Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Thomas Bowman" data-source="post: 7317860" data-attributes="member: 6925649">Lord Foul's Bane is an extreme example, the reason the character did it was because he felt the World he was witnessing was not real, so he figured he could get away with stuff without consequences, that is why he was called the Unbeliever. For the rest of the novel, he was motivated by guilt for that one act. In a real world, bad things happen, and characters have to make choices about right and wrong. I don't have a list of banned actions, I figure I either trust to players to make good decisions or I do not. I noticed than in some of the old D&amp;D modules for example, each encounter had contingencies in case the players were determined to be murder-hobos, a store proprietor was given combat statistics in case the players tried to rob the store, and details were given about various sorts of traps and so forth guarding the inventory. You ever play the Keep on the Borderlands? That module was set up that way, the authors didn't know what the players were going to do, so they anticipated every possibly contingency including what if the players decided to play characters that wanted to rob and steal, and how the NPCs would react to that. Admittedly I would get tired of DMing players who wanted to play evil characters, but I figure it is the DMs job to be neutral, one of the hard parts of being the DM is portraying evil characters in a realistic way, it is the evil characters that create the adventure after all. Generally its the PCs job to fight the bad guys. if the players want to do bad things, that doesn't mean they are on the same side as the villains who are driving the plot. If the villain's goals directly affect the PCs in a adverse way, they are going to have to do something about it, whether they are heroes or not!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Thomas Bowman, post: 7317860, member: 6925649"] Lord Foul's Bane is an extreme example, the reason the character did it was because he felt the World he was witnessing was not real, so he figured he could get away with stuff without consequences, that is why he was called the Unbeliever. For the rest of the novel, he was motivated by guilt for that one act. In a real world, bad things happen, and characters have to make choices about right and wrong. I don't have a list of banned actions, I figure I either trust to players to make good decisions or I do not. I noticed than in some of the old D&D modules for example, each encounter had contingencies in case the players were determined to be murder-hobos, a store proprietor was given combat statistics in case the players tried to rob the store, and details were given about various sorts of traps and so forth guarding the inventory. You ever play the Keep on the Borderlands? That module was set up that way, the authors didn't know what the players were going to do, so they anticipated every possibly contingency including what if the players decided to play characters that wanted to rob and steal, and how the NPCs would react to that. Admittedly I would get tired of DMing players who wanted to play evil characters, but I figure it is the DMs job to be neutral, one of the hard parts of being the DM is portraying evil characters in a realistic way, it is the evil characters that create the adventure after all. Generally its the PCs job to fight the bad guys. if the players want to do bad things, that doesn't mean they are on the same side as the villains who are driving the plot. If the villain's goals directly affect the PCs in a adverse way, they are going to have to do something about it, whether they are heroes or not! [/QUOTE]

Verification