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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6004726" data-attributes="member: 996">Hm... OK.1) I'd have to say no to both, at least, for an RPG emulating the heroic fantasy genre.  You could have completely class-less NPCs who don't need class/level to be fully realized.  You could have NPCs that don't /fit/ in any class/level progression (for instance, because their wildly good at one thing, like a skill or casting certain spells or whatever, but also terribly fragile - D&D class/level always increases hps, saves, and the like).2) Again, for an FRPG, I'd have to say no.  PCs are the 'heroes' of a story (their own story), they need to fit that protagonist role.  Some NPCs may need to be similar to them in abilities, but others will have to be wildly different to fill roles as 'background characters,' supporting characters, 'extras,' sources of exposition, plot devices, very-high-power-but-for-some-reason-unwilling/able-to-intervene mentors/masters, and even the occasional outright deus-ex-machina.3) The advantage of having different rules for PCs & NPCs is that it allows the game to model the way protagonists are treated in genre vs the way support characters and adversaries are handled.  Thus, it delivers a good genre-simulation.    The advantage of using the same rules for PCs & NPCs is that it creates an impartial imagined world in which the PCs are very much /not/ the heroes, but just like everyone else - they may become heroes, if lucky and determined enough, but more likely if they go out and 'try to be a hero,' they will, like most people who jump on grenades or try to wrestle the bomb away from a terrorist, simply die.  Thus, it delivers a more realistic simulation.</blockquote>

Verification