Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 7379786" data-attributes="member: 6785785">So I haven't posted in this thread in some time because I didn't think I had that much to add. But I've been keeping my eye on the discussion. However, something in my D&D campaign happened and I'd be interested to get the feedback of the posters in this thread. Now, I can provide more details if requested, but I think a broad description will suit. My PCs are in Chult. They are there to pursue long term campaign goals. A couple of them also have more short term, personal goals in mind that they may pursue in Chult. Our campaign began at the same time as 5E, but we've incorporated longstanding elements from past campaigns from all editions. The game uses the entire D&D multiverse as its setting (although I've taken plenty of liberties with canon and lore as needed). So I've decided to incorporate the WotC adventure Tomb of Annihilation into our campaign. There are many reasons for this; the fact that both Ras Nsi and Acererak, prominent villains in Tomb, have both been longstanding parts of our campaign world is a big one, but I also decided to use it because I liked the idea of putting the PCs up against a classic dungeon. The fact that Chult was such an important location in our campaign and then was also the setting for ToA was also very interesting. So the nature of the ToA adventure, without delving into spoilers, is that there's a Death Curse that afflicts anyone who has previously been raised from the dead in some way. This leads investigators and other characters interested in this dark phenomenon to Chult, the seeming source of the curse. Three of the six PCs in my campaign have received some kind of raise dead magic (two by the Revivify spell, one by Raise Dead). So they are afflicted by the curse, which means that their HP maximum goes down by 1 HP per day. So they have a ticking clock to deal with this situation. Now they have to decide to set aside their personal goals and look into this Death Curse situation, or continue pursuing their goals and risk the effects of the curse becoming much worse. To grant context, they are tantalizingly close to a major step forward in their main goal. I feel the introduction of the ToA content has added a dimension that previously didn't exist in the campaign; how important is their main goal? Are they willing to set it aside to deal with another concern? Are they willing to risk the lives of half the party by ignoring the Curse? If we consider the main goal of the PCs as the Player Introduced content, and the ToA/Death Curse as the GM Introduced content, then in that case doesn't the GM Introduced Content add meaning to the Player Introduced content? Doesn't it make a statement about how badly they want to achieve that goal? Or at least, can't it potentially say that? How the PCs choose to prioritize these goals says something more about them than simply pursuing one goal, no? Without GM Introduced Content, is there ever any way to present two potentially opposed goals and force the players to decide which one their characters are going to pursue? In a Story Now game, would such only be possible by taking the goals of two or more PCs and then presenting them as goals in opposition? Would having a player who came up with two goals for his character really qualify if the game placed these two goals in opposition? If anyone wants to share their thoughts on this, I'd be interested to hear.</blockquote>

Verification