Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 6156320" data-attributes="member: 177">Right.&nbsp; So by that measure, they'd be better served by going for &quot;success&quot; by choosing to sit back at the inn, where nothing riskier than a bad pot of stew awaits them?&nbsp; Does that give a good game experience?&nbsp; As a GM or a game designer, how much do you want the players to avoid risk?&nbsp; You want to put the old tomb and stories of its loot on stage in Act 1, and *not* have them go for it?I don't think that makes sense.&nbsp; As a GM or a designer of an RPG, you want the players to have a good time, probably with something adventurous.&nbsp; The players should avoid being stupid, but only insofar as it is consistent with the conceit that they are characters who make bloody combat part of their life's work.&nbsp; We are all accepting a basic level of stupidity (or life-threatening need) as part of the game assumptions.&nbsp; It is our jobs as GMs to offer reasonable risk, consistent with the players having a good time.&nbsp; Now, what counts as &quot;reasonable&quot; is subjective, but be very careful how much you shift the blame for deaths down to the player, when it is already agreed between you that this is supposed to be a fun, escapist, adventure game.A GM should own their part in it.&nbsp; We either designed or accepted the design of the adventure and the encounters within.&nbsp; We put it there for them to choose.&nbsp; We don't get to wash our hands of that and lay it all on them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 6156320, member: 177"] Right. So by that measure, they'd be better served by going for "success" by choosing to sit back at the inn, where nothing riskier than a bad pot of stew awaits them? Does that give a good game experience? As a GM or a game designer, how much do you want the players to avoid risk? You want to put the old tomb and stories of its loot on stage in Act 1, and *not* have them go for it? I don't think that makes sense. As a GM or a designer of an RPG, you want the players to have a good time, probably with something adventurous. The players should avoid being stupid, but only insofar as it is consistent with the conceit that they are characters who make bloody combat part of their life's work. We are all accepting a basic level of stupidity (or life-threatening need) as part of the game assumptions. It is our jobs as GMs to offer reasonable risk, consistent with the players having a good time. Now, what counts as "reasonable" is subjective, but be very careful how much you shift the blame for deaths down to the player, when it is already agreed between you that this is supposed to be a fun, escapist, adventure game. A GM should own their part in it. We either designed or accepted the design of the adventure and the encounters within. We put it there for them to choose. We don't get to wash our hands of that and lay it all on them. [/QUOTE]

Verification