#ttrpg:
As a GM, do you build encounters to the PC's strengths and weaknesses, or do you build to the setting and region? Do you go for suspension of disbelief and verisimilitude, or to create awesome scenes?
As a GM, do you build encounters to the PC's strengths and weaknesses, or do you build to the setting and region? Do you go for suspension of disbelief and verisimilitude, or to create awesome scenes?
None of these ways are wrong, but each table, we think, has a preference. We go for trying to paint scenes which are accurate to the region, add verisimilitude, and then see how the players run with what's been provided.
Mostly, because we believe that being a hero is earned, one isn't 'just a hero', one strives to do right, and in so doing, faces tests, and overcoming them (or failing and pressing on), becomes a hero.
Sure, in some games, the PCs are a cut above the status quo. That doesn't make them a hero. What they do with it is what makes them a hero - and the story isn't a heroic one unless the characters push to earn the title. It doesn't 'just happen'.
But that's our take.
But that's our take.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
