The Gaming Den

An amusing thought just occured to me.

In 3.x the world from a Monsters Point of View wasn't much nuttier than the PC's. They can use magic items, when they die their bodies hold what they carry, and they see heroes who are both lower and higher level than they are. When they beat down a hero, that hero usually stays down.

Now in 4e though we have a different perspective. Heroes use these weapons of power that suddenly when the monster holds them stops working. When their monster buddies die they have random items on their body not related to what they were carrying. They can beat the heck out of a fighter after he's unconscious, slit his throat, and all his buddy needs to do is yell "Hey Wulfgar, we need you" and suddenly that dude stands up ready to fight.

Not to mention they probably never encounter anything humanoid that will die, despite being half their size.

Must be like living in the twilight zone for 4e Monsters eh?

Plus most monsters can barely heal or even be healed, since they have a default of one healing surge and generally no way to unlock it.

4E monster PoV doesn't change much honestly.

The only PCs in your world are the actual player's characters, and the monsters basically only fight them once, after which they die. So anything the PCs do will actually be a surprise to them, since everything else they've fought (which was either NPC or monster), doesn't play by the PC rules.

Remember this isn't a MMO, the PCs are literally the only characters running by the PC rules in any specific game world.

RandomCasualty2 wrote: Remember this isn't a MMO, the PCs are literally the only characters running by the PC rules in any specific game world.

That makes it even stranger really... the PC's are freakish, one of a kind superhumans blessed with the unnatural ability to heal wounds and activate all those glowy paper weights that the gods placed everywhere.

And of course then there's the fact that there are entire economies and odd systems set up and maintained all over the world, just for the direct use of a dozen or so people...

Hell... Exalted PC's really ARE suppose to be freakish, one of a kind superhumans blessed with the unnatural ability to heal wounds and activate all those glowy paper weights that the gods placed everywhere and yet even that world makes more sense than the generic 4E setting.

sake wrote: That makes it even stranger really... the pc's are freakish, one of a kind superhumans blessed with the unnatural ability to heal wounds and activate all those glowy paper weights that the gods placed everywhere.

Well yeah, but that's pretty much what mythology and the like is based on. Hercules, Achilles, Gilgamesh, they're all total badasses.

And of course then there's the fact that there's entire economies and odd systems in place all over the world, maintained just for the direct use of a dozen or so people...

Well, magic items still work for monsters and NPCs (though not as well as for PCs), it's just that they tend not to have them.

As for economy, it's not really all that odd. I mean it takes all of one hour to cook up a magic item, so even if a Sword +5 is only ordered by heroes, it doesn't take any special economic infrastructure to be able to construct that sword on demand. You just need a bunch of arcana ritual components or whatever, which you use for other stuff anyway.

Now as to why PCs can only sell items for 20%, that may well be because NPCs get less value out of magic items for the most part (due to the virtual bonus thing bringing down the bonus they get from items they use). So they in turn pay less for them.

RC2 wrote: Well yeah, but that's pretty much what mythology and the like is based on. Hercules, Achilles, Gilgamesh, they're all total badasses.

That's not the problem. The problem is that badasses (PCs) operate on different rules from sub- and super-badasses (lower and higher-level monsters).

PCs are flimsier than other similarly powered badasses in a lot of ways. They need specifically-tailored magical equipment in order to work and they run out of combat juice in about 5 rounds. This doesn't (in theory, the actual result is different due to bad math) reduce their output of badassery, just the result.

To cap this off, their weird phlebtonium is not like the other characters you mentioned. Hercules and Conan can do shit most people can't, but it still makes some internal sense. Hercules is powerful because he's the son of a God. Conan is badass because he does a ridiculous amount of situps. If you were to have a god fuck your mom or you were to buckle down and do hardcore Cimmerian exercises, you could expect similar results.

This isn't the same thing for PCs. They have interactions with the game world that are totally unexplained. PC Wizards aren't so different from other spellcasters because they practiced a secret technique or of a magic-touched race or are using a super-artifact. They're just special for no goddamn reason.

