Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 3560230" data-attributes="member: 22779">By your own definition this isn't world building.  How is this moving from generic to specific?  We have a nameless force (not even a god) as the patron of the cleric (which we mechanically HAVE to have - the force, not the cleric), any and all duties and whatnot of the cleric is entirely left in the player's hands.  Other than the bare minimum dictated by mechanics - picking domains, what world building have we done here?  His home isn't named and is "very far away".  Other than a vague "somewhat Chinese" we don't have much of anything here.Don't conflate theme with world building.  The character has a theme - Asian monk/fish out of water.  He has pretty much no detail.And, fair enough.  This goes back to the assumption that our DM isn't incompetent.  If he is, then, well, there isn't much we can do about it.  The response - no, there's nothing really going on - is perfectly reasonable.  Sure, the DM could also use the cleric as a source of plot hooks, and, I agree, that would likely be the best way to go.  Without knowing more of the specifics of the adventure, it's pretty hard to tell either way.Hang on, I didn't say that.  I asked the player what he was intending to achieve.  Granted, I didn't ask it very nicely, but, that is what I asked.  I assumed that there were actual plot hooks being given to the players and then Mr Cleric has gone walkabout in town looking for something to do while the other players gather supplies, since that was Darth Shoju's comment.If, OTOH, the players are fumbling about in the dark, then, yes, you would be exactly right.  Again, without more information, it's pretty hard to tell.Hang on.  One second ago, you were saying that players shouldn't get what they want whenever they want it.  Yet, now, we've got the players in an uproar because I've moved the action away from their supposed spotlight.  Which is it?  Should I be constantly rewriting adventures to dovetail nicely with the PC's?  Or should the PC's be created with some idea of the themes of the adventures I intend to run?  Let's not forget here, I'm advocating that the entire campaign arc be created in advance.  If our campaign is going to be about dungeon crawls looking for artefacts and someone's making a druid, there's possibly been a miscommunication.  Never mind that the bard isn't going to be talking to many people in the bloody forest of death anyway.  He's pretty much screwed in either case.Unless, of course, I should rewrite my world building to suit the players.On the Conan bit, I'll admit, I've never read the originals.  Only the De Camp versions.  The first story in that version has Conan running half naked through the wilderness trying to escape wolves.  Comments on how much Conan someone has read would depend on which author we'd like to compare no?  In any case, you still get the point without having to get too pedantic about it.Umm, no.  We've already established that the setting required by the adventure is created.  I've assumed that there were no encounters in the Forest of Death and done a nice cut scene.  I could easily have included a nice map of the Forest and set encounters there as well.  It is not too far of a stretch to think that the setting for our adventure would include at least a basic idea of the town and the surrounding countryside on the way to X.  Pretty much like Keep on the Borderlands.  Since that's almost guaranteed to come up in play, I would call that setting.  I think I got mixed up when you were answering KM and not me.  Sorry, not sure where I was going with that.  That was a bloody long post.  <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=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification