|
6 months ago ::
Jan 08, 2013 - 8:29AM
#31
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
Well isn't that the point of the thread. Playstyles that don't fit the core rules and accompanying rules modules?
PC vs PC could be interesting but it is very hard to make work.
Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds.
Constitution Based Class for Next!
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 08, 2013 - 8:30AM
#32
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
Well isn't that the point of the thread. Playstyles that don't fit the core rules and accompanying rules modules? PC vs PC could be interesting but it is very hard to make work.
I think you're better off giving them rival kingdoms/lands to rule.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 08, 2013 - 8:52AM
#33
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
Well isn't that the point of the thread. Playstyles that don't fit the core rules and accompanying rules modules? PC vs PC could be interesting but it is very hard to make work.
If every class is encounter balanced... ummm. OK yes hard.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 08, 2013 - 8:52AM
#34
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
Use armies? The use of armies to deal with intraparty issues in a bandage over the issue.
What if the PCs respects his men too much to have them fight and die over his personal beefs? Or if a PC is the mole/double agent?
Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds.
Constitution Based Class for Next!
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 08, 2013 - 8:57AM
#35
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
Use armies? The use of armies to deal with intraparty issues in a bandage over the issue. What if the PCs respects his men too much to have them fight and die over his personal beefs? Or if a PC is the mole/double agent?
I was just giving a suggestion on how to do a PC v PC type game. As for the PC who respects his men too much, he's not going to have much choice when Vlad the Impaler (PC#2) has sent his army towards him. If you want to do a PC as a mole/double agent, then do the game in teams.
Or don't do it at all and arrange for a different PC v PC type game. Another issue with the PC v PC type game is that it tends to be short. Someone will win the fight fairly quickly, so they're generally just a one or two night thing. It's hard to go from level 1 to 20 while trying to kill each other 
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 08, 2013 - 9:38AM
#36
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
PC vs PC only works if it plays out a lot like Spy vs Spy.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 08, 2013 - 9:39AM
#37
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
PC vs PC only works if it plays out a lot like Spy vs Spy.
Wooden sticks and traps that don't actually cause anyone to die? 
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 08, 2013 - 10:01AM
#38
|
Date Joined:
Dec 13, 2006
|
PC vs PC only works if it plays out a lot like Spy vs Spy.
PC vs PC only works out when the campaign and group support that idea. It's an alternate playstyle that does not fit well with how Dungeons and Dragons is made, nor the core assumptions of the game.
Dungeons and Dragons has always been a group of adventurers working together to overcome a challenge (and kill things and loot the bodies). Attacking other players (unless it's a previously-understood part of the game) only invites drama, hurt feelings, and a lack of teamwork at the table. In short, it takes everything that makes D&D run well, and throws it under a bus.
You can use D&D to run player-vs-player games; you can also use D&D to run sci-fi games about alien invasions. Neither are really what the rules are intended for, balanced for, or good at.
Want the tl;dr of my posts? Read the bold text; I put it there to highlight the main points for ease of skimming.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 08, 2013 - 11:25AM
#39
|
|
|
|
|
|
