NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6104463" data-attributes="member: 42582">It actually advocates skipping both in the circusmtances Hussare described - skip them unless the players have a Belief. a Relationship or an Instinct that is put into play.It also advises the GM what to do if s/he wants to bring the desert or the hiring into play - frame it by reference to some player cue.The Relationship example in the revised rulebook is clear - if one of the PCs has a romantic partner in the village, and a vampire turns up, it tries to feed on the partner. The discussion in the Adventure Builder elaborates on these sorts of points with more examples of when to Say Yes and when to roll the dice.Nor is 4e. Nor, I gather, is TRoS. I don't see what that has to do with it, though. Resolution can be breezy and not player-driven. Or non-breezy and player driven. Or vice versa.If that's really how you see The Sword, then I have to conclude that you don't understand what the designer is aiming for.Or are you using a slightly facetious way of speaking to make the point that The Sword shows how something can be problematised that D&D often doesn't problematise? D&D doesn't normally make contractual negotiations high stakes either, but in the original session in which the PCs in my game began to establish their relationship with the duergar, it unfolded as contractual negotiations over the ransom of hostages. And the stakes were high, the negotiations tense, and the payoff at the table great. Perhaps, though personally I don't see it. Whether or not the point is fine, it's accurate.I know nothing of your style but what you post. Here is what you posted in the other thread; it sets desiderata for a setting that bear almost no connection to my desiderata:I am not interested in (a), (b), (e) or (f). I am confident that if I care about (g) I can do it better than any game designer except perhaps Greg Stafford or Lev Lafeyette.As far as (c) and (d) are concerned, the best D&D world I have yet run is the default 4e setting, because it provides a cosmology and a history that are laden with conflict that the players are almost (not quite - there is the possibility of halfling ranger worshippers of Melora) obliged to buy into in building their PCs. But that is not how you have framed your interest, which is in terms of "believing in the setting".Whether or not you intend it, everything you post gives me the impression that simulation, with the GM having responsbility for maintaining that sort of consistency (esp via prep) is a very high priority for you.That's not a high priority for me. The presentation of the 4e default world in the PHB and DMG alone is better for my purposes than anything else I've ever seen, setting-wise, for fantasy RPG ing.</blockquote>

Verification