Well, magic items still work for monsters and NPCs (though not as well as for PCs), it's just that they tend not to have them.

As for economy, not really. I mean it takes all of one hour to cook up a magic item, so even if a Sword +5 is only ordered by heroes, it doesn't take any special economic infrastructure to be able to construct that sword on demand. You just need a bunch of arcana ritual components or whatever, which you use for other stuff anyway.

NPCs are not supposed to have magical items beyond being equipped with Arbitarium, especially at higher levels, because it breaks the game. Putting Orcus in +6 Godplate and who ditched his rod (for whatever dumb reason) for a +6 Withering Longsword completely wrecks everything. Not just because it puts PCs out of wealth-by-level, but because it causes their attack and defense scores to shoot out of range.

Furthermore, who the hell are the heroes who are supporting this economy? The NPCs don't even know who they are. Actual in-game characters before the party got started aren't using the magical items. And it's not like they're even preparing items in expectation of purchases; they don't even know who the future customers are. If the PCs were touched by fate and this was announced to everyone that they would need Super Special Magic items it would make a little bit of sense.

But 4E tells us that there's a magic-item economy in place for dozens of years that doesn't get used. Magic items just end up in piles. Every now and then you'll see something like a Sword of Kas or a Magic Carpet, but no one uses magic swords or staves or any of that shit. So why are they setting fire to their money?

Lago PARANOIA wrote: This isn't the same thing for PCs. They have interactions with the game world that are totally unexplained. PC Wizards aren't so different from other spellcasters because they practiced a secret technique or of a magic-touched race or are using a super-artifact. They're just special for no goddamn reason.

It really can't tell you why, because it's supposed to be used for a variety of characters. So it lets you fill in the blanks. Do you just have better DNA than your peers and your abilities reached new heights? Were you awesome because you were trained by a blind monk master or a famous wizard? Seriously, that's for the player to decide, I don't really want everyone having the same background.

NPCs are not supposed to have magical items beyond being equipped with Arbitarium, especially at higher levels, because it breaks the game. Putting Orcus in +6 Godplate and who ditched his rod (for whatever dumb reason) for a +6 Withering Longsword completely wrecks everything. Not just because it puts PCs out of wealth-by-level, but because it causes their attack and defense scores to shoot out of range.

Well remember that a level 30 creature wtih a +6 armor isn't getting +6 AC, it will only give him like a +2 or so due to the virtual equipment levels or whatever 4E calls it.

Furthermore, who the hell are the heroes who are supporting this economy? The NPCs don't even know who they are.

The economy doens't really need support, because it's based on custom designs that can be made in one hour. They don't prepare items for purchase, they just create them on demand. You want a +5 sword? Ok whatever, give me money to buy components and come back in an hour. Any decent leveled caster with the enchant ritual can do that.

I don't see 4E as being shelves stocked with shit. It's Lenscrafters. You place a custom order, and you come back in an hour. Magic item vendors have no reason to even carry inventory.

Really the main question in 4E economics relates to ritual components.

RC2 wrote: It really can't tell you why, because it's supposed to be used for a variety of characters. So it lets you fill in the blanks. Do you just have better DNA than your peers and your abilities reached new heights? Were you awesome because you were trained by a blind monk master or a famous wizard? Seriously, that's for the player to decide, I don't really want everyone having the same background.

Your explanations do not explain anything for 4E, because 4E doesn't have an explanation.

If it is your superior genes, when you meet your evil twin later in life they're going to have completely different abilities from you--which means the reason why you're so special isn't your damn DNA.

Similarly, if you're trained by a master wizard or master monk, other students that get trained by the same guy have different abilities from you. The monk can give the exact same training to someone else in your peer group and they'll turn out completely different for no goddamn reason other than 'because we say so'.

Well remember that a level 30 creature wtih a +6 armor isn't getting +6 AC, it will only give him like a +2 or so due to the virtual equipment levels or whatever 4E calls it.

Forgetting masterwork equipment, this just ain't so. If a creature that gets their high AC while being butt-ass naked like a ghoul they become invincible when they put on plate armor. If a human barbarian puts on plate armor they get nowhere near as much protection.

