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: 6121819" data-attributes="member: 22779">Leia has massive political obligations which she completely ignores to go off and save Han.  Luke has an entire code that would tell him not to save Han.  Chewie, I'll give you.  "Because he's my friend" is a bit much when we're talking about leaders of the Rebellion.  Luke is a Commander and thus subject to a chain of command.  Leia is one of the leaders of the rebellion.  Both completely ignore their obligations to go save a "friend".  And, they get to do so without any consequence too.  Convenient that.---------Why do you make this assumption?  Nothing N'raac has said has shown this.  To the contrary, in his examples, the group has very little reason to be together - the Wizard and the Cleric and the Fighter have mutually exclusive goals, for example.  N'raac is all about "Story Now", so there is no linking of backstories in his games.  So, beyond, "Well, we're all PC's", there is no real reason to help Bob.----------I look at the Bob example like this.  Bob's player wants to inject a complication into the game without doing any of the work of actually getting any buy-in from the other players.  Additionally, the players are now obligated to play out Bob's complication, despite zero buy-in.  And, it's now up to the DM to somehow gain buy-in from the other players, despite the fact that the complication has nothing to do with those players and is pretty much solely Bob's complication.In a group where everyone is obligated to play whatever complication is presented at the table, this works.  I don't want to play at that table though.  No one at my table is ever obligated to play anything.  If I, as a player or a DM, want to introduce a complication, I have to do the leg work to make sure that that complication is acceptable to the table.  Sometimes that's very easy - dangle some juicy carrot and it's not too hard to get players to do something. Sometimes it's hard - you have to invest a lot of time at the table to get people to do something.  Sometimes it's impossible and the complication I want to introduce just doesn't gain any traction and it dies stillborn.But, in any case, without buy in, I am never going to drop things on the group, nor do I particularly want to play in games where the level of buy in is forced by obligation.  If we as a group are going to play, say, Shackled City, and Bob gets the DM to introduce the secret cult thing, then I don't really want to play.  I'm there to play Shackled City, not Bob's Cult Game.  Bob's Cult Game might be tons of fun.  Sure.  But, that's not what I signed up to play.  It's bait and switch and I really don't enjoy that.</blockquote>

Verification