Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6052544" data-attributes="member: 42582">Interesting! I mostly skipped 3E too (though for me I was mostly GMing RM, and played but only once or twice GMed 2nd ed).I know a lot of people use inherent bonuses, which weren't formalised until DMG2 (I think).I use the approach mentioned in Adventurer's Vault, of generally levelling up the PCs' existing items in lieu of having them find new ones.I think it would have been helpful for either or both of these options to be mentioned up front in the first DMG.I'm curious about the tiers of these PCs.Paragon tier PCs are certainly capable of killing kings and their entourage, as you say. They may be kings, or king equivalents, themselves. (A bit like AD&amp;D name level PCs.) The game relies upon the assumption that kings are embedded in a deeper, cosmology-spanning social order (hence the link, in Worlds &amp; Monster and subsequent setting material, between the overthrow of Nerath and the demon lord Yeenoghu.)Epic tier PCs, in turn, are capable of killing gods, or at least godlings. They are gods themselves, reshaping the cosmology-spanning social order.I'm not sure how any of the above relates to your own experiences with the game. But it's the way I see the game's fiction working.I know that Chris Perkins runs a more world-bound game that he describes in his column, but for the sorts of reasons that I read in your posts (or, at least, that I take from your posts!) I'm not 100% sure how it works - how he reconciles a world in which the NPC kings, spy masters etc are as tough as gods. Maybe in Iomandra gods aren't such a big deal?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6052544, member: 42582"] Interesting! I mostly skipped 3E too (though for me I was mostly GMing RM, and played but only once or twice GMed 2nd ed). I know a lot of people use inherent bonuses, which weren't formalised until DMG2 (I think). I use the approach mentioned in Adventurer's Vault, of generally levelling up the PCs' existing items in lieu of having them find new ones. I think it would have been helpful for either or both of these options to be mentioned up front in the first DMG. I'm curious about the tiers of these PCs. Paragon tier PCs are certainly capable of killing kings and their entourage, as you say. They may be kings, or king equivalents, themselves. (A bit like AD&D name level PCs.) The game relies upon the assumption that kings are embedded in a deeper, cosmology-spanning social order (hence the link, in Worlds & Monster and subsequent setting material, between the overthrow of Nerath and the demon lord Yeenoghu.) Epic tier PCs, in turn, are capable of killing gods, or at least godlings. They are gods themselves, reshaping the cosmology-spanning social order. I'm not sure how any of the above relates to your own experiences with the game. But it's the way I see the game's fiction working. I know that Chris Perkins runs a more world-bound game that he describes in his column, but for the sorts of reasons that I read in your posts (or, at least, that I take from your posts!) I'm not 100% sure how it works - how he reconciles a world in which the NPC kings, spy masters etc are as tough as gods. Maybe in Iomandra gods aren't such a big deal? [/QUOTE]

Verification