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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6108348" data-attributes="member: 22779">A later thought.  ((Maybe I'm thinking too much about this thread.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />))Take the example of hiring the hirelings and getting a wanted criminal.  Now, the DM adds in the complication of the wanted criminal.  But, this complication is completely separate from the players' stated goals.  In fact, this complication does nothing to further these goals whatsoever and can only serve to delay or distract from their goals.  At best it's a wash and the players don't interact with it.  At worst, significant table time is spent on a sidebar complication that is not relevant.My advice to DM's is, don't do this.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with adding in complications.  But, do so with the goals of the players in mind.Compare the two desert city examples - the city is under siege and there are desert bandits.  Now, in the city siege example, the DM has added a complication that is directly related to our goals.  Obviously we cannot simply walk into a city under siege.  Additionally, if the siege is successful, maybe our goals will be lost - thus adding a nice, possible, time pressure.  As an added bonus, the siege might actually be turned into a resource - the PC's could potentially join the siege and help break into the city in order to reach their goal.  It's possible and presents the players with a broad range of choices for achieving their goals.  Great.Now take the desert nomads example with a prisoner.  In order for this to become relevant to the players, they must first interact with the nomads, presumably defeating them in some manner in order to secure the release of a prisoner they don't even know exists and then finally interact with that prisoner in such a way that he reveals that he has resources that will help the players.  In other words, there is no relevance to this complication for the players until the very end of things.  The players are very much disconnected from the entire scenario until the very last.I don't know about you, but, I find that incredibly frustrating as a player.  Note, also, that the desert nomads example can go seriously badly.  If the prisoner is killed, if the players choose not to interact with the nomads, if the players interact with the nomads for some time and then give up and go on - all of these invalidate any relevance the scenario has for the players.I've been asked repeatedly how I know that the desert isn't relevant.  It's not relevant because there is nothing prepared beforehand to make it relevant.  All of the relevance is invested in the goal - the city.  Why would I interact with the nomads?  I have no particular reason for doing so.  At best, again, it's a distraction and a delay.  Adding in a Macguffin at the end of the scenario in an attempt to retroactively add relevance rarely works IMO.  Instead you have signficant time spent in frustration followed by a very brief, "Oh, that's why we did that." moment.My advice to DM's.  If it's not relevant and by relevant I mean relevant to the players, don't do it.</blockquote>

Verification