On Jun 1, 4:12 pm, Russell Wallace <russell.no.spam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> David Alex Lamb wrote:
> > Though, if it were a long-term campaign, they should have, I guess.
Were there
> > similar but less critical situations previously that might have taught
them
> > the appropriate lessons?
>
> This was only session 11, and was really the first time that sort of
> strategic decision had been required of the players, so from that
> perspective it's not too unreasonable.
The fate of the entire world rested on their first major strategic
decision?
I can't argue that nuclear weapons facilities aren't obviously in need
of
protection, but if the PCs are the only ones who can protect all such
vital strategic assets, it seems that they would be stretched a bit
thin.
Did they build the nuclear weapon facility that they didn't protect?
If not, they might have reasonably expected the NPCs who did build
it would defend it. If the PCs and villains operate on a level that
no
such NPCs can match, then perhaps the players didn't expect that
the weapons those NPCs could make would decide the PC/villain
conflict.
--
Magister
|
