Same rules or different Rules (PC vs NPC)

[BryonD]

I used to shoot longbow (English, not American - the American 'flatbow' is quite a different beast). I have a pretty good idea of what a longbow can do IRL. Playing in a game run by a DM who has no such experience, though, I end up in a weird bind if we don't stick to game rules that say exactly what a longbow can do. Because either I come accross as a jerk when I tell the DM that what he is narrating is complete rubbish, or I have no clue about what a longbow is supposed to be capable of in this world, when both I and my character (a longbow expert, let's say) should absolutely have a good idea of how a longbow will perform.

But you are again turning this into something completely different than what I said.

I didn't say that the players and characters would know how hard something in game would be for them to try in real life. I said the players and characters generally know how well they can face an in game challenge to the same extent that the player would know their real world abilities.

Or, in the case of your archery, you need to forget your own real world archery knowledge as irrelevant but get that an in game archer would know about *in game* archery at least as well. But his *in game* knowledge need not have anything to do with real knowledge.

Climbing a bit different because it translate pretty well at low levels. But in a recent game there was a high level rogue with such great climbing skill that is was treated as borderline supernatural. His knowledge of climbing capable was completely unrelated to anything real. But he could always be fairly confident in ranking trivial/easy/.../hard/inverted glass wall levels of difficulty.

Again, the point here is that I an against giving the players a fixed DC.
I don't see anything you are saying that makes the case why I need to do that.

 

[LostSoul]

No.

25 years ago they would have blown my standards away. But now I can do much better.

How so? In which way (or ways!) do they not hit the mark?

Once again, thanks for the reply. I tend to get myopic when it comes to preferences, so discussion with someone who has different ones is fruitful. Especially this reply - I'm surprised!

 

[BryonD]

You probably should not presume that I don't. "Characters" can be expanded from props if you so desire, but NPCs as props should remain as the base.

I don't know you. I just know what you said.

Explain to me why "NPCs as props should remain as the base" is a truth. And remember the goal of the exercise is to get a lot of people who don't play 4E to play 5E. In that context, explain to me "why".

Please.

 

[BryonD]

How so? In which way (or ways!) do they not hit the mark?

Once again, thanks for the reply. I tend to get myopic when it comes to preferences, so discussion with someone who has different ones is fruitful. Especially this reply - I'm surprised!

All you have done is paint the flavor text I described onto a stock monster.
The "killed if gnome" is mechanically there.

But I could describe another completely different npc of the same power level and you could take the stat block you just made and paint it differently. I already agreed you could paint any narrative you want on top of the same bland mechanics over and over. So simply demonstrating that you can doesn't address the issue.

 

[Aldarc]

I don't know you. I just know what you said.

Explain to me why "NPCs as props should remain as the base" is a truth. And remember the goal of the exercise is to get a lot of people who don't play 4E to play 5E. In that context, explain to me "why".

Please.

And what of the people who don't like 3E's changes in that regard but which are consistent with 4E's treatment?

 

[herrozerro]

I dont think the issue of linking NPCs to the PC creation rules creating complexity with every player supplement has been addressed either.

it seems to have just been sidestepped with a "well then the supplement is to blame."

I feel that linking NPC and PC creation to the same system inherently makes NPC creation too complex or PC creation too shallow.

 

[BryonD]

And what of the people who don't like 3E's changes in that regard but which are consistent with 4E's treatment?

What about them?
WotC wants to maximize their audience. And it seems beyond obvious to say that what they have now is not meeting some standard of acceptability.

As I've said multiple times in this thread, the way I'm advocating serves people 4E doesn't serve and can also be worked with to cater to fans of the 4E style.

To the best I can interpret, you seem to be saying to hell with people who like something else and to hell with WotC wanting a bigger fan base.

Can you offer comments that contribute to improving on the 4E fan base? Yes or no?

 

[Aldarc]

What about them?
WotC wants to maximize their audience. And it seems beyond obvious to say that what they have now is not meeting some standard of acceptability.

As I've said multiple times in this thread, the way I'm advocating serves people 4E doesn't serve and can also be worked with to cater to fans of the 4E style.

To the best I can interpret, you seem to be saying to hell with people who like something else and to hell with WotC wanting a bigger fan base.

Can you offer comments that contribute to improving on the 4E fan base? Yes or no?

All I'm hearing from this is that you expect people to make concessions to your wants - playing lip service to "WotC wants to maximize their audience" - but not the other way around. What concessions are you willing to make?

 

[herrozerro]

If you're playing D&D, you've adopted the conceit that a living creature is defined by certain attributes that can be represented in numerical form. Working within that conceit, every living creature should in theory have those stats.

Yes, I can get behind this, but here is the rub, what stats define living creature? within D&D I define it as HP, and maybe some attributes. thats really all you need.

not every single living creature needs AC, nor skills, or even attacks.

So every living creature has HP... thats pretty much all it needs, HP gone its no longer a living creature.

What does it add to the game to stat up every single creature in the game? does it give you a sense of living worldlyness that you could say "hey this hut has 3 HP Ill bet you didnt know that?

 

[BryonD]

All I'm hearing from this is that you expect people to make concessions to your wants - playing lip service to "WotC wants to maximize their audience" - but not the other way around. What concessions are you willing to make?

Well then you are not reading what I've written very well.

Again, I have MULTIPLE TIMES described how they should work toward a system that pleases everyone. How do you back up your "lip service" claim? Are you going to step up to the plate and offer something or not?