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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6559157" data-attributes="member: 4937">Yeah, I know some people prefer a decoupling.   But, if you think about it, I think you'll agree that even you would not want to see a full decoupling of the system for PC's and the system for NPC's.   For example, you could have a system where PC's had wound tracks and rolled a D20 to hit, and monsters had hit points and rolled a D% to hit, PC's had saving throws, but monsters had ablative protection in the form of will points, and as such monster powers were written from the perspective of what they'd do to a PC and PC powers (such as spells) were written from the perspective of what they'd do to a monster.  That this would inevitably lead to holes that had to be filled in by conversion systems and straight fiat is I think obvious.  Plus, at this level it's obvious that the disconnect doesn't actually lead to any simplification.  In fact, for the DM it's like learning two whole different systems.So the question because, first, what exactly is it about the disjointed system that you like?   And from a designer's perspective, how far do you go to achieve that, before you start opening up the sort of problems implied by the two fully disjointed systems?   Because if the answer is just something like, "I like the ability of the DM to freeform a monster without having to worry about if it is 'right'.", or "I like that monsters are conceptually simpler than PCs", I personally don't feel that it's essential to not have some sort of systematic approach in order to achieve those two results and ultimately make everyone happy.</blockquote>

Verification