Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 8146818" data-attributes="member: 29398">Where to me there's as far as possible no difference between PCs and NPCs.  They're all equally a part of the game world, and that I'm running some and the players are running some has - or should have - no bearing on how they interact or operate.Which means that if you can use Intimidate (or any other social roll) on an NPC, so should an NPC be able to use it on your PC with exactly the same degree of effect.  Given that, and given that having it work this way would hammer player agency into the ground, it's a pretty easy call to just strip such mechanics out of the game wherever possible and to oppose them wherever they arise.Same reason I rarely if ever use reaction rolls.Sure - charm etc. are (usually) an accepted part of both the game and the setting.  No problem there, and it can work equally both ways.Experience tells me that if-when I try running significant NPCs without much forethought the results tend to either be predictable (as per [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER] 's theories posted above) or quickly become somewhat incoherent and inconsistent.  Neither is ideal. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Absolutely.  I don't much care if the gate guard the PCs speak to once ever comes across the same as all the other gate guards the PCs speak to once ever; but I do care that the personality and motivations of the party's patron have a solid pre-built foundation so I can play him consistently from one session to the next and from one year to the next.</blockquote>

Verification