Not Failing Forward
I might be a bit old-school. I started gaming in 1984, give or take. Cut my teeth on Palace of the Silver Princess, picked up Call of Cthulhu as my second ever RPG, and then ended my AD&D experience with Throne of Bloodstone before I moved on to other games in another part of the country. I understand the idea of "fail forward", and I understand the intent. The GM wants the PCs to make it to the BBEG, and doesn't want the road there to be blocked. The GM doesn't want the players to fall to 'accidents' and crappy dice rolls along the way. No, I totally get this. And in some games, sure. Okay. But not every game. Here's the thing for me. If the hazard isn't actually hazardous, then there's no point to it being there. Some GMs may talk about 'tension' or 'dramatic scenery', but I'm fine with doing that as background, not as a 'threat that isn't really a threat don't worry about it'. If you're in a swordfi...