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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dualazi" data-source="post: 6985500" data-attributes="member: 6855537">Going to chop this just down to questions and subsequent answers for brevity. Good post though, certainly food for thought.Well, there are multiple ways of thinking of this. One is that given elves’ long lifespans and relative isolationist tendencies, they might have a very small relative population, and thus require less food than you would think for their community, and may simply subsist as a hunter/gatherer society within their forests (giant spiders are rich in protein at least…). Depending on how alien your elves’ physiology is, they might also have very different nutritional needs or digestion speeds that could affect their requirements as well. Maybe elves kick around in trees because they make use of photosynthesis? A more D&D oriented response would be that create food and water has typically been a low-level spell/ritual for a couple editions now, and if you assume NPC clergymen/druids/etc. have at least a couple levels in their associated classes, then you end up with a huge amount of supplementary diet options. I tend to remove such spells from my game because they trivialize adverse environments quite often.You mark out the general area of the forest and simply note that the house/castle could be anywhere within, and is not a fixed location. You would likely be able to counter the effect in a number of ways, either with general creativity or specific items allowing you to do so, but in most cases I would simply say the magic is so powerful and pervasive that the PCs don’t have either the time or energy to make dispelling it a compelling option. By the time they have that option, enchanted forests are probably smalltime.See above about create food. Similarly, she can’t be a very good enchantress if she can’t charm some people into servitude, can she? More realistically they might serve for favors of their own in the future, because of personal infatuation, or simply because a powerful caster might provide for them a more stable life than the local lord, cash or no.Well, that’s to be expected, our analysis and expectations of the game have come a long way since the days of old. I’m not convinced it’s as huge of a problem, though. For one, players can simply learn to plan a way back into the dungeon as they leave it, which opens up a new element of the game through utility options that make that sort of thing possible. Another point is that in the case of intelligent creatures, the dungeon is probably a semi-permanent home, I doubt they’re going to uproot overnight consistently. They may move around the area and change fortifications and the like, but aside from very mobile races (like djinn) they’re more than likely still there. Lastly, organic dungeons like that can help keep players on edge, because now they have to ask themselves if they want to risk a tough fight when they’re worn out, or risk powerful loot slipping through their grasp. Planning is great and all, but I would rather it be against the dungeon as a whole rather than resting and surveilling each individual room.There are chase rules in the DMG, and with a few tweaks they work well enough. It also varies greatly by creature; a golem will probably not chase beyond the area it’s set to guard, whereas an animal might pursue over long distances. Also, not sure players *should* always dictate the pace of the game. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don’t. I disagree. There are many spell/ritual options to explain them being as they are in the fairy tales if you’re pressed to do so, and if not your players will just go with the flow. Same thing with monsters, you say a troll would be better off catching the player, but when have trolls been great at logic/deferred gratification? What if these trolls are lazy or cowardly? A lot of these concerns are well-founded but over-thought, I think, which I can relate to because I do it quite a bit as well.In the end, I don’t think the two concepts are actually at odds with each other. You can definitely have a living, breathing, fairy-tale world. The real key to making it work is making it internally consistent, I think.Still disagree. If the enchantress is so powerful and sly that the guards can’t be bribed then the PCs still set the pace, just with a different plan of action, and having their knowledge reinforced that the enchantress is in fact quite magically skilled.Same thing with the oil. If there isn’t any then the players move on to plan B. The DM doesn’t need to figure out exactly what the trolls do during their day; he can just move them around and wing it if asked. I would find it a little more odd if there was consistently oil available everywhere, or if the trolls stayed in one spot (unless it happens to be under a bridge). I really don’t think there has ever been a point where fairy-tales have been “everything is possible” since even in real world folklore magic often came with restraints and conditions, or was set against the backdrop of an otherwise believable normal environment. It’s more about imparting a sense of wonder, which can certainly be done in tandem with (most) concerns about setting believability, especially with how high-magic D&D is.</blockquote>

Verification