Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="smerwin29" data-source="post: 3195630" data-attributes="member: 15050">While an interesting idea, I think the following dichotomy will become apparent in responses:A majority of the people play in or run campaigns where they create their own adventures, or modify published adventures trememndously.&nbsp; Such a system of adventure building, to these people, is at best confining and at worst a complete curtailment of creative freedom.&nbsp; Most DMs of this nature place themselves in a category of gamers who know enough to be able to create their own game their own way, without a need for any such system.&nbsp; (Whether they need or could use such a system or not is another topic entirely, but only their players know for sure!)A minority of people, especially those who play in or DM in campaigns that are more widespread, or who use published adventures without much deviation, will admit that for purposes of &quot;quality control&quot; (for the lack of a better phrase), such a system, or at least a very loose set of adventure-creation guidelines, are not necessarily a bad thing.&nbsp; If dozens or hundreds or thousands of players are going to be playing an adventure, you need to have some standards to make sure the adventure is playable by people with vastly different play styles and expectations.Another tangential question will be &quot;should the combats always have to be fair based on the PC level?&quot; and &quot;should players expect the combats this, or does that weaken one of the better parts of the game?&quot;&nbsp; The answers to those questions are, of course, that it depends on the campaign.I understand those who would chafe at the restrictions.&nbsp; If I want to do things a little differently, and if my players are having fun, systems like this be damned.&nbsp; On the other hand, we've all seen or heard about those campaigns where the first-level characters are thrown into the fire against an incredibly difficult encounter that they should never in a million years win, and then either are slaughtered or are &quot;scripted&quot; into winning by the DM.&nbsp; Then we hear people talking about how their first-level characters defeated Tiamut, and we roll our eyes.&nbsp; Such a system would at least eliminate that.&nbsp; :-D</blockquote>

[QUOTE="smerwin29, post: 3195630, member: 15050"] While an interesting idea, I think the following dichotomy will become apparent in responses: A majority of the people play in or run campaigns where they create their own adventures, or modify published adventures trememndously. Such a system of adventure building, to these people, is at best confining and at worst a complete curtailment of creative freedom. Most DMs of this nature place themselves in a category of gamers who know enough to be able to create their own game their own way, without a need for any such system. (Whether they need or could use such a system or not is another topic entirely, but only their players know for sure!) A minority of people, especially those who play in or DM in campaigns that are more widespread, or who use published adventures without much deviation, will admit that for purposes of "quality control" (for the lack of a better phrase), such a system, or at least a very loose set of adventure-creation guidelines, are not necessarily a bad thing. If dozens or hundreds or thousands of players are going to be playing an adventure, you need to have some standards to make sure the adventure is playable by people with vastly different play styles and expectations. Another tangential question will be "should the combats always have to be fair based on the PC level?" and "should players expect the combats this, or does that weaken one of the better parts of the game?" The answers to those questions are, of course, that it depends on the campaign. I understand those who would chafe at the restrictions. If I want to do things a little differently, and if my players are having fun, systems like this be damned. On the other hand, we've all seen or heard about those campaigns where the first-level characters are thrown into the fire against an incredibly difficult encounter that they should never in a million years win, and then either are slaughtered or are "scripted" into winning by the DM. Then we hear people talking about how their first-level characters defeated Tiamut, and we roll our eyes. Such a system would at least eliminate that. :-D [/QUOTE]

Verification