Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Iosue" data-source="post: 9476080" data-attributes="member: 6680772">Let's turn the heat down a bit. You don't have to be a jerk DM to look at stronghold rules and think about how you can use them as hooks to challenge players or to provide emotional reaction to story developments. Heck, we don't even have to go that far. In D&amp;D, the DM is responsible for and has control of the setting; with Bastion rules in the DMG, it would be natural for DMs to assume that they would likewise be responsible and have control of the Bastion.Telling DMs that players are responsible for and have control of Bastions is not legislating against them. It's just making sure that everyone understands who controls what. Bastions are extensions of PCs, not part of the setting. That doesn't mean they can't be used as a part of adventure or campaign design. It just means that, like a PC that is likewise used, the DM needs to ensure player buy-in to avoid friction.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Iosue, post: 9476080, member: 6680772"] Let's turn the heat down a bit. You don't have to be a jerk DM to look at stronghold rules and think about how you can use them as hooks to challenge players or to provide emotional reaction to story developments. Heck, we don't even have to go that far. In D&D, the DM is responsible for and has control of the setting; with Bastion rules in the DMG, it would be natural for DMs to assume that they would likewise be responsible and have control of the Bastion. Telling DMs that players are responsible for and have control of Bastions is not legislating against them. It's just making sure that everyone understands who controls what. Bastions are extensions of PCs, not part of the setting. That doesn't mean they can't be used as a part of adventure or campaign design. It just means that, like a PC that is likewise used, the DM needs to ensure player buy-in to avoid friction. [/QUOTE]

Verification