Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cadence" data-source="post: 8069277" data-attributes="member: 6701124">Was the symmetry in PC-NPC&nbsp; a big 3/3.5/PF thing? IIrc, both 1e and 2e&nbsp; only have the DM do as little as needed for the NPCs, 1e had different ability score recommendations, and both had 0-level humans.Is there anything in the 1e, 2e, B/X rules that sets it up as a competition between the PCs and NPCs (or DM and players) in a way that's different than what 5e has? Moldvay notes that &quot;The DM is there to see that the adventure is interesting and that everyone enjoys the game. D&amp;D is not a contest between the DM and the players!&quot; And I think there are admonitions in 1e about not making things too difficult for the players.&nbsp; It feels to me like the goal was always to get players to get characters to become the big heroes. (Either that or the amount of focus on getting followers and land and castles seems a bit misplaced in the books). I think it is true that not nearly as many PCs made it from 1st to high levels back then.&nbsp;&nbsp; But. is someone really a hero if they're never endangered by what they're trying? Is a group of people actually endangered by what they're trying if almost none of them ever die? (Did the deaths back then mostly happen before 3rd or 4th level?&nbsp; How would a group of 3rd level 1e characters fare against 1st level 5e characters?).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cadence, post: 8069277, member: 6701124"] Was the symmetry in PC-NPC a big 3/3.5/PF thing? IIrc, both 1e and 2e only have the DM do as little as needed for the NPCs, 1e had different ability score recommendations, and both had 0-level humans. Is there anything in the 1e, 2e, B/X rules that sets it up as a competition between the PCs and NPCs (or DM and players) in a way that's different than what 5e has? Moldvay notes that "The DM is there to see that the adventure is interesting and that everyone enjoys the game. D&D is not a contest between the DM and the players!" And I think there are admonitions in 1e about not making things too difficult for the players. It feels to me like the goal was always to get players to get characters to become the big heroes. (Either that or the amount of focus on getting followers and land and castles seems a bit misplaced in the books). I think it is true that not nearly as many PCs made it from 1st to high levels back then. But. is someone really a hero if they're never endangered by what they're trying? Is a group of people actually endangered by what they're trying if almost none of them ever die? (Did the deaths back then mostly happen before 3rd or 4th level? How would a group of 3rd level 1e characters fare against 1st level 5e characters?). [/QUOTE]

Verification