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="GQuail" data-source="post: 2843351" data-attributes="member: 30709">As someone who is often vague about XP with players, I just wanted to single that out as not being intrinsically "cheating" by itself: and depending on the situation, I can imagine why a Lich might not be known to in fact be a Wererat lich.  Then again, I get the feeling your DM was just mince in general, and the specifics are irrelveant.  :>I prefer players to always have the chance to win, but by no means should it be definite.  I've put my current group up ahainst plenty of swingy encounters, and while they've not lost a PC yet they definatly know they've come close: the only time it almost  happened was when a player forgot something realtively obvious and I decided to give him a bit of leeway since doing so would have lead to basically insta-death. Still, I feel mst people wouldn't enjoy a game that didn't have some sort of risk of failrue, so a game where the PCs /always/ win sounds a bit silly to me.Then again, the opposite (where the PCs can't win) isn't fun either.  But it depends on what you class as "win".  A Cthulhu group can never kill Yog-Sothoth, but they can still "win" by stopping the ceremony tos ummon him and saving their town from immediate destruciton.  A game can be bleak and still allow the players to "win", evne it'[s a small victory.IN most tales, some sort of failure often appears as a dramatic point.  Boromir dies, or Luke loses his hand and barely gets out from Vader alive, or Batman doesn't get there in tim to save Robin from the Joker, or.....  Constant success would be bad because all these great plot hooks would never be open to you, IMHO.</blockquote>

Verification