Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4176911" data-attributes="member: 710">If the internet counts for "knowing", now you know someone. Yes, we're not happy with the solution either. Magic Rituals or Magic Artifacts are perfectly accepted explanation among us. As long as we're allowed to do something about it, everything is fine.That was never a problem situation for me. Unless I really haven't prepared any idea of what the Vampire might be doing when he's attacking the PCs. I certainly never did need to look at the rules for this, except to find out which skills he could use (in interaction with the PCs). That's not something 4E changes.Okay, and where at this point entered the RAW? DM 2 probably didn't bother describing the artifact (or any reason at all) or where it came from, that's why he reacts a bit.. pissy when the players ask. But that has still noting to do with rules, but a lot with fluff. The motivation of monsters or the history of events are not rules. They are fluff. If the Aboleth would only contain the fluff information "uses mind control to keep minions", that would just mean that the PCs are not wondering how the Aboleth can do something other Aboleths can't do, but that doesn't mean they won't be asking the question how he can do it at all. There is no change in your scenario.</blockquote>