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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chris_Nightwing" data-source="post: 6004589" data-attributes="member: 882">I'll try saying this again, for the 15th time or so. I like simulation, I like mechanics that apply to players and NPCs and monsters alike. Levels are a useful way to measure experience and power. You DO NOT HAVE TO CORRELATE ALL THESE THINGS but 3E does. I am not defending 3E. I am defending simulationism against gamism/narrativism.See above, but also consider that both 3E and 4E are flawed in that they don't allow PCs to make up characters that follow some of these archetypes. In 3E this is because you won't be able to do anything useful in combat as an NPC class. In 4E this is because you can only become good at stuff by gaining levels - and in fact levels dominate how good you are at stuff, and how good you are at all stuff all at once. 4E is much worse than 3E in terms of correlating all these features for player classes. 5E has a good chance to avoid it with flat math (but so far hasn't).I agree with you about the reputation/hammer skill correlation, but again, read above. Things such as attacks and saves don't have to correlate with level, they just do, in 3E and 4E for players, in 3E for NPCs too. I stopped playing 3E a long time ago, I'm not advocating the same system, I am merely advocating the same approach: levels and simulation.Yeah basically see above, and I thoroughly agree with [MENTION=17106]Ahnehnois[/MENTION] ' point that it's crappy players can't do the same things the DM can do with his NPCs. I *hated* the 4E attitude that everyone must be useful in combat. I love playing Call of Cthulhu because there's always room for a professor who can't shoot an elder thing with a shotgun at five yards.Whoever brought up the 'make these NPCs' challenge should be shot, because it was ultimately edition warring which has led to me constantly having to defend my simulationism, which everyone here associates with 3E. 3E was flawed, but it doesn't make simulationism inherently wrong. 4E gives you buckets of flexibility in NPC creation but doesn't offer the same courtesy to players. I want 5E to follow simulationist principles, but with the flexibility of being a 4E DM - and I believe this is POSSIBLE, especially with flattened math. Whether it happens is another matter.</blockquote>

Verification