Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 6298385" data-attributes="member: 29398">This style of play, when not taken to extremes, certainly has a place now and then in a long campaign...believe me.&nbsp; This, I'm not as willing to completely dismiss it as you might be.That said, &quot;we're supposed to / going to win&quot; isn't often heard 'round here, and for good reason. <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&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />OK, what about off-screen success; where the Pellenor Fields is won because of a random weather roll that puts the wind in the right direction and keeps the clouds away so they don't block the sun in the enemies' eyes?Besides, if something like the wind direction is enough to make or break a battle scene that big it's on far too fine an edge.&nbsp; A random &quot;off-screen&quot; element shouldn't be enough to make or break the scene, but it should have the ability to make a difference - for good or bad - both to the difficulty for the PCs and the approach taken by all.Not everything has to be dramatic; and if it is then the once-dramatic will too soon become mundane.Sometimes the little not-very-dramatic events and consequences can end up changing the course of a campaign; something as simple, for example, as the party deciding not to explore a particular passage down which lies the trigger for a 3-adventure arc.&nbsp; Or a bean-counting spellcaster who realizes she hasn't got quite enough beans to afford a particular spell (but would have if the party had just been a bit more mercenary last time in the field), where unknown to the player said spell could make a huge difference to how the next few adventures play out.&nbsp; And so on.Lan-&quot;with minor in-game causes from 2009 still leaking into campaign events today&quot;-efan</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 6298385, member: 29398"] This style of play, when not taken to extremes, certainly has a place now and then in a long campaign...believe me. This, I'm not as willing to completely dismiss it as you might be. That said, "we're supposed to / going to win" isn't often heard 'round here, and for good reason. :) OK, what about off-screen success; where the Pellenor Fields is won because of a random weather roll that puts the wind in the right direction and keeps the clouds away so they don't block the sun in the enemies' eyes? Besides, if something like the wind direction is enough to make or break a battle scene that big it's on far too fine an edge. A random "off-screen" element shouldn't be enough to make or break the scene, but it should have the ability to make a difference - for good or bad - both to the difficulty for the PCs and the approach taken by all. Not everything has to be dramatic; and if it is then the once-dramatic will too soon become mundane. Sometimes the little not-very-dramatic events and consequences can end up changing the course of a campaign; something as simple, for example, as the party deciding not to explore a particular passage down which lies the trigger for a 3-adventure arc. Or a bean-counting spellcaster who realizes she hasn't got quite enough beans to afford a particular spell (but would have if the party had just been a bit more mercenary last time in the field), where unknown to the player said spell could make a huge difference to how the next few adventures play out. And so on. Lan-"with minor in-game causes from 2009 still leaking into campaign events today"-efan [/QUOTE]

Verification