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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 5426977" data-attributes="member: 8835">the problem I see is what is really meant by the players choosing Chicago over New York.If the PCs don't have a specific reason for choosing Chicago over New York, and the thing in New York is not really tied to new york, then SOME DM's and players have a problem moving the thing to Chicago.If the PCs are specifically choosing Chicago over New York to avoid the thing, then moving it to Chicago should be considered a bad practice.For some DMs some content can be considered flexible.  There is some content, that should not be flexible, in that if the players make certain choices, they should successfully avoid encountering that content.Take the Chicago vs. New York.If you've got an encounter  for a pick-pocket to attempt a grab when the players arrive in the city.   It doesn't matter if you move this encounter.  The PCs aren't aware of it to avoid it, and it isn't contradictory for it to be possible to happen in either city.  The choice of city never really mattered, other than for local color.If the PCs are going to Chicago, to avoid contact with somebody who is trying to take the McGuffin from them, then moving the bad guy to Chicago is Railroading because you are thwarting player decision.  The choice of city was crucial in this situation.As a DM, if you've got all these locations pre-planned on what's where, or if you've got random tables to determine what's where, and what's going to happen next, then you've no NEED to move stuff around.If as a DM, you haven't built all these encounters ahead of time, and don't have piles of encounter tables to do all this (like Shaman's NPC encounter table thing), then moving stuff MAY be acceptable practice.I'm obviously of the latter camp.  I don't mind shuffling some stuff around, so I don't have to make a zilliion different things.  Perhaps what might help to contemplate this, is that the encounters are locationless.  Their location gets set when it is applicable to put it somewhere.  The dark stranger in the inn with the map to adventure is an example.  Does it REALLY matter which inn he's at?  If the PCs aren't specifically avoiding him, then having him be at the inn the players decide to stay at is an accepted practice by many GMs.If somebody wants to call in the GM Police on me because I didn't make 3 different dark strangers with 3 different maps (or other hooks) to each be placed individually in the 3 inns the town has, they take their gaming way too seriously.I consider the real problem being the GM not taking "no thanks" as an answer.  When the players decline to follow-up on the map, then don't make the sherrif force the party to follow the map to the same dungeon.  Move on.</blockquote>

Verification