Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="thefutilist" data-source="post: 9617337" data-attributes="member: 7044566">That's Crimsons (and my and Pedantic and Micah's) point though. And Abduls as well really.Abdul said: However, that degree really rests heavily on a shared understanding of the principles, agenda, and practices of play! THIS is a key insight in the evolution of RPG practice. In fact there's an interesting practical question that will come up in this sort of play.The players have wounded Jackson (the imaginary guy from my last post) and then left to go and raid some dungeon or whatever. They're deep on the trail and have made camp (including set an alarm spell) and the GM realises that Jackson would have got one of his assassin friends to track them down and take them out (maybe Henrik from several posts ago).So:A) It is legit for the GM to create the assassin and place him in the situation now because that's an extension of what would have happened.B) You missed your chance, it's not legit to decide Jackson hired Henrik and he's tracked them to the woods because we're in situ. You'll have to come up with a reason why it didn't happen. Maybe it did happen but it took a while for Jackson to contact Henrik so he'll be along later but not in this 'chunk' of situation.</blockquote>