Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6118735" data-attributes="member: 22779">The difference is, as N'raac claims, the PC's are in no way special.&nbsp; Events in the game progress according to the DM's view of how the simulation of that world works.&nbsp; In my view, the NPC's goals are largely only there if they in some way impact what the PC's are doing.&nbsp; Otherwise, the NPC's don't even come into the game at all.&nbsp; So, the leaders of the siege want to go into the city, of course.&nbsp; But, the progress of the siege will be tied to the PC's goals within the city.&nbsp; It's similar to the old quote by JM Straczynski (Creator of Babylon 5) who said that the spaceships fly at the speed of plot.The siege of the city will proceed in accordance to the player's progress in achieving their goals.&nbsp; IOW, the siege exists only as an element for the players to play with.&nbsp; It has no function outside of that.&nbsp; Which is different from the desert.&nbsp; The desert can't actually do anything.&nbsp; It's just there.&nbsp; It has to be crossed because, well, it's a city in a desert - I'm not completely blind to the need of some degree of plausibility.&nbsp; But, the desert has no goals.&nbsp; It can't.&nbsp; At best, the desert acts as a roadblock or as a source of side-trek adventures only tenuously linked to the goals within the city because the desert can be skipped with impunity. And the desert can be skipped because one of the players wants to skip it.&nbsp; At least, AFAIC, that's all it takes.&nbsp; The players have no investment in the desert in and of itself.&nbsp; So, the desert is largely a big time sink with getting to the city at the end of it.&nbsp; I'd rather skip the time sink and just get to the city, which is where our group's goals are.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 6118735, member: 22779"] The difference is, as N'raac claims, the PC's are in no way special. Events in the game progress according to the DM's view of how the simulation of that world works. In my view, the NPC's goals are largely only there if they in some way impact what the PC's are doing. Otherwise, the NPC's don't even come into the game at all. So, the leaders of the siege want to go into the city, of course. But, the progress of the siege will be tied to the PC's goals within the city. It's similar to the old quote by JM Straczynski (Creator of Babylon 5) who said that the spaceships fly at the speed of plot. The siege of the city will proceed in accordance to the player's progress in achieving their goals. IOW, the siege exists only as an element for the players to play with. It has no function outside of that. Which is different from the desert. The desert can't actually do anything. It's just there. It has to be crossed because, well, it's a city in a desert - I'm not completely blind to the need of some degree of plausibility. But, the desert has no goals. It can't. At best, the desert acts as a roadblock or as a source of side-trek adventures only tenuously linked to the goals within the city because the desert can be skipped with impunity. And the desert can be skipped because one of the players wants to skip it. At least, AFAIC, that's all it takes. The players have no investment in the desert in and of itself. So, the desert is largely a big time sink with getting to the city at the end of it. I'd rather skip the time sink and just get to the city, which is where our group's goals are. [/QUOTE]

Verification