Quote:
Originally Posted by PK
Here's what I see as the real problem: The GM decided that it would be fair to let you know that this particular NPC cannot be killed. Your response is to ask us for advice as to how you can kill him.
|
Yeah. The whole idea of the thread bugs me in that way. The GM is saying, you can't defeat this guy by killing him, you're going to have to find another way. And the reaction is, no, there must be something in the rulebooks that says you're wrong and we can kill him.
It's one thing to ask, "How do I kill a guy with Unkillable?" but another to say "How I do undermine the basic idea of the game?" and I think the approach is more the latter. If the basic idea of the game is that there are some things you can't solve by eroding hit points away but need to be dealt with in another way, maybe finding a way to erode the hit points away anyway is really counter to the fun of that game.
You've been freed from trying to kill this guy because you know that's not the answer. Why not have fun trying to find another way to get a win instead of a way to prove the GM's basic assertion wrong?