> This was never (and never will be) my view. I'd never do (or permit
to be done) what you are suggesting. Sorry if I gave that impression.
> The idea wasn't to decide for the players who will succeed or any
such thing! It was to keep the story *working* and that's all.
Ah, but the issue becomes: what is the definition of "working"?
In my Rass campaign, the early story outline involved the Heroes FAILING at the Zola Fel Cleansing Leap heroquest, waking up at the mouth of the river and then being ('scuse the pun) plunged into the Troubled Waters scenarios revised for HW.
But the naughty heroes actually aided the Zola Fel hero to succeed at the quest, even after several important bungles on the way.
So, all the Troubled Waters issues that could be resolved by the quest succeeding were handled, and all the others went unresolved. Plus, the heroes got a boon from ZF. That enabled the family curse to be broken in time for the Chalana Arroy temple to complete the ressurection ritual on the Clan leader, which was the issue that got them all started in the first place. That's in contrast to my original plan, where the lack of a clan leader meant that a Hero had to step into the role or the family would be adrift.
I pretty strictly reserve NPC hero points for Real Honest to Goddess NPC Heroes. That helps to differentiate them for the players and gives them a bit of a hint about just how special the player Heroes are.
Powered by hypermail