Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6571416" data-attributes="member: 6696971">This is spot on. For instance, consider your Paladin Thurgon thrust into the exact same scenario that Saerie is in.&nbsp; The differences between the two characters would clearly come out in playt:
- Thurgon is a man of religion and miracles, literally bulwarked by divine potency.

- Thurgon is a man of action, of physical, symmetrical, overt approach.

- Thurgon is a learned man and understands the art of relations, statesmanship, and the projection of presence.How do we know this?&nbsp; You built him such that:- Athletics (+ Mighty Sprint), Diplomacy, Endurance, Intimidate, and Religion will succeed at the medium DC with regularity with the other social skills respectably challenging it.

- Exiled Noble + Knight Commander 

- Suite of resources that places him at the tip of the spear, inspiring allies with presence and action, and wielding miracles where that fails.My guess is that you would play Thurgon such that he would eschew seeking natural shelter and holing up there.&nbsp; He would probably steel the childrens' will, aggressively work his way down the mountain with them in lockstep behind him, pray for divine intervention (perhaps a fishermen or local hunters or fishermen from a nearby village randomly being where they are), and if it be the will of Kord that he stumbles upon some folks in these wilds, he would attempt (likely successfully) to parlay with them.And if I wanted to &quot;put Thurgon in a spot&quot; and &quot;show a downside of his class/PC build&quot; (as the result of a failure) to see how he responds, I would be doing some different things than I would be with Saerie.&nbsp; That isn't &quot;gaming the system&quot; from a PC perspective and it isn't GM fiat (meaning a decree indistinguishable from arbitrary) from a GM perspective.&nbsp; It is appropriate PCing and GMing!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 6571416, member: 6696971"] This is spot on. For instance, consider your Paladin Thurgon thrust into the exact same scenario that Saerie is in. The differences between the two characters would clearly come out in playt: [INDENT] - Thurgon is a man of religion and miracles, literally bulwarked by divine potency. - Thurgon is a man of action, of physical, symmetrical, overt approach. - Thurgon is a learned man and understands the art of relations, statesmanship, and the projection of presence.[/INDENT] How do we know this? You built him such that: [INDENT]- Athletics (+ Mighty Sprint), Diplomacy, Endurance, Intimidate, and Religion will succeed at the medium DC with regularity with the other social skills respectably challenging it. - Exiled Noble + Knight Commander - Suite of resources that places him at the tip of the spear, inspiring allies with presence and action, and wielding miracles where that fails.[/INDENT] My guess is that you would play Thurgon such that he would eschew seeking natural shelter and holing up there. He would probably steel the childrens' will, aggressively work his way down the mountain with them in lockstep behind him, pray for divine intervention (perhaps a fishermen or local hunters or fishermen from a nearby village randomly being where they are), and if it be the will of Kord that he stumbles upon some folks in these wilds, he would attempt (likely successfully) to parlay with them. And if I wanted to "put Thurgon in a spot" and "show a downside of his class/PC build" (as the result of a failure) to see how he responds, I would be doing some different things than I would be with Saerie. That isn't "gaming the system" from a PC perspective and it isn't GM fiat (meaning a decree indistinguishable from arbitrary) from a GM perspective. It is appropriate PCing and GMing! [/QUOTE]

Verification