NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6172455" data-attributes="member: 6681948">Ultimately, it is the players' choice.  If, in your game, Goblins and Kobolds are evil, twisted creatures who can be slain with impunity by PC's, then why should they expect it to be different this time?  In fact, if we bludgeon them with "well, these ones are different", then why are they different?  But if, in your game, goblins and kobolds are like any other group - some good, some bad - and the expectation is not that the PC's first solution to every issue should be "kill them, loot the bodies and burn their village", then that is the approach I would expect the PC's to take here.IOW, I agree that it's not the scenario's job to set your group's play style expectations.Again, play style.  The mere presence of goblins means "kill the goblins" is the mission to some groups and some players.  Others will see diplomacy as the first approach.  That the scenario allows for both approaches seems, to me, a strength that was lacking in many of its predecessor adventures for 1e/2e.Play style.  If the group is happy with "monsters are monsters - kobolds and goblins are evil, and kept so, irredeemably and irrevocably, by Goblin and Kobold deities - they exist only to be killed" as a justification for humanoid monsters as XP farms, then that's a valid playstyle.  "Gob-lin-oids are just the same as you and I - all bi-peds're brothers 'til the day we die" can also be a wonderful world  excuse me, another valid playstyle.  Now, if the group is divided on valid playstyle, that's a concern, but the scenario allows for both possibilities and many in between.  It's not up to the scenario to start with "In this very specific case, attacking the monsters may not be your best approach and you should consider diplomacy just this once".</blockquote>

Verification