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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lizard" data-source="post: 4152699" data-attributes="member: 1054">Partially. I look at things like racial abilities, class powers, and so on, to determine how the world works. I use the demographics in the DMG to determine if it's realistic that the PCs will even be needed to solve a particular problem -- if not, I find a different problem or move it to a different locale. And I make sure some things are possible -- that the mayor's aide has the skills needed to manipulate politics, or, if he doesn't, that there's some other, believable, explanation -- the local thieves guild rigged things. Indeed, if someone does something they shouldn't (mechanically) be able to do, that's a Clue.Sometimes I will do roll-offs between NPCs to see how things work out. I've checked to see if NPC thieves can slip past NPC guards to reach the MacGuffin, for example. This was in a case of the PCs needing to protect it, and not doing it themselves, but hiring guards. I didn't want to fiat/handwave it.It's a philosophical distinction. Obviously, there aren't mechanics for everything. However, there's a difference between "The world exists only when the PCs look at it" and "the PCs live in a world which exists on its own". Different mechanics for PC and NPCs -- even if those mechanics don't affect the whole world -- push the former worldview. 4e monster/NPC design, centered on the idea (explicitly stated) that NPCs only exist for 5 rounds of combat and don't need any stats beyond that, exemplifies the idea that nothing exists but the current situation. As others have noted, creatures have no skills other than the ones they need to fight the PCs *now*. The Pit Fiend, plotting ruler of hell, has all of 3 skills and no out-of-combat powers, except a once a century wish. The rules seem to model a world which exists in isolated bubbles of space-time called encounters, and the DM's job is to hustle the PCs from one stage to the next. The full context of the game might be very different, but what I've seen of the 4e rules implies a flat, shallow, world. Simplified armor, simplified magic, simplified stat blocks...how much can you simplify the mechanics before you simplify the world? Yes, a world can be described non-mechanically -- indeed, most of it must -- but it's nice when you can have the mechanics reflect the flavor text meaningfully. To go back to earlier editions of the game...I could describe an orc lord as cunning, but I coudn't make that intelligence matter mechanically. I could say 'The people of the north are fierce axemen', but there was no 'Weapon Focus (Axe)' I could give to make a Northman fighter different from a longsword-wielding southman. (Yeah, I could always make a handwave 'Northmen have +1 when attacking with axes', but you can handwave in any mechanics as needed...we're discussing what the game supports OOB). Now, it does look like I can do some of that in 4e by creating a 'Northman Soldier' NPC and giving him a bonus with axes and some kind of cool axe-related combat technique pretty easily...but then we get the reverse problem, that of a player saying, "Hey, cool, my fighter is a northman...how do I learn that?" and me telling him "Well, it's balanced for NPCs with 5-round-lives, it's not for PCs to use." (See: Bugbear strangler)I like it when an NPCs personality, interests, and needs can be modeled in their mechanics. I like being able to give someone a 'hobby skill' of a point or two in a knowledge or a craft. The binary 'trained or not' skill system of 4e removes that (for PCs as well). (Of course, there are no crafts anymore...)</blockquote>

Verification