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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5553305" data-attributes="member: 6668292">When I run my game, I don't have the PCs as inherently superior. They begin on the low side of average (1st hit die, in this case). They have average attributes when compared to NPCs (although they could potentially spike above average, since I roll stats).I know that many people play games with the idea that "the PCs are superior" or "the PCs are destined" or "the PCs are heroes" and that's awesome. I've played many of those games, and they are a ton of fun.When I run a game, however, I like to differentiate the PCs by their actions, rather than by a mechanical advantage to NPCs. Now, this is personal taste for myself and my players. It's definitely not right for everyone (or the majority of people, I'm guessing).What I'm curious about is, how do people feel their game should be run? By that, I don't mean "what is the best type of game" or anything else that cannot be objectively decided.I mean, basically, at your table, as a player or GM, what do you prefer, subjectively? Should PCs be destined for greatness from the beginning, separated from the large majority of NPCs in terms of power and capabilities? Should PCs be just like everyone else in terms of power and capabilities, and never have much of a chance to rise above that, instead being separated by actions they take? Or, instead, is there some preferred middle ground that you like to see take place?There are no right or wrong answers, just preferences. I'm curious to see what other people like. As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification