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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jackinthegreen" data-source="post: 6118184" data-attributes="member: 6678119">The city/temple is perceived as being inherently interesting.  Let's face it, they usually are because they can cater to a stupendously wide variety of encounters.  The desert/wasteland is not, and is certainly more limited in its possibilities than the city.  Thus, it is certainly not a stretch to say that little is interesting in the desert compared to the city.  It can even be exaggerated a bit to say that nothing in the desert is interesting compared to a city.  It might not be completely true, but it's also not completely false either.Suddenly making something in the desert tie in to the city, regardless of what the scenario actually is, can be seen as contrived because it looks like the DM is attempting to force the desert into being interesting.  Forcing something to look like it's interesting can be argued to look a lot like, and even be, railroading.  Which actually was the case with the module.Keep in mind "desert exploration" seems to be meant along the lines of "doing anything in the desert."  Let's face it, saying "we're going exploring!" is a great euphemism for "this is a mind-numbing slog that's being sugar-coated.  Polish a turd, it's still a turd."I would expect that how a player (or DM) words something will definitely change what goes on.  The sentences above should illustrate one possibility there.  Some of the trouble that's going to happen is someone might think there's only one way to explain something, but run into someone else who thinks that explanation means something completely different, and thus they might never see eye to eye simply because they can't interpret something the same way.  Such a scenario has almost certainly happened in this thread several times.</blockquote>

Verification