Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 4155168" data-attributes="member: 2067">Hahaha, sorry I lost ya. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Well, yeah, I'd hope so. 3e had this, too, though they had the "true spellcasting" of an adept, and I do look forward to 4e's more ritualized approach. <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=":)" />What I'm wondering about is all the OTHER people in the world who go into dungeons and kill monsters for fame and fortune. The people who aren't the PC's, but who would keep power with them, because they're engaged in the same things.The ones who maybe retired after finding the MacGuffin or slaying the Dragon. The ones who guard the Portals to the Abyss against further incursion. The heroes of the Olde Days, whom the bards will compare the current PC party to. Or the rival group from the Easterlands who are racing the PC's to the treasure. Or the last guys who went down into that dungeon and weren't quite at the PC's level. I guess it's totally possible that the implied setting ditches the idea of NPC "adventurers" entirely, but that'd be a little sad. I like a world where the PC's aren't the only movers, shakers, and temple-raiders, and portal-guarders, and evil-vizier-killers, where it's implied that this is a whole world of mythic adventure and at any moment, the PC party could be any of these adventures, that they're one group amongst many with legendary stories to tell.I guess, to put it more plainly: if the PC's use special rules that are for the PC's only, what about the people who, in the world, are functionally equivalent to the PC's, but who just don't happen to be the party we're focusing on? Maybe that's totally not a problem, though? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />IMO, I think my reception of 4e is kind of hindered by 3e's success. 2e, for me, had become unplayable without heavy modification. 3e I can still enjoy from levels 1-15, and that's a LOT of gaming time (longer than most of my campaigns last!). 4e might be better, but it's a diminishing return. I think I'll go start a new thread about that. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification