While prepping for my latest session, I thought about a situation that perfectly encapsulated the concept of “Yes, but.” This is just one example, but the idea can be applied to many situations.
The encounter: The party is trying to retrieve a set of keys from a guard house. I know they can cast Mage Hand, and from experience they'd probably want to try and use it here.
The "No." approach: We may be tempted to find a reason why they couldn’t use Mage Hand. After all, a single cantrip circumventing the whole challenge feels anticlimactic. But doing so negates the choices our players made during character creation. It’s fine to challenge our party’s weaknesses sometimes, but we should balance that with opportunities for them to showcase their strengths, as well.
The "Yes, but" approach: We can anticipate what our party might do and account for them in the encounter. In our example, we can allow them to use Mage Hand to retrieve the keys, but they must make a Sleight of Hand check to avoid being noticed. Although we're still requiring a check, it may be easier than not using Mage Hand at all. We should think of our party's abilities not as instant solutions, but as ways to attempt to solve a problem (which may or may not work– it's up to the dice).
Are there any other approaches you would take?
No comments:
Post a Comment