Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crimson Longinus" data-source="post: 9181003" data-attributes="member: 7025508">What does it even mean if you no longer have objective measure of combat ability, as the same fictional entity could have whatever stats?Why do the stats of the enemies change? Characters already get better stats at higher levels, thus they will be relatively better compared to objectively statted enemies. You are double representing the same thing, that is confused. Furthermore, minionisation or elitisation is not based on any actual measurable relation, it is completely up to GM. Nah. It works just fine in 5e. It's not. That you cannot be perfectly consistent doesn't mean you should be intentionally inconsistent! No one is saying all orcs have same stats, merely that the differnce in stats actually represents a diegetic differnce. We just finished a longish arc in my campaign dealing with orc politics (orc politics involve good amount of violence) and I certainly had bunch of differnt orcs with differnt stats. But none of them switched stats to produce a certain narrative I wanted to force!Yeah, that could totally happen. And such change is diegetic, and therefore not a problem with representing a consistent fictional reality.But I want that world that the PCs experience to be consistent, represented by consistent rules. The NPCs in the world have objective reality and they have objective rules. And the world being like this makes it more predictable and thus more real to the players, as the rules do not just keep changing depending the GM's whims. This desire for consistency it is not just to satisfy my OCD, it is for players' benefit too.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crimson Longinus, post: 9181003, member: 7025508"] What does it even mean if you no longer have objective measure of combat ability, as the same fictional entity could have whatever stats? Why do the stats of the enemies change? Characters already get better stats at higher levels, thus they will be relatively better compared to objectively statted enemies. You are double representing the same thing, that is confused. Furthermore, minionisation or elitisation is not based on any actual measurable relation, it is completely up to GM. Nah. It works just fine in 5e. It's not. That you cannot be perfectly consistent doesn't mean you should be intentionally inconsistent! No one is saying all orcs have same stats, merely that the differnce in stats actually represents a diegetic differnce. We just finished a longish arc in my campaign dealing with orc politics (orc politics involve good amount of violence) and I certainly had bunch of differnt orcs with differnt stats. But none of them switched stats to produce a certain narrative I wanted to force! Yeah, that could totally happen. And such change is diegetic, and therefore not a problem with representing a consistent fictional reality. But I want that world that the PCs experience to be consistent, represented by consistent rules. The NPCs in the world have objective reality and they have objective rules. And the world being like this makes it more predictable and thus more real to the players, as the rules do not just keep changing depending the GM's whims. This desire for consistency it is not just to satisfy my OCD, it is for players' benefit too. [/QUOTE]

Verification