Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8831508" data-attributes="member: 82106">That might be an interpretation, but it seems to go against the whole 'naturalistic' bent of things, IMHO. That is, I think that the explanation of 'Underworld' is actually elucidated best by reference to the 'D' series of modules. OTOH Volume 3 itself seems to use 'Dungeon' and 'Underworld' as synonyms, except on page 35! So, I have a suspicion that page 35 is using the term in more the way the 'D' modules illustrate a fantastical underground wilderness-like geography that is somewhat disconnected from the traditional 'dungeon' concept. The text of page 35/36 is still problematic though, as it doesn't easily explain why you would want to pass time at a real world rate for some PCs stuck in the underworld where supplies are super limited and they are presumably totally isolated. It seems odd. Either that or we have to figure out which of 2 rules (1 week per expedition or 'real world time') applies in the dungeon.Right, if you read the text in the 1e DMG it makes all this VERY clear. The whole POINT there is to track the distribution of characters in time and space such that the whole campaign has a coherent conception of 'now'. The DM can 'fudge' here and there, allowing some PCs to move ahead of others, but he points out this may put constraints on action, or require some players to suspend the play of certain PCs in order to resolve other parts of the timeline first (IE if your party enters a dungeon level where other PCs incomplete play session is in progress still from an early timeframe). This is one reason why there is an emphasis on episodic play too, because it means these situations are less likely to arise. If the PCs always exit the dungeon at the end of the Saturday session, then the Monday Night game is free to enter, AND the 'real time passing' rule could then be handy as just a quick way to say "well, you party for a week at the Tavern, and then hit the dungeon again." Now you KNOW that whatever the Saturday crew did has passed chronologically and the Monday crew will find the dungeon in whatever condition they left it, modulus any updates. So, when you look at it that way, you see that PART of what video guy is saying KINDA makes sense. However, it makes a LOT more sense from the standpoint of a single DM running many groups on different days, with PCs potentially exchanging between parties, going off on their own, etc. In point of fact, as I understand it, Gary and a couple of the other participants in his group DID 'co-DM' to a degree, so that different people DMed for various people on different days in the same campaign world. I assume they had to assiduously exchange notes somehow if the potential arose for cross over between these sessions, but I also suspect they almost always were present as players in the sessions they didn't run. I just think that there's a pretty large amount of subtle difference between the way the video puts it and how the game was designed to play.</blockquote>

Verification