Search results

I am well aware that you like to attack the stance of those who attempt to interact with and portray the world as a thing in and of itself. When an NPC takes an action, I attempt to remove myself - as much as is possible, given the situation and mechanics used - from the decisions made...

I'm not exactly sure how relevant or pertinent this is, but I was here and noticed this interesting tidbit... Which made me say, "Um... what?"

I am constantly telling my players that it is never me, the DM, doing X or Y to them; it is the setting and its inhabitants. I never seek to kill off characters; NPCs, on the other hand, may want to do so very much. The distinction is, I feel, an important one, to the point that I try to make...

"Impossible" things happen. Nothing is guaranteed.

Depends on the dragon. IMC, there are twelve dragons in the entire setting, so I don't know if I can really speak to this specific example. But in a more general sense, for big things like dragons or liches and whatnot, you'd try to have an idea of what the creature is like. Is it an angry...

Only one way to find out.

I've actually been thinking about this, as of late; specifically powers that are power source-specific, but not class-specific. The benefit of general power source powers is that you can have powers that evoke the feel of the power source in question. Is there a generic martial ability that...

Could you be a bit more specific as to what they liked about it, if you can?

That would require forethought and travel plans... asking here is a lot easier. :p Oh, right. Good call.

I have no expectation of anything beyond anecdotal evidence, but that's fine. It's not like I'm trying to conduct a scientific study here. That scenario - folks getting the game as a gift - strikes me as something probably system-independent? So it's not something that 4e is/has done to help...

There are lots of folks - myself included - who don't like 4e. When it comes down to it, though, that doesn't matter. Regardless of whether we like 4e or not, the vast majority of folks around here are gamers, and it is unlikely that a single edition of a single game could be so horrid that it...

Fair enough. Again, fair enough. I guess that's reasonable. If you approach the game from a non-simulationist standpoint, there's not much reason to worry about the kinds of things I'm worrying about. I've found that 3.5 functions, though it is a bit of a square-peg-round-hole deal. West...

Depends where you decide the "average" is, then. I would start here, and question the logic of there being a wide variety of levels across a setting. IMC, there are maybe a handful of NPCs higher than 10th level. Because otherwise we run into the problem you're describing here - why doesn't...

Just to be clear, I hope you're not conflating a detailed setting with consistency in mind and a setting where the NPCs are invariably vastly superior to the PCs. IMC, there are villains and threats of many scopes. Some are local, some are global, some are stellar. NPCs also vary wildly in...

Yes. I currently have a player who is working on something along those lines. Not quite world destruction, but definitely world-changing for the worse.

The idea of "we game to have fun" strikes me as absurd. As a player or DM, each of us enjoys something about the game, which is what we find fun. In the end, sure, the idea is to "have fun," but you can't just come out and say it that way. There is a process involved, and the steps in-between...

I am defensive because I'm tired of my particular approach to gaming being treated as though it were inferior or somehow dysfunctional. No religion, kthx. As pointed out several pages ago (which you may not have read), "fun" is not the purpose of the game. We play the game for a variety of...

No, they're not. No, they are not more important. Different, yes; better, possibly. So far as the world is concerned, a PC is not more important than an NPC just because of the fact that they are a PC. So far as the game is concerned, yes, the PC is more important than the NPC, because we...

I have a need for consistency. You do not. Fine. I define the world beforehand, so that I am able to work with a cohesive and consistent background for events that occur in the course of a game. Because that's ridiculous? How likely is it that the PCs happen to get there and stop the ritual...

I find little purpose in playing in or running a setting that changes on a whim. Such a setting would lack consistency. For one thing, I wouldn't do something to "build up a sense of urgency." The ritual would be completed when it is completed. I also do not write into my adventures how...