Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 9151097" data-attributes="member: 29398">The generation process can be whatever you like as long as the resulting character fits within the bounds of what a same-species PC can be.In our games in-party adventuring NPCs are so common we don't bat an eyelid, and never have.  There's usually one or two in any party, having got there either because they've been recruited at some point by the PCs in order to fill a gap in their lineup (very common), or are an ex-hench who has been promoted to full-member status (uncommon but it happens), or have been inserted as a plot device (only happens once in a while).  Sometimes those adventuring NPCs become beloved and valued long-term core members of the party, other times they come and go as needed, while yet others are one-hit wonders who either die or drift away fairly soon.This doesn't include henches, or in-field recruits.  My current party have been dealing with Orcs of late (en route to bigger things, Orcs alone are way beneath their pay grade these days), and some of the wiser of these Orcs have been surrendering to the PCs instead of dying to no purpose.  Result: the PCs have been taking them in as de-facto party henches; and thus that party has been crawling with low-to-no-level NPC Orcs.And yes, separating self from character is a baseline requirement here.  That way, the characters can get up to all sorts of shenanigans against each other and it doesn't spill over to the table. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Sure.  The detailing of all those NPCs isn't what I'm concerned about, as long as they fit within PC parameters.Yes, or close enough.Now we're getting to it.  NPCs should not have access to abilities PCs can't get, nor should PCs have access to abilities NPCs can't get.While I get what you're saying, for me consistency is paramount; and if the GM uses those acrylics to paint something that the ink-and-pencil PCs can't do, that's inconsistent.  And at the same time, probably unfair.That's a whole different discussion, I think, and likely unrelated to this one.Thing is, the statistics (at least in D&D) go a long way toward defining the character.When I started playing 3e I very intentionally tried to reprise a couple of characters I'd had in 1e, in part simply as an experiment ot see if the then-newfangled game would allow it.  One was a "heavy Ranger", i.e. a tank in the woods, and the other was an Illusionist.Results: dubious at best.  Though I ended up with two decent enough characters (of which one remains perhaps my all-time favourite), their fidelity to their earlier counterparts was in some ways rather fleeting in part because the 3e system was fighting me the whole way.</blockquote>

Verification