AC, along with every other stat in the game, is determined first and then it's justified. This causes problems when you decide that the only thing scarier than trolls are trolls with heavy shields and plate armor.

RC2 wrote:The economy doens't really need support, because it's based on custom designs that can be made in one hour. They don't prepare items for purchase, they just create them on demand. You want a +5 sword? Ok whatever, give me money to buy components and come back in an hour. Any decent leveled caster with the enchant ritual can do that.

I don't see 4E as being shelves stocked with shit. It's Lenscrafters. You place a custom order, and you come back in an hour. Magic item vendors have no reason to even carry inventory.

Really the main question in 4E economics relates to ritual components.

?????

RC2, have you looked at the treasure tables? You don't gain most of your magical equipment by crafting it, because you don't get enough money. You gain most of your magical equipment by finding it in little piles scattered across the world.

Who made these magic items and why? No one uses them.

Lago PARANOIA wrote: RC2, have you looked at the treasure tables? You don't gain most of your magical equipment by crafting it, because you don't get enough money. You gain most of your magical equipment by finding it in little piles scattered across the world.

Who made these magic items and why? No one uses them.

NPCs can use magic items. The whole "NPCs can't use magic swords" is pure hyperbole. While it's true they gain less benefit, they can totally use magic items, though are unlikely to be decked out in magic items like PCs. As for why the items were made, I don't see why it's hard to believe that would be NPC heroes or villains would have items commissioned and would eventually die in dungeons (lacking the powers of a PC).

I mean, that's perfectly believable to me.

4E tends to get a bad rap for no good reason a lot of the time. I mean, Shadowrun allows a runner to basically get critically wounded by a shotgun blast and be healed up with natural healing in a few days. Yet, people don't complain about that. But they do complain about 4E healing surges being really unrealistic.

Honestly I think 4E gets pretty unfair treatment in general. There are plenty of real problems with it, like skill challenges being totally broken and unfun, but a lot of things are just made up.

As far as world building goes, it honestly makes more sense than 3E, the game that literally can't explain why an economy exists at all with spells like fabricate and planar binding around.

NPCs can use magic items. The whole "NPCs can't use magic swords" is pure hyperbole. While it's true they gain less benefit, they can totally use magic items, though are unlikely to be decked out in magic items like PCs. As for why the items were made, I don't see why it's hard to believe that would be NPC heroes or villains would hav We items commissioned and would eventually die in dungeons (lacking the powers of a PC).

Okay, while it's not literally true that NPCs can't use magic swords, the game is balanced in such a way so that NPCs are not supposed to start picking up magic swords.

And because the game tells DMs not to stick magic swords in the hands of NPCs, it creates cognitive dissonance when we see so many magic swords lying around. We know Bloodclaw axes exist in the game. They're awesome and it's like winning the lottery. But we never see NPCs actually using them.

RC2 wrote: 4E tends to get a bad rap for no good reason a lot of the time. I mean, Shadowrun allows a runner to basically get critically wounded by a shotgun blast and be healed up with natural healing in a few days. Yet, people don't complain about that. But they do complain about 4E healing surges being really unrealistic.

The thing is though that Shadowrun's rules are uniform and they have an explanation for it, even if the rules are 'wounds heal faster in this universe'. If NPC runners recovered at a different rate from PC runners then it would be an enormous problem. But they don't. It creates real immersion in that game when if the PCs and their NPC assistances get their asses kicked by Ork gangers and have to hide out they recover at pretty much the same rate. It wrecks the game when Decker McNerdington recovers from crippling wounds faster than Beefy McManstick because Decker is a PC and Beefy isn't.

RC2 wrote: As far as world building goes, it honestly makes more sense than 3E, the game that literally can't explain why an economy exists at all with spells like fabricate and planar binding around.

3E's economy sucked. What it was supposed to represent and what was actually going on were two complete irreconcilable viewpoints.

4E's explanation for the economy is 'it works because we say that it does!'

That is fucking lazy. People really, really hate that viewpoint and for good reason. A game should try as hard as it can to explain shit without bogging down the game.

