NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sadras" data-source="post: 6814407" data-attributes="member: 6688277">None of what I have written is anything new, @<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=48965" target="_blank">Imaro</a> I believe has addressed it, but for what its worth let me see if I can make some headway.Using the below quote as the primary quote which I intend to analyse.  Let us now examine the Mace and the Tower.  This reads that the PCs were looking for the mace from before. The player guessed the dark elf had it. You wrote it into the story because it suited your purpose. Same with the ruined tower. From play reports I have read on Enworld and my experience as DM, there are plenty of DMs who pilfer ideas from their player's ramblings and guesswork because sometimes it makes for a better story. Even with pre-authorship there is plenty that is determined at the table.That is why in my very first post on this thread, I mused that certain people are arguing extremes here when most DMs fall somewhere in the middle leaning to one or the other, but certainly possess a blend of "in the moment" and "pre-authorship"   Now with regards to your Dark Elf. From your own words he was always going to be an antagonist similar to how I "pre-author" my Bad Guys in my adventures.So if they fail the desert - Dark Elf is an Antagonist.So if they succeeded in the desert = No Dark ElfIf PCs leave tower (1 - and they were travelling to it) (2- No Skill Check required to leave) & (3 - I'm guessing at one point they have to leave) = Dark Elf Antagonist. That is a pure rail road to a Dark Elf Antagonist.How is this different to pre-authorship adventures where I include a monsters/encounter at X location. Like @<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=48965" target="_blank">Imaro</a> has been stating the same bias / GM Force exists - you wanted to use the Dark Elf as an antagonist. You didn't plan the terrain but you certainly planned the antagonist. It wasn't that random you just had to pick the appropriate moment during the story to create the most dramatic play. I believe many DMs do that.Since YOU created the Dark Elf, you brought the below into play through "pre-authorship" of the Dark Elf antagonistWhat is left is you determined to 'colour' the failed skilled check with the motives of a pre-determined (pre-authored) Antagonist. I don't believe that is at all alien to "pre-authorship" styled adventures. There is nothing unique about this. So if the characters succeeded on their checks, they would have found a usable well, upon a failed skill check undrinkable well.   So when you write I have to strongly disagree with you. Most of what you have described above is a result of pre-authoring and using your own DM bias for the NPC antagonist you created to use at some point in play and to colour failed skill checks.</blockquote>

Verification