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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 6812948" data-attributes="member: 7006">Okay.  Well, in that case I still don't ascribe to your theory that it's the best way to play, because I am of the opinion that if the players can and should create backstory and history which can and will be engaged in through play... that the DM should be doing the exact same thing.  The DM should (as part of designing the campaign) be creating backstory too to engage in.  But I also don't believe that backstory should stop existing or progressing just because the players don't go running after it.  It can and should always be there in the background, various NPCs running their own lives the same way the PCs are.  Otherwise you do have a stasis wherein the world only advances as far as the PC's engagement in it.  In your example, if there's an evil Duke and the PCs are on his hit list... that Duke doesn't stop his plans just because the PCs run away from him.  At some point, I as the DM will drop hints to the party as to what happened in the duchy once they took off.  The Duke's plans perhaps come to fruition even without any direct involvement by the PCs.  That "story" continues on.Now the players are still free to have little to no concern and completely ignore what the Duke is now doing... but that's on them.  Or to put it in Adventure Path terms... the players are more than free to ignore the Cult of the Dragon's various events geared towards summoning Tiamat... but I'm not going to say those events just "don't happen" if they do ignore it.  But more likely than not... the players WILL engage that story on some level, because I find in my experiences my players prefer having some "overarching" story to give meaning to the campaign.  I've never been one to just have a campaign world that's existed for decades and various PC groups come in and out over the years just "doing stuff" in it.  That's not how I roll.  Not saying that doesn't work for some people... but I am saying there's nothing inherently BETTER about that style than the other.  They both are equally valid and enjoyable and at the end of the day it comes down to how good the DM is and how good the players are to engage and run with whichever type they go with.</blockquote>

Verification