Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Emerikol" data-source="post: 8219100" data-attributes="member: 6698278">I would say that is a very standard and classic way of playing.&nbsp; So you are in good company.&nbsp; In my younger days I used a store bought world and mostly store bought adventures.&nbsp;&nbsp; Now I almost always do my own world (world building is fun to me).&nbsp; I do use third party adventures sometimes but not every time.&nbsp; So I am in no way critiquing your approach to the game.I prefer the players do not assume I as DM will look out for them when it comes to encounters.&nbsp; It is absolutely a valid situation in my campaign that some encounters are intended to be ran from especially at lower levels.&nbsp; I tend to go with the idea that the wilderness has random encounters and some of them might be too much to handle especially at lower levels.&nbsp; It's best to avoid a long overland journey.&nbsp;&nbsp; Now about 4th or 5th level the PCs get to a level where they can handle the outdoors.&nbsp; They could in theory though encounter a dragon and at their level they should run or hide.My style is very much old school and I enjoy that approach.&nbsp; If you are having fun with your approach then you are doing it right.&nbsp; What people get out of roleplaying games varies.Addendum:And when I say it varies it really does a lot.&nbsp; Look at the games out there.&nbsp; They are all over the play in the style they intend.&nbsp; Some people want to weave a story where they are more author than player.&nbsp; So deliberately having bad things happen to the PC is part of the fun.&nbsp;&nbsp; So we are probably closer in approach than we are with those folks.&nbsp; But if those folks are having fun and enjoying a game then they also are doing it right.&nbsp;&nbsp; Gygax himself said that the dirty little secret is that people could make their own game and part of that is taking a ruleset and making the game your groups.Addendum 2:I forgot to mention but in my games I tend to do a lot of preparation before the game even starts or I've even recruited a group.&nbsp; It's why I tend to offer what I have and players accept or they don't.&nbsp; Right now I am building a world.&nbsp; I will then build the sandbox.&nbsp;&nbsp; I will create a bunch of adventures (some of which will be reskinned 3rd party modules).&nbsp;&nbsp; I will create wandering monster tables.&nbsp;&nbsp; Then when the campaign begins I will be running the game but not building the game as much.&nbsp; Now when the PCs outgrow the sandbox, I will have been working on the next &quot;sandbox&quot;.&nbsp; At really high levels, the sandbox becomes a bit looser.&nbsp; You have PCs who can travel around the world with ease.&nbsp;&nbsp; Then it perhaps becomes a bit more dangling of various &quot;hooks&quot; as mentioned above and the group biting.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Emerikol, post: 8219100, member: 6698278"] I would say that is a very standard and classic way of playing. So you are in good company. In my younger days I used a store bought world and mostly store bought adventures. Now I almost always do my own world (world building is fun to me). I do use third party adventures sometimes but not every time. So I am in no way critiquing your approach to the game. I prefer the players do not assume I as DM will look out for them when it comes to encounters. It is absolutely a valid situation in my campaign that some encounters are intended to be ran from especially at lower levels. I tend to go with the idea that the wilderness has random encounters and some of them might be too much to handle especially at lower levels. It's best to avoid a long overland journey. Now about 4th or 5th level the PCs get to a level where they can handle the outdoors. They could in theory though encounter a dragon and at their level they should run or hide. My style is very much old school and I enjoy that approach. If you are having fun with your approach then you are doing it right. What people get out of roleplaying games varies. Addendum: And when I say it varies it really does a lot. Look at the games out there. They are all over the play in the style they intend. Some people want to weave a story where they are more author than player. So deliberately having bad things happen to the PC is part of the fun. So we are probably closer in approach than we are with those folks. But if those folks are having fun and enjoying a game then they also are doing it right. Gygax himself said that the dirty little secret is that people could make their own game and part of that is taking a ruleset and making the game your groups. Addendum 2: I forgot to mention but in my games I tend to do a lot of preparation before the game even starts or I've even recruited a group. It's why I tend to offer what I have and players accept or they don't. Right now I am building a world. I will then build the sandbox. I will create a bunch of adventures (some of which will be reskinned 3rd party modules). I will create wandering monster tables. Then when the campaign begins I will be running the game but not building the game as much. Now when the PCs outgrow the sandbox, I will have been working on the next "sandbox". At really high levels, the sandbox becomes a bit looser. You have PCs who can travel around the world with ease. Then it perhaps becomes a bit more dangling of various "hooks" as mentioned above and the group biting. [/QUOTE]

Verification