Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Greenfield" data-source="post: 6127005" data-attributes="member: 6669384">Offering closure is all well and good.Offering closure in a way that's likely to get the character and her companions killed?&nbsp; Not so much.You throw Gate to call in an Angel?&nbsp; Go big or go home!&nbsp; She's going to go for the Solar.&nbsp; Planetar is second fiddle.&nbsp; Trumpet Archon isn't in the orchestra.She'll call in what she needs, because she needs it.&nbsp; Substituting an &quot;also ran&quot; in the climactic battle?&nbsp; Just because you aren't satisfied with the player's choices and RPing in a now-defunct story arc?When a DM starts making decisions for the players, or the player choices have no impact on what happens, it stops being a rope-playing game and turns in a DM playing solitaire with a captive audience.The DM can't be wrong about a rules question, but the can sure muck up a campaign.&nbsp; I've seen entire player groups walk over this type of thing.&nbsp; Don't do it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Greenfield, post: 6127005, member: 6669384"] Offering closure is all well and good. Offering closure in a way that's likely to get the character and her companions killed? Not so much. You throw Gate to call in an Angel? Go big or go home! She's going to go for the Solar. Planetar is second fiddle. Trumpet Archon isn't in the orchestra. She'll call in what she needs, because she needs it. Substituting an "also ran" in the climactic battle? Just because you aren't satisfied with the player's choices and RPing in a now-defunct story arc? When a DM starts making decisions for the players, or the player choices have no impact on what happens, it stops being a rope-playing game and turns in a DM playing solitaire with a captive audience. The DM can't be wrong about a rules question, but the can sure muck up a campaign. I've seen entire player groups walk over this type of thing. Don't do it. [/QUOTE]

Verification