Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sacrosanct" data-source="post: 6374687" data-attributes="member: 15700">You have essentially said that anyone who doesn't adhere to your personal preferences is a bad DM.  You didn't say, "this is how I like to do it."  You said, "Doing this is bad DMing." And you wonder why they might get defensive on that?But a game world has to have some sort of sense of believability.  And in order to do that, certain assumptions are made.  Things like weather patterns.  Biology and habitat functionality.  If you have a city of 50,000 humans, does that city include tax collectors, sanitary workers, etc, or is every single person there a guard or merchant because those are the only two occupations that have been literally detailed, and therefore no other occupations exist?Come on now.  What happened to all those goblin tribes that were around when the PCs were lower level?  Did they all just disappear because they don't literally exist in the real world?  Nothing in the game literally exists, so that basis for your argument seems awfully odd.  If it sounds insane, it's because you aren't grasping the point.  I am not blaming the players.  In fact, I am doing the opposite.  I am empowering the players because I am giving them choice.  I am not pushing them in a specific direction, nor altering the game world to ensure they hit the points I want them to hit.  However, along with that choice is being responsible for that choice.  If the players decide to do something stupid, I'm not going to wave it all away and give them a free ride.  If the players decide to spend resources on X encounter, I'm not going to let them get all the way back up to full just because it would help them later.  Players make the decisions; I don't make it for them.  As a player, I would feel your described style of play is belittling and condescending.XP for loot mechanic doesn't mean Gygaxian D&D was nothing but combat to combat grabbing loot.  This is an obvious fallacy of logic.  There's a reason why Mearls says things like, "D&D is going back to emphasizing all three pillars of play."  That means Gygaxian D&D also placed emphasis on exploration and interaction.  Do not assume how AD&D was played based off of how tournament modules were designed.Once again you've missed the point.  You really should stop accusing me of things (punishing players, going off on tangents) when you're not even reading my posts.  Go back and reread what I said, specifically:"Just because none of that is mentioned in the official game adventure doesn't mean it can't happen."That means there is no reason for the goblin tribe being there.  None.  Nada.  The reason is non-determined until the players decide how they are going to interact with it, then, if you're a DM with even an ounce of creativity, you come up with a reason.Good on you, but don't make statements that an alternative style of gaming is bad DMing.  And frankly, as the DM, the area is only as boring as you make it.  Since it's your game world and all.If there's one lesson that has always rung true over 30+ years of DMing, it's that players don't always follow all of you plot hooks, and the vast majority of players I have played with don't enjoy it when instead of letting them explore where they want, I just say, "Tough.  Nothing happens there.  You need to go here instead."Indeed...</blockquote>

Verification