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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Snoweel" data-source="post: 4486903" data-attributes="member: 4453">Laughing at your own joke? How indulgent.Let's keep the personal speculation to a minimum shall we? We'd all hate this thread to be closed.It is indeed. Thankfully nobody in this thread has been advocating such a strawman.There is no cookie if it was a straight one-for-one increase for both parties.Yet another strawman S'men?Not at all. The results of one game mean very little in the grand scheme of things. That's why the league is nearly always won by the best team but a cup almost never is (cups featuring knock-out games).The results of one game a reliable indicator of the relative strengths of each team? Rubbish.Once again, rubbish. Hull beat Arsenal away the other day. Does that say anything about the relative strengths of the two teams? All it says is that Hull has the possibility of beating Arsenal away.If they played again tomorrow at the same venue I'd have my house on Arsenal (don't worry, it's a rental) if they were paying evens.And no bookie in the world would offer odds like that.Yet you said "mechanics". A Freudian slip?How do levels have anything to do with world physics? They are an abstract concept representing likelihood of achievement.No twisting involved mate. That's exactly what I'm advocating and that's why I said it "can be seen as a fault, depending on your preference". I know some people like to play as though their characters were subject to the same impersonal random chance we are in real life but that's hardly how things work in any other entertainment medium.Fortune might favour the bold (especially so in movies and books) but in real life, if you continually risk your life you will end up dead.The reward: risk ratio is far higher for the PCs than it is for anyone else in the universe. So they should already know they're in a story.Tangential to this is the fact that if the PCs decide that unimportant NPC #237 is important to the story then he just might be. I'm flexible. I like plot twists as much as the players do. I'm willing to rework something if the players give me a good idea.Excellent point.But you neglect to mention what would happen if A narrowly beat B on points, and B only just got a split decision over C?C has beaten A on many occasions. Even more so in a team sport.This sounds more like a plot than an adventure.The adventure is what happens when your PCs interact with the plot.And encounters are what happens when they interact with places and characters described therein.Don't start trying to claim "creative highground" or whatever it is you're doing. It's a form of 'Alpha-geeking', and if you want to play that game I'll concede without a fight.Ah... so... encounter design = railroading?Wow. Your elaborate game, with its undesigned encounters is just so... superior. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/ponder.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":hmm:" title="Hmmm    :hmm:" data-shortname=":hmm:" />Encounter design has nothing to do with why the encounter occurs, it is concerned with how the encounter will play out. ie. will it be worth rolling dice for or not?I've got no problem with this but I'd prefer a boss fight somewhere between the middle and the end of the adventure. Whether that's with the BBEG, his henchmen or someone avenging his downfall doesn't matter so much, but I like a bit of combat with my D&D.I've always found this sort of thing a terrible anticlimax.It's been enough to make rewrite the rest of the adventure to cause an appropriately climactic climax.</blockquote>

Verification