Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="LostSoul" data-source="post: 2647469" data-attributes="member: 386">I made a comment on the other thread.&nbsp; My point was something like, if you don't let your PCs be evil, can they really be good?For example, let's take this situation (a nice one, by the way).&nbsp; If the PCs don't have the option of just walking away (&quot;Let someone else deal with it&quot;), do the PCs still have a choice between being heroes and just being regular people?The choice in that example is a good one, because it forces the PCs to ask, &quot;Which is more heroic?&nbsp; Saving the village of Malamyr or racing towards the clocktower?&quot;&nbsp; (I'm assuming racing towards the clocktower is to stop some kind of evil deed.)&nbsp; But what if the choice was between saving the villagers and going to the clocktower because that's where the Silver Train has it's drop-off point, and there won't be many guards there, so we can grab it and be rich?&nbsp; Then the players have to choose between the heroic path and the selfish one.And because the players have to pick between the two options - being heroic or selfish - does that choice allow the players to be more heroic than if the options were heroic deed A and heroic deed B?If the only choices that the players can make are heroic ones, are they really heroic?[I guess that would be the difference between simulationist (we want to play heroes) and narrativist (we want to struggle with the choice) play.&nbsp; I could be wrong about that.]edit: There is also the choice between the amount of personal sacrifice you're willing to go through to be heroes, which I ignore above.&nbsp; So let's say that, in the example above, going to the clocktower would be heroic, but the PCs won't face death.&nbsp; Going to save the village will probably result in at least one PC death, but it is the more heroic action.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="LostSoul, post: 2647469, member: 386"] I made a comment on the other thread. My point was something like, if you don't let your PCs be evil, can they really be good? For example, let's take this situation (a nice one, by the way). If the PCs don't have the option of just walking away ("Let someone else deal with it"), do the PCs still have a choice between being heroes and just being regular people? The choice in that example is a good one, because it forces the PCs to ask, "Which is more heroic? Saving the village of Malamyr or racing towards the clocktower?" (I'm assuming racing towards the clocktower is to stop some kind of evil deed.) But what if the choice was between saving the villagers and going to the clocktower because that's where the Silver Train has it's drop-off point, and there won't be many guards there, so we can grab it and be rich? Then the players have to choose between the heroic path and the selfish one. And because the players have to pick between the two options - being heroic or selfish - does [i]that[/i] choice allow the players to be more heroic than if the options were heroic deed A and heroic deed B? If the only choices that the players can make are heroic ones, are they really heroic? [I guess that would be the difference between simulationist (we want to play heroes) and narrativist (we want to struggle with the choice) play. I could be wrong about that.] edit: There is also the choice between the amount of personal sacrifice you're willing to go through to be heroes, which I ignore above. So let's say that, in the example above, going to the clocktower would be heroic, but the PCs won't face death. Going to save the village will probably result in at least one PC death, but it is the more heroic action. [/QUOTE]

Verification