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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 6002509" data-attributes="member: 177">It is kind of tautological.  IF they have one avenue, they will take that avenue.  If they have multiple avenues, they may take multiple avenues. Did they have multiple avenues to get the information?  Was waylaying a member of the security force and grilling him on their org chart really an option?  Did they have a terminal and a slicer at hand to hack the (probably well-protected) security force systems?  Did they have someone with really good deception skills who could sneak into their ready room and somehow unobtrusively ask questions while stealing a cup of their coffee?And, moreover - was there reason to think that any of those other options was really worth the risk?  If not, then they only have one reasonable avenue to get that information.As for it not being a choke point - that the information turned out to be irrelevant... is irrelevant.  They wouldn't know that until *after* the check.  I have often seen the case where players thought a piece of information they sought was crucial to success, while the GM figured it was trivia.  I don't know if that was what was going on in your case, of course.How is making sure they've got all the information at hand not part of reducing clues?Old school is, if nothing else, unforgiving.  Players are taught to "play smart", which usually amounts to "play paranoid" - old school is the play with 10' poles and having everyone search every section of wall three times over until you know it is statistically impossible that you missed the secret door.  So, dogpiling low-risk opportunities for information is very old school.</blockquote>

Verification