Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 4170023" data-attributes="member: 4937">Or, you could just 'wing it', responding to the various propositions the the players make and creating content as needed.  This is almost exactly like having a skill challenge, sans the arbitrary tally of abstract successes and failures.  Or, you could use a narrative map instead, in which various decisions moved the party between preplanned scenes and challenges.  That you wouldn't have to have the whole city layout prepared (much of which would go unused anyway).  And you could combine that with 'winging it' when or if the party went off the map.Or you could really mix it up and use a combination of random encounters, a game map, a narrative map, and winging it - which is what most DMs are doing after they've been on the job for a couple of years.All of which is really quite reutine.  In a typical city escape challenge, you have some rough idea of the physical layout of the city and the hazards of escaping it (are thier natural obstacles?, is it on an island?, is it walled?, does it have regular patrols?, does it have streets or canals?, how big is it?, how deep within the city are the players?, what section of the city are they in?, etc.)  You have some idea of the demographics of your campaign and the city in particular (what level are typical guards in my campaign world?, what races inhabit the city?, what resouces do the pursuers have?).  So you respond to the PC's propositions and set the challenge according to what they do.   If they want to flee, well then you improvise a chase scene, possibily with a couple prepared (or at least preimagined) chase scenarios.  If they want to fight, well then you improvise some combat.  If they want to talk, then you improvise that.  Perhaps they end up doing a bit of everything.The only problem with it is that it makes a lousy system for handling a tournament encounter because it doesn't communicate to the end GM user exactly how you wanted the encounter to play out.  It's too abstract.  It leaves too much up to GM judgement.  It is not going to be played out consistantly between groups.  Enter the skill challenge system.In other words, its alot like 'winging' it.How is this any different than what we have now?  If someone tells me, "I want make a history check", they are going to have to tell me what they want to learn.  If they don't, they don't do anything.  If you want to jump, you have to tell me where you are jumping.In fact, in the extreme, as it is the players don't really need to know how the skill system works.  They could simply say, "I want to do this.", and I could handle it behind the scenes as a skill check.  In that way, you'd be gauranteed to have a role playing experience where you explain what your character is doing in the game world rather than just explaining the rules you are using.Uh huh.  You of course are perched on the RPG high ground looking down at all of us mere hack and slashers.</blockquote>

Verification