NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 9699824" data-attributes="member: 6785785">No. As it was my game, I'm going to explain it to you. I already have done that, but I know this is a long thread with many different tangents... but after this clarification, I am going to expect you to proceed accordingly. I don't want to see you describing my example of play in a way other than how it was again. The characters came to a cliff. I explained to them that it did not look like it would be a particularly difficult clime based on the surface and other observable factors... that the issue was more how much time it would take. The destination they were trying to reach was one where a dark ritual was due to be performed... ideally, they'd get there before the ritual was completed. So, before they rolled, I explained that the risk here is that the climb takes too long, and the ritual will be that much closer to completion. I had used a Clock to indicate the ritual being completed. A Clock is a simple visual indicator... a pie chart... where you fill in slices to represent a countdown. I told them I would tick the clock (fill in one of the 6 slices) for each of them that failed the check. I provided the DC and allowed them to consider using any abilities or items that may have assisted them (as I recall, they didn't have or choose to use anything). They made their rolls. One of them failed. I ticked one section of the Clock as the consequence of the failed roll.This was a failure. There was a known consequence. I inflicted that consequence. That's honoring the roll. No, we don't. As an audience member, I don't want to see Frodo's peril reduced. I want to see him persevere in spite of all the danger. As players, we can place our characters into danger, and we should do so. We don't have to do so without any consideration for their safety or well-being... but the principle is telling us that's not our primary concern. Our primary concern is to make things interesting... to pursue their goals and make a mess of things from time to time. As GMs, our job is to put adversity in the way of their goals. To make things hard for them, yes... but also to make things enjoyable for them. Certainly, the respite at Rivendell is not boring, from the perspective of the audience. Interesting things are learned and happen there. Friends are made and alliances formed. It's not all about the bad. Yes, and they are clowns. I can't account for extremists... I'm just going to speak about rational people. No, that's not what's being said. [USER=6906980]@AlViking[/USER] has pointed out repeatedly what his preferences are. Anyone involved with this thread with any kind of regularity would have been hard pressed to miss him point out his preferences. They're known. When it comes to "fail forward" he said this: So if literally all he has to say is that it's a preference and he doesn't like it... then mission accomplished.The suggestion to not engage any more is because he seems perturbed by engaging with that topic.</blockquote>

Verification