Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Emerikol" data-source="post: 8224183" data-attributes="member: 6698278">Also, let me break down the other style a bit for you.I like to think of the Pathfinder Adventure Paths, when used as the primary vehicle for the group, as the party approach.&nbsp;&nbsp; The party still likely finds a hook and picks up the clues and begins the adventure path.&nbsp; The DM provides the connective tissue between adventures and he provides a small modicum of underlying world info to the group as needed.&nbsp; The NPCs for example all exist to support the adventure path.&nbsp; If they do not support it then they are essentially &quot;extras&quot; that the DM can just randomly choose.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Often a third party world, like Pathfinders, is used because that enables the DM to provide the information without a lot of extra effort.&nbsp;&nbsp; This approach is very popular no matter what the above poll says.&nbsp;&nbsp; Not everyone comes here and those who do are more invested in roleplaying than the average gamer.In a sandbox, that adventure path could exist.&nbsp; It's not the only thing that exists though.&nbsp; It's probably not the only or even the primary set of adventures.&nbsp; It's just one possible choice and it's far more likely the group might quit the path early and lunge off in another direction.&nbsp; It's kind of like the DM has to have many adventure threads available and the party can choose to follow whichever one they want to follow.&nbsp;&nbsp; A lot of the NPCs in a sandbox are important and are part of something that is happening.&nbsp; Lots of them are plotting.&nbsp; You know as DM how it all interconnects.&nbsp;&nbsp; Adventures might lead back and forth from one thread to another.&nbsp;&nbsp; It's kind of like you are bobbling the plots of a dozen novels.&nbsp; If the group interferes then that novel turns out differently but if the group doesn't then the novel runs to completion with whatever consequences.&nbsp;&nbsp; I also tend to think you develop stronger relationships between PCs and NPCs.&nbsp; The NPCs have real personalities and are up to their own agendas.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Emerikol, post: 8224183, member: 6698278"] Also, let me break down the other style a bit for you. I like to think of the Pathfinder Adventure Paths, when used as the primary vehicle for the group, as the party approach. The party still likely finds a hook and picks up the clues and begins the adventure path. The DM provides the connective tissue between adventures and he provides a small modicum of underlying world info to the group as needed. The NPCs for example all exist to support the adventure path. If they do not support it then they are essentially "extras" that the DM can just randomly choose. Often a third party world, like Pathfinders, is used because that enables the DM to provide the information without a lot of extra effort. This approach is very popular no matter what the above poll says. Not everyone comes here and those who do are more invested in roleplaying than the average gamer. In a sandbox, that adventure path could exist. It's not the only thing that exists though. It's probably not the only or even the primary set of adventures. It's just one possible choice and it's far more likely the group might quit the path early and lunge off in another direction. It's kind of like the DM has to have many adventure threads available and the party can choose to follow whichever one they want to follow. A lot of the NPCs in a sandbox are important and are part of something that is happening. Lots of them are plotting. You know as DM how it all interconnects. Adventures might lead back and forth from one thread to another. It's kind of like you are bobbling the plots of a dozen novels. If the group interferes then that novel turns out differently but if the group doesn't then the novel runs to completion with whatever consequences. I also tend to think you develop stronger relationships between PCs and NPCs. The NPCs have real personalities and are up to their own agendas. [/QUOTE]

Verification