Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 6115890" data-attributes="member: 85870">All good questions. In truth, I went along with Player 1's desires in large part because he's been the one most interested in &quot;driving&quot; the action. I read a blog recently somewhere addressing this--not all players are interested in &quot;pushing&quot; the action equally. Most everyone wants to be involved and feel useful, but not everyone needs their character to have as much &quot;spotlight&quot; on their story. Player 1 regularly pushes for this, and seeks for this. He clearly expresses that things of interest to him as a player, and to his character, are the things he will pursue, and will generally only &quot;play along&quot; engaging with other players' &quot;plot material&quot; for so long. As far as &quot;time-sensitive&quot; constraints for the plot hooks, the only one that had any kind of &quot;time bomb&quot; attached is the link to Player 3's thieves' guild. Yes, the missing NPC COULD be time sensitive, but in the context of this story, this NPC also regularly has good reasons for being gone, handing off assignments to underlings, etc. If anything, Players 1 and 2 knowingly took on themselves the &quot;complication&quot; of not reporting directly to someone within their organization before leaving to parts unknown. This was also CLEARLY, however, a concession to Player 1's character &quot;theme.&quot; Player 1 made it clear both during character generation, and at several times during actual play, that his character had an intense interest in history, ancient cultures, rumors of artifacts, etc. Fast forwarding in this way was an attempt to let Player 1 explore his character in the ways he clearly indicated. (As a side note, both Players 3 and 4 were fairly hesitant to follow along from the get go. Player 3's character had a clear incentive to follow his time-sensitive &quot;marching orders,&quot; such as threat of violence, imprisonment, etc.).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="innerdude, post: 6115890, member: 85870"] All good questions. In truth, I went along with Player 1's desires in large part because he's been the one most interested in "driving" the action. I read a blog recently somewhere addressing this--not all players are interested in "pushing" the action equally. Most everyone wants to be involved and feel useful, but not everyone needs their character to have as much "spotlight" on their story. Player 1 regularly pushes for this, and seeks for this. He clearly expresses that things of interest to him as a player, and to his character, are the things he will pursue, and will generally only "play along" engaging with other players' "plot material" for so long. As far as "time-sensitive" constraints for the plot hooks, the only one that had any kind of "time bomb" attached is the link to Player 3's thieves' guild. Yes, the missing NPC COULD be time sensitive, but in the context of this story, this NPC also regularly has good reasons for being gone, handing off assignments to underlings, etc. If anything, Players 1 and 2 knowingly took on themselves the "complication" of not reporting directly to someone within their organization before leaving to parts unknown. This was also CLEARLY, however, a concession to Player 1's character "theme." Player 1 made it clear both during character generation, and at several times during actual play, that his character had an intense interest in history, ancient cultures, rumors of artifacts, etc. Fast forwarding in this way was an attempt to let Player 1 explore his character in the ways he clearly indicated. (As a side note, both Players 3 and 4 were fairly hesitant to follow along from the get go. Player 3's character had a clear incentive to follow his time-sensitive "marching orders," such as threat of violence, imprisonment, etc.). [/QUOTE]

Verification