Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sam Witt" data-source="post: 1103381" data-attributes="member: 1449">Because it's a lot of work for a GM to start figuring out what's going to happen to his $40 setting book when the characters bust a cap in Elminster's behind. It is far easier for a GM to simply say, "No, that plan is crazy and will blow the living snot out of this campaign" than to figure out the logical consequences of changing a linchpin of any given campaign setting.One of the things I've seen in my experience as a GM, player, and writer of game-type stuff, is that the more time it takes to prep an adventure, the less likely a DM is to be willing to deviate from the course of that adventure to accomodate wacky PC actions. This theory holds true for for campaign settings, where a single evening of play can wreck weeks, even months, of prep time.For the players, changing the world is exciting and adventurous activity. For the DM, it often means scrapping a lot of existing work, even to the point of nearly starting over. While good GMs are very adept at reusing their content to adapt to changes in their worlds, a lot of GMs are simply overwhelmed by the idea of such radical changes to their campaign.I'm not saying it's a good thing, but it's a true thing, in my experience.Sam</blockquote>