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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ShinHakkaider" data-source="post: 3511095" data-attributes="member: 9213">I know that this is kinda going in circles but I agree with this, as far as DM's running adventures go. I dont care for improvised adventures that much when I run adventures I try to be very familiar with that path or flow of the adventure as well as the encounter areas. Of course I tend to run pre-written adventures mainly because they actually take less time to prepare than if I were to craft my own from scratch. And as far as railroading goes, I really think that posters who use this as a term of derison need to reconsider whether it's use in that fashion is going to lead to a productive discussion. I think I've said this before but every table is different and there's a certain type of contract that needs to be stated with each group or game even before play starts. In my case I let my potential players know what I'm going to be running. I let them know at the beginning what ruleset were using and what additional books we'll be using. I let them know that I'll be running a modified pre-written adventure or adventure path. Because I'm using the adventure path does not mean that I don't want input on what their characters are interested in. Even after the game starts, I still ask for input and try to work things in for each character to make the story matter to them. Sometimes we can get sidetracked for a few sessions for someones story or stories, other times their story gets tied directly into the AP. Is that wrong? No. I let my players know that I dont run free form games. It really takes too much effort and I dont have the patience anymore. Even with a greatly detailed world in advance, you'll still wind up doing more work than you want to. If the PC's decide that they want to go fight Hobgoblins in the YVelchek, but YVelchek is across the country from where the PC's are and they want to fight Hobgoblins NOW. as a DM do you move the location closer so the PC's can have thier fun? or do you stick to your beloved map / world that you crafted and make the PC's travel? If you change things up are you a bad DM? I've already said that ther's nothing wrong with worldbuilding if that's your thing. Personally I think it has more to do with the ego (and this is not a slam) of the DM and their need craft a world more than anything. If it didnt then it would be more of collaborative effort between the DM and the PC's. Which is one of the reasons why I like using the AP's and not using a specific campaign world. I start with a general location and based on the path and the interest of the PC's  we go from there. By the time they reach 10th level or so they are going to have a pretty fleshed out world, or at least the part of the world that is important to them. One of my PC's is interested in getting magical tattoos, so in between sessions while I found a suitable mechanic for them I also came up with where he'd be able to find someone to craft said tattoo. Of course I worked it into the AP as one of the people who would be able to tell him where to go is located in one of thier mission objectives. Is that railroading? or is that getting creative when working within certain "constraints". See that's the thing with this part of the discussion and I think that Umbran pointed this out earlier, worldbuilding isnt digital it's analog. There's a range of what people are willing to do. To me I dont see the value of building a WHOLE LOT before hand. I do build SOME before hand but just the area that the PC's are starting in and with an AP most of that is done for you. If either side can't accept that there are valid points to both methods then why even discuss this, because right now it seems that this has turned into a "my side is valid and your side is balls" type of discussion.</blockquote>

Verification