Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 7387735" data-attributes="member: 29398">Or make the decision to do without the gold.  It forces a choice on to the players/PCs.Taken in isolation, sure.  But when taken in context of all the other things a PC might want to spend money on while in town (restocking supplies, bribes for information, high-roller living, commissioning scrolls or potions, whatever) it's better just to track it properly.Yes.  IMO however, v-tude is much much easier to achieve if there's a solid foundation of realism underlying it.About as often as it happens where they suddenly realize they don't have something so simple because it isn't noted on anyone's sheet.Hard and fast rule: if it's not noted on your character sheet, you don't have it.Dice-for-it does come up now and then, for sure, though only in non-essential situations.This will NEVER be taken out of my games.  Hell, magic item fragility is the main reason I can keep giving out lots of neat funky magic items for them to play with! <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=":)" />Never mind that sometimes when they break they go boom or have some other odd effect.Magic is dangerous stuff.I'm a weather geek in real life, so of course that's going to translate into my games! <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=":)" />When designing my current game world one of the things I did was work out the rough climate patterns and zones for the part of the world I expected most of the play to be in, so I could then have a vague idea of what types of weather would make sense for what times of year based on where they happen to be at the time.  What actually gets narrated each day is based on a certain amount of expected variance from these norms, as run through my tables if I'm being diligent and my head if I'm not. <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 know enough about the climate and weather in my own game world to say that sticking a mile-high thousands-mile-long cliff somewhere is going to have some serious effects on the weather and climate of the areas relatively close to it.  And as that cliff has in theory always been there (it didn't just appear out of nothing!) but is only just now being authored into play, so would its effects have in theory always been there...and thus would have affected elements of play in the past had they been known about at the time.  To me this invalidates the previous play, which is something I adamantly oppose.An analogy might be changing some significant game rule in mid-campaign, trying to retro-act the change all the way back to the start for consistency, and finding the old rule had in the past allowed or caused some major things to happen which in theory under the new rule could not have happened (or vice versa).  To me this invalidates what came before...and in this example would cause me to abandon the rule change; I'd be stuck with the old rule until I changed campaigns or game worlds.  (right now I've got a list of things I want to change but can't, for just this reason) Character wouldn't need to spend three days in the streets figuring it out - fifteen minutes with a good map ought to suffice; and in most cases medieval street plans looked like spaghetti anyway. <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=":)" />Lanefan</blockquote>

Verification