Player vs. Player


log in or register to remove this ad

Christian, I'm really hoping you will tell us a little bit more about your situation and in what ways you feel responsible. While this is still a raw issue for you, I would nonetheless appreciate more specifics from you (whenever you have the requisite emotional distance).

I'm worried that a situation that could lead to this is just beginning in a campaign I am running. My last session turned kind of ugly over a theft and some characters threatened one of their party with death and abandonment if he continued to steal the possessions of allied NPCs.

Moriarty and Merak, I sympathize with both of your positions. But, Merak, why on earth would you be using D20 for the type of game you seem to want to play? I play both kinds of game -- Moriartys and yours -- and I cannot fathom why someone would use D20 for the kind of game you seem to play. I went back to D20 because I my games have become too rarified and cerebral -- when I run D&D, I plan a combat every episode; I plan for people to play heroically rather than realistically. And my gaming group has not changed in composition; it is still the bunch of clever geeks that Moriarty so aptly pointed out were probably all beaten up in school.
 

fusangite said:
But, Merak, why on earth would you be using D20 for the type of game you seem to want to play? I play both kinds of game -- Moriartys and yours -- and I cannot fathom why someone would use D20 for the kind of game you seem to play. I went back to D20 because I my games have become too rarified and cerebral -- when I run D&D, I plan a combat every episode...
D&D is what my group knows. I don't think I could get them to bother learning a new system even if I wanted them to. We're all adults with kids, so we don't have much time to read new books.

But, so far, I haven't had any trouble getting the D&D d20 system to do exactly what I want it to do. People seem to think that D&D is designed to be played a certain way, but I've never really found that to be the case.
 

Rackhir said:
Merak, it simply isn't worth trying to argue with DocM. The responses from him that you've gotten so far are typical of his, to anyone who doesn't think his way. Just put him on your ignore list, that's what it's there for.


:(

And to think I search these boards every day to find the pearls of wisdom you put out.

:rolleyes:
 

DocMoriartty said:
Actually it makes no sense at all. In the situation mentioned the people at stake would be considered vital to national security and the goverment would take extensive steps to try and rescue them.

Get your priorities right. Most important in situation like this is to prevent nuclear secrets from falling into wrong hands. Workers, however competent, can be replaced (in time). But once the nuclear secrets are out of the bottle there's no getting them back.

So I'd guess the government would be more concerned in stopping the terrorists than over the workers safety. Besides, the government doesn't negotiate with terrorists, so they'll know whats the results going to be regardless.
 

Remove ads

Top