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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JoeGKushner" data-source="post: 1887773" data-attributes="member: 1129">No, Henry states that the party could and that there would be repercussions and that if they planned well, they would get away with it and everyone would have fun. My point was that you're going to have to allow the campaign a lot of flexibility in dealing with high level characters.No, Herny was noting that assassins and other elites could work against the characters but noted that the characters could once again win and that the game would still be fun. Right, but since the king is often a lower level individual, he's not going to have a lot of choice about it. Once again, the MOBILITY, the sheer versitlity in movement that characters have is too great. Even in Eberron with it's more advancement movement like ships and trains. And you'll note that I mentioned this myself several times. Fighter getting the leadership feat, hiring his own mercenaries. The mage perhaps using his own craft abilities to create golems and other creatures. In Eberron that are probably only going to be a handful of people that can create an Iron Golem and the PCs are now among those ranks. Rogues gaining their own thieves guild. Heck, this is just assuming the 'base' classes. What if one of the players is an assassin and has his own assassin's guild?Which is why no party is going to go toe to toe with an army. I've mentioned that several times as well. That due to the party's mobility, that the army will never catch them. And heck, even if the army did manage to catch up to them, unless it's in a magic dead zone, it won't matter. Yes, there will be a lot of '20's but home many of those will be confirmed criticals? Not many. Mages will probably have spells like Stoneskin so those hits will mean little and the cleric will have spells like heal ready in case a few lucky shots do go in.And just so we're on the same page, here's Henry's Quote. Note that he fully accepts that the players can WIN and that the game can be good.You've also skipped my comments that it's not necessary that the players are working for other people at 20th level. What is wrong with the players taking the initiative and not being servants at 20th level?You've also not mentioned your own experience at running high level campaigns and seeing how they play out. I've had a lot of it as a GM. Trust me, the players are not stupid. Some will allow themselves to be 'shackled' just so that the story or game can get it but they have the power to heavily influence the setting.And heck, look at Hong's post. He's dead right. In D&D, you can waltz into the town and take it over. Once again, it's not history, it's D&D. You're not reading a play, you're involved in an interactive game. You don't control the players, you present options.</blockquote>

Verification