Lago PARANOIA wrote:Okay, while it's not literally true that NPCs can't use magic swords, the game is balanced in such a way so that NPCs are not supposed to start picking up magic swords.

The example adventure in the DMG has an NPC with a magic staff. It doesn't modify the balance significantly, because it's a +1 bonus. Because of the magic item threshold, it'll always be a +1 bonus.

Lago PARANOIA wrote: Okay, while it's not literally true that NPCs can't use magic swords, the game is balanced in such a way so that NPCs are not supposed to start picking up magic swords.

And because the game tells DMs not to stick magic swords in the hands of NPCs, it creates cognitive dissonance when we see so many magic swords lying around. We know Bloodclaw axes exist in the game. They're awesome and it's like winning the lottery. But we never see NPCs actually using them.

I had my NPCs in a 4E game use magic weapons if they were part of the treasure I planned to give out. It didn't really cause any huge balance problems. An NPC with an extra +1 or +2 to hit isn't really all that big.

The thing is though that Shadowrun's rules are uniform and they have an explanation for it, even if the rules are 'wounds heal faster in this universe'.

I didn't see any explanation for it in the SR4 rules. I mean to me it's the same thing as 4E not giving any explanation for "PCs are special."

You just have to assume that people have some super human healing factor, but it's never explained why. I mean, it's obviously not ultra tech, because you dont' have to go to a hospital and it's not based on lifestyle. The squatter sitting in a cardboard box eating cheap bargain basement meals heals that fast.

If NPC runners recovered at a different rate from PC runners then it would be an enormous problem.

Why?

I'm not sure why that even causes any immersion problem if the PCs happen to be special. It doesn't really affect the world because the PCs are unique, and thus any effect it might have on the world hasn't happened yet until the PCs start playing.

The whole PCs are special thing just doesn't bother me at all. The PCs are the heroes of your story, they're supposed to be special.

4E's explanation for the economy is 'it works because we say that it does!'

Honestly, 3E's economy was the same way. The only reason it "worked" was because genius level archwizards were supposed to be too stupid to figure out they could conjure infinite gold and magic items with their spells.

The 4E economy actually makes reasonable sense when you think about it. You just have to accept that PCs are special. Basically it goes like this:

-Magic items don't go on the shelf, theyre custom built. Custom building takes full price magical components. So when PCs go to buy they get charged a lot.

-NPCs don't really need magic items and receive less benefit, therefore they pay less for them when PCs want to sell them. Also given the economy is based on custom built magic items for the most part, there isn't any great reason to hold magic item inventory, so the price you get back from them is rather bad. Most NPCs probably figure at worst they'll melt down the item into residuum.

I mean, that actually makes some degree of sense, at least in my mind.

I could never really wrap my mind around 3E economics. It was literally like they totally ignored the rules and the fact that 3E magic was worldshaking. I mean I can live with NPCs not having world shaking powers, but when they're supposedly genius level and haven't figured otu something as simple as wall of iron + fabricate, that really breaks suspension of disbelief for me. I just cannot believe that Elminster and the other wizards of Faerun haven't broken the economy and the PC mage is the first one to think of it. That totally kills it for me way beyond any problems 4E might have.

RC2, what you are not getting is that PC vs. NPC is a completely bullshit distinction for characters in the game world.

Being godtouched is an acceptable explanation for having special powers. Getting special training is also an acceptable explanation. Having super-DNA also works.

Being a player-character is not. Why? Because it is completely meaningless from an in-universe perspective. All Player Character means is that you're the viewpoint character for the story. That's it. Making special in-universe rules because someone is a PC is idiotic. That would be like making special rules for a character because their name comes up in boldface on a script.

Lago PARANOIA wrote: Being a player-character is not. Why? Because it is completely meaningless from an in-universe perspective. All Player Character means is that you're the viewpoint character for the story. That's it. Making special in-universe rules because someone is a PC is idiotic. That would be like making special rules for a character because their name comes up in boldface on a script.

Don't we already kind of do that with movies and scripts?

