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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8600050" data-attributes="member: 42582">This is exactly an example of what I posted upthread (originally in reply to [USER=29398]@Lanefan[/USER]) - the reason the players can't have a PC's sister leave the side gate open is not because its unrealistic, or contradicts other setting elements, or even that it creates an "unfair" advantage, but because it disrupts the GM's prep and pacing.OK, fair enough. But if you're a GM running a game that depends on that sort of control over prep and pacing, then I think you have to resign yourself to the players not engaging with your setting via deep investment of their PCs. You're deliberately running a game in which the players have to look to you to provide the fiction!I don't run sandboxes. I use various forms of scene-framing or PbtA-ish "fiction first, play to find out", as fits the system. With varying degrees of prep depending on system.I don't see why you couldn't just narrate you checkpoint into play, though. Again, I think I'm agreeing here with [USER=22779]@Hussar[/USER] (who has more familiarity than I do with "checkpoint" play).I mean, going back to your sage example - suppose that the adventure outline posits that to get into the cave you need to speak the password in Draconic. And suppose that the adventure posits that you will get that from the sage, who will also warn you that the cave contains a medusa, so you better pack some mirrors! But now a player wants to introduce their cousin the Draconic-speaker, which means the players won't seek out the sage. Why can't the GM just have the sage turn up?</blockquote>

Verification