Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lyxen" data-source="post: 8385419" data-attributes="member: 7032025">I think over-generalisation  is not helping here, first it depends on the amount of fudging, and second it depends on the reasons for fudging.Moreover, on this particular case, it's also good not to be too judgemental. There are some groups who want at least some level of railroading. At one of our tables, one group was really lost in STK when they came to the pure sandbox part of the campaign. And even with the very experienced group that I'm running Avernus for, they were a bit lost at start when it came to the sandbox that I had turned the campaign into.In the end, it's not black and white, and a good DM is the one who provides what his players are looking for (and if does not feel like it, then it's probably better not to DM for that table anyway).And again, mixing improvisation in it is not necessary. Good for you if doing this leads to the kind of game that your table enjoy, but I've gone in multiple directions in different campaigns even for groups composed more or less of the same people, and sometimes it's better one way and sometimes it's better another way, even within the structure of a given campaign by the way. Having a wide palette of styles is also helpful in renewing the game, which is probably what you have been doing, and it's often a good thing too, in and of itself.</blockquote>