Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 8233758" data-attributes="member: 29398">Disagree on just a few specific lines where you seem to be rolling &quot;rules-based events&quot; in with GM Notes, perhaps to bolster your point.&nbsp; Random wilderness encounters i.e. frequency, creatures potentially met, etc. - are often laid out in the base rules system the GM is using for that campaign (e.g. the 1e DMG); meaning that if the GM is playing the game as written then sooner or later those encounters are going to arise unless she in effect overrides her dice and tells them not to.Other than that, your assessment is more or less correct.What I don't see is where there's any problem with any of the above.&nbsp; There's a nice foundation laid for a campaign which could go in any number of directions; and the players/PCs end up faced with a series of questions they now need to answer regarding the Chamberlain, the King, and what to do next:&nbsp; narrator voice&quot;Do they seek someone else in high authority e.g. the head of a major local temple or guild, and warn that person instead?&nbsp; Do they start investigating the Chamberlain to find out if he's a crook?&nbsp; Do they examine the King's recent actions and try to figure out if he's acting under his own free will?&nbsp; Do they try to sneak into the palace to get to the King directly?&nbsp; Do they chuck it all and head back out to find more ruins to plunder?&nbsp; Stay tuned for our next exciting episode...&quot; <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&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />/narrator voiceWhat's left unsaid in the summary of events is whether the GM planned this specific outcome, whether the GM had plans for several possible outcomes, or whether she'd left herself in react mode once the PCs got back to town with their info assuming they went back to town at all.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 8233758, member: 29398"] Disagree on just a few specific lines where you seem to be rolling "rules-based events" in with GM Notes, perhaps to bolster your point. Random wilderness encounters i.e. frequency, creatures potentially met, etc. - are often laid out in the base rules system the GM is using for that campaign (e.g. the 1e DMG); meaning that if the GM is playing the game as written then sooner or later those encounters are going to arise unless she in effect overrides her dice and tells them not to. Other than that, your assessment is more or less correct. What I don't see is where there's any problem with any of the above. There's a nice foundation laid for a campaign which could go in any number of directions; and the players/PCs end up faced with a series of questions they now need to answer regarding the Chamberlain, the King, and what to do next: narrator voice "[I]Do they seek someone else in high authority e.g. the head of a major local temple or guild, and warn that person instead? Do they start investigating the Chamberlain to find out if he's a crook? Do they examine the King's recent actions and try to figure out if he's acting under his own free will? Do they try to sneak into the palace to get to the King directly? Do they chuck it all and head back out to find more ruins to plunder? Stay tuned for our next exciting episode...[/I]" :) /narrator voice What's left unsaid in the summary of events is whether the GM planned this specific outcome, whether the GM had plans for several possible outcomes, or whether she'd left herself in react mode once the PCs got back to town with their info assuming they went back to town at all. [/QUOTE]

Verification