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="Jackinthegreen" data-source="post: 6111728" data-attributes="member: 6678119">Perhaps it could be said that the players don't want there to be anything interesting in the desert right now, or in the future, that affects their goals in the city.  They don't know whether something was interesting in it, but they don't want complications from it screwing with them getting to the city or interacting with it.  It's possible that the player(s) want to dismiss the desert scene entirely.  I can envision a player that even might want to murder the desert and everything it stands for since it's seen as such a roadblock, but I don't think anyone in this thread (even [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION]) is of that mind.  He tried to give it an in-game reason to handwave it after all instead of ripping up the map and proclaiming the desert no longer exists.  And I don't think anyone in this thread or even on these boards would try that stunt.I realize I've been a bit back and forth and what my own views are, but I have mentioned I wouldn't be keen on nuclear options like one player saying "I don't have the in character resources to do this, but I just want to skip this scene."  My first inclination would be to negotiate with the player.  That might change depending on the campaign and players.  However, if the people in his game agree that someone can go nuclear every now and then, then they're free to do that because they have every right to make the game their own.Obviously not everyone did agree in those circumstances, to which I'd probably say going nuclear is not a good move because it can really unhinge people.  Yes, there will be times when a person is bored to tears, but if their answer to a situation is to throw a wrench into the feel of the game itself then they'd better have a damn good reason.If the only times [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] went nuclear were with the desert and those mercs, and he has done decades of D&D, then that's far less than even 1% of the time in his entire career where he's gone nuclear.  I could see giving that sort of option to someone if it happened once or twice over the entire campaign.  Maybe I'd call it a Destiny/fate system or something (and totally unrelated to anything bearing a similar name) where, if the player feels there's just no other way to go about it, they can spend one of their uses to totally skip a certain scene.  Only once or twice in an entire campaign, and if they changed their mind and wanted to go back to it, oh well.  Can't un-nuke something.I don't think the entire game needs to be all or nothing with regards to having the players take responsibility for their actions.  Sometimes having the option to ignore that is healthy for the players so they don't get overloaded.  Yes, even experienced D&D players can be overloaded even if it doesn't come up in a certain campaign.I try to deal in possibilities in this thread because it's only possible to make them a reality in some places not in this thread.</blockquote>

Verification