Should PCs Be Exceptional?

[cbwjm]

An easy example, using 3e, might have an exceptional elf using the elite stat array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8), compared with an unexceptional elf who might use the standard array (11, 11, 11, 10, 10, 10). They'd otherwise both have the same traits as an elf like low-light vision, immunity to sleep, a bonus to save vs enchantment, weapon skills, and skill bonuses)

 

[doctorbadwolf]

And you are interpreting "exceptional" as "completely different" which makes no sense.

Exceptional means above the average, a difference of scale, not kind.

I honestly don't know what your argument is, given that.

Then you aren’t reading my posts to understand.

Have a good one

 

[James Gasik]

Ok, I have to ask. What is the definition of "exceptional" that this thread is working with?

Are we talking "higher stats/more advantages than NPC's" or "have an important role in the world"? My vote was based on the latter, not the former- in my games, the players are generally not some random gang of misfits brought together by chance (even though it may certainly look that way...). There's a method to the madness, built into the campaign to explain why adventures pop up around them, wherever they go. I don't tell them outright why this is so, but I will drop hints. They have free will, and can accept this destiny or not, but I do treat them as if they have an important place in the setting.

If, on the other hand, we're simply saying "yeah, they got class levels, feats, and better stats than the NPC's around them, and that's why they are special"...well, yeah, kind of.

An archmage is a CR 12 foe. He has some of the abilities of an actual PC Wizard, but he's not the same. He probably has things the PC doesn't have (resistance to spell damage) but lacks things the PC has. Now you can either just say "well, his stat block is shorthand, he's really the same as any other Wizard, the rules aren't important" or you can say "hm, there is something different about the PC Wizard".

Whichever approach works for a given group is best, naturally, but I grew up with large D&D settings chock full of named NPC's with high levels and stats, and rarely was there any explanation for why the city of Mulmaster, ruled by a 20th level Fighter, with a Fighter 16 general (one of 8), with a guild of Wizards of levels 4-12, an independent Wizard 20, a level 19 high priest, a Wiz/Priest 11/11, and so on*, can find itself in a situation where a party of adventurers levels 5-7 are suddenly vital to it's survival- unless there's something unusual about these guys (or everyone else is just incompetent, "busy with other matters" or some equally handwaved answer).

Eberron was a world where you didn't really need many high level people around to make the setting feel fleshed out, and the fact that the PC's can hit high levels ensures that one day, they will definitely stand out. I rather like this approach, because it's far more logical than trying to run adventures in a nation with a council of 36th level Wizards running things (Mystara's Glantri) and wondering exactly why there's a problem for the PC's to solve in the first place!

*statistics taken from Forgotten Realms Adventures.

 

[RainOnTheSun]

PCs don't have to start out exceptional, but it makes it a lot easier to explain why they're going on an adventure in the first place. If they're being hired by some kind of patron, it stands to reason that the patron will seek out the most qualified people they can afford, and if they're self-employed, it's a little odd if they're actively going around looking for fights to the death if they aren't at least above average in a fight.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

“Elf” has a mechanical meaning in the game, therefor those mechanics represent what an elf is.

I keep meaning to show up at a con game and play an elf with a pot belly and receding hairline. Just to see how people react.

 

[RainOnTheSun]

"Most of my hair has already sailed into the west..."

 

[AK81]

I like the PCs to be heroes from the start. They should be a step above a common soldier or town's guard IMO. But not be superheroes! Except in superhero settings of course.

 

[Sossij]

Exceptionally delicious. You wouldn't want to feed your pet dungeon denizens anything less.

That being said, we definitely have an overpowered party and even in a game of hapless people, I'd want them to be uniquely adapted to meet the challenges.

 

[aramis erak]

I disagree completely. "Personness" is totally unrelated to mechanics.

Not always.
I'll start with my definition of Person: a member of a clade noted for intellect with free will and logic, and the ability to act based upon the interaction of perception, intellect, reason, and logic.

D&D, RuneQuest 3rd, GURPS, and others have distinguished full intellegence from animalistic intelligence for decades (since the 80s), but D&D has weakened the distinction on intelligence in 5th.
RuneQuest even makes it matter - one can convert a creature from limited to full intelligence (and thus mostly free willed).
D&D has distinguished free-will vs automaton in constructs and undead since the 80's. Non-free willed undead are supposed to be unable to act other than the most basic "move and attack"
Many of the D&D-based heartbreakers kept the distinction.

Tunnels and Trolls 5th had an interesting distinction: Slaves lack Luck and Charisma attributes. Since interpersonal actions are mostly done with Charisma saves, Slaves auto-fail. That feels very un-personhood. I'll note as well: I never used that clause of the Slaves rule.

 

[Fifinjir]

PCs are the ones equipped to take down the wraith raising and army of the dead.

The part about the army? The PCs are going to need some assistance with that part.