Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 7932456" data-attributes="member: 6801228">We seem to be in dispute about the average.Luck is a factor, but it is a boring factor. Taken to an extreme, it is a dungeon that says "roll a die, if you roll an even number, you live move on to the next room and repeat. If you roll an odd number you die"  There is no challenge, and it gets kind of boring. Sure, a monster that has the ability to kill you in a single attack is "threatening" but it isn't "interesting" or "challenging". It is just RNG, do you die this attack or not. We have enough luck in the game with attack rolls and damage rolls making lots of variable outcomes. I much prefer to have skill and planning come out rather than rely on more luck.Who said anything about a guaranteed success? I certainly don't want it to be a guarantee, if it was I'd do a cutscene not an adventure. But, if the players are supposed to be so scared of a monster they don't want to fight it.... then what use is the monster's combat abilities? And, what equipment counters ghouls? I'm not familiar with anything, but if it exists.. why bother? If the good part of ghouls is that their touch is so scary you don't want to fight them, why give an item out that cancels that effect. Seems to completely negate your position. Then it is just pay to win. Rich parties will always succeed because they can buy the answers to the problems. Finally, complete tangent I know, I hate that elves are immune to the Ghoul touch, especially with the 5e lore about the Ghoul King. Ive excised that from my game because it is just too stupid. So, without the lore reason in 5e, I saw no reason to keep Elves immune to ghouls. (Yes, if it ever comes up I'll tell my players, but I've never had an elf PC when they fight ghouls anyways, so it is a moot point)And some of those options work well for certain groups. I certainly could never get some of my players to play two PCs, they have a hard enough time running one. And they'd never be able to run the monsters. Others could, but not all of them.And frankly, it seems like you created a problem, then needed to create a solution to that problem that you created. Why not just avoid the problem in the first place? Which is what RAW 5e does?Definetly a different perspective. Myself and my groups prefer creating a narrative, interacting with NPCs and forming relationships. It is more interesting for us to see how a character grows and changes than just to see how far we get before dying. Sure, they might die, but I've often found that my players have more fun with me doing things to them through the medium of the story than killing them. A dead character has very little future potential after all.</blockquote>

Verification