Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 9122230" data-attributes="member: 29398">So in your particular campaign the issue sounds like a lack of downtime: you can make money but don't get any opportunity to spend it.Sometimes the only way to solve that is to have the party simply make a hard-hearted decision to take some time off and not do any adventuring for a while, and if that means some things go badly then so be it.Not everyone likes training-to-level rules but the one real benefit of them is they force parties to take some downtime.Agreed.  Option 1 rejected.  Nest, please. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I wouldn't want to force this paradigm onto players but having some mention of the idea in the rulebooks somewhere sure wouldn't hurt.Even groups of wierdos can come together on a common goal such as building a home base for themselves.And that leads into the one place the rules could really help: providing a decent guide to stronghold or base building.  1e had this.Or at the least have there be a reasonable expectation that making those investments isn't just throwing money down the drain.  Sure, there's random elements that say not every investment is going to work out perfectly, and that's fine.That wouldn't get anywhere largely because the PCs would quickly end up feeling like faction employees or staff rather than independent protagonists.  Having a patron (or two or three) is fine, but I think the relationship kinda has to be - and be known to be - on an at-will basis.I don't have to worry about this as much as in my game, if you're unlucky, magic items can be destroyed.  End result: sure something might be a bit broken for now but odds are it won't be around forever; and I can more freely give out new toys. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I don't equate the first with the second, here.  Heroic/superheroic play doesn't necessarily follow from getting epic swag; that swag could just as easily be used for anti-heroic or even villainous play.  But yeah, bring on that swag! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Here I think we disagree on a fairly fundamental level, in that IMO a game where the characters can't lose is going to collapse through boredom in fairly short order.  Flip side, and speaking from long experience: a campaign where a few succeed and many fall by the road along the way has everything it needs to last for ages, in that players are more than willing to just keep on trying.Indeed, and this comes back to the game needing a bit more focus on downtime and-or non-adventuring activities.In the game I play in, the company (a collection of about three dozen characters) currently owns a secret base (converted from a cleared-out dungeon), a warship, a merchant ship, a large-ish pleasure yacht, and a stolen zeppelin.  Acquiring the zeppelin was an unexpected side effect* of some adventuring; the the rest - and housing/hiding the zeppelin - has all come about through or as downtime activities.* - I suspect the DM thought we'd just destroy it rather than actually get it operational, figure out how to run it, steal it, and fly it halfway around the world!Completely agree.</blockquote>

Verification