUST THAT NICE.Campaign is long. Long campaign with story is like work. Having story is fun, but still work. Work is good, if succeed at the end. Succeeded at the end, but DM then take success away. No good.It really is that simple. The players felt they had finally achieved the objective of several previous sessions (up to 35) of adventuring, only to have it snatched away from them after they'd put in all that effort.INHERENTLY, THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH TAKING THE MACGUFFIN AWAY. HOWEVER, it's not something a DM should do without thinking through all the possible consequences, and also structuring the flow of events so that players don't feel discouraged if/when it happens. A DM who doesn't do their homework is a careless DM, as I might have said before.Perhaps you'd like to turn that into a strawman as well, assuming there's that much straw in Toronto.You seem to have trouble distinguishing between a surprise that grabs people's attention and makes them more interested in continuing the game, and one that simply makes them annoyed. This is despite swrushing, among others, explaining the difference to you in very clear terms, along with ways of ensuring a positive outcome rather than a negative one. Why is this?You keep saying "near the climax". I do not think those words mean what you think they mean.So why do you think they were feeling down? Flat beer?Which part ofanddid we fail to understand? Furthermore, which part ofanddid we also fail to understand? (That was referring to staging climaxes at the end of a session, but the general point still holds.)Good ones. More to the point, what kinds of stories do you tell?Which part of anddid we fail to understand? Or am I to suppose you have now decided that Ambrus really decided to come here to complain about a great ending to the session, and how all his players bar one liked it? Looks like it, seeing how you've already started banging on the "Ambrus has issues with his fiance" drum.Yes, most of the players are willing to give the DM a break. Bully for them. That speaks volumes for their reasonableness (and Ambrus's; if he really was a crap DM, no doubt they'd be less generous), but it doesn't change the fact that things could have been handled much better.</blockquote>

Verification