D&D General D&D 2024 does not deserve to succeed

[Micah Sweet]

i mean...do you do that for parts of the settings you don't think your players will ever interact with or will ever effect them (e.g. completely different continents they'd have no reason to visit)? if so, why? and if not, doesn't that demonstrate on some level that you DO consider the PCs to be the protagonists?

Sounds like a gotcha question. It's not perfect, of course, and I do pay more attention to things that have a better chance of affecting the PCs than otherwise. I'm still a human being living on Earth.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Ask Matt Coville whose favorite setting he can't play because Brightright is partially blamed for TSRs demire and thus gets no support and few care enough to run it.

Mistake on the consumers side if company death means you have no one to play with.

To be honest, I get more enjoyment out of reading and writing than I do running or playing.

 

[Weiley31]

When does 13th Age date from? I don’t recall it from the 80s

The dark and dimly remembered year of 2013.

You get the Ducks AND the Rune quest setting for 13th Age!

 

[dave2008]

What they decide to do in the game is their choice, and the setting will react to it in a realistic way.

Except of course this is impossible. A DM cannot possibly simulate reality, no one person can. It will ultimately react in a way you feel is realistic, not necessarily what truly is.

Also, what about the parts of the world that have no interaction with the PCs? DO you create stories and events for those parts of the world all on your own?

For example, if the PCs are on continent A, with no connection to continent B, do you keep track of the factions on continent B completely separately? Do you track the sociological, political, economic, and environmental factors of the factions in continent B to check to see if they gain the will or means to travel to continent A? Are the Bs explorers, merchants, conquerors? How can these complex relations happen realistically off screen without it being DM fiat (not that there is something wrong with that - but it is not "realistic")?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Except of course this is impossible. A DM cannot possibly simulate reality, no one person can. It will ultimately react in a way you feel is realistic, not necessarily what truly is.

Also, what about the parts of the world that have no interaction with the PCs? DO you create stories and events for those parts of the world all on your own?

For example, if the PCs are on continent A, with no connection to continent B, do you keep track of the factions on continent B completely separately? Do you track the sociological, political, economic, and environmental factors of the factions in continent B to check to see if they gain the will or means to travel to continent A? Are the Bs explorers, merchants, conquerors? How can these complex relations happen realistically off screen without it being DM fiat (not that there is something wrong with that - but it is not "realistic")?

I use a lot of tables, mostly, tuned to the setting.

Look, are you trying to catch me in an inconsistency? Obviously this is an ideal no one lives up to perfectly, but it's what I want and I do my best, using the simulationist tools available to me, with the most cooperation I can get from my players.

 

[billd91]

Did someone say "Judean People's Front"?

"Judean Peoples' Front?!? Eff off! We're the Peoples' Front of Judea!"

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Do you constantly track the location of all the wandering monsters rather than rolling on a table?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Do you constantly track the location of all the wandering monsters rather than rolling on a table?

Why would I do that? That's what the tables are for. I do keep track of the ones who die, so the PCs can't encounter more of a given monster than actually exists in the dungeon.

Seriously, is there a reason for this increasing level of scrutiny of my chosen playstyle preference? Are you folks pushing on me for a reason? I'm starting to take it personal.

 

[dave2008]

Look, are you trying to catch me in an inconsistency?

No, but I can see why it looks that way.

What I was hoping to get was an admission that when playing the game with players, they are the story. It is only a game because there are players. Otherwise it is just DM fiction. You can have the most robust and independent world building (and I love that myself - I mean 99% of the monsters I make never make it to the table), but it is not a game, it is not an RPG if you don't have players and they are not front and center to their stories.

Obviously this is an ideal no one lives up to perfectly, but it's what I want and I do my best, using the simulationist tools available to me, with the most cooperation I can get from my players.

Sure, I don't have any issue with that.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Why would I do that? That's what the tables are for

Tables are player-centric. They teleport the monster to wherever the players happen to be. A truly deterministic world has no need for random tables. The ogre isn’t quantum because it’s just as real as the PCs and knows where it is.

Seriously, is there a reason for this increasing level of scrutiny of my chosen playstyle preference

It’s just very difficult to envision how it works.