+ Log in or register to post
Results 11 to 14 of 14
Monday, 1st October, 2012, 02:52 AM #11
Enchanter (Lvl 12)
You are absolutely right. I can totally see how they are focusing on PC development at this point, and I'm ok with that. I'm sure it will be much easier for them to work on the monsters after all of the PC work is solidified. I just want to make sure they hear our voices so that when they do calibrate PCs vs. Monsters, they make it lean more towards the challenging side and give DMs simple to follow guidelines to alter monsters from Standard to Elite, or Solo, or down to "mook". I am optimistic that they will do this.
- EN World
- has no influence
- on advertisings
- that are displayed by
- Google Adsense
Monday, 1st October, 2012, 08:18 AM #12
Waghalter (Lvl 7)
PC and monster abilities are not at all easy to evaluate separately, and I don't think the designers are actually intending that to the happen in the playtest. There is a difference between "not polished, not quite consistent" which is reasonable, and "not fun to play" which reflects badly on the playtest and will need fixing ASAP.
In software terms, open playtesting is not a unit test, where items are considered in isolation, it is a functional test with a look at the whole thing as it will be used.
Monday, 1st October, 2012, 09:39 PM #13
Acolyte (Lvl 2)
Tuesday, 2nd October, 2012, 04:13 AM #14
Superhero (Lvl 15)
How do you know what the right amount of damage is for a PC to deal unless you know what monster hp should be?
How do you know how powerful armor is without having a concept of what sort of attack bonuses monsters will have?
These things are defined in a large part by their opposite components. How much damage a PC should do depends on how often they hit, what monster defenses and abilities look like, and how many hit points monsters have. They have to plug numbers into all of those and adjust them until the balance is good. It's all part of a larger system.
Iron DM 2014 Champion