Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Stormborn" data-source="post: 3118247" data-attributes="member: 14041">When I homebrew I never create uber NPCs.&nbsp; The one time I did it was to have him serve as a patron for the PCs and then I had him killed in front of them by the time they were 3rd level.&nbsp; Otherwise they are figures of legend that are long gone or rulers of distant lands.&nbsp; They don't adventure, they don't get in the way of the PCs.&nbsp; They don't come to the rescue.&nbsp; When I run premade campaign settings I do everything in my power to keep the PCs away from the uber NPCs.&nbsp; Perhaps I have simply never understood the appeal of such things.&nbsp; When I develop a campaign, whether it is using an established setting or homebrew, the PCs are the focus, not the NPCs.&nbsp; I think that uber-NPCs are an unfortunate inheritance of DnDs past.It seems that werk has had some bad experiance with homebrews and ican see how that would turn you off.&nbsp; Its unfortunate.&nbsp; As to the earlier comment that a setting can't be explained in a few sentences.... well, quite simply its wrong.&nbsp; There is no setting that can't be boiled down to a few sentences, if not a single sentence.&nbsp; Being unable to do so is not a refelection of the campaign setting, its a reflection of the communication skills of the GM.&nbsp; Which in and of itself could be a&nbsp; problem.Basically there are pros and cons to both homebrew and published for the player and the GM.&nbsp; Everything has to be weighed out. I think that the best course of action when someone says &quot;its a homebrew and its complicated&quot; is to ask &quot;well, can you describe to me the things the PCs did in the last session/what you see PCs doing in the game?&quot;&nbsp; If they answer is something you would like to do, then at least give it a try.&nbsp; The issue isn't the setting, its what the person running the game does with it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Stormborn, post: 3118247, member: 14041"] When I homebrew I never create uber NPCs. The one time I did it was to have him serve as a patron for the PCs and then I had him killed in front of them by the time they were 3rd level. Otherwise they are figures of legend that are long gone or rulers of distant lands. They don't adventure, they don't get in the way of the PCs. They don't come to the rescue. When I run premade campaign settings I do everything in my power to keep the PCs away from the uber NPCs. Perhaps I have simply never understood the appeal of such things. When I develop a campaign, whether it is using an established setting or homebrew, the PCs are the focus, not the NPCs. I think that uber-NPCs are an unfortunate inheritance of DnDs past. It seems that werk has had some bad experiance with homebrews and ican see how that would turn you off. Its unfortunate. As to the earlier comment that a setting can't be explained in a few sentences.... well, quite simply its wrong. There is no setting that can't be boiled down to a few sentences, if not a single sentence. Being unable to do so is not a refelection of the campaign setting, its a reflection of the communication skills of the GM. Which in and of itself could be a problem. Basically there are pros and cons to both homebrew and published for the player and the GM. Everything has to be weighed out. I think that the best course of action when someone says "its a homebrew and its complicated" is to ask "well, can you describe to me the things the PCs did in the last session/what you see PCs doing in the game?" If they answer is something you would like to do, then at least give it a try. The issue isn't the setting, its what the person running the game does with it. [/QUOTE]

Verification