Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="TwoSix" data-source="post: 6816130" data-attributes="member: 205">But that's what I mean!&nbsp; If you change the encounter from the stated stakes, you change the odds!&nbsp; You've impacted the mechanics because of your pre-authoring.&nbsp; If the PC says, &quot;I want to cross the desert&quot;, and the DM says, &quot;OK, that's difficult, you only have a 30% chance of that happening without complication&quot;, and they roll that 30%, and then you introduce a canyon in the middle because of your secret map, you've changed the stated stakes and odds, unless crossing the canyon has a 100% chance of success.&nbsp; Now, if the assumed way you play your game is more of the traditional type where the players don't state their intent specifically, and more of a &quot;Well, let's start crossing the desert and see what happens,&quot; than THIS DOESN&quot;T APPLY TO YOU.&nbsp; In the type of game, the players are EXPECTING the DM to provide them with color encounters because the focus of the game is specifically about encountering those encounters.&nbsp; In those games, worlds with detailed maps and NPCs acting based on hidden agendas is both expected and celebrated.&nbsp; I am not judging you for playing this way.&nbsp; I OFTEN PLAY THIS WAY MYSELF.&nbsp; But it's a technique I use based on the game and players at hand.&nbsp; If I was a player in your game, I'd play your way because I'm familiar with the technique.&nbsp; If I was a player in [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION]'s game, I would play his way, because I'm familiar with the technique.&nbsp; You see how the trick here is to be familiar with as many techniques as possible so you can play in, and more importantly be comfortable with, as many play styles, games, and players as possible?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="TwoSix, post: 6816130, member: 205"] But that's what I mean! If you change the encounter from the stated stakes, you change the odds! You've impacted the mechanics because of your pre-authoring. If the PC says, "I want to cross the desert", and the DM says, "OK, that's difficult, you only have a 30% chance of that happening without complication", and they roll that 30%, and then you introduce a canyon in the middle because of your secret map, you've changed the stated stakes and odds, unless crossing the canyon has a 100% chance of success. Now, if the assumed way you play your game is more of the traditional type where the players don't state their intent specifically, and more of a "Well, let's start crossing the desert and see what happens," than [B]THIS DOESN"T APPLY TO YOU[/B]. In the type of game, the players are EXPECTING the DM to provide them with color encounters because the focus of the game is specifically about encountering those encounters. In those games, worlds with detailed maps and NPCs acting based on hidden agendas is both expected and celebrated. I am not judging you for playing this way. [B]I OFTEN PLAY THIS WAY MYSELF[/B]. But it's a technique I use based on the game and players at hand. If I was a player in your game, I'd play your way because I'm familiar with the technique. If I was a player in [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION]'s game, I would play his way, [I]because I'm familiar with the technique.[/I] You see how the trick here is to be familiar with as many techniques as possible so you can play in, and more importantly [I]be comfortable with,[/I] as many play styles, games, and players as possible? [/QUOTE]

Verification