Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 5586619" data-attributes="member: 8835">No.  I haven't gotten into Moist Robot theory and left brain/right brain decision making flow.The OP said his GM has this big war going on and big NPCs telling the PCs what to do.those GM-based initiators are influencing the player decision process, and can make the player feel like he has less valid choices.Even if the PCs feel stuck in doing what Elminster says, it's not like he's giving them round by round direction for what spells to cast and weapons to use.  the party goes to where Elminster said and then does the unpredictable things players to solve the problem.  So at the micro level, still lots of choices going on.At the macro level, which big goal to pursue, the players feel constrained to having to go pursue that big problem.So, is it fair for a GM to spring up new DM invented problems on the players?  Is there a scope or frequency of these DM invented problems that should be taken into consideration?Is it fair, and not Deus Ex Machina, for the GM to bring in NPC heroes to deal with DM invented problems the PCs ignore?Is there an issue if there are too many DM invented problems going on at once AND he does not have NPC heroes cover the gap?Note that I prefaced problem, with DM Invented.  Problems the players make are actual Consequences of their action.  That's kind of the point for those.  But when the GM invents new problems out of the blue (like an Adventure Path inherently does), are there some guidelines to be followed?If I was running a sandbox, I think I would start the world where there's lots of opportunities, to entice the party into action.  very little direct Threats initially, unless the party needed stimulus into action (I don't want to play Beet Farmer the RPG).  After that, I would make anything that happens after that be a consequence or prior PC action.  Only rarely would I invent a new problem, namely when all the major problems/consequences have already been dealt with, so as to stimulate some change and action.If I was running an adventure path, I think the main hook would be a DM Invented problem that involves and interests the players/PCs.  I would not have multiple of these things going on, as invariably, the PCs are the heroes, and too many problems, and they would not be able to win.  the point of winning being that clever play through solving the main hook's problem is victory, failure to solve it is failure.  If I have 2 major problems, and only the PCs as heroes, they will fail one of those problems.  if I have an NPC party step up for the other problem, the the players learn that neither problem was special and about the PCs, and they can let the NPCs handle it all.</blockquote>

Verification