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="Hussar" data-source="post: 6111991" data-attributes="member: 22779">True.  The players would never encounter the city save for the city.  And, given the proper resources, the players would never encounter the desert AT ALL.  And you don't mind that.  You have no problems with the group skipping the complication so long as they have the proper in-game resources to do so.  Even if most of the group wanted to interact with the desert and the wizard just teleported them into the city anyway, you'd have no problems (after all, the wizard forcing the group to interact with the lost tower a few pages back was fine).That's the primary difference here.  It has nothing whatsoever to do with how interesting the desert is or not.  The desert could be the most wonderful or the worst scenario ever written and it doesn't matter.  The only issue is, does the group have the proper in-game resources, yes or no.In my games, I don't force that much attention to the rules.  I have no problems setting aside the rules of the game in order to make sure that everyone at the table is enjoying the game.  Strict adherence to the rules is not my primary criteria.  If ignoring the rules would result in one of the players not hating and totally disengaging from the game, then I will ignore the rules every single time, regardless of the rest of the group.  Because I know that the rest of the group will enjoy the next thing anyway.I don't care about losing single scenarios.  It doesn't matter to me.</blockquote>

Verification