Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="StalkingBlue" data-source="post: 1532485" data-attributes="member: 645">Hm, I'm finding it sorta difficult to answer that one - the way you wrote it, it's not a situation likely to come up in a game I run.  Again, it's a style thing.  I'm sure your style works well for you - that's why you run your game the way you do, I'd assume! OTOH I don't tend to run NPC interaction challenges without context. It wouldn't work for me, nor for my players, to have an NPC stranger 'parked' at a T junction when the PCs are pursuing an enemy (I guess that is the setup underlying your example, yes?), pointing them the wrong way.  If that kind of situation came up at all I'd want it to be a challenge for both PCs _and_ players.  For example, I'd have let them meet the NPC in question before and gained information on his allegiances, agenda and/or trustworthiness.  Or I might have dropped clues that in this particular town, everyone/the thieves' guild/some unidentified group is out to get them. Etc. Generally speaking, I'd give my players a background to work from, or I wouldn't run the encounter at all.  My players would then generally decide all on their own whether or not they wanted to trust the NPC in question -they might either ask for a Sense Motive roll or might decide to resolve the situation in game by asking questions, simply running in the direction _opposite_ of the one the NPC pointed in, splitting up, whatever appeared a valid tacictal decision at that point. Any clearer? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification