Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 8380588" data-attributes="member: 29398">Haven't you ever been in a campaign where something discovered or found or learned in what seemed at the time to be a one-off adventure - and maybe even ignored at the time - turned out to be vitally important later?&nbsp; Or where something done (or not done) in a one-off adventure turned out to have major consequences down the road?&quot;You wouldn't know that&quot; is the only reason I need to withhold information.Put another way, if the PCs are guessing then the players are guessing.You'd likely never see a DC changed, because (I would hope!) the DC is set based on the direction from which the PCs are likely to approach.&nbsp; But if somehow the PCs approach from the other side then hells yes it should be changed.&nbsp; It's called simulation of reality, an important aspect for an immersive game-world. <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=":)" />And in so doing give yourself a bonus without penalty, I think.&nbsp; Two-weapon fighting, for one thing, assumes a dominant and off hand; ambidexterity should reduce the off-hand penalty (and if it doesn't the game's failing at simulation - again).Run it the way you want to run it, and patch to suit.Better, after a certain point, is almost completely subjective.&nbsp; Your better, for example, might well be my worse; and vice versa; and we're just two grains of sand on a beach where every other grain of sand each also has its own unique definition of &quot;better&quot;.&nbsp; The designers can't hope to nail it for all of us, just try to get as close as they can for as many as they can and call it done.It's far easier (and more pleasant) to be the DM who is easing off on the harshness than the DM who's ramping it up.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 8380588, member: 29398"] Haven't you ever been in a campaign where something discovered or found or learned in what seemed at the time to be a one-off adventure - and maybe even ignored at the time - turned out to be vitally important later? Or where something done (or not done) in a one-off adventure turned out to have major consequences down the road? "You wouldn't know that" is the only reason I need to withhold information. Put another way, if the PCs are guessing then the players are guessing. You'd likely never see a DC changed, because (I would hope!) the DC is set based on the direction from which the PCs are likely to approach. But if somehow the PCs approach from the other side then hells yes it should be changed. It's called simulation of reality, an important aspect for an immersive game-world. :) And in so doing give yourself a bonus without penalty, I think. Two-weapon fighting, for one thing, assumes a dominant and off hand; ambidexterity should reduce the off-hand penalty (and if it doesn't the game's failing at simulation - again). Run it the way you want to run it, and patch to suit. Better, after a certain point, is almost completely subjective. Your better, for example, might well be my worse; and vice versa; and we're just two grains of sand on a beach where every other grain of sand each also has its own unique definition of "better". The designers can't hope to nail it for all of us, just try to get as close as they can for as many as they can and call it done. It's far easier (and more pleasant) to be the DM who is easing off on the harshness than the DM who's ramping it up. [/QUOTE]

Verification