D&D General No Fixed Location -- dynamically rearranging items, monsters, and other game elements in the interests of storytelling

[FrogReaver]

We really are again arguing past each other on different styles of play.

• There is a story the players are going to participate in, and alter what they find to help them follow the story.
• There is a setting the players are going to explore in which things will happen, have the setting react based on player action.

Neither is invalid. Both are fun.

In both situations the DM can have better ideas as the game progresses and either change the story, or change the setting.

Can we all get along now? 🕊

We are and have been getting along. The issue isn't different styles of play though. The issue is the insistence from those in your camp that my playstyle:

A. Invalidates player agency
B. Precludes setting based reactions to player actions
C. Is cheating
D. Makes player choice into an illusion
E. Etc...

 

[Don Durito]

We really are again arguing past each other on different styles of play.

• There is a story the players are going to participate in, and alter what they find to help them follow the story.
• There is a setting the players are going to explore in which things will happen, have the setting react based on player action.

Neither is invalid. Both are fun.

In both situations the DM can have better ideas as the game progresses and either change the story, or change the setting.

Can we all get along now? 🕊

Binary oppositions are stale and lifeless. No real game is either of those two extremes. That is why we are having this discussion and that is why it is a difficult discussion.

And even the idea that there is a continuum and people can be placed at some point along it is highly questionable.

 

[FrogReaver]

And yet you throw clues into their faces because they didn't do what you wanted them to do (find clue).

No. You are prescribing a bad motive where there is only a good motive.

 

[Derren]

No. You are prescribing a bad motive where there is only a good motive.

I am not describing a motive but an action.

 

[FrogReaver]

I am not describing a motive but an action.

And yet you throw clues into their faces because they didn't do what you wanted them to do (find clue).

You have declared that my motive for "throwing clues into their faces" (a perjorative in it's own right), is because they didn't do something I wanted them to.

This is a textbook example of prescribing bad motives. I ask that you apologize and refrain from such statements in the future. Please.

 

[Monayuris]

For the same reason you changed it on Friday before the session...

In this case I would not change the location of the treasure room during the session.

If after the session, they did not find the place and no information was gained about it, I would revisit.

 

[FrogReaver]

In this case I would not change the location of the treasure room during the session.

If after the session, they did not find the place and no information was gained about it, I would revisit.

Now you are leaving the example completely. You wrote up the dungeon on Monday. You decided to change this room on Friday. What is different about changing the room on Friday and changing it mid session? What would be different about changing it on Friday and changing it after the session (if not found)?

 

[Derren]

You have declared that my motive for "throwing clues into their faces" (a perjorative in it's own right), is because they didn't do something I wanted them to.

This is a textbook example of prescribing bad motives. I ask that you apologize and refrain from such statements in the future. Please.

Except that this is exactly what you said.
The players do not find the clues, so you bring it to them and you do so because you think the adventure should play out differently (stalling).

If the clue can't be missed there is no point in hiding it in the first place and not tell them directly what you want them to know without pretending that they have to "find" them.

 

[Fenris-77]

That again this invalidates the players actions as they are not allowed to get it wrong.

Pardon? They got it wrong several times to get to clue 4, and they might get it wrong again. If they got to clue four you can reasonably assume some player investment in figuring things out, so leaving them hanging isnt a 'good thing' no matter what your investment in the fiction. There's no player action being invalidated here, no matter how hard you try to ignore the larger conversation.

 

[FrogReaver]

Except that this is exactly what you said.
The players do not find the clues, so you bring it to them and you do so because you think the adventure should play out differently (stalling).

If the clue can't be missed there is no point in hiding it in the first place and not tell them directly what you want them to know without pretending that they have to "find" them.

no. That is your twisted bad motive version.

my actual motive is to ensure my players have the most enjoyable game experience possible