Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 4449320" data-attributes="member: 32740">Although they have never been linked via the rules age and higher levels are generally associated in players minds.  If an NPC is really old then "logically" he should be very high level.  If an NPC is very high level then it's typical to expect him to be older than the next character of the same or lower level.  The rules regarding aging amount to a point or two of reduced ability score.  There is nothing like real world effects of aging such as slowed movement and reactions, reduced physical stamina, diminished mental capacity or even dementia. Because the game applies none of these real-world limitations for age, and makes no formal association between age and character level you end up with the idea that characters (PC or NPC) will be fully capable and willing to adventure right up until the day they die of old age - and then it's not a death that comes of complications from advanced age but simply reaching a hard-coded limit.  Like the character Roy in Blade Runner EVERY character can and will kick ass right up until their odometer ticks from 999,999 to 000,000 instead of 1,000,000. The acceptable role for an NPC is what the _DM_ gives them - never EVER what the setting gives them.  The setting cannot know, and therefore cannot CARE what level your PC's are, nor what they actually are going to do.  If the PLAYERS are having their characters defer to Elminster or another older, higher level NPC to save the world when the DM's adventure is intended for the _PC's_ to save the world, then the DM has erred in presenting that NPC or that adventure. Personally, I believe it is a signficant design error for a setting to have NPC's like Elminster who are presented as being highly involved in world events, higher level than the PC's (indeed being quasi-deity in the case of Elminster), AND ACCESSABLE by the PC's (either by design or by simply failing to instruct the DM NOT to allow the PC's to be overshadowed unnecessarily).  It places the NPC in the position of the default go-to guy - NOT the PC's which is the position the NPC's should occupy.  The only time the PC's should be deferring to NPC's for ASSISTANCE much less simply giving over responsibility and control of events is when the PC's are unquestionably outmatched.  Otherwise when the PC's face threats and hardships then the _PC's_ should be stepping up - whether they think Elminster is older and more capable or not - and leaving them in the position of having nothing to do but saying afterwards, "Job well done.  I'm going to have tea now.  Care to join me?" The game is about what the PC's do - not about what the NPC's do.  It is when settings provide NPC's who are ORIENTED to overshadow the PC's, and when DM's fail to voluntarily LIMIT those NPC's when running his game regardless of what the setting says that you run into trouble.</blockquote>

Verification