Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 481944" data-attributes="member: 2205">Fletch (or mkletch):&nbsp; I don't think we're actually disagreeing, then, although we think we are.&nbsp; I think I'm assuming that by not tailoring adventures, you're putting&nbsp; stuff up that the PCs genuinely can't handle no matter what they do.&nbsp; You're describing ways around that and describing ways in which the PCs actually can accomplish what you put in front of them.&nbsp; And I suspect that when I advocate tailoring, you're imagining that I'm taking all the teeth out of my adventures in favor of my PCs, which I'm not doing in the least.So, likely what we're doing really isn't that different.&nbsp; The important point to me is that players are allowed to play what they want, not be forced into a role they're not interested (the infamous reluctant cleric being one such role.)&nbsp; And by tailoring the story, it isn't so much changing the challenges (although a party with no magic users would have a hard time against certain things) as using what the PCs are as a springboard for adventures.&nbsp; Again, my biggest complaint is with railroading.&nbsp; Whether or not you tailor adventures because of party composition, you certainly have to tailor it due to party actions in game, or it turns out that it doesn't matter too much what the PCs choose to do, except for on the tactical battle map.&nbsp; I find that style of play very &quot;against the grain&quot; for me.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Desdichado, post: 481944, member: 2205"] Fletch (or mkletch): I don't think we're actually disagreeing, then, although we think we are. I think I'm assuming that by not tailoring adventures, you're putting stuff up that the PCs genuinely can't handle no matter what they do. You're describing ways around that and describing ways in which the PCs actually can accomplish what you put in front of them. And I suspect that when I advocate tailoring, you're imagining that I'm taking all the teeth out of my adventures in favor of my PCs, which I'm not doing in the least. So, likely what we're doing really isn't that different. The important point to me is that players are allowed to play what they want, not be forced into a role they're not interested (the infamous reluctant cleric being one such role.) And by tailoring the story, it isn't so much changing the challenges (although a party with no magic users would have a hard time against certain things) as using what the PCs are as a springboard for adventures. Again, my biggest complaint is with railroading. Whether or not you tailor adventures because of party composition, you certainly have to tailor it due to party actions in game, or it turns out that it doesn't matter too much what the PCs choose to do, except for on the tactical battle map. I find that style of play very "against the grain" for me. [/QUOTE]

Verification