Be honest, how long would it really take you to notice all of this stuff...?

[billd91]

This is like saying that the failing of AD&D is that it lost an adequate sense of realism.

Gygax, in the introduction to his DMG (p 9), explains that he is not setting out to achieve realism, and this point is reiterated at other places in the game (eg hit point rules, saving throw rules, XP rules, etc). For those who prefer the sort of "realism" that Gygax eschewed, there was Runequest, Chivalry & Sorcery and (not very many years later) Rolemaster. But Gygax didn't lose it - he never had it.

4e doesn't set out to present mechanics for simulating the processes of a fantasy world. It takes for granted that the GM and players can write backstory for such a world without using mechanics. It presents mechanics for resolving player action declarations. It is, in that respect, very close to Gygax's approach with 1 minute rounds and saving throws, and quite a way away from weapon vs armour tables, or 3E's replacement of AD&D saving throws with Fort, Ref and Will. It hasn't lost anything, though, any more than Gygax had - it never set out to achieve it!

You're going to have to accept that I don't see it that way at all. 4e, to me, represented an imbalanced approach to role playing gaming - emphasizing the game play aspects of it to a extreme that had not been present in D&D before.

 

[Obryn]

I think we're going to have to consider issues like these differences in GMing philosophy. I may not invest as heavily in the well-being of Terry the Butcher as my players invest in their characters in general... but when they encounter him, I will be trying to make him as valid and interesting a character as I can and I will be invested in his survival. That's my job as a GM - to breathe life into the NPCs as the players do the same with their PCs. It has been my experience that the gaming is much more fun that way. I may play a set of orc raiders differently, but then, none of them are likely to have an ambition of becoming a dancer rather than a butcher. Their motivations are more about personal glory and plunder, even at the risk of grave personal harm.

The difference, I think, is that if my players use Diplomacy on him to get a better price, I don't feel like my agency over him is being abused. That's over and beyond the fact that I want to make him an interesting character. The practical fact of the matter is that he's onscreen for maybe 15 (hopefully memorable) minutes, and the PCs are there all the time.

No matter how much life I try to put into my NPCs and no matter how much I like them, it's not my job to get attached to them in the same way the players are into their PCs, and they should never approach being as important as the PCs in the world or in the rules.

 

[Lanefan]

The difference, I think, is that if my players use Diplomacy on him to get a better price, I don't feel like my agency over him is being abused.

Whereas I do.

My agency over Terry is already considerably limited in that I don't get to use Diplomacy (or similar) rolls against the PCs; my only recourse for Terry is to try and roleplay my way into or out of whatever situation I or the PCs want to put him in. For example the PCs can try and Diplomacy their way to a better price for his beef but Terry can't Intimidate them out of his store or Diplomacy them into buying a few cuts of pork to go with said beef.

That's over and beyond the fact that I want to make him an interesting character. The practical fact of the matter is that he's onscreen for maybe 15 (hopefully memorable) minutes, and the PCs are there all the time.

No matter how much life I try to put into my NPCs and no matter how much I like them, it's not my job to get attached to them in the same way the players are into their PCs, and they should never approach being as important as the PCs in the world or in the rules.

One of the things that makes a good director a good director is that she pays just as much attention to the details of the show's bit players and extras as she does to the stars. Same goes here.

Another example: early in my current campaign there was a vaguely-relevant-for-a-while NPC named Madam Merta, owner of a brothel in the realm's biggest city and something of an information gatherer on the side. She hasn't interacted with a PC for about 3 in-game years; mechanically when last seen she was an intelligent and reasonably charismatic (but not entirely Goodly) commoner who probably had the chops to take up wizardry if she ever had the desire - and the years to spend on training.

If and when a PC ever meets her again I'll roll a few dice and figure out what she's been up to in the intervening time, keeping in mind that the result has to logically follow from what she was before. In other words, this low-strength person won't have become a 5th-level fighter but might well have become an advisor to or spy for one (or more) of the various interests at work in that city...or she might still just be running her brothel.

While it's not written out on paper anywhere, in my head I've probably got just as much of an idea as to what makes Merta tick as most players do for their PCs; and if I could do this for every NPC they ever met I'd be a much happier DM and I think my game world would be a much deeper and richer setting. Unfortunately life is too short...

Lan-"it just shouldn't be possible for someone named Terry the Butcher to have a decent Diplomacy skill"-efan

 

[Lanefan]

I gather from this that you're not familiar with 4e's mechanics (and/or didn't read all of my post).

When you change the hit points of a 4e creature (eg elite to minion) you also change its level, and hence it AC and to hit bonus, and also the damage and other effects of its powers.

Thus to me making it a completely different creature; and mechanics be damned.

Verbrugge the Frost Giant, sitting on his throne in his glacial hall, has AC -1, 93 h.p., 2 attacks a round at +5 to hit/2d10+8 damage, fights like a 15th-level fighter (or BAB +15, depending on system), cold immunity, and vulnerable to fire. If he remembered to put it on this morning his crown also gives him an always-on charm effect vs. other Frost Giants; but he's not very bright and thus forgets to wear it about 1 day out of 3.

What you're saying is that most of this changes depending on who or what he's entertaining in his court at any given moment; which to me is preposterous.

I assume by "mechanics" of the gameworld you mean the same thing as "natural laws". Of course whether natural laws cause things to happen, or rather are generalisations of what happens, is a vexed question (see eg David Armstrong vs David Hume).

