Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="prabe" data-source="post: 8011091" data-attributes="member: 7016699">The notion of &quot;mistake&quot; or &quot;wrong choice&quot; isn't inapposite at all.Making a mistake/wrong choice in the context of trying to get into the castle by way of the heavily-guarded main gate (if you'll allow that to be a mistake) isn't all that dissimilar from--going back in the direction of the situation in the original post--insulting a hypersensitive minor noble. There is a presumption that the PCs come across information to the effect that the gate is well-defended in the one case and that the noble is hypersensitve in the case of the other, so there is reason for them to expect that a frontal assault is not a path to likely success at getting into the castle, or that insulting the minor noble is a path to likely success at negotiating with him.Much of the response to the OP seemed to me to be along the lines of &quot;there should have been a way toward success that included insulting the Baron.&quot; If the PCs have information that the Baron reacts badly to being insulted, it seems to me that intentionally insulting him in the process of negotiating with hiim is a mistake, and should have consequences. This might not be a given person's preferred playstyle, but it doesn't seem to me to be an unreasonable position. I'm not trying to argue whether there should be a path to success at negotiating with the Baron that involves insulting him--there at least can be; should is a matter of preference on several axes. I'm also not trying to argue whether the consequences in the OP are the right ones--again, that's probably a matter of preference with no actual right or wrong, just what works at a given table.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="prabe, post: 8011091, member: 7016699"] The notion of "mistake" or "wrong choice" isn't inapposite at all. Making a mistake/wrong choice in the context of trying to get into the castle by way of the heavily-guarded main gate (if you'll allow that to be a mistake) isn't all that dissimilar from--going back in the direction of the situation in the original post--insulting a hypersensitive minor noble. There is a presumption that the PCs come across information to the effect that the gate is well-defended in the one case and that the noble is hypersensitve in the case of the other, so there is reason for them to expect that a frontal assault is not a path to likely success at getting into the castle, or that insulting the minor noble is a path to likely success at negotiating with him. Much of the response to the OP seemed to me to be along the lines of "there should have been a way toward success that included insulting the Baron." If the PCs have information that the Baron reacts badly to being insulted, it seems to me that intentionally insulting him in the process of negotiating with hiim is a mistake, and should have consequences. This might not be a given person's preferred playstyle, but it doesn't seem to me to be an unreasonable position. I'm not trying to argue whether there should be a path to success at negotiating with the Baron that involves insulting him--there at least can be; should is a matter of preference on several axes. I'm also not trying to argue whether the consequences in the OP are the right ones--again, that's probably a matter of preference with no actual right or wrong, just what works at a given table. [/QUOTE]

Verification