Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 280746" data-attributes="member: 177">I think such things can be incorporated into a long-term campaign, in theory.&nbsp; I've yet to see it be anything but disruptive in practice, so I don't encourage it.I don't require PCs to be close buddies.&nbsp; I don't even need them to like each other.&nbsp; Open hostilities (be they flashing swords or intrigue) between PCs generally doesn't help build a story.&nbsp;&nbsp; More often than not, it tears down what story was there, and takes over so no otyher plot can develop until it's resolved.&nbsp; It also tends to bring hard feelings between players.&nbsp; Even when it doesn't, it isn't usually much fun for peole who aren't the principles in the conflict.&nbsp; I've seen such stuff work well in one-shots, short campaigns lasting a few sessions, and the like.&nbsp; But if I intend the game to last for years, it seems a bad idea to encourage infighting.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 280746, member: 177"] I think such things can be incorporated into a long-term campaign, in theory. I've yet to see it be anything but disruptive in practice, so I don't encourage it. I don't require PCs to be close buddies. I don't even need them to like each other. Open hostilities (be they flashing swords or intrigue) between PCs generally doesn't help build a story. More often than not, it tears down what story was there, and takes over so no otyher plot can develop until it's resolved. It also tends to bring hard feelings between players. Even when it doesn't, it isn't usually much fun for peole who aren't the principles in the conflict. I've seen such stuff work well in one-shots, short campaigns lasting a few sessions, and the like. But if I intend the game to last for years, it seems a bad idea to encourage infighting. [/QUOTE]

Verification