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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pielorinho" data-source="post: 300465" data-attributes="member: 259">My main dislike is playing in a random universe.Fights are good, and sometimes random fights are good.  But I like to feel that most of the encounters i get into advance the storyline.If I'm going through the woods, anda  group of ogres exact toll on us, that's fine.  But if we're going along a regular trade route, and we encounter four scary magical beasts or abominations in two day's worth of travel, then my character oughtta be wondering, "what's going on here?  why is this regular trade route suddenly so deadly?"And if there's no answer to that question -- if the trade route was only deadly so that we could have some fights -- then my suspension of disbelief suffers.As a DM, I rarely use dungeon crawls, precisely because I have a hard time giving them a strong narrative.  I'm best as a DM in city-adventures, I think, and I'm reasonably good at wilderness-quest adventures.  But I'm not so good at dungeon adventures.I really like playing with social conventions in my game -- struggles between the merchant class and the landed nobility, theological disputes between monotheists and polytheists, savagery committed by humans on orcs and vice-versa. Sometimes, I'll warn my players that some attitude will mark them as a social pariah (e.g., atheists are unheard-of in my campaign world, and anti-slavery-activists are almost nonexistent among humans).  But I wouldn't ever forbid someone from playing a certain way.  If they want to be my campaign's equivalent of a flat-earther or an ecoterrorist, more power to them.  But I think the warnings are necessary.Very interesting thread!Daniel</blockquote>

Verification