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="Celebrim" data-source="post: 4174918" data-attributes="member: 4937">I think you are correct.The question of whether this approach is superior is a more difficult one, in no small part because there probably isn't an objective answer.I tend to think that the 4e approach runs into big difficulty whenever the play departs from the core gameplay of 'killing the monster and taking thier stuff'.  I think pawsplay is spot on when he questions how this will work when conflict resolution means something other than combat.  What happens when the players gain control of the Succubus?  Does it immediately lose its fantastic powers to prevent them from falling into the hands of the PCs?  Or can the PCs then cast charms which can only be broken be lost mirrors of Pelor? A few scarce months ago when people were first getting used to the idea of NPCs and PCs using different rules, it seemed to me that the vast majority of defenders of the notion took solace in the idea that all the 'cheating' would be in the PC's favor.  That is to say, alot of people interpretted 'NPCs and PCs use different rules' to mean, NPCs are strictly inferior to PCs.  At the time I claimed that this would never be the case and that 'NPCs and PCs using different rules' would inevitably return us to the days of 1e when NPCs did fabulous things with ease and only PCs were confined to strict rules that made them slog through the metaphorical mud. So here we are and people are talking about NPCs doing fabulous things with ease as if such ideas presented no problems at all, and as if the fact that NPCs and PCs not using the same rules wasn't in fact one of the things that annoyed many people away from 1e.We've been here folks.  This is nothing new.</blockquote>

Verification