Bounded Accuracy L&L

[Viking Bastard]

It boggles the mind that people can't simply say "Yeah, a wooden door should be no challenge at level 20. Now, about this other point..." and instead have to keep defending such stupidity.

I was having a similar thought, only reversed. But that seems like a good point for moving on.

 

[Siberys]

I like the article, but I feel like a lot of people bring up this sort of complaint against 4e DCs, and it's just completely against how I interpreted the rules.

[MENTION=63]RangerWickett[/MENTION] - Man, I miss the XP system.

 

[Remathilis]

"My game was ruined when a wizard animated a wooden door and had it fight all my NPCs!"

I had two PCs killed by an animated rug in 3.5...

 

[Piratecat]

Jokes about animated doors aside - 'cause those are funny - I'm going to call a moratorium on the whole "door" discussion. No more, please. Let's get back to discussing the point of the article.

 

[Tortoise]

It makes no sense that a wooden door would be as difficult to damage at level 1 as at level 20 even though you do much more damage to monsters. If doors are unable to be damaged with weapons, and can only be "broken" through a strength check then we just wrecked immersion, disregarding all real life examples of people using axes to destroy doors.

What wrecks immersion is the idea that someone becomes Superman just because they are higher level. So if I try breaking a door today, why would that exact type of door be any easier for me in another year just because I slaughtered some goblins?

And what's wrong with the DM applying modifiers for various methods used? There is no rule saying various tools can't be used. Besides, if my players say we're breaking the door down by using an axe or crowbar or Nodwick's head, I tell them if it works right away or not and see if they decide to continue, then give them a time frame for completion. If they outright say we go till we're done, I tell them how long it takes. There is no reason to have something like that spelled out to the last detail in the rulebooks.

Sure the tools can add variables, but why waste book space when a couple examples to help guide DM's is all you need.

 

[Tortoise]

Jokes about animated doors aside - 'cause those are funny - I'm going to call a moratorium on the whole "door" discussion. No more, please. Let's get back to discussing the point of the article.

Sorry Kevin, didn't see this till getting to the actual forum. Went to notifications first and replied to quotes directly. Will watch closer next time around.

 

[PowerWordDumb]

stupidity.

You keep using that word...

Back on topic, please! -- PCat

 

[TwoSix]

never mind, saw mod comment.

 

[darjr]

I think the article spells out exactly why bounded accuracy is important for the game. Brilliant. I worry that the 'other' stuff for PC's advancement would escalate things in new and heretofore unseen bad ways. But I think, from what I've been reading, they are probably looking out for this as well.

 

[Fenes]

What wrecks immersion is the idea that someone becomes Superman just because they are higher level. So if I try breaking a door today, why would that exact type of door be any easier for me in another year just because I slaughtered some goblins?

Have you ever played D&D? Any edition? Where you struggle with an orc at level 1, yet after a year of slaughtering monsters, killing the exact same type of orc is now easy? That's called leveling up.

This is rude and insulting. Knock it off. -- PCat

At the highest level you are supposed to be superman, kicking demonlords around. 4E even has a "demigod" path to take.

Do you really want your character to not advance in any way at all? To never progress from a young fighter to a grizzled swordmaster? From apprentice mage to archwizard?