Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 4693977" data-attributes="member: 29398">Late to the party as usual, I am; but a few thoughts...1. As played, Varis got it right.&nbsp; Period.2. Chekhov's Gun really should, in a D+D-type game, be an illusion more often than not.&nbsp; Dead ends exist.&nbsp; So do death traps.&nbsp; Characters will insist on exploring both regardless.&nbsp; In this particular case, if the outfall end of the pipe is obvious enough that the PCs can't help but notice it as they walk by, then it pretty much has to be described along with the rest of the scenery.&nbsp; If they want to explore it, more power to 'em.Why should it sometimes be an illusion?&nbsp; To avoid the horrible sound of players saying &quot;The DM mentioned it, it must be important!&quot; whenever something unusual does get mentioned in a scene or description.&nbsp; Sometimes, unusual things are there just to, well, be unusual; and the players/characters have to spend effort and look for the important stuff among the irrelevancies.3. I have no problem with the party splitting up.&nbsp; When my players do this they know damn well there's going to be some downtime involved for each group and that it might not be evenly divided; they accept that, and split anyway.&nbsp; Fine with me.4. Those who fought the Orcs get the ExP for that battle.&nbsp; Those who weren't there - or who were there but did nothing - get nothing.&nbsp; I highly recommend this as a standing rule for all situations - if you're not involved in it, you don't get ExP for it, regardless what &quot;it&quot; is.Lan-&quot;the art lies in making the skill look like art&quot;-efan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 4693977, member: 29398"] Late to the party as usual, I am; but a few thoughts... 1. As played, Varis got it right. Period. 2. Chekhov's Gun really should, in a D+D-type game, be an illusion more often than not. Dead ends exist. So do death traps. Characters will insist on exploring both regardless. In this particular case, if the outfall end of the pipe is obvious enough that the PCs can't help but notice it as they walk by, then it pretty much has to be described along with the rest of the scenery. If they want to explore it, more power to 'em. Why should it sometimes be an illusion? To avoid the horrible sound of players saying "The DM mentioned it, it must be important!" whenever something unusual does get mentioned in a scene or description. Sometimes, unusual things are there just to, well, be unusual; and the players/characters have to spend effort and look for the important stuff among the irrelevancies. 3. I have no problem with the party splitting up. When my players do this they know damn well there's going to be some downtime involved for each group and that it might not be evenly divided; they accept that, and split anyway. Fine with me. 4. Those who fought the Orcs get the ExP for that battle. Those who weren't there - or who were there but did nothing - get nothing. I highly recommend this as a standing rule for all situations - if you're not involved in it, you don't get ExP for it, regardless what "it" is. Lan-"the art lies in making the skill look like art"-efan [/QUOTE]

Verification