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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Warbringer" data-source="post: 6115236" data-attributes="member: 14391">IMHO, a large part of this 'conflict of position' around [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] is that he assumed that he was entering a Transition Scene, whether it was positioned or not as an Action Scence. If we were playing MHRP or TOR there would be no ambiguity, but in DND (even 4e) there is less obvious demarcation.At this point we have to trust that the GM/DM/Nararrator/Watcher will obide by the contract that if there is really nothing interesting to the PC story, no challenge or reward outcome that propels the plot, the we can move to the next Action Scene.If the PCs have a method to avoid the scene (Teleportation) so be it, if the plot needs to return the desert (because there is something critical to the PC story) so be it, but if the PCs cannot avoid the scene (ie they have to travel through it) then the players need to abide by their side of the social contract and see what happens.Personally, I like to use either Challenges or simple Consequences, as the currency for this different focus (non turn based tactics) of play. A Challenge is as it sounds, a skill challenge to be overcome; A Consequence is a simple cost that is meant to represent "what happened" during the Transition Scence, a cost that is applied at the start of the next Action Scene (usally cost of HPs, of Recovery/HS, use of a daily).Depending how the Challenge proceeds (if the players take that option), we may drop into tactical play for combat or exploration.(To be honest, explicity using this approach fro me is new and based on how things are handled in MHRP, Cortex Plus and lesser extent TOR; of course [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION], [MENTION=463]S'mon[/MENTION] and [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION] have gone a long way to helping me understand how to shape my game with this approach.)</blockquote>

Verification