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="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 6111963" data-attributes="member: 6668292">What puzzles me is that the siege does not relate to the PC goal inside the city. It affects the city, but the goal of the players is not "interact with the city", it's "interact with the goal." The siege is a complication on the way to that goal in the same respect that the desert is one, the difference is proximity (what I've called "backdrop).In your last couple posts, it looks like you've rather subtly changed the goal to "interact with the city" as compared to "interact with the goal inside the city (inside the desert)" (the goal being a temple, or whatever). The temple can certainly exist without the city; the city can exist without the siege, or without the desert.The fact that the siege cannot exist without the city is a feature of the siege, not the city, and while it can very well have an affect on the city, engagement with the city is still essentially a tangent to the players' goal (interact with the temple). The siege might be a welcome complication, but it also might be entirely irrelevant (or relevant) or uninteresting (or interesting). The desert might be a welcome complication (and relevant or irrelevant / interesting or uninteresting). The city might be a welcome complication (and relevant or irrelevant / interesting or uninteresting).I'm not confused or puzzled about how the siege is connected to the city. That's very obvious to me. I'm confused as to how it's inherently more relevant or interesting than any other complication. And proximity is about all I'm getting here, and even that leads me to question "if the temple being in the city makes a siege an interesting and relevant complication, why is it when the temple is in the desert it's not also an interesting and relevant complication?"But, you say it's not proximity, and I believe you. I just can't parse the difference, still. And I think that between me, Celebrim, Nagol, and N'raac, we've got some decent mental firepower on our side. I'm not telling you that I think you should play differently, I'm telling you that I can't "get inside your head", or see what logic you're using. And that's why I'm still engaging in this conversation. As always, play what you like <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