[dungeoncrawl] Re: Thursday morning summary

Hopefully, next week should serve to 
shed some light on where things are 
headed.  Believe it or not, the road to 
godhood is already being paved - for 
better or for worse.

Let me take this opportunity to ask an 
important question:  does anyone have a 
character in the current group that 
they do not want to see become a god?  
(Important: I'm not saying this in 
terms of what the character wants, but 
in terms of what the player wants).  

In the end, instead of failing, the 
characters might find a divine destiny 
to be unavoidable.

> 
>     In the end, what will really 
disappoint or upset me is an ending
> that doesn't allow us a chance to 
retire these characters.  Do I hope
> that they will become gods?  Yes I 
do.  I am so excited about writing
> these guys and girls up as deities!  
I can't wait!  However, if it
> doesn't happen, it doesn't happen.  
As long as it doesn't end stupidly.
>     Let me put it another way.  I 
don't want the end to be something
> contrived.  So far you have never 
gone in the direction I intended, yet
> you have continued to do things that 
made sense and were lots of fun.  I
> have faith you will keep doing that.
> 
> jimkaren@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> > 1.  I had to chuckle when you 
brought
> > up the fact that NPCs give such
> > constant abuse to characters.  I 
hadn't
> > thought of that, and had to respond
> > without reading the rest.  Very good
> > point!  As for Elminster, he had a 
lot
> > on his mind:  powerful wizards 
seeking
> > godhood, vast sources of power 
leaking
> > into the realms, etc etc.  A bit 
harsh,
> > but in line for him (at least from 
what
> > I've read over the years).  I'll now
> > read the next section:
> >
> > 2.  I'm getting a sense of relief 
from
> > reading section 2 as well.  For some
> > reason, I just don't have a problem
> > with Baish!  I should, and I 
remember
> > the character giving you tremendous
> > headaches as a DM.  I think I've 
hit on
> > a "aha!" moment here:  I'm really
> > overwhelmed by roleplaying 
spellcasters
> > in 3rd edition, not by character
> > personalities.  It was reeeallly 
tough
> > running both Amrikals and not having
> > them annihilate everyone and 
everything
> > around them.  I just don't have a 
firm
> > enough grasp of 3rd edition magic.
> >
> > 3.  Yes, it does make sense.  I left
> > last night mentioning two things to
> > Matt and Damon:  (1) How to DM your
> > powerful characters (which we 
discussed
> > today), and (2) how terrified I am 
of
> > this plot.
> >
> > I'm loving it, and I'm glad everyone
> > else is having fun, but there's 
bound
> > to be some controversy from what
> > happens next!  As each week 
progresses,
> > the danger level is going to go up.
> >
> > Some of that "controversy" concern
> > comes from my knowledge of things to
> > come that won't necessarily be 
popular
> > with the players - the events might
> > even come across as a "wet blanket" 
of
> > sorts.
> >
> > For example, Gadget and Faceus 
weren't
> > captured by Mylena - Tyr sent them.
> > They both have a specific mission:
> > Faceus to prevent the group from
> > succeeding, and Gadget to deal with
> > Klaw.
> >
> > For an example of what concerns me,
> > I'll mention one idea now that I 
won't
> > use in play:  I considered having 
the
> > gods send a messenger to the Riders 
in
> > Sigil.  They could return of their 
own
> > volition, or sacrifice all godly 
aid.
> > That would mean no spells or 
abilities
> > for any of the priests, among other
> > things.  But I've thought of a
> > different, more democratic way that
> > they will handle the problem, and it
> > ain't going to be pretty either! :)
> >
> > That's why I feel like taking these
> > things to their logical conclusions 
is
> > going to make me as much a dreaded 
DM
> > as Dan Robinetti.
> > :)
> 
> 
>

Other related posts: