>From: "frank_rafaelsen" <frank_rafaelsen_at_...>
>
>This was helpful advice. So the way to go is to plan the scenario in
>terms of tools avilable, and not in terms solutions?
Well, yes. I use the term situation instead of tools. That is, if you hand somebody a tool, it says, "use me!" Just throw in a lot of data. Which your examples seem to mostly be, really.
>And try hard not to expect what they will do with the tools they are
>given.
Yep. Futher, go with what they come up with. "The LDoaH has family nearby? Maybe we can find out some weakness!" Then come up with some weakness that they can find out through their encounter with the family. "There's a sinless man in Zoria with the soul of the LDoaH? Let's go find him, and convince him to help us stop the KoW!" Then make this a possibility.
Then complicate, complicate, complicate. The sinless man will help you, but only if you convert to his cult. The LDoaH's family tells you his secret weakness, but to exploit it, the PCs will have to perform a ritual that's likely to get them excommunicated. That's what you want to aim for - set up situations where things the characters value are brought into conflict with each other, and the PC has to choose between them. You force the question, but the player chooses the rout to proceed along. No right answers, just what the player feels is coolest.
Facilitating the player's chosen rout as a viable option doesn't mean having to make it easy - the players probably want it to be hard, for there to be chances to fail. Throw big resistances at them if you feel like it. Not so large as you're effectively telling them "Don't try this, or else!" But big enough that, if they do succeed, it'll be a tale worth telling. And when they fail, they'll understand that you're not saying "Don't go this way!" but simply that they can try another interesting approach now, and be all the more happy if/when their new vector succeeds.
Mike
Powered by hypermail