Also moved from over there...
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMS
Telling a player to essentially run a stablehand with a group of rune lords (sticking with our ongoing example), when even the associate NPCs are strong initiates, seems like punishment to me. When your new PC is outclassed by the NPC followers of the other PCs, it doesn't sound like much fun to me.
|
People keep throwing around stablehand and farmer as if you must start that way. A starting character in RQ3, or Stormbringer, or many games is just not equivelent to a farmer or stablehand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMS
Or an Eurmal follower....
|
Oh god, just kill those right away...
On the other issues, without extensive quoting, It has always been my belief that forced balance is artificial, though you and I seem to differ by degrees. You would start a new character at in a 10th level game at say 5th level, which is still a disadvantage. Honestly many of the D&D games I played in started everyone at 3rd or 5th level anyway.
But enough with D&D analogies - who plays that system anyway? (Well, OK, I just started in a d20 Thieves World, but it is literally the first time in 20 years).
One difference is even rune levels I don't usually run a bunch of NPC's as the retinue. The party is the players, and maybe 1-2 NPC's come and go. Honestly, once a character reaches Runelord and Priest level normally all their time would be spent doing mundane boring cult stuff, and really should retire from adventuring. PC Runelords and Priests are therefore kind of oddballs anyway, and I don't attach a bodygaurd of NPC's to them while they are adventuring - I just prefer the party to be mostly the PC's - excepting situations where they are leading raiding parties or armies etc. etc.
[/quote]