The mechanics are essentially a stripped-down expression *of* the game world's natural laws, and at the same time are the interface through which everyone involved - DM and players alike - interact with said world and said laws. Even if nothing else was involved, this alone would be reason enough to unequivocally state that those mechanics have to be both consistent with themselves and locked in on (or before) first contact in order to ensure both a playable game and believable setting. A creature whose mechanics change over time dependent on the PCs it's facing is by definition not consistent with itself; which to me renders that mechanical system - or at least that aspect of it - pointless.

Lanefan

 

[evileeyore]

My agency over Terry is already considerably limited in that I don't get to use Diplomacy (or similar) rolls against the PCs...

You don't? Weird, I do.

 

[Henry]

You don't? Weird, I do.

Depends on the edition. In 3.x and Pathfinder, the rules explicitly say that Diplomacy can only be used on NPCs (the d20pfsrd does not have the proper rules text on this by the way). No such restriction on bluff and intimidate, mind you, but those are special cases involving uses like fast talking and demoralizing also.

 

[Obryn]

What you're saying is that most of this changes depending on who or what he's entertaining in his court at any given moment; which to me is preposterous.

I will not speak for [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION], and he may very well disagree, but for me there's a difference between "a frost giant" and "Verbrugge, King of the Frost Giants." The latter carries a whole lot more narrative weight than the former and I'd be inclined, absent any gameplay considerations, to just stat him up as a 19th level or whatever Elite and keep him that way. He's different from a random Frost Giant in the fiction.

With that said, his stats aren't him. His fictional role doesn't require any stats until the rubber hits the road. If need be, he could be re-modeled with different stats - for example, if he gets severely wounded (that is, there's an important fictional change), I'd have no qualms about modeling him as a 9th level Solo for a group of 6th-level PCs or something. That'd make for a much more interesting encounter than just leaving him as a 19th level Elite with 20 hit points, and gameplay considerations trump all else in my book.

Whereas I do.

My agency over Terry is already considerably limited in that I don't get to use Diplomacy (or similar) rolls against the PCs; my only recourse for Terry is to try and roleplay my way into or out of whatever situation I or the PCs want to put him in. For example the PCs can try and Diplomacy their way to a better price for his beef but Terry can't Intimidate them out of his store or Diplomacy them into buying a few cuts of pork to go with said beef.

You see, to me that's exactly how it should work. Mr. the Butcher is an NPC, no matter how many pork chops he summons from his meaty dimension. He doesn't have the same "rights" in gameplay as a PC deserves, and if a die roll says he gets tricked or scared, so be it.

 

[evileeyore]

Depends on the edition. In 3.x and Pathfinder, the rules explicitly say that Diplomacy can only be used on NPCs (the d20pfsrd does not have the proper rules text on this by the way). No such restriction on bluff and intimidate, mind you, but those are special cases involving uses like fast talking and demoralizing also.

Yup. And if you feel that removes too much agency from your hands, what do you do?


You fix it. Or... talk about it online. Either way, my choice was "fix it", so I decided that rule was stupid, dropped it, and kept on rolling.

 

[Lanefan]

I will not speak for [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION], and he may very well disagree, but for me there's a difference between "a frost giant" and "Verbrugge, King of the Frost Giants." The latter carries a whole lot more narrative weight than the former and I'd be inclined, absent any gameplay considerations, to just stat him up as a 19th level or whatever Elite and keep him that way. He's different from a random Frost Giant in the fiction.

Sure he's different in that he's a King and people have probably heard of him, but all the same principles should equally apply to the third Frost Giant guard to his right.

With that said, his stats aren't him. His fictional role doesn't require any stats until the rubber hits the road. If need be, he could be re-modeled with different stats - for example, if he gets severely wounded (that is, there's an important fictional change), I'd have no qualms about modeling him as a 9th level Solo for a group of 6th-level PCs or something. That'd make for a much more interesting encounter than just leaving him as a 19th level Elite with 20 hit points, and gameplay considerations trump all else in my book.

Except if he's been statted up as a 19th-level Elite that's what he is, as far as I'm concerned, whether he's raiding a village of commoners or fighting a well-equipped band of 30th-level donkey-kickers.

You see, to me that's exactly how it should work. Mr. the Butcher is an NPC, no matter how many pork chops he summons from his meaty dimension. He doesn't have the same "rights" in gameplay as a PC deserves, and if a die roll says he gets tricked or scared, so be it.

Style difference, then; as from here he should have exactly the same rights (and restrictions) as a PC.

Lan-"is the elemental plane of meat the place where hit points go to die?"-efan

 

[Obryn]

Sure he's different in that he's a King and people have probably heard of him, but all the same principles should equally apply to the third Frost Giant guard to his right.

Except if he's been statted up as a 19th-level Elite that's what he is, as far as I'm concerned, whether he's raiding a village of commoners or fighting a well-equipped band of 30th-level donkey-kickers.

Style difference, then; as from here he should have exactly the same rights (and restrictions) as a PC.

Lan-"is the elemental plane of meat the place where hit points go to die?"-efan

No, that random frost giant lacks the narrative status. In movie terms, he's a Mook. He doesn't need to stay a Mook forever if the story demands it, but he sure is by default. Major characters carry more weight than minor ones and them more than mooks. And PCs carry more than any of them.

e: The Butcher! (I have a 4 year old.)
http://wordgirl.wikia.com/wiki/The_Butcher