Why does Captain Kirk tend to survive while the red shirts don't? Is he really that lucky, or is he just playing by alternate rules?

We kind of make fun of Kirks alternate rules RC2. No one says Plot armor is awesome, more shows should have it.

Captain Kirk just really is that lucky.

The rules of the universe state that Captain Kirk is made of the same weak human flesh as Ensign Throwaway. If both of them get blasted in the chest with a phaser then they both get disintegrated. So what happens in the story is that all of the shots miss Captain Kirk--or if we're on VOY/ENT he gets a heroic graze in the leg.

Captain Kirk is treated differently, but only from an out-of-universe perspective. But from an in-story perspective he's no different than someone who gets struck by lightning or has a winning lottery ticket.


And you know what? The redshirt/Captain Kirk survival dissonance is the whole reason why we try to insert as few immersion-breaking rules as possible into the game. The fact that we even have a term called Redshirt means that we're already trying the audiences' suspension of disbelief. Tabletop RPGs should go as far as it can to scuttle the theory of narrative causality without causing the game to collapse.

Lago PARANOIA wrote:Captain Kirk just really is that lucky.

Is he? Or does he have some uber Edge stat that nobody knows about?

Same with James Bond, or really any action hero. How is that they can repeatedly be under fire, and yet never get seriously hurt. Even if they happen to be facing down an automatic weapon with a pistol.

Hell After Obi-Wan dies in A new Hope Luke just sits there as stormtroopers blast away at him. A stationary target for supposedly well trained soldiers at medium range. And yet he walks away unscathed.

Really, in any games where you're expected to have long running characters, it surprises me that there isn't any plot armor handed out to important characters (like PCs). The bottom line is that we don't want the Ellensar game where anyone can die at any time. We want long running characters, and honestly I don't see any problem with granting them some kind of plot armor. We're trying to emulate cinematic characters here, and yes... Bond and Kirk do have some kind of special defense that lets them survive time and time again. They're not super RNG defying gods with magic dice that never roll below a 16. Their edge may not be something that's tangible, but it's there. They have benefits that others don't.

And people want to be Kirk or Bond, they don't want to be some redshirt that may succeed at Kirkesque feats if he's lucky enough. That's the way of Ellensar gaming.

Now 4E is kind of disturbing with how easily it is for PCs to get up from being KOed by a wound. That's honestly stupid and insulting, but I don't really have a problem with the economy or the basic nature of them being special. But like I said, it annoys me how fast people heal from gunshot wounds in Shadowrun too.

Those examples you gave out, RC2, those are not good things, because plot armor is not a good thing. It's like heart surgery. You need it to live but you want to have as few situations where you need it as possible.

4E doesn't just equip characters with plot armor, which frankly every RPG does, but it also equips them with plot weapons, plot powers, and plot economy.

When you up the situations that state 'this is only happening because the plot requires it', you end up with bullshit situations like the audience laughing whenever the Redshirts appear onscreen or rolling their eyes when Luke doesn't get shot at point-blank range.

Lago PARANOIA wrote:Those examples you gave out, RC2, those are not good things, because plot armor is not a good thing. It's like heart surgery. You need it to live but you want to have as few situations where you need it as possible.

Well given that cinematic action heroes get placed in lots of dangerous situations, you're probably going to need plot armor a bit more than you'd like.

4E doesn't just equip characters with plot armor, which frankly every RPG does, but it also equips them with plot weapons, plot powers, and plot economy.

Actually most RPGs don't give out any kind of plot armor. 3E especially gives you basically nothing. As the heroes of the story, you have literally no advantage over any of the monsters. The only thing that keeps you alive is that the encounters you face are supposed to be weaker than you are. So you basically avoid fair fights and win by picking on stuff smaller than you are. I mean really, in 3E an average encounter for a 1st level group is 4 guys gang banging a single orc.

That's just not very heroic if you ask me.

Now I don't really have a problem with games that are designed to be gritty and brutal to not award plot armor. If people are supposed to left and right, that's fine. But in games with continuing characters I'd like my characters to be able to do heroic things and come out alive.

RandomCasualty2 wrote:So you basically avoid fair fights and win by picking on stuff smaller than you are. That's just not very heroic if you ask me.

RandomCasualty2 wrote:In games with continuing characters I'd like my characters to be able to do heroic things and come out alive.

But doesn't plot armor kind of defy the whole point of heroism? Is fighting a dragon with a 5% chance of dying more heroic than fighting an orc with a 5% chance of dying? Because that is all what plot armor does.

Well given that cinematic action heroes get placed in lots of dangerous situations, you're probably going to need plot armor a bit more than you'd like.

You use the bare minimum that's required. When you layer on enough plot armor so that you have situations where enemy ninjas empty their M-16s at someone from point-blank range and don't hit the comic relief, people notice.

It takes them out of the experience of being in a story and makes them go 'oh, yeah, I'm watching a movie or playing a video game'. This is a bad thing.

4E's special rules for heroes does that. When they meet their long-lost evil twin who trained in the same arts as they did and they have a face-off and the game explodes. Because what the game says should happen (two equally matched foes have a long, climatic battle where they counter each other with moves in their arsenal) does not actually happen for no other reason than one character is a PC and the other is an NPC.



As you've noted, there is some plot armor in the game. It's a necessary evil because we value the experience of 1st-level PCs not getting their shit wrecked by ancient red dragons--even though our gaming world tells us that they have an equal chance of encountering one in a random dungeon as a team of orc recruits.

Why would you want to increase the amount of immersion-breaking rules in the game? 4E hits you over the head with the fact that the universe works differently for you for no goddamned good reason.

Murtak wrote:But doesn't plot armor kind of defy the whole point of heroism? Is fighting a dragon with a 5% chance of dying more heroic than fighting an orc with a 5% chance of dying? Because that is all what plot armor does.

Is a peasant charging at the Nazguls more heroic than Frodo charging at the Nazguls? The Dragon and Orc have objective quantities of danger they represent, and the danger that a Dragon represents is higher than the Orc. To claim that your heroism is dependant entirely on personal risk makes it more heroic to cut off your arms before fighting - which is retarded.

Murtak wrote: But doesn't plot armor kind of defy the whole point of heroism? Is fighting a dragon with a 5% chance of dying more heroic than fighting an orc with a 5% chance of dying? Because that is all what plot armor does.

I guess I shouldn't use the word heroic, so much as cinematic. We want our heroes to fight big threats. Seeing John McClane, Dirty Harry and James Bond take down one petty crook in a gang bang isn't cinematic or exciting.

Now, yes, I realize that you're not really increasing the danger, but you're increasing the illusion of danger. A bunch of guys beating up a lone orc doesn't feel particularly heroic or cinematic. A bunch of guys fighting a dragon however feels much better.

LAGO wrote: 4E's special rules for heroes does that. When they meet their long-lost evil twin who trained in the same arts as they did and they have a face-off and the game explodes. Because what the game says should happen (two equally matched foes have a long, climatic battle where they counter each other with moves in their arsenal) does not actually happen for no other reason than one character is a PC and the other is an NPC.

But here's the thing. You don't want to have a 50/50 battle like that in an RPG. Pretty much ever. Because a 50% chance of dying is unacceptable in an RPG with continuing characters. Now you can do something similar to that with systems with PC perks by just denying the enemy the PC advantages. For instance in Shadowrun, you could fight a runner with your same stats, yet he has no edge. That creates the illusion of a fair fight.

But it's important to remember that you pretty much never want a fair fight. Because it means to make the PCs have decent odds of survival your enemies have to use bad tactics.

I really, really hope what I'm about to say isn't some kind of 'roleplaying not rollplaying' argument.

Why is plot armor bad? RPGs are by definition cooperative storytelling. If your group wants to tell the story of characters that defies odds to overcome adversity, then that set of characters are going to follow a different set of rules than a near identical set of characters by virtue of them being the 'main characters'. Bond & Kirk both experience enough danger that their continued unmaimed survival makes statisticians weep, and they are both in a story that you might want to base your game off of.