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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LostSoul" data-source="post: 3493299" data-attributes="member: 386">Yeah.I think our problem was mostly a social one, one that came from a lack of open communication between everyone playing.  In our game, we wanted the DM to railroad us into the adventure - and once we were there, we could make all sorts of meaningful decisions.  Which path to take, what spells to memorize, how to fight the monsters, how our feat choices would affect the next encounter, etc.  That is what we wanted, and what we didn't clearly express to the DM.I ran an adventure for the same group that took place in a small mountain pass.  Yeah, the PCs couldn't leave that pass and do whatever they felt like.  But we all knew that we were going to deal with the conflict that existed there, so the players had no reason to leave.  And we got right down to the adventure.  So railroading = True, yeah, but fun = True as well.In my little example of a poor game, I'm not saying that D&D is at fault (it ain't), or the DM (he's a good DM), or that the players were (we've had many a successful session before).  What happened is that all of it failed to come together, and everyone is at fault.But it is not true that 20 minutes of fun in 4 hours does not exist in our hobby.  I would like to see designers tackle that problem - making it less likely to occur.  It's never going to go away, given that real people are involved, but any tools we can have to reduce the chances of it via the game text are welcome.In my opinion, anything that aids communication between players (including the DM) about what people want when they sit down for a game would help out here.  What this means, I leave up to guys like mearls.</blockquote>

Verification