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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rils" data-source="post: 6902634" data-attributes="member: 78768">While typically I would agree with that, in this setting, it might make a bit more difference.  The socioeconomic basis is described as consisting of three towns - one is practically deserted, and the other two are walled and fortified.  In fact, the area around Vallaki is described as so dangerous that the inhabitants won't take the 15 minute walk to the lake to go fishing, and although there are buildings outside the walls, they are abandoned and dilapidated. (man, so many big words...)  As described, it makes no sense for there to be outlying farms or people living off the land - otherwise the danger of the setting is nullified.  Why all the fuss of finding safety in the walled town before nightfall, if you've got a couple hundred Farmer Bob's off in the trees minding their own business?So in this case, I'd argue it does affect both the player and DM experience - because it 100% changes the tone of the game.  The night-time random encounter table becomes completely useless because all those prowling horrors would be off terrorizing the farmers.  Or, you'd have to find a reeeeaaaalll good reason why several hundred people can live in solitary homesteads no problem, while the DM rolls on that encounter table every fifteen minutes for a small band of adventurers...  For me, it causes more problems than it solves, and kind of cheapens the vibe of the place.  Plus I have the good fortune of players who accept things like that at face value, without trying to be too simulationist about the detailed economies in nightmare realms.</blockquote>

Verification