Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lyxen" data-source="post: 8398944" data-attributes="member: 7032025">And again, even if it was the case, there is not rule anywhere that prescribes that all members of any population can do whatever the PCs and their adversaries can do.The basics is that the PCs are exceptional, but also that their adversaries are exceptional, and nothing prescribes that the mass population can do what these do, and nothing prescribes that the paths to power that the PCs can follow are the same the NPCs. Nothing except your own views that it has to be so, but it has nothing to do with consistency.And that is the exact contrary of the D&D paradigm since the beginning of time. PCs are exceptional.This is a pure sophism (incorrect logical reasoning)<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A is exceptional</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">B is exceptional</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">So A=B</li> </ul>There is absolutely no such problem, you are creating those for yourself with your own constraints that exist only in your representation of consistency.Really too bad, my point was just that it's certainly not a DM horror story, unless by these you refer to horror stories for poor DMs who deserved better for trying to run a game for abusive players. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />There can be, but in that case, they are one and the same.Huh, no, in general constraints stifle creativity, or at best channel it along very narrow paths.Again, I'm not advising it (in particular not as something to be done lightly or every other session), but I've done it once or twice, it can sometimes be justified.The problem is that you mandate consistency when there is no need for it except in your vision of what the world should be. But D&D was only that way during the relatively short lived 3e, and a lot of the DMs out there, including all those who started with 5e with its major explosion don't see consistency problems there...And then, because it's absolutely the DM's prerogative to say that Orcus does not find the PC acceptable, that way is officially closed. Does it make it inconsistent ? No, it's actually a common fantasy trope "the chosen one" who does not have to be a PC.It is absolutely not the case. No PC apart from Gandalf can decide to wield magic (assuming that it is what Gandalf does). No PC in the fellowship can hope to match the Witch-King of Angmar or have any of his powers. As for the One Ring, it's just an item, and gaining it does not give you the powers of Sauron. For example, Gollum never acquires them, and neither of the two hobbits do when wielding the ring. And neither did Isildur, for example. There was no path to Sauron's power, who is a being of a higher order any way.And again, no one can hope to match Anakin, who is the chosen one, apart from another Skywalker. The path is closed to a few chosen ones, and not all PCs (depending who you see as PCs) can chose to be whatever they want despite the race they were born in. Even being a Jedi is not race specific, it's a gift.</blockquote>

Verification