/pics/4008401898_2e76efc949.jpg
I want to like Pathfinder. It’s large, it has adventure paths with long stories, it has more traditional modules, it has background material, colorful art – and yet the products are often awfully *long*. I used to appreciate that, but these days I often think that the material takes me longer to read than to think up myself. I’m still subscribed to their adventure path line, however, and I still listen to 3.5 Private Sanctuary.
In *Known Direction 31* they discussed “interesting” encounters and Ryan says: “Basically if every player feels like they have something they can do on their turn, and not just something they can do but something that they’ve put into their character, some part of their character build that they can use, then they’re going to feel better about it.”
I feel torn. On the one hand, I absolutely understand it. On the other hand, this leads to “my precious encounter design” and railroads and quantum ogres (otherwise players will miss on these carefully designed encounters). I prefer games where as a player I have more freedom, where builds are not that important, where encounters can be incluenced by player ingenuity at the table and don’t server to reward choices made during character creation.
Hack & Slash: On the Superiority of the Railroad Method Over Sandboxes
The Alexandrian: The Rise of Tactical Gaming
EN World: Player Entitlement and My Precious Encounter
#RPG #Podcast #Agency
(Please contact me if you want to remove your comment.)
⁂
Not to bother you, but I think you might be talking about a quantum ogre, not a phantom one. http://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com/search/label/series%20%28Quantum%20Ogre%29
http://hackslashmaster.blogspot.com/search/label/series%20%28Quantum%20Ogre%29
– -C 2012-03-06 05:06 UTC
---
You’re right. I’ll add that link.
– Alex Schroeder 2012-03-06 08:00 UTC
