Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="gizmo33" data-source="post: 3477245" data-attributes="member: 30001">Heck, a winter-wight with a wig is &quot;zombie-ish&quot;.&nbsp; That doesn't tell me anything about what the creatures capabilities are in intercepting my sprint towards the BBEG.&nbsp; They could have been faking the slow shuffle thing.&nbsp; A cheetah doesn't always move at 60 mph.What do you mean static?&nbsp; Surfaces in a campaign world are static?&nbsp; Spilled oil in your campaign mops itself up?&nbsp; Railing repair themselves, and structurally weak places are auto-fixed?&nbsp; Nothing in the real world is static - why not use that as inspiration for a fantasy world?The funny thing about scaring people is that it doesn't have to be likely.&nbsp; If someone pulled a gun on you and told you he would squeeze the trigger but it &quot;was very much possible but unlikely that the gun was loaded&quot; you'd still have the bejeepers scared out of you.&nbsp; Fear is all about uncertainty.&quot;Most&quot; is irrelevant.&nbsp; Most, is not all, and as I said above, most is not good enough when you stand the chance of being wrong and getting killed.&nbsp; You don't know if you're facing a character that reqiures material components to cast spells or not until the DM tells you that you are.Agreed, but irrelevant since I'd have to first identify who a wizard is, rule out all possible other variants, creatures, and so forth.&nbsp; I'm not even sure that the so-called &quot;wizard&quot; that I see is not an illusion.The point is that you can debate with me whether or not such things are &quot;likely&quot; in my campaign world, but you really don't know anything about it other than what I tell you, and if I conduct my campaign anything like the way real-life operates - you can never 100% predict any of the circumstances that you're facing just because you have a handful of past experiences.And that doubt, mingled with the possibility of a horrible result, is the essence of fear.&nbsp; No, moving through an area does not require me to tell the player if it's trapped or not.&nbsp; It very well could be a timed device that doesn't activate for another 3 rounds.&nbsp;&nbsp; I'm only required to give the PC his character information would have, and ruling out everything that didn't happen or that his character doesn't know about never falls into that category.Look, I can't sit on a &quot;duh duh&quot; moment for ever, hoping the players will be scared by what's behind the door.&nbsp; At some point they are going to open the door, see there is nothing behind it, and go on to the next moment of uncertainty.&nbsp; However, I'm selling myself short as a DM if I tell the players &quot;you see a door but there's nothing behind it&quot; and then wonder why my players aren't scared or why my scenario is not dramatic.&nbsp; The DM just needs the will-power and experience not to present information to the players in the omniscient voice.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="gizmo33, post: 3477245, member: 30001"] Heck, a winter-wight with a wig is "zombie-ish". That doesn't tell me anything about what the creatures capabilities are in intercepting my sprint towards the BBEG. They could have been faking the slow shuffle thing. A cheetah doesn't always move at 60 mph. What do you mean static? Surfaces in a campaign world are static? Spilled oil in your campaign mops itself up? Railing repair themselves, and structurally weak places are auto-fixed? Nothing in the real world is static - why not use that as inspiration for a fantasy world? The funny thing about scaring people is that it doesn't have to be likely. If someone pulled a gun on you and told you he would squeeze the trigger but it "was very much possible but unlikely that the gun was loaded" you'd still have the bejeepers scared out of you. Fear is all about uncertainty. "Most" is irrelevant. Most, is not all, and as I said above, most is not good enough when you stand the chance of being wrong and getting killed. You don't know if you're facing a character that reqiures material components to cast spells or not until the DM tells you that you are. Agreed, but irrelevant since I'd have to first identify who a wizard is, rule out all possible other variants, creatures, and so forth. I'm not even sure that the so-called "wizard" that I see is not an illusion. The point is that you can debate with me whether or not such things are "likely" in my campaign world, but you really don't know anything about it other than what I tell you, and if I conduct my campaign anything like the way real-life operates - you can never 100% predict any of the circumstances that you're facing just because you have a handful of past experiences. And that doubt, mingled with the possibility of a horrible result, is the essence of fear. No, moving through an area does not require me to tell the player if it's trapped or not. It very well could be a timed device that doesn't activate for another 3 rounds. I'm only required to give the PC his character information would have, and ruling out everything that didn't happen or that his character doesn't know about never falls into that category. Look, I can't sit on a "duh duh" moment for ever, hoping the players will be scared by what's behind the door. At some point they [b]are[/b] going to open the door, see there is nothing behind it, and go on to the next moment of uncertainty. However, I'm selling myself short as a DM if I tell the players "you see a door but there's nothing behind it" and then wonder why my players aren't scared or why my scenario is not dramatic. The DM just needs the will-power and experience not to present information to the players in the omniscient voice. [/QUOTE